THis is the answer to our Special Forces need


PDA






nathan
April 30, 2012, 10:04 AM
Made in the Philippines, the Ferfrans SOAR

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/global-filipino/04/26/12/filipino-twins-develop-assault-rifle

If you enjoyed reading about "THis is the answer to our Special Forces need" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Sam1911
April 30, 2012, 10:13 AM
Not sure exactly why it's something our Special Forces need?

Cyclic rate can be set several ways. I'm not sure that there's anything absolutely magical about lowering the M-16/M-4's rate. Probably not a bad idea, but not groundbreaking either. If that was wanted, it could have been specified as a change or an option at any point. Heck, the AKM has featured a rate reducing mechanism for about five decades now. Sub-gun shooters tune their cyclic rates all the time with simple buffers and heavier or lighter bolt assemblies.

http://www.ferfrans.net/products/s-o-a-r
The SOAR incorporates modifications and improvements to the M4 rifle that will among other things ensure enhanced reliability, accuracy, firepower, zero retention, ergonomics/ man machine interface, overall parts longevity, and increase service life. By incorporating the patented Independent Sear Disconnector reduced the cyclic rate of fire in full auto below 700 rpm. This allowed the weapon to be totally controllable in full-auto, reduced impact stress on the parts, increase accuracy and firepower, reducing the heat and increase the resiliency to cookoff, increase parts longevity and overall service life.

The soar P (Piston version of the soar), further increase the benefits of the SOAR by changing the gas system with a short stroke piston system with the independent sear disconnector enhancing the capability of the rifle to fire without draining the water in “over the beach” operations.

Some of the statements here seem quite over-hyped and perhaps even misleading.

Just seems "odd."

ejnogarb
April 30, 2012, 10:30 AM
So their big innovation is a muzzle break and reducing the rate of fire? :what:

nathan
April 30, 2012, 10:32 AM
Los Angeles SWAT using it now.

Sam1911
April 30, 2012, 10:33 AM
Los Angeles SWAT using it now. Really? Has that been verified? (Source?) And why? Have they stated a reason this is the right thing for them?

wildehond
April 30, 2012, 10:58 AM
Sorry no replacement for training. :scrutiny:

It will never be better than instictive shooting a good "double-tap".

RhinoDefense
April 30, 2012, 11:01 AM
So it's another AR based weapon that shoots slower and has a muzzle break. Nothing new.

Robert
April 30, 2012, 11:50 AM
THis is the answer to our Special Forces need
Why?

Los Angeles SWAT using it now.
And? As Sam said please cite a source for that.

nathan
April 30, 2012, 12:08 PM
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/12028482-filipino-twins-launch-new-assault-rifle-now-used-by-swat-in-us

Sam1911
April 30, 2012, 12:09 PM
Los Angeles SWAT using it now.

To be perfectly honest, a US police force making any weapons purchase based on the capabilities of said weapon's full-auto firing characteristics makes me exceedingly nervous. There are many instances where departments take the trouble to disable/remove the burst or F/A function of carbines they receive through fed.gov programs before deploying them. The ability to fire full-auto is not wanted or needed for almost any conceivable civilian police work.

As we've discussed many times, the response of a police force in a civilian/peace-time setting, to even a hostile person or small group armed with assault rifles or machine guns of their own, should not be returning automatic fire. There's very little benefit and the risk of unintended casualties is far too great.

Hence, I'm surprised (at least) to see even a SWAT team making an armament decision based on better F/A characteristics.

Sam1911
April 30, 2012, 12:14 PM
From the "allvoices" link: ...This feature has made the 'new' weapon popular among enthusiasts here and abroad that it was now being used by several Special Weapons and Tactics or SWAT teams in the US, as well as the Chief Protection Unit of the Los Angeles Police Department.

I tried to find the "Chief Protection Unit" of the LAPD. No luck. Does such a Unit exist?

N003k
April 30, 2012, 12:18 PM
Any chance that the 'Chief Protection Unit' is basically the chiefs toy collection? Theoretically he could place the order for the department, right?

And being the chief, he COULD be his own 'protection unit' right? :neener:

C-grunt
April 30, 2012, 12:27 PM
Every SF soldier I have ever talked to were perfectly happy with their M4s and Mk18s. Soldiers rarely ever use the full auto capabilities of their rifles as it usually just wastes ammo. Well aimed semi auto fire will always be better than full auto at ranges beyond about 15 yards.

Condor1970
April 30, 2012, 12:37 PM
Pointless. Just like the M14, which has had issues that simply cannot be fixed by tweeking, so does the AR platform. The AR platform will eventually be replaced, and all issues it has ever had, even with piston systems causing carrier tilt, will be gone. Good Riddens!!!

RhinoDefense
April 30, 2012, 12:53 PM
Every SF soldier I have ever talked to were perfectly happy with their M4s and Mk18s. Soldiers rarely ever use the full auto capabilities of their rifles as it usually just wastes ammo. Well aimed semi auto fire will always be better than full auto at ranges beyond about 15 yards.
Yup and most of my AR sales are guys getting out of the military and buying Colts and BCM M4 clones.

Float Pilot
April 30, 2012, 05:37 PM
The biggest hindrance to any military unit is the Washington Belt-Way, not the mechanical belt feed.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 30, 2012, 06:47 PM
For one, I don't care how good the brake is, at 500 to 600 rpm you are NOT "eliminating" muzzle rise. Maybe decreasing it somewhat, but not "eliminating" as they claim. For two, full automatic fire has absolutely NO business in the hands of civilian authority. FA is for "suppression" (keep the enemy heads down) so your troops can move in. Law enforcement has no need for such maneuvers.

As others have said, this is nothing new whatsoever. There have been systems designed to lower cyclic rate for decades. Pretty much as long as the M16 has been around. This seems just another attempt to hype a product because it was designed by someone from an impoverished country.

allaroundhunter
April 30, 2012, 07:02 PM
The last that we have been told about the SF that killed Osama is that he was not killed with FA fire....it was a nice controlled pair (semi-auto doubletap)

Our special forces are trained well enough that they do not need a slower rate of fire to be better at their jobs. If they need to fire FA, they can do so accurately and controlled at 900 RPM. When precision is necessary, they will still use SA. This doesn't offer anything extra.

carbine85
April 30, 2012, 07:09 PM
From the video it looks like about the most controllable AR platform going. The best thing about the AR platform is it's ability to be adapted to something new, and listening to all the nah sayers.

bigfatdave
April 30, 2012, 09:11 PM
muzzle breaksay what?
why would you damage the muzzle?

I thought the idea was to slow recoil down, with some king of "brake" like device.

hey, I know, how about we call it a muzzle brake?!?!

allaroundhunter
April 30, 2012, 09:40 PM
FA is for "suppression" (keep the enemy heads down) so your troops can move in. Law enforcement has no need for such maneuvers.

I am going to disagree with you here. There are situations where LE does have a use for a select fire weapon that don't involve "suppression".

When law enforcement special weapons teams use MP5s, there is no need to restrict them to semi-automatic fire. The 9mm round is very controllable, especially in 3 round bursts, and I would prefer an operator fire 3 rounds of 9mm into a suspect in one pull of a trigger than have to pull the trigger 3 times in semi-auto.

With a 5.56 rifle, select fire does not serve as great of a purpose, but in 9mm (and other handgun calibers), it most certainly is viable and, at times, useful.

Adam123
April 30, 2012, 11:11 PM
say what?

I thought the idea was to slow recoil down, with some king of "brake" like device.

hey, I know, how about we call it a muzzle brake?!?!

Say what? I propose a Queen brake-like device, but there's certainly no need for a King in this situation.

Also, maybe you should try to be typo-free when you are making fun of others' typos. I sure hope you try to brake that nasty habit. Many greetings!

ugaarguy
April 30, 2012, 11:33 PM
full automatic fire has absolutely NO business in the hands of civilian authority. FA is for "suppression" (keep the enemy heads down) so your troops can move in. Law enforcement has no need for such maneuvers.
Ordinary civilians can get pre-86 full autos in many states. Private security firms engaged in details on highly threatened protectees have been known to train in the use of FA fire to break ambushes in much the same way their civil LE and military counterparts do. On that note, civil LE agencies on the federal level, such as the US SS and US DSS, have a very strong need for FA capability. I wouldn't be surprised if there are state level LE agencies with similar missions and equal need of FA fire.

As AAH has already mentioned, there are also circumstances even at the municipal LE level where FA fire can be desirable. Saying that FA fire "...has absolutely NO business in the hands of civilian authority." is too broad and general of a statement.

I'm not advocating FA weapons for general LE use any way either, and as Sam1911 has already noted: There are many instances where departments take the trouble to disable/remove the burst or F/A function of carbines they receive through fed.gov programs before deploying them. LE agencies aren't just handing out FA weapons to every recruit fresh out of the academy. The vast majority require their officers / deputies to undergo separate training and qualification just to have a rifle in the patrol vehicle.

Also, The ability to fire full-auto is not wanted or needed for almost any conceivable civilian police work. I've noted some exceptions that are conceivable, but, again, I'll emphasize that these are exceptions. Outside of specialized units with unique missions, highly selective entry criteria, and rigorous training & proficiency requirements I tend to agree. Given the entry selectivity, level of training, and fluid nature of their missions I have no problem with US SS and US DSS having FA weapons generally available to almost all of their special agents. Again, exceptions based on missions frequently carried out by those agencies.

red-demon652
April 30, 2012, 11:38 PM
Keep head down spray and pray. I want as many rounds down range as posible. Sniping is accuracy in a combat situation, a machine gun has its purpose as well.

Whether its 1000 rounds or 600 rounds per minute its still spray and pray.

Ive heard a lot of ppl call it spray and pray, im sure its was for a reason.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 30, 2012, 11:45 PM
Keep head down spray and pray. I want as many rounds down range as posible. Sniping is accuracy in a combat situation, a machine gun has its purpose as well.

Whether its 1000 rounds or 600 rounds per minute its still spray and pray.

Ive heard a lot of ppl call it spray and pray, im sure its was for a reason.

The reason is, because it doesn't matter how much you train or how good you think you are, Full Auto from ANY rifle can only be SOMEWHAT controlled. Even 3 round bursts from an MP5 under combat situations will be only somewhat well placed. Where innocent civilians are concerned, full auto has absolutely NO place period. Now maybe out in the boonies on a drug raid where casualties will only be the bad guys, then yeah OK let them rip. But in 99.9% of the other situations in civilian population, they are absolutely un-needed and quite frankly, more danger to innocents than the bad guys.

ugaarguy
May 1, 2012, 12:39 AM
The reason is, because it doesn't matter how much you train or how good you think you are, Full Auto from ANY rifle can only be SOMEWHAT controlled. Even 3 round bursts from an MP5 under combat situations will be only somewhat well placed. Where innocent civilians are concerned, full auto has absolutely NO place period.
How much experience do you have shooting true assault rifles or SMGs? Even with my limited training and experience controllable shooting of an MP5 or a Grease Gun in FA is very easy with some basic technique. Those two are actually pretty forgiving. The Thompson SMG with its higher cyclic rate requires more concentration, and somewhat more refined technique; but I've personally seen total firearms novices learn to control a Thompson within a half hour on the flat range. M16s and M4s are a little tougher, but with good fundamentals in FA fire technique they're not that hard to be proficient with even in true full auto. The burst setting on most assault rifles and SMGs feels like cheating.

We're not talking about true machine pistols like Cobray M10/M11 and Micro Uzis that, particularly without using a butt stock, a very hard to control in FA without ridiculous amounts of practice.

We're talking about MP5s & similar SMGs, and M4/M16 family and similar rifles & carbines. Just about anyone in decent physical condition, with a confident mindset, and teachable disposition can, with adequate practice, reach a pretty high level of proficiency with these types of weapons. When we start talking about specialized LE units their personnel exceed this minimum. These are individuals in peak physical condition, with very sharp minds, who have proven their abilities to learn advanced skills. Their training and practice levels far exceed being just adequate. Again, it's this level of selectivity that allows me to have little worry about these officers using FA weapons when necessary.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
May 1, 2012, 01:25 AM
How much experience do you have shooting true assault rifles or SMGs?

20+ years service, many of them under combat situations. Being "under fire" is a HELL of a lot different than any training or range scenario. Yes, under range conditions, good control is easily attained with Battle rifles and SMG's but the plain old truth of it is, what you are discussing is far from range conditions. When the bullets start flying around your head, fully automatic weapons are by far NOT a choice to be used where there are innocent civilians. There are simply too many factors to be controlled. If you ever find yourself in that situation, you will find yourself agreeing with what I said 100%. Ask ANYONE that's been under fire and they will agree with me. I can see 3 round burst select fire being acceptable in the hands of a true professional, but full auto in civilian populated scenario is just a flat out NO.

allaroundhunter
May 1, 2012, 02:18 AM
I can see 3 round burst select fire being acceptable in the hands of a true professional, but full auto in civilian populated scenario is just a flat out NO.

I think that we are seeing eye-to-eye here now. I personally have no experience firing automatic weapons in a combat situation, but I do know many that have. They all agree that FA has it's place, but it's place is not when precise round placement is needed.

For a civilian hostage scenario (think SWAT situation), an entry team should not go in with M4 selector switches on auto. However, going in with a more controllable round (9mm MP5 for example), having the selector on 3 round burst is viable.

RhinoDefense
May 1, 2012, 02:56 AM
When the bullets start flying around your head, fully automatic weapons are by far NOT a choice to be used where there are innocent civilians. There are simply too many factors to be controlled. If you ever find yourself in that situation, you will find yourself agreeing with what I said 100%. Ask ANYONE that's been under fire and they will agree with me. I can see 3 round burst select fire being acceptable in the hands of a true professional, but full auto in civilian populated scenario is just a flat out NO.
Been there, done that, got the T shirt and the bumper sticker. I disagree.

Tirod
May 1, 2012, 10:39 AM
Well, it looks like the post Title is accomplishing exactly what was intended.

THis is the answer to our Special Forces need

"THis" being something the OP has decided in his wisdom and experience to be better than what others use. Which implies he is better than the extensive experience of engineers, designers, commanders, and battle veterans have proven works.

"Answer" to a question left unstated. What's wrong with what we have?

"Special Forces" being those people doing unconventional warfare - and held up as a higher standard compared to what?

"Need" which is left as ambiguous as the "answer" to a question we've yet to determine was even asked.

"Flame war," which is exactly what some of you got suckered into.

(insert pic of Jiffy pop warming over flames emitted from the top of a computer screen.)

Andrew Wyatt
May 1, 2012, 10:47 AM
it's just another piston upper.

Autopistola
May 1, 2012, 03:52 PM
I get a kick out of the Filipino guy who really does not want to quit shooting, he keeps smiling (finger on the trigger) while the SWAT guy wrestles it from his hands. Bad form, I know.

And they hold their support hand awkwardly, blocking the field of view. I know it's to keep muzzle control, but the VFG seemed to work just as well.

ugaarguy
May 1, 2012, 09:13 PM
Yes, under range conditions, good control is easily attained with Battle rifles and SMG's but the plain old truth of it is, what you are discussing is far from range conditions.
I fully understand that. However, even with my limited experience, I have imparted the basics of full auto SMG firing technique to a firearms novice. Within half an hour I had this novice manually shooting burst from a FA Thompson to a level where he could all round a standard torso silhouette at 15 yards.

This goes back to my previous point: The relatively few LEOS who are authorized to use FA weapons on duty get orders of magnitude more training & practice under much more strenuous conditions. This training is under the direction of not only formally qualified instructors, but instructors who are orders of magnitude more qualified than myself.
When the bullets start flying around your head, fully automatic weapons are by far NOT a choice to be used where there are innocent civilians. There are simply too many factors to be controlled.
I'd rather have qualified LEOS with access to FA weapons than not, particularly when the Jamie Hood (http://onlineathens.com/local-news/2012-02-15/jamie-hood-i-could-have-killed-more-officers)s of the world are running loose.
If you ever find yourself in that situation, you will find yourself agreeing with what I said 100%. Ask ANYONE that's been under fire and they will agree with me.
Been under fire myself, but it was indirect fire (mortars & rockets), and I was inside a well defined perimeter keeping air control equipment working. I won't pretend to have been under fire in the same way you have, but I do at least have some understanding.

Here's the core of the issue, skip the above if you'd like.
I can see 3 round burst select fire being acceptable in the hands of a true professional, but full auto in civilian populated scenario is just a flat out NO.
FFIL this is why you provoke such heated disagreement. You state your opinions as fact, and you argue in absolutes. You won't allow for any exception that doesn't fit exactly with your opinion. Do you doubt that US SS and US DSS protective detail qualified agents are true professionals? Do you doubt that other highly vetted and specially trained LEOS from the federal level down to the municipal level are true professionals? Your outlandish assertions that such men and women are not true professionals is an insult to their qualification.

Onmilo
May 2, 2012, 09:41 AM
It isn't the weapon that makes a Special Forces Soldier Special, it is his ability to effectively use any weapon that makes a Special Forces Soldier Special!

mr.trooper
May 2, 2012, 10:23 AM
Even DOC uses FA weapons on certain teams.

There certain ARE situations where non military entities need to "suppress" fire, or "keep peoples heads down".

FIVETWOSEVEN
May 4, 2012, 02:03 AM
Ask ANYONE that's been under fire and they will agree with me.

I guess Special Forces don't go fire at all.

Full auto is seen here in combat by Special forces from a short carbine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwDxpST8EU8
Full auto is seen here being used by a member of the British SAS by another short carbine just off screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01v0sUra-yg&feature=relmfu

Full auto in combat is real and used.

Quiet
May 4, 2012, 02:29 AM
FYI.
LAPD SWAT also has Colt M-4A1, H&K HK-416, FNH SCAR-L and FNH SCAR-H in their inventory.

In 2010, the H&K HK-416 was slected to replace the Colt M-4A1 as the standard 5.56x45mm rifle for the LAPD SWAT.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
May 4, 2012, 02:44 AM
I guess Special Forces don't go fire at all.

Full auto is seen here in combat by Special forces from a short carbine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwDxpST8EU8
Full auto is seen here being used by a member of the British SAS by another short carbine just off screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01v0s...feature=relmfu

Full auto in combat is real and used.

He and I were discussing Civilian Authority in use of full auto not military. Try reading what I said before you post ty.

jmorris
May 4, 2012, 08:26 AM
More of the same and I thought it was going to be this.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/First_peace_badge.jpg



With all of the gun laws in CA making it one of the safest places in the US, I would think all the regular police would need is a whistle with SWAT being issued a short wooden stick.

Robert
May 4, 2012, 10:41 AM
Ug enough.

If you enjoyed reading about "THis is the answer to our Special Forces need" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!