The IDF will equip its troops with the new Tavor assault rifl

IMRA ^ | 7-24-02

[SJackson]

The IDF will equip its troops with the new Tavor assault rifle, manufactured by Israel Military Industries.

Globes' correspondent 23 July 2002

Hebrew daily "Yediot Ahronot" reports that the IDF will equip its troops with the new Tavor assault rifle, manufactured by Israel Military Industries (IMI), the IDF Army Headquarters decided yesterday. The decision will shortly be sent to IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Moshe Yaalon for approval.

Most IDF troops currently use the obsolescent US M-16 or Israeli Galil rifle. The IDF decided a new, more advanced rifle was needed. The two alternatives were the Tavor and the M-4, an updated version of the short M-16. The advantage of the M-4 is it could be bought with US military aid.

Both rifles underwent extended testing in the past year. The Tavor was given to soldiers in the Givati infantry brigade, and the M-4 to the Nahal infantry brigade. Both rifles saw operational use in the fighting in the territories.

Yesterday, GOC Army Headquarters Maj.-Gen. Yiftah Ron Tal convened a meeting that decided that the Tavor will be the IDF's next rifle. The IDF will shortly open negotiations with IMI to finalize delivery details.

The Tavor is equipped with an Israeli-built integral reflex optical reflective sight. The rifle's rearward center of gravity provides easy aiming, including in the standing position. The rifle passed many firing tests, proving effective in difficult field conditions. Givati infantrymen, who have used the Tavor for months, have heaped praise on the new rifle, saying it was very comfortable, accurate and always reliable on the battlefield.

[Lurker]

Yea I have one.

Leave the bullpup slung, and toss in a couple of frags.

Just my opinion FWIW. Your mileage may vary.

Regards,

L

[Squantos]

Thus confirming that Israeli's now own Ronnie Barrett's Company now.........(rumor I heard a few months ago)

Stay Safe Archy , good info !

[archy]

Thus confirming that Israeli's now own Ronnie Barrett's Company now.........(rumor I heard a few months ago)

Stay Safe Archy , good info !

I don't know about *owning* it, though as with another Tennessee-based small arms manufactory, they may have infused a substantial financial influx, offering good will and influence if not outright control. But having a U.S. civilian version of the Tavor reach acceptance with American shooters would likely not hurt international sales of their military offering a bit- or vice-versa.

The *civilian Tavor* bullpup prototype appears quite different from the military versions, though, and the betting is that internally, it's more akin to the BATF-kosher Galil semiauto or the Israeli *Magal* police carbine than the Tavor.

[archy]

Your criticism makes sense, though I'm not particularly qualified to dispute it either. And the IDF doesn't exactly "prepare" the house the way we would (and they should) before clearing.

In the recesses of my mind (archy would know, thus the ping) I think I remember a bullpup version of the M14, developed very early on, perhaps in the transition from the Garand, rejected for similar reasons, the ejection was too close to the face.

There was indeed a bullpup variant among the various developmental offerings created along the path of the search for a Garand replacement or improvement that included the eventually successful T44E4 pushed by Colonel Rene R. Studier, Earle Harvey's T25, and the FN offering of a U.S. version of their FAL, the T48, among others. [T20, T20E1, T20E2; T22, T22E1, T22E2; and T27). Then the rest of the T series (T28; T31; T33; T35; T36; T37; T25; T47; T44, T44E1 - T44E6]

T25

And too, at around the same time, former tank sergeant and small arms designer Loren Cook came up with a straight-line bullpup .45-caliber SMG as a possible replacement for the WWII-era M3 and M3A1 Greaseguns that soldiered on until the last decade of the XX century. He was not an officer, so his uinteresting design had little chancce of acceptance among the Ordnance Corps brass.

The real gem of that period was the British EM-2 in the *.270/30* chambering, actually a .276 caliber, 7mmx45mm caliber bullpup rifle. But it wasn't chambered for that NATO-sdesired US cartridge, so Great Britain's Tommies got a pommified FAL instead.

EM-2

[MoJo2001]

In fact, I'll bet if you look into it, we'll find your posts have been inspired from pro-jihad sites, and your computer possibly subsidized with checks from Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

OUCH!! LOL!! BTTT Yehuda!!

[archy]

Your criticism makes sense, though I'm not particularly qualified to dispute it either. And the IDF doesn't exactly "prepare" the house the way we would (and they should) before clearing.

I believe that the after-action reports of Patton's Third Army, probably the all-time champions of house-to-house rathunts and MOUT, eventually came to the the conclusive thought that the best way to do so was with direct fire from self-propelled 155mm artillery pieces, though many of the then-existing designs had trouble maneuvering in narro European city streets. But the basic concept certainly works for me.

[archy]

I feel VERY SORRY for an troops who are issued these things. The Israelis do a lot of house clearing and a bullpup design makes this very difficult to do. When doing house clearing, you need to change which shoulder the gun is mounted on. When going around a right hand corner, you mount the gun on your left shoulder to help keep as much of your body behind cover as possible. The opposite goes for moving around a left hand corner, the weapon is mounted on the right shoulder.

A bullpup design makes this impossible without having rounds ejected DIRECTLY into your face. In order to use this gun, if you are going around a right hand corner, the gun must stay mounted on your right shoulder. This exposes most of your body to enemy fire. If this post is true, I feel bad for the troops who have to use this gun.

Nah. For all the grief the Brits have had about the problems they've had with their SA80/L85A1 bullpup rifle, that's not been much of one, though clearly, a weapon that dumps its brass downwards of forward is preferable. But in MOUT operations in Northern Ireland, and previously in Hong Kong and elsewhere by the British Gurkha Regiment, the procedure was simply to raise the weapon to the leftside shoulder, rotate the pistol grip 90º to the left, hiorizontal, and use the optical telescopic sight with the left eye, a procedure similar to that used when firing with a gas mask in place. Precision accuracy id degraded, but not entirely absent.

Anyway, it clearly works from the Gurkhas, who've been noticibly silent about any feelings they've had about SA80 shortcomings. In my own dealings with them, they've always seemed to have more pressing concerns worth their real concern.

Ayo Ghorkhali!

[Shryke]

In fact, I'll bet if you look into it, we'll find your posts have been inspired from pro-jihad sites, and your computer possibly subsidized with checks from Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Excellent. Thanks, good post. It's unfortunate Illbay continues to slander Israel.

[The KG9 Kid]

If you KNOW the bad guys are in the next room and haven't got hostages (or don't care), then Lurker's idea seems reasonable.

I once read an account from a Russian military police captain who was visiting the LAPD as a guest. After watching a house-clearing live fire training exercise by SWAT entry guys armed with MP5s and non-lethal 'flash-bang' grenades (done perfectly because they'd trained the same scenario hundreds of times before, of course) the Russian captain was asked 'How do the Russians handle the same scenario?'.

He said that instead of rushing into the room in a single file, throwing flash bangs, and engaging individual targets in short 9mm bursts like LAPD SWAT did, his men just stand in the corridor outside with their AKs and fire into the room through the walls in 'Mad Minute' style emptying three mags full, and THEN they toss general-issue frag grenades inside.

I know you didn't ask me, Travis, but I don't see any downside to bullpups at all.

[Cap'n Crunch]

I don't have any experience with bull pups. Pit bulls, now thats another story.

I thought it was interesting the soldiers thought they were more accurate than conventional (if you will) rifles.

They look ugly to me. But if they're effective.

[SJackson]

I believe that the after-action reports of Patton's Third Army, probably the all-time champions of house-to-house rathunts and MOUT, eventually came to the the conclusive thought that the best way to do so was with direct fire from self-propelled 155mm artillery pieces, though many of the then-existing designs had trouble maneuvering in narro European city streets. But the basic concept certainly works for me.

I was thinking air, but that works.

I love this map.

I mean, turn it around, in the other direction, the entire West Bank is in range of WW2 artillery (and Israel has advanced WW2 technology a bit).

Do you think Sharon (and his predecessors) don't know that? IMO, the restraint, given the targeting of Israeli civilians, is appalling.

..........................

BTW, my question on the M14 bullpup came from something I read some time ago, that it was a thought in early development. I can't imagine the ejection port under my nose. My ears, they'd ber ruptured anyway. I did a search and came up with one hit, no text. What is that?

[SJackson]

entire West Bank should have been Area A, but you get the idea.

[Travis McGee]

I shot the Steyer AUG a long time ago, but not enough to get used to it. I guess a shorter overall length from shoulder can only be good in terms of patrolling through brush or going around corners, and less fatiguing for sustained shooting off hand with the center of gravity closer to the shooter's support arm and shoulder...

[SauronOfMordor]

bump

[archy]

I was thinking air, but that works.

I love this map.

I mean, turn it around, in the other direction, the entire West Bank is in range of WW2 artillery (and Israel has advanced WW2 technology a bit).

Do you think Sharon (and his predecessors) don't know that? IMO, the restraint, given the targeting of Israeli civilians, is appalling.

That's WAY obsolete. Base-bleed 152mm [Soviet] and 155 [US/NATO/Israeli] projectiles extend the range of medium-heavy guns well beyond that shown, and the Israeli RAP projectiles for the 175mm are nearly double that listed. Thank Dr Gerald Bull and SRC in Canada for many of the developments along those lines....

..........................

BTW, my question on the M14 bullpup came from something I read some time ago, that it was a thought in early development. I can't imagine the ejection port under my nose. My ears, they'd ber ruptured anyway. I did a search and came up with one hit, no text. What is that?

That's an AWC G2 modification of a US M14 rifle, a stock and sight mount add-on to make the old M14 a bit more adaptable to a muzzlemount silencer/suppressor, AWCs real line of products. The Israelis use the similar M36 Sardius/Sirkus-designed bullpup M14, [now the TCI M89SR] so that the silencer-equipped rifle remains of about the sdame overall length as the original as-issued M14.

The AWC company is still in business, and I believe their G2 package for upgrading the M14 [or semiauto Springfield Armory M1A] remains available...though not cheap.

[archy]