Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful? (Read 6220 times)
Mortdooley
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6778
Texas Gulf Coast
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #45 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:16am
 
You are assuming it is good.
Back to top
 

The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. ~Ecc. 10:2
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #46 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 95236
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #47 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:57pm
 
Jasin wrote on Sep 23rd, 2017 at 10:02pm:
So what would be the recommendation for getting around the USA?
I picture a neat little Uzi - but in movies, they seem to miss a lot.
What would be a not too big, but not too crap - gun?



I ask a Yank once if a .44 magnum would be required to go to McDonald's for a hamburger  & he said
no - a .44 is a bit too large -
a .38 snub nose is all you'd need.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #48 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 1:38pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 6:46pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 12:30pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 21st, 2017 at 4:02pm:
As much as I enjoyed firing the L1a1, BigOl64 it was not to me, the epitome of mechanical engineering.   The .303in SMLE Mk.III* was.

http://cdn1.bigcommerce.com/server1000/817fb/product_images/uploaded_images/1ref...

Simple, effective and deadly accurate.



We did keep the various models of SMLE in service for many decades and it did serve us well during that time for sure.


Less parts, less to go wrong, but not as much fun.  Smiley Smiley


Works in conditions that stop most other firearms from working.  Hits the target effectively at all ranges.  Kills the target.   What other fun is there to have?   Roll Eyes



20 round mag and semi-auto.


Mo' bullets = mo' fun.  Smiley Smiley
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39526
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #49 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:00pm
 
Mortdooley wrote on Sep 23rd, 2017 at 9:36pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes



It is good to see you can have this type of conversation without interjecting you political views.

The Small Magazine Lee Enfield or Smelly was an excellent rifle for its time and still has its uses. Careful aimed shots as opposed to spray and pray are more effective at longer ranges. It was comparable to the 8mm Mauser and 30-06 Springfield rounds, the AK-47s 7.62x39 is comparable to the 30-30. You wouldn't want to use them for the same purpose.

The AK borrowed heavily from the STG-44 and because it could be produced cheaply and performed reliably under harsh conditions it became the success we see today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44


Apart from externally being similar, the Kalashnikov series of Assault Rifles owes nothing to the earlier Sturmgewehr 44.
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39526
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #50 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:03pm
 
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.


...

Ah, that'd explain why so many modern American servicepeople are always complaining about their M4 Carbine/Rifle and it's inability to hit a target accurately at beyond 3-400 metres, Hammer?   Tsk, tsk, the 5.56x45 SS109 round was only designed to have a maximum effectively range of 300 metres.   The .303in round was designed to have an effective range of 2,240 yards.    Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39526
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #51 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:07pm
 
BigOl64 wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 1:38pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 6:46pm:
BigOl64 wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 12:30pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 21st, 2017 at 4:02pm:
As much as I enjoyed firing the L1a1, BigOl64 it was not to me, the epitome of mechanical engineering.   The .303in SMLE Mk.III* was.

http://cdn1.bigcommerce.com/server1000/817fb/product_images/uploaded_images/1ref...

Simple, effective and deadly accurate.



We did keep the various models of SMLE in service for many decades and it did serve us well during that time for sure.


Less parts, less to go wrong, but not as much fun.  Smiley Smiley


Works in conditions that stop most other firearms from working.  Hits the target effectively at all ranges.  Kills the target.   What other fun is there to have?   Roll Eyes


20 round mag and semi-auto.

Mo' bullets = mo' fun.  Smiley Smiley


Interestingly, the rate of fire for both the .303in SMLE and the 7.62x51mm L1a1 was the same - 20 rounds a minute.   You just need to reload the SMLE once, as they proved during the "Mad Minute" at Mons in 1914...

A removable box magazine does wonders for rates of fire.  Both weapons had one. 

I would still prefer an SMLE on the Western Front to an L1a1...   Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #52 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:58pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.


http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Ah, that'd explain why so many modern American servicepeople are always complaining about their M4 Carbine/Rifle and it's inability to hit a target accurately at beyond 3-400 metres, Hammer?   Tsk, tsk, the 5.56x45 SS109 round was only designed to have a maximum effectively range of 300 metres.   The .303in round was designed to have an effective range of 2,240 yards.    Roll Eyes
That's because it's designed as a long distance rifle. Assault rifles are designed for close quarter. Why are you comparing 2 different types of rifle. The M16 fires a small round a long distance and it used in close quarter. Can a AK do that muppet?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #53 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 4:10pm
 
For Bwian- Wiki- The M16 rifle is "accurate beyond description".[172] Its light recoil, high-velocity and flat trajectory allow shooters to take head shots out to 300 meters.[173][174] Newer M16s use the newer M855 cartridge increasing their effective range to 600 meters.[124] They are also more accurate than their predecessors and are capable of shooting 1–3 inch groups at 100 yards.[175][176] "In Fallujah, Marines with ACOG-equipped M16A4s created a stir by taking so many head shots that until the wounds were closely examined, some observers thought the insurgents had been executed."[177] The newest M855A1 EPR cartridge is even more accurate and during testing "...has shown that, on average, 95 percent of the rounds will hit within an 8 × 8-inch target at 600 meters."[178]
The AK-47's accuracy has always been considered to be "good enough" to hit an adult male torso out to about 300 meters.[175][179][180] "At 300 meters, expert shooters (firing AK-47s) at prone or at bench rest positions had difficulty putting ten consecutive rounds on target."[181] Despite the Soviet engineers' best efforts and "no matter the changes, the AK-47's accuracy could not be significantly improved; when it came to precise shooting, it was a stubbornly mediocre arm
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39526
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #54 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:08pm
 
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.


http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Ah, that'd explain why so many modern American servicepeople are always complaining about their M4 Carbine/Rifle and it's inability to hit a target accurately at beyond 3-400 metres, Hammer?   Tsk, tsk, the 5.56x45 SS109 round was only designed to have a maximum effectively range of 300 metres.   The .303in round was designed to have an effective range of 2,240 yards.    Roll Eyes
That's because it's designed as a long distance rifle. Assault rifles are designed for close quarter. Why are you comparing 2 different types of rifle. The M16 fires a small round a long distance and it used in close quarter. Can a AK do that muppet?


I am comparing nothing.  I originally was correcting the misconception of yourself when you claimed that the range of the .303in SMLE "let it down".   Tsk, tsk, the M16/M4 family is an Assault Rifle, yes.  It is intended to be used at closer ranges than the full power round of the .303in SMLE.   Now run along, Hammer your opinion is worthless.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #55 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:17pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:08pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.


http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Ah, that'd explain why so many modern American servicepeople are always complaining about their M4 Carbine/Rifle and it's inability to hit a target accurately at beyond 3-400 metres, Hammer?   Tsk, tsk, the 5.56x45 SS109 round was only designed to have a maximum effectively range of 300 metres.   The .303in round was designed to have an effective range of 2,240 yards.    Roll Eyes
That's because it's designed as a long distance rifle. Assault rifles are designed for close quarter. Why are you comparing 2 different types of rifle. The M16 fires a small round a long distance and it used in close quarter. Can a AK do that muppet?


I am comparing nothing.  I originally was correcting the misconception of yourself when you claimed that the range of the .303in SMLE "let it down".   Tsk, tsk, the M16/M4 family is an Assault Rifle, yes.  It is intended to be used at closer ranges than the full power round of the .303in SMLE.   Now run along, Hammer your opinion is worthless.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
I never said the 303 had a poor range. I said the AK range let it down against other assault rifles. Stop making stuff up. It's a fact that the AK47 is behind high tech assault rifles.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39526
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #56 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:20pm
 
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:17pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:08pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.


http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Ah, that'd explain why so many modern American servicepeople are always complaining about their M4 Carbine/Rifle and it's inability to hit a target accurately at beyond 3-400 metres, Hammer?   Tsk, tsk, the 5.56x45 SS109 round was only designed to have a maximum effectively range of 300 metres.   The .303in round was designed to have an effective range of 2,240 yards.    Roll Eyes
That's because it's designed as a long distance rifle. Assault rifles are designed for close quarter. Why are you comparing 2 different types of rifle. The M16 fires a small round a long distance and it used in close quarter. Can a AK do that muppet?


I am comparing nothing.  I originally was correcting the misconception of yourself when you claimed that the range of the .303in SMLE "let it down".   Tsk, tsk, the M16/M4 family is an Assault Rifle, yes.  It is intended to be used at closer ranges than the full power round of the .303in SMLE.   Now run along, Hammer your opinion is worthless.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
I never said the 303 had a poor range. I said the AK range let it down against other assault rifles. Stop making stuff up. It's a fact that the AK47 is behind high tech assault rifles.


"High-tech Assault Rifles"?  The AK series is superior to most such creatures as the insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq have proved.    Roll Eyes

The only person "making stuff up" is yourself.  Read "Soldier of Fortune" a lot do you?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mr Hammer
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 25212
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #57 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:27pm
 
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:20pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:17pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:08pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:58pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 3:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 12:50pm:
Brian Ross wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 11:03pm:
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 22nd, 2017 at 9:34pm:
It's outdated now though. It's range let's it down.


Errr, you do realise that the .303in round exceeds the ranges of most modern Assault rifles?   Roll Eyes
That's because assault rifles are for assaulting a position dumbsky. Good modern rifles , particularly the US military weapons can do both. Shoot accurately at long distances and be used in close quarter. The AK has a shorter and fatter slug.


http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/128170/2467911-yawn_20smiley.jpg

Ah, that'd explain why so many modern American servicepeople are always complaining about their M4 Carbine/Rifle and it's inability to hit a target accurately at beyond 3-400 metres, Hammer?   Tsk, tsk, the 5.56x45 SS109 round was only designed to have a maximum effectively range of 300 metres.   The .303in round was designed to have an effective range of 2,240 yards.    Roll Eyes
That's because it's designed as a long distance rifle. Assault rifles are designed for close quarter. Why are you comparing 2 different types of rifle. The M16 fires a small round a long distance and it used in close quarter. Can a AK do that muppet?


I am comparing nothing.  I originally was correcting the misconception of yourself when you claimed that the range of the .303in SMLE "let it down".   Tsk, tsk, the M16/M4 family is an Assault Rifle, yes.  It is intended to be used at closer ranges than the full power round of the .303in SMLE.   Now run along, Hammer your opinion is worthless.    Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
I never said the 303 had a poor range. I said the AK range let it down against other assault rifles. Stop making stuff up. It's a fact that the AK47 is behind high tech assault rifles.


"High-tech Assault Rifles"?  The AK series is superior to most such creatures as the insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq have proved.    Roll Eyes

The only person "making stuff up" is yourself.  Read "Soldier of Fortune" a lot do you?   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
No they aren't. They are cheap and reliable. That's all. A top weapon but not as good as many modern assault rifles. You are talking through your ass. Even the Rusians have moved on from the AK47. It's an outdated model.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian Ross
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Representative of me

Posts: 39526
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #58 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 7:58pm
 
Mr Hammer wrote on Sep 24th, 2017 at 5:27pm:
No they aren't. They are cheap and reliable. That's all. A top weapon but not as good as many modern assault rifles.


How are they "not as good"?  The AK series is, as you note - "cheap and reliable".  What else can a soldier ask for, from their weapon?   It does the job asked of it.   It has shown itself to be superior to the M16/M4 family of weapons.   

Quote:
You are talking through your ass. Even the Rusians have moved on from the AK47. It's an outdated model.


The AK74, which is the standard Russian rifle nowadays is based heavily on the original AK47 design, Hammer.   As I have pointed out, throughout this thread, the AK47 was only producion in the fUSSR for about 10 years.  It was replaced by first the AKM and then AK74.
Back to top
 

Someone said we could not judge a person's Aboriginality on their skin colour.  Why isn't that applied in the matter of Pascoe?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 95236
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Why has the Kalashnikov been so successful?
Reply #59 - Sep 24th, 2017 at 8:22pm
 
Guess what?
The .303 is still in use today!


Lee–Enfield No. 4 Mk I
...

Lee–Enfield No. 4 Mk 2 with the ladder aperture sight flipped up and 5-round charger.
...



Canadian Rangers, photographed in Nunavut, June 2011
...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee%E2%80%93Enfield


The Lee–Enfield in military/police use today


An Afghan mujahid carries a Lee–Enfield in August 1985
Canadian Rangers, photographed in Nunavut, June 2011

The Lee–Enfield family of rifles is the second oldest bolt-action rifle design still in official service, after the Mosin–Nagant.[7] Lee–Enfield rifles are used by reserve forces and police forces in many Commonwealth countries, including Malawi. In Canada the .303" and .22" models are being phased out [2016]. Indian police officers carrying SMLE Mk III* and Ishapore 2A1 rifles were a familiar sight throughout railway stations in India after Mumbai train bombings of 2006 and the November 2008 Mumbai attacks. They are also still seen in the hands of Pakistani and Bangladeshi second-line and police units. However, the Lee–Enfield was mainly replaced in main-line service in the Pakistani Police in the mid-1980s by the AK 47, in response to increasing proliferation of the Kalashnikov in the black market and civilian use. In Jordan, the Lee–Enfield was in use with the Police and Gendarmerie until 1971, and with the Armed Forces until 1965. In Iraq and Egypt, the Lee–Enfield was replaced by the Kalashnikov as the standard issue rifle in the Armed Forces by the late 1950s, and in Police Forces by the late 1970s. In the UK, the single-shot .22 calibre Rifle No. 8 is in regular use with UK Cadet Forces as a light target rifle.[93] Enfields continue to be used as drill weapons by the National Ceremonial Guard of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF).[94]

Many Afghan participants in the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan were armed with Lee–Enfields.[95] The CIA's Operation Cyclone provided hundreds of thousands of Enfields to the Mujahideen, funneling them through Pakistan's ISI. CIA officer Gust Avrakotos later arranged for the Egyptian Ministry of Defence to set up production lines of Enfield .303 ammunition specifically for the conflict. Later on when Avrakotos asked Michael Vickers to revamp their strategy, he stopped the Enfield system and, with the large amounts of money available thanks to Charlie Wilson, replaced them with a mix of modern weapons like AK-47s and mortars.[96]
An SMLE owned by Maoist rebels in Nepal, 2005.

Khyber Pass Copies patterned after the Lee–Enfield are still manufactured in the Khyber Pass region, as bolt-action rifles remain effective weapons in desert and mountain environments where long-range accuracy is more important than rate of fire.[7] Lee–Enfield rifles are still popular in the region, despite the presence and ready availability of more modern weapons such as the SKS-45, the AKM, the Chinese Type 56 assault rifle, and the AK-74.[7][97] As of 2012, Lee–Enfield rifles (along with Mosin–Nagants) are still being used by the Taliban insurgents against NATO/Allied forces in Afghanistan.

Photos from the recent civil war in Nepal showed that the government troops were being issued SMLE Mk III/III* rifles to fight the Maoist rebels, and that the Maoists were also armed with SMLE rifles, amongst other weapons.[98] Police in Kathmandu may also be seen equipped with SMLE rifles. Lee–Enfield rifles have also been seen in the hands of both the Naxalites and the Indian police in the ongoing Maoist insurgency in rural India.

Police forces in both the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu continue to operate and maintain stocks of SMLE Mk IVs.[99] The Tongan security forces also retain a substantial number of Mk IVs donated from New Zealand's reserve stocks.[99
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print