L86 is no match to M14 or SVD

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 · Post by **Jonathan_Archer_nx01** » 2007-03-18 18:50

I know it's because of 5.56mm NATO ammunition. That means more hits are needed to kill target, But

L86 has bipod so it should have as low recoil as chinese machine gun Type 95.
And of course 5.56mm rounds much lighter = British marksman should have 1-2 more magazine(s).

DirtyHarry88 · Post by **DirtyHarry88** » 2007-03-18 18:52

More accurate than the SVD IMO.

r3st · Post by **r3st** » 2007-03-18 18:55

DirtyHarry88 wrote:More accurate than the SVD IMO.

facts or gtfo
opinions don't mean anything

Longbow* · Post by Longbow* » 2007-03-18 19:00

Jonathan_Archer_nx01 wrote: British marksman should have 1-2 more magazine(s).

Use semi-auto , L86 is fine as it is .

mrmong · Post by **mrmong** » 2007-03-18 19:08

more mags would be nice.. maybe some nades isntead?

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2007-03-18 19:10

r3st wrote:facts or gtfo
opinions don't mean anything

Respect. Get out until you learn some...

Yeah I have noticed that tho. I think Full Auto capability makes up for it in some aspects tho.

Post by **strima** » 2007-03-18 20:01

It's strange that the L86 was chosen as a marksman weapon. IRL it is a section weapon that replaced the LMG, having two per section (one in each fire team). Each LSW gunner is issued 6 mags as opposed to four as they are to suppress enemy positions whilst the assault is going in.

You'll find that more units are now using the minimi for this job as the L86 is ****, why have a magazine fed support weapon.

If anything bin the marksman kit for the brits and give everyone a SUSAT as this is happening IRL. With all section bods having a decent sight there would be no need for the marksman.

Silens.Intro · Post by **Silens.Intro** » 2007-03-18 20:07

In reality the Dragunov is somewhat less accurate then the M14 for two main reasons:
1. The Dragunov has a stamped receiver and not milled like the M14.
2. The Dragunov doesn't have a free floating barrel.
Although also in reality the recoil system (kalashnikov) makes the Dragunov much more reliable in battle conditions so theres less malfunctions.

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2007-03-18 20:15

I know its not the most credible source, but Wikipedia says that each 4 man element (Fire Team i think) in British Army they have a Grenadier (L85+UGL), Rifleman (L85), Support Gunner (Minimi) and Designated Marksman (L86) so apparently they coincide? Dunno tho and im sure the guys on the DEV team can clarify

00SoldierofFortune00 · Post by **00SoldierofFortune00** » 2007-03-18 20:16

'[R-PUB wrote:Viper5']Respect. Get out until you learn some...

Yeah I have noticed that tho. I think Full Auto capability makes up for it in some aspects tho.

Owned.

Post by **strima** » 2007-03-18 21:06

'[R-PUB wrote:Viper5']I know its not the most credible source, but Wikipedia says that each 4 man element (Fire Team i think) in British Army they have a Grenadier (L85+UGL), Rifleman (L85), Support Gunner (Minimi) and Designated Marksman (L86) so apparently they coincide? Dunno tho and im sure the guys on the DEV team can clarify

The L86 is a support weapon not a marksman weapon. With the introduction of the Minimi and UGL's sections can adapt what they carry to what they require for a specific job. If they need a marksman a dedicated sniper from the unit is attached.

An L85 in good hands is just as accurate as an L86. Bin the L86 and give everyone a decent sight, the riflemen should have a better zoom to compensate in the game. This may encourage n00bs to stop getting the kit and buggaring off somewhere. The squad sniper can do the job of observing and taking out key targets.

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2007-03-18 22:03

Now from what I understand, while the L86 was due to be phased out completly (and chopped up into L22s for tank crews) with the introduction of the minimi para in the LSW role for British forces, this plan was changed to keep the L86 on as a longer ranged support weapon (the minimi para would be used for area suppression while the L86 would be used to enguage point targets) so while it is not actually a DMR, its role is similar. Personally I suspect the reasoning behind this decision was "The americans have them, we need them too!".

And you dont think it measures up to the M14 or SVD. You wait till the MEC get the G3SG/1, that'll have the power, mag capacity and accuracy of the M14 combined with the full auto L86!

DirtyHarry88 · Post by **DirtyHarry88** » 2007-03-18 22:56

r3st wrote:facts or gtfo
opinions don't mean anything

How mature you complete moron.

IN GAME I find the L86 more accurate than the SVD.

D_LaMz · Post by **D_LaMz** » 2007-03-18 23:06

Silens.Intro wrote:In reality the Dragunov is somewhat less accurate then the M14 for two main reasons:
1. The Dragunov has a stamped receiver and not milled like the M14.
2. The Dragunov doesn't have a free floating barrel.
Although also in reality the recoil system (kalashnikov) makes the Dragunov much more reliable in battle conditions so theres less malfunctions.

I think the Dragunov/Tiger/PSL does have milled receiver versions. The AK has either a stamped or milled receiver, why not the Dragunov?

Expendable Grunt · Post by **Expendable Grunt** » 2007-03-18 23:52

I've never heard of the AK having a milled reciever -- isn't that part of it's cheapness package?

D_LaMz · Post by **D_LaMz** » 2007-03-19 00:50

Expendable Grunt wrote:I've never heard of the AK having a milled reciever -- isn't that part of it's cheapness package?

Milled recievers are expensive, not cheap. Search around, the Arsenal Inc AKs are milled.

WNxKenwayy · Post by **WNxKenwayy** » 2007-03-19 04:52

Um, the M14's we use now are probably the most reliable weapon system I could put my hands on in Iraq besides the shotgun and M2. Closed bolt + 7.62mm + gas piston + simple operation = win. AK still has a enclosed receiver so its better in dust storm/being dropped situation.

Silens.Intro · Post by **Silens.Intro** » 2007-03-19 05:27

I wasn't going to get into the different Kalashnikov manufacturers and which ones offer higher quality milled receivers and whatnot.. The common Dragunov uses a stamped receiver native the the Kalashnikov.
I'm sure you can get a milled Dragunov or Tigr, but most often it's stamped.

ReadMenace · Post by **ReadMenace** » 2007-03-19 08:11

Silens.Intro wrote:I wasn't going to get into the different Kalashnikov manufacturers and which ones offer higher quality milled receivers and whatnot.. The common Dragunov uses a stamped receiver native the the Kalashnikov.
I'm sure you can get a milled Dragunov or Tigr, but most often it's stamped.

SVD/Dragunov uses a milled reciever; PSL/ROMAK3 uses a stamped receiver.
Reasons for the SVD/Dragunov being less accurate than other DMRs? Barrel rigidity, action etc...

D_LaMz wrote:Search around, the Arsenal Inc AKs are milled.

They offer stamped receivers too.

But, back on topic; I think we need to realize that every cartridge (of any given caliber) is created equal. For example, with 5.56, for longer distance shots, you'd want to utilize a heavier weight bullet, which in turn would require a faster rate of twist on the rifling. While I know nothing about logistics for the Royal Armed Forces; I know that the US Army does often issue "Match-Grade" 5.56 cartridges to Designated Marksmen. I think that the L86 should inflict more damage per bullet than say, the M4 or M16, to simulate this difference.

Anyways.. Blah blah blah....
-REad