• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Serious PAP Replacing Old Local Machine Gun With Better Foreign One! Guess New Machine Gun For SAF Warriors!

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
ST_Engineering00.jpg


The Singapore Army has picked Colt’s IAR6940 as its new section automatic weapon, and so it will eventually replace the venerable ST Engineering Ultimax 100 that has served the army for more than 30 years.

The selection was revealed in the army work plan video for the last fiscal year.

001.jpg


Singapore’s MINDEF told Shephard: ‘Our army has conducted extensive trials and evaluations of various weapon models as part of continued force modernisation efforts. The Colt Infantry Automatic Rifle has been assessed to be a suitable replacement for the SAW.’

The Colt IAR6940 lost out to the M27 in the USMC

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/...ps-ultimax-100-light-machine-gun-for-m27-iar/
 

SBFNews

Alfrescian
Loyal
Waste of money. These weapons will never see a war. Even if it did, Singapore is already gone before a single round is fired at the enemy.
 

borom

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Surprised they chose one that is basically an improved version of AR 15 and rejected by the USMC .
Does it has anything to do with manufacturing it here ?
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Its a mistake to replace the Ultimax 100. But they had to do it because of the cost. The original Ultimax 100 were not that great. I know, because I used it in the SAF. Mags would drop for no reason. Gun would jam all the time when using the drum mags. But that was 30 years ago. since then, the design has been refined and is more dependable now. Also, they worked the kinks out of the 100 round drum mags. And added the picatinny rail. Buying this COlt IAR 6940 was more for cost reason. ST could not give the Ultimax away and therefore, the production run was considered small batch in today's infantry weapons industry. No major army adopted it and they mostly just sold to SAF. The cost per gun was therefore a lot higher. And after not even being allowed into the USMC competition, I think ST saw the writing on the wall and discontinued the production. Other much larger manufacturing concern can produce the guns like the IAR 6940 for likely a cheaper price.
 

Leckmichamarsch

Alfrescian
Loyal
Its a mistake to replace the Ultimax 100. But they had to do it because of the cost. The original Ultimax 100 were not that great. I know, because I used it in the SAF. Mags would drop for no reason. Gun would jam all the time when using the drum mags. But that was 30 years ago. since then, the design has been refined and is more dependable now. Also, they worked the kinks out of the 100 round drum mags. And added the picatinny rail. Buying this COlt IAR 6940 was more for cost reason. ST could not give the Ultimax away and therefore, the production run was considered small batch in today's infantry weapons industry. No major army adopted it and they mostly just sold to SAF. The cost per gun was therefore a lot higher. And after not even being allowed into the USMC competition, I think ST saw the writing on the wall and discontinued the production. Other much larger manufacturing concern can produce the guns like the IAR 6940 for likely a cheaper price.
Designed by Jim Sullivan
Paid US$1 000 000
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
Its a mistake to replace the Ultimax 100. But they had to do it because of the cost. The original Ultimax 100 were not that great. I know, because I used it in the SAF. Mags would drop for no reason. Gun would jam all the time when using the drum mags. But that was 30 years ago. since then, the design has been refined and is more dependable now. Also, they worked the kinks out of the 100 round drum mags. And added the picatinny rail. Buying this COlt IAR 6940 was more for cost reason. ST could not give the Ultimax away and therefore, the production run was considered small batch in today's infantry weapons industry. No major army adopted it and they mostly just sold to SAF. The cost per gun was therefore a lot higher. And after not even being allowed into the USMC competition, I think ST saw the writing on the wall and discontinued the production. Other much larger manufacturing concern can produce the guns like the IAR 6940 for likely a cheaper price.
If all the kinks have been worked out. There is no reason to change it...in addition since singkieland has a domestic arms industry..it can always modify n Improve n keep the production local...ammo size still the same

 

mojito

Alfrescian
Loyal
Its a mistake to replace the Ultimax 100. But they had to do it because of the cost. The original Ultimax 100 were not that great. I know, because I used it in the SAF. Mags would drop for no reason. Gun would jam all the time when using the drum mags. But that was 30 years ago. since then, the design has been refined and is more dependable now. Also, they worked the kinks out of the 100 round drum mags. And added the picatinny rail. Buying this COlt IAR 6940 was more for cost reason. ST could not give the Ultimax away and therefore, the production run was considered small batch in today's infantry weapons industry. No major army adopted it and they mostly just sold to SAF. The cost per gun was therefore a lot higher. And after not even being allowed into the USMC competition, I think ST saw the writing on the wall and discontinued the production. Other much larger manufacturing concern can produce the guns like the IAR 6940 for likely a cheaper price.
So windy. It is flimsy and look like crap, in other words. :cautious:
 

mixmasternrv

Alfrescian
Loyal
Its a mistake to replace the Ultimax 100. But they had to do it because of the cost. The original Ultimax 100 were not that great. I know, because I used it in the SAF. Mags would drop for no reason. Gun would jam all the time when using the drum mags. But that was 30 years ago. since then, the design has been refined and is more dependable now. Also, they worked the kinks out of the 100 round drum mags. And added the picatinny rail. Buying this COlt IAR 6940 was more for cost reason. ST could not give the Ultimax away and therefore, the production run was considered small batch in today's infantry weapons industry. No major army adopted it and they mostly just sold to SAF. The cost per gun was therefore a lot higher. And after not even being allowed into the USMC competition, I think ST saw the writing on the wall and discontinued the production. Other much larger manufacturing concern can produce the guns like the IAR 6940 for likely a cheaper price.
The Ultimax 100 is used in significant numbers by the armed forces of Singapore, Croatia and the Philippines. The Mark 3 variant is currently used in the Singapore Armed Forces and known by soldiers as the SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon). Used it myself during NS and IMO it was super effective as a LMG because it combines portability and firepower in one reliable package - the magazine kinks (drum) were fixed by then. The SAW has very low recoil for a fully automatic machine gun. During BMT and later OCS, relatively long distance hikes and route marches was central to the infantry experience. I'd always choose to be SAW gunner as it's the better walking stick when the mentor isn't looking and shooting-wise, the Ultimax is just a recoilless, slightly heavy rifle with a crappy trigger. I loved that thing, over the SAR-21. But if only the mags (30 round clips) weren't so crap and it had a scope. If I had to do fire movement or move around urban areas gun up (that’s most of our training exercises), I'd rather do it with the Ultimax than a GPMG. But that is my opinion.

Still it is stupid we are picking a glorified M-16 (Colt AIR 6940) that was beaten by the Heckler & Koch M-16 clone - the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR) adopted by the US Marines.
 

Hypocrite-The

Alfrescian
Loyal
The Ultimax 100 is used in significant numbers by the armed forces of Singapore, Croatia and the Philippines. The Mark 3 variant is currently used in the Singapore Armed Forces and known by soldiers as the SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon). Used it myself during NS and IMO it was super effective as a LMG because it combines portability and firepower in one reliable package - the magazine kinks (drum) were fixed by then. The SAW has very low recoil for a fully automatic machine gun. During BMT and later OCS, relatively long distance hikes and route marches was central to the infantry experience. I'd always choose to be SAW gunner as it's the better walking stick when the mentor isn't looking and shooting-wise, the Ultimax is just a recoilless, slightly heavy rifle with a crappy trigger. I loved that thing, over the SAR-21. But if only the mags (30 round clips) weren't so crap and it had a scope. If I had to do fire movement or move around urban areas gun up (that’s most of our training exercises), I'd rather do it with the Ultimax than a GPMG. But that is my opinion.

Still it is stupid we are picking a glorified M-16 (Colt AIR 6940) that was beaten by the Heckler & Koch M-16 clone - the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR) adopted by the US Marines.
The issue is the yanks might change to a larger calibre...the 5.56 might go obsolete n once the yanks change the calibre the whole world will follow..

 
Top