The C9A2 (pics)

[D-n-A]

http://www.cdnmilitary.ca/images/C9A2_1.jpg


http://www.cdnmilitary.ca/images/C9A2_2.jpg


*for those who dont know, the little black rectangle shaped box is a AN-PEQ2 unit

 

[AlphaCharlie]

sexy.

 

[leopard11]

very nice indeed, one of my friends pointed this out, one of the barrels is longer on one pic from the other, i take it they are still prototyping and havent found the exact specs they want yet?

 

[scm77]

One is a normal barrell the other is for FIBUA and other CQB situations. I read something somewhere that said each C9 gunner would get two of each barrell.

And yes it is very sexy.

Anybody know if they upgrading the the C8‘s to Diemacos C8A2 aswell?

 

[48Highlander]

Am I the only one who doesn‘t know what an AN-PEQ2 unit is?

 

[Jarnhamar]

Thats a beautiful gun.
Gotta get rid of the C79 site though.
I‘d probably prefer the shorter barrel as well. I‘d even trade the distance and accurcy with the longer one for the shorter one.
Carrying 4 barrels woudln‘t be much fun either.

 

[stukirkpatrick]

I looked the AN-PEQ2 up, it appears to be some sort of aiming laser, but most of the web references are for Airsoft...

Why mount a laser sight on an LMG?

 

[mattoigta]

Originally posted by Kirkpatrick:
[qb] Why mount a laser sight on an LMG? [/qb]

In that same vein, why mount an optical sight on an LMG?

 

[48Highlander]

the optical sight makes some sense for an LMG. Used at the section level, the C9 is rarely employed as a machinegun at all, especially during the type of advance-to-contact that we usualy paractice. There‘s very little use of the concept of the beaten zone. It‘s basically used as a C7 with much more ammo, so mounting a C79 sight on it makes as much sense as mounting it on a C7. Putting it on a C6 on the other hand would be a mistake because the C6 actually IS supposed to be employed as an MG.

 

[D-n-A]

The AN-PEQ2 is a IR Pointer/Illuminator, with a 0-600m Range.

 

[D-n-A]

Here‘s a AN-PEQ2 zap-strapped to a US Marines M16A2? rifle

http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/gulf_war_2_iraqi_freedom_marines/usmc21.jpg


And another picture of it on a Marines M4 Rifle
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/gulf_war_2_iraqi_freedom_marines/usmc186_001.jpg

 

[kyleg]

Please excuse the complete lack of knowledge on this subject, but why would a laser need such a big case? I mean, laser pointers are smaller than pens nowadays...

 

[Marauder]

Given that the C79 can‘t hold a zero worth a shiite on a rifle, I still don‘t know why Higher insists on keeping it on an MG, even if it is firing 5.56. It should be used as an area weapon, and IMO should be issued with iron sights. If it‘d only being used as another automatic rifle, it‘s being underutilized.

And I don‘t understand why They would cheap out on not having CADPAT furniture, and just settling for OD. I‘d say you could do the job at unit level, but I‘m sure some obscure little corner of the Puzzle Palace will spew out a rule against that too.

 

[Infanteer]

As usual, your right on the money bro.

About the pics...I like the cloth ammo bag, BIG improvement from the usual ka-CLUNK, ka-CLUNK, ka-KLUNK noise a gunner makes when running.

 

[1feral1]

Very interesting pics indeed! I take the second image is the para one with the shorter bbl.

Interesting about the C8/M4 style butt too.

Australia too is upgrading its F89A1 Minimi fleet, but not to extreme the CF is.

Presently the main diff between the Aussie Minimi and the CF one is as fol:

1. MAG 58 style flash suppressor
2. Thicker barrel
3. No front sight on the gas block
4. No Emerg sights on the rail
5. Knurled take down pin
6. Optics are 1.5X, but the C79 is also used
7. Hyrdraulic buffer is used
8. Solid M249 type butt

The improvements are to install a rail system where the handgurad normally is. we already have the para Minimi in service. Also used is various NINOX kit, and NADs.

Ther is a pic of the Aussie F89A1 in the weapons uploads, so go have a squizz.


Cheers,

Wes

 

[jbeach95]

Wesley Allen, in regards to number 3 on your list, some C9s that I have used do not have front sights, which are probably easy to remove. Those C9s used the C79 optical sight only.

As for the optical vs. iron sights debate, why not let the gunners decide which one to use? They make rear iron sights that attach to the rail (with elevation adjustment, unlike the built in aperture).

 

[AlphaCharlie]

Originally posted by Marauder:
[qb]

And I don‘t understand why They would cheap out on not having CADPAT furniture, and just settling for OD. I‘d say you could do the job at unit level, but I‘m sure some obscure little corner of the Puzzle Palace will spew out a rule against that too. [/qb]

I‘m no expert, but I would think that printing OD on a rifle would be MUCH easier than trying to print CadPat...

 

[scm77]

Originally posted by Pte. gremlin:
[qb] Please excuse the complete lack of knowledge on this subject, but why would a laser need such a big case? I mean, laser pointers are smaller than pens nowadays... [/qb]

It‘s an Infra Red laser pointer/illuminator. You can‘t see it without night vision.

 

[Slumsofsackville]

I used Pac 4 In VA, Only way I was Doing Live Fire Fibua, I could tell where my Muzzle was and so Did my buddy.

It‘s an Infra Red laser pointer/illuminator. You can‘t see it without night vision.

Bingo, Naked Eye Cant See It, But NVD Can.

 

[kyleg]

Originally posted by scm77:
[qb]

Originally posted by Pte. gremlin:
[qb] Please excuse the complete lack of knowledge on this subject, but why would a laser need such a big case? I mean, laser pointers are smaller than pens nowadays... [/qb]

It‘s an Infra Red laser pointer/illuminator. You can‘t see it without night vision. [/qb]

Well that makes sense, thanks for the info. I didn‘t realize night vision was needed to see it.