Hmm.......This is my personal take on how the SAR-21 should have
been. Firstly, The LAD must be removed. Bcos the LAD has onli a
combat range of abt 100m, thus watever beyond that is useless. In
the night, the moment u on your LAD, u are a bullet magnet. All the
ppls can see u and can shoot at you. You will be basically just a
LIVING blinking figure 12. Next is the issue of the scope. The
scope is prone to dewing in the morning and after river crossing,
even wif scope rubber, it is damn JIALAT. They could have a rail
instead for those sharpshooter to mount their scope. Lastly, should
have a better iron-sight like that of M-16 to act as a spare.
I feel that the Singapore rifle should be USER friendly and also
IDIOT-PROOF. Just tell me how the average left hander shoot with
the SAR-21?
I think the emphasis should be more on fire-power than the part on
accuracy. I remember that the jungle instructor at Laikun camp in
Brunei told us that in typical jungle setting, the maximum typical
engagement is lesser than 150m. Thus in the heat of a fire fight,
do you think you will have the chance to aim properly and shoot?
NO. History have also proven that fire-power is veri essential
especially for conscript based army. Look at the battle of
Stalingrad, the Soviet has at least 1 LMG, and 4 SMG per squad.
Bcos in a typical BUA situation, you do not need to have range
except for sniper. Also to train a typical conscript soldier to
fire the Mosin Ngant properly is time consuming. Thus by letting
their soldier carry the SMG, they will have a higher chance of
killing the enemy eventhough they use more rounds. One might say
that the average amt of time the Singaporean soldier receive for
training is more than the Russians,....... but the veri old
reservist guys may not be able to handle the new weapons that are
too complicated. Thus having a cheap, pick up to fire type of rifle
is definitely a plus over the typical new age rifle.
