Thread: At least it's a nice colour green - NZDF choose AR to replace Steyrs

Isn't a civilian Steyer quite abit different from a Mil-spec one? Op rod and bolt in particular are different I think. So the now mil-surps couldn't be bought on E (if 'they' allow that to happen), would be classed as C because of the select fire.

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Isn't a civilian Steyer quite abit different from a Mil-spec one? Op rod and bolt in particular are different I think. So the now mil-surps couldn't be bought on E (if 'they' allow that to happen), would be classed as C because of the select fire.

I'm up for correction here but my understanding is that select-fire weapons that are imported have to be rendered as semi-auto prior to their arrival in NZ in order to be registered as E category? Have no idea what the rationale would be re local Steyrs.

I think people need to back the bus up a little . All that has happened is that Bullsh@t Castle has said is that "We liked playing with a rifle ".
There is nothing to say that they will get what they "want ". In the end they will accept what they are given and the Politicians will decide not the Mandarins of Bullsh@t Castle . The Aussies will be very unhappy of a different choice from them no matter what we think . Remember MonKey boy preferred a Softball game over a Funeral .

Originally Posted by Tankd

I think people need to back the bus up a little . All that has happened is that Bullsh@t Castle has said is that "We liked playing with a rifle ".
There is nothing to say that they will get what they "want ". In the end they will accept what they are given and the Politicians will decide not the Mandarins of Bullsh@t Castle . The Aussies will be very unhappy of a different choice from them no matter what we think . Remember MonKey boy preferred a Softball game over a Funeral .

I don't think the Aussies would care what rifle we had as long as it fires 5.56x45mm.

Originally Posted by Ryan

I don't think the Aussies would care what rifle we had as long as it fires 5.56x45mm.

Obviously you do not understand just how things work .This is as much a political decision as a millitary one

Originally Posted by Tankd

Obviously you do not understand just how things work .This is as much a political decision as a millitary one

Unfortunately I think it is you who does not fully understand how things work fully. There is no "conspiracys" involved. The current weapon is coming to the end of its life and there has been a trial and LMT is the winner. Job done. That's it.

Originally Posted by Shooter

Unfortunately I think it is you who does not fully understand how things work fully. There is no "conspiracys" involved. The current weapon is coming to the end of its life and there has been a trial and LMT is the winner. Job done. That's it.

Last time at the end on the Trials ,they said to the Government of the day "We want the Canadian C7/9 " . The Government said back "No you don't you want the Aussie Styer " and guess what we got ????.

Bit of a pissed post, but, sas (as only being small force and also unique in what they do) should get what ever they need. And lets face it, the general person will not know the true cost for these people - and i dont think they need to. We dont live in a third world nation and the people that run the country arent that bad, so give them the benefit of trying to safe guard these guys that do things that the norm dont need to know about.
General force, army navy air etc., need to have a somewhat balanced approached to gear. That Hopefully doesnt sound too bad, and i do think the people on the pointy end need the best, but $ do come in at some point.
If there is any mention of back handers for deals, PROVE and expose.

And i dont think we spend enough on the military

Originally Posted by Beaker

And i dont think we spend enough on the military

+1

There are a lot of others areas that could do with more $ as well, just getting the extra $ is the hard part as every current govt expense would be hard or ill advised to reduce.
I'm actually surprised the current govt haven't come down harder on mil spending as they have been very hard on other departments,with mixed outcomes.

Originally Posted by res

+1

There are a lot of others areas that could do with more $ as well, just getting the extra $ is the hard part as every current govt expense would be hard or ill advised to reduce.
I'm actually surprised the current govt haven't come down harder on mil spending as they have been very hard on other departments,with mixed outcomes.

Forced to save $400 Million by this year and with the redunacy of 300+ soldiers, airman and sailers I would think that would consitute "coming down hard" on military spending. It is all relitive and if you don't see it then you may not realise how tight the purse strings really are.

illjust stick with the SLRgents .heavy yeah but if something got hit it stayed hit and also a 10 lb rifle makes a mighty fine bloody shin scraper! ore spine readjuster (oops did i say that) and i stillremebers me TF basic at burnham.very impressionable raw recruits see 4 grizzled RFsgts operating on a stumpwith SLRS. end of volley-our sgt "go have a look and t
ell me what you learned
Its a very powerful bullet sgt
No son ,the correct answer is soldiers dont hide behind bloody trees-thats why god gave ya feet to keep your arse off the ground moving and keep you alive so the army can teach you to shoot back!
had he not been in the military hed have made a topnotch stand up comedian.
The M16-most outstanding feat I saw was it used as a chainsaw to chop a tree in half. 1x30rd mag +1/2 a mag. the plt commander concerned actually had a rather memorable conversation with the CO over that stunt
i got out in 1991as the steyr was comin into general service and i was always told we got it because lithgow small arms in aussie tooled up to manufacture it etc etc and the anzac relationship.as a mere TF sgt I accepted the
"official line -it seemed the simplest option and really who knows how a bloody politicians mind works anyhow at the end of the day!

Originally Posted by kotuku

illjust stick with the SLRgents .heavy yeah but if something got hit it stayed hit and also a 10 lb rifle makes a mighty fine bloody shin scraper! ore spine readjuster (oops did i say that) and i stillremebers me TF basic at burnham.very impressionable raw recruits see 4 grizzled RFsgts operating on a stumpwith SLRS. end of volley-our sgt "go have a look and t
ell me what you learned
Its a very powerful bullet sgt
No son ,the correct answer is soldiers dont hide behind bloody trees-thats why god gave ya feet to keep your arse off the ground moving and keep you alive so the army can teach you to shoot back!
had he not been in the military hed have made a topnotch stand up comedian.
The M16-most outstanding feat I saw was it used as a chainsaw to chop a tree in half. 1x30rd mag +1/2 a mag. the plt commander concerned actually had a rather memorable conversation with the CO over that stunt
i got out in 1991as the steyr was comin into general service and i was always told we got it because lithgow small arms in aussie tooled up to manufacture it etc etc and the anzac relationship.as a mere TF sgt I accepted the
"official line -it seemed the simplest option and really who knows how a bloody politicians mind works anyhow at the end of the day!

You are making the presumption that their mind works to start with.....?

As for Budget cuts. they have XXXX Billion $$ to spend. SOme goes here, some goes there and some goes somewhere else. If you want more spent on the military (and I am NOT saying it is not justifiable) then it has to come from somewhere else. Do you take it from:
Healthcare ( also needs more money), or
Welfare (also needs more money), or
Police and law and order (also needs more money), or
Education(also needs more money), or
DoC (also needs more money), or
the higher taxes and get it from the taxpayer (also needs more money) ....?

Hang on, I think I see a pattern forming here....

Nah what you do is just give everyone more money (except the taxpayer) and don't worry about where it comes from.... or in other words be a green party economics spokesman... or a labour party finance spokesman in opposition... (at least they shape up a little when they have to be responsible)

I used to get on the piss a bit with a retired Colonel who had a fair bit to do with the Steyr trial, R93 probably knows him. He got himself in a bit of strife later in life but was quite a good dude. I remember asking him about Steyr selection once and sorry to quell all the conspiracy/butter theories but vaguely(as was quite chopped @Cowboys Bar) remember him saying it tested far better than the other options available at the time. The AR's we get now are possibly made a bit better than the ones 20 odd years ago provided to be making fair comparisons with, as have tested up tops this time and as a result they have selected them.
Many grunts back then may have also had personnel preferences to AR'S like if everyone on here were told this is the one rifle you can buy to go hunting many would be pissed off.