Title: The argument for the Ultimax
seWer Rat - April 23, 2006 02:08 AM (GMT)
SR officer H. Cabunoc's opinion on the Ultimax for the Army and the SRs in particular:
| QUOTE |
| I had tried both the M249 and the Ultimax and saw for myself the distinction as a shooter and infantryman. The manufacturer (CIS) has corrected the defects of the Ultimax (falling drum-magazine, double feeding and other malfunctions) which made it an "unwanted" weapon in the 7th SRC when we were deployed in Maguindanao. The advantages of the Ultimax include the following: CIS has a local counterpart company (Floro Arms) which assist the repairs and parts replacement. We wont be too dependent of the M855 SS109 linked ammo which the Arsenal is not capable of producing It out-performs the M249 (shot grouping capacity) out to 500m. It should be noted that the Singapore Shooting Team is the consistent champion in the LMG Category of the Australian Army Skill At Arms Meeting that we participated recently. I had seen how the NZ, Aus Army, US AMU and USMC Shooting Team of Quantico (all were using M249 except NZ team which used the M240B) were "routed" by the Singaporeans. We were using the brand new M249 from SEB, PA. Tigok rin kami sa LMG Category! Perhaps, we can request from Singapore, our ASEAN neighbor, to design a 1:9 twist bull barrel for the Ultimax so that we can use either the SS109 and the M193 ball. We immediately submitted our observations and recommendations to the CGPA himself when we arrived in December. I hope there will be positive action very soon. The Army guys (especially the office boys) who are responsible for the procurement of our weapon systems must really rethink about their options. Ultimax or the Minimi? Nasubukan ko na yan... ang iba, nabola or nagpabola lang sa dealer. Hoooooooooah! |
makes you wonder why the honchos still would like to get that blasted Minimi, heck, even the PMC likes the Ultimax over the Minimi :armyroleyes:
tirad - April 23, 2006 04:08 PM (GMT)
That would make the Ultimax cheaper, lighter and better.
And we're going for the 2.5X more expensive, 1.5X heavier, and less accurate Minimi. Oh well.
The Ultimax importer in the US also developed a "Mk 4" version with incremental improvements, including that SR officer's wished for 1:9 twist barrel, along with semi/3rd-burst/full-auto modes (Mk3 was auto-only), side-folding or M4-type telescoping buttstock, 1913 rails, etc.
article on Ultimax Mk4: http://www.defensereview.com/...News&file=article&sid=853
Also, the USMC in 2005 tried to replace its Minimis with an IAR (interim auto rifle), spec'd very closely to an Ultimax-type light, mag/drum-fed 100rd auto weapon. If I recall correctly, tough the USMC canceled that program but not too sure (and can't make google turn up a related link). I could be wrong, and the USMC may not have dropped the program yet.
At any rate, the fact is a major Minimi/M249 operator like the USMC looked for (or is still looking?) for an Ultimax-type SAW.
This has been brought up in previous threads but again, when it comes to these 5.56 SAW/AR, there's the matter of price: $2,000 Ultimax vs $5,000 Minimi.
For the same money, the AFP could equip 2.5X as many fire teams with a SAW/AR.
Alternatively, if they're willing to equip a fire team with 1 x $5K Minimi, then why not 2 x $2K Ultimax's -- that'd 2 autoriflemen per fire team! and with a thousand dollars in change too.
And we're going for the 2.5X more expensive, 1.5X heavier, and less accurate Minimi. Oh well.
The Ultimax importer in the US also developed a "Mk 4" version with incremental improvements, including that SR officer's wished for 1:9 twist barrel, along with semi/3rd-burst/full-auto modes (Mk3 was auto-only), side-folding or M4-type telescoping buttstock, 1913 rails, etc.
article on Ultimax Mk4: http://www.defensereview.com/...News&file=article&sid=853
Also, the USMC in 2005 tried to replace its Minimis with an IAR (interim auto rifle), spec'd very closely to an Ultimax-type light, mag/drum-fed 100rd auto weapon. If I recall correctly, tough the USMC canceled that program but not too sure (and can't make google turn up a related link). I could be wrong, and the USMC may not have dropped the program yet.
At any rate, the fact is a major Minimi/M249 operator like the USMC looked for (or is still looking?) for an Ultimax-type SAW.
This has been brought up in previous threads but again, when it comes to these 5.56 SAW/AR, there's the matter of price: $2,000 Ultimax vs $5,000 Minimi.
For the same money, the AFP could equip 2.5X as many fire teams with a SAW/AR.
Alternatively, if they're willing to equip a fire team with 1 x $5K Minimi, then why not 2 x $2K Ultimax's -- that'd 2 autoriflemen per fire team! and with a thousand dollars in change too.
City Hunter - April 24, 2006 12:57 AM (GMT)
Hmmm. On that bit about falling drum magazines sa tingin ko tama yun advice sa akin with regards on mag issues about M16s. Kasi isa lang kinakapitan ng mag kaya hindi pwede mabigat. If I'm correct sa Ultimax di ba pwede rin M16 mags kaya most likely pareho ang mag system even with the drum. They need to refine that part nga. Pero maganda naman siya from specs and looks kasi pwedeng paiksiin at madaling i-control. Great for CQB if fitted with a suppressor tapos CQB barrel at walang stock.
My first choice back then was the Ameli pero masyadong mataas ang ROF. Maganda sana kung Bren o FG42 pero Ultimax has the edge dahil sa design niya pwede paiksiin without suffering severe penalties. Sana improve na lang natin ang design.
My first choice back then was the Ameli pero masyadong mataas ang ROF. Maganda sana kung Bren o FG42 pero Ultimax has the edge dahil sa design niya pwede paiksiin without suffering severe penalties. Sana improve na lang natin ang design.
fizzy123 - April 24, 2006 10:25 AM (GMT)
Yup, totally agree with wat is written as above. The Ultimax is both cheaper and lighter. I have the privilege of firing before both the Ultimax100 and the Minimi before. The ultimax is light enough in terms of weight and recoil for a typical Asian soldier to fir in the standing shoulder postioin and the high kneel position. It is also good in Urban operations as u do not need to line the windows with sandbags to support the weapon when firing. In tactics wise, the Ultmiax gunner that is organic to the infantry section can take part in the "room capturing" role, instead of just being used as fire support. This is my personal experience. During one of the 300m range test, my company mate did a spectacular shoot being the highest hit rate among the LMG gunners. In fact, he overshot the marksman criteria by a lot. The secret is in the Ultimax100. He deliberately deprive the barrel of gas by setting the gas regulator to a low number at the same time ensuring it doesn't have stoppages. Thus he could shoot the rounds out one by one!! Coupled with the low recoil, he easily got the highest score
tirad - April 25, 2006 03:59 AM (GMT)
About Ultimax barrels, I'm sure no problemo naman yan to request the manufacturer for our desired specs if we're going to acquire something that would equip several divisions worth. Such as, SR officer Cabunoc's wished-for 1:9 twist barrel (their US importer already offers this), or having both the standard 20-inch barrel, and maybe an 'autocarbine' for spec-ops types with a 16" bbl and telescoping stock.
USMC 'IAR'
Last year, the USMC sought to replace the Minimi/M249 with an IAR (infantry auto rife) that was lighter (required 12.5 lbs empty -- the Ultimax is ~10lbs), 100-round mag/drum-fed instead of belt-fed, and select-fire (the Mk3 is auto-only, the Mk4 offers semi/3rd-burst/auto).
I'm not sure about the status of their IAR program. I remember reading they later canceled the tender, although some more recent entries online seem to indicate it's still in play. Can't make google turn up a link that would officially confirm or deny either way.
At any rate, fact is even a major Minimi operator like the USMC has considered replacing it with a lighter auto weapon.
Whatever happened to...
iirc, The reason the Ultimax was "disqualified" from the AFP's SAW bidding because they specified a dual belt/mag-feed weapon -- in short, the tender was loaded in favor of the Minimi and, nominally, a Korean copy.
They should've just a minimum ammo capacity such as 100rds. Kinda ironic, the US SOCOM's supposed "improved" M249 is a lighter 'Mk46' that has belt-feed only and uses 100rd belts instead of 200-rounders. Also happens to be even more expensive that than MInimi.
The PMC liked the Ultimax better, and apparently some SR prefer it too. So who wanted the more expensive, heavier Minimi? Unfortunately, no recent news on what the DND/AFP plan to do with that controversial deal. Re-bid or just renegotiate?
USMC 'IAR'
Last year, the USMC sought to replace the Minimi/M249 with an IAR (infantry auto rife) that was lighter (required 12.5 lbs empty -- the Ultimax is ~10lbs), 100-round mag/drum-fed instead of belt-fed, and select-fire (the Mk3 is auto-only, the Mk4 offers semi/3rd-burst/auto).
I'm not sure about the status of their IAR program. I remember reading they later canceled the tender, although some more recent entries online seem to indicate it's still in play. Can't make google turn up a link that would officially confirm or deny either way.
At any rate, fact is even a major Minimi operator like the USMC has considered replacing it with a lighter auto weapon.
Whatever happened to...
iirc, The reason the Ultimax was "disqualified" from the AFP's SAW bidding because they specified a dual belt/mag-feed weapon -- in short, the tender was loaded in favor of the Minimi and, nominally, a Korean copy.
They should've just a minimum ammo capacity such as 100rds. Kinda ironic, the US SOCOM's supposed "improved" M249 is a lighter 'Mk46' that has belt-feed only and uses 100rd belts instead of 200-rounders. Also happens to be even more expensive that than MInimi.
The PMC liked the Ultimax better, and apparently some SR prefer it too. So who wanted the more expensive, heavier Minimi? Unfortunately, no recent news on what the DND/AFP plan to do with that controversial deal. Re-bid or just renegotiate?
fizzy123 - May 10, 2006 09:51 AM (GMT)
An interesting video of Ultimax100 life firing............
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev2yJeeyn5A...h=Ultimax%20SAW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev2yJeeyn5A...h=Ultimax%20SAW
Marschall - May 10, 2006 07:33 PM (GMT)
Are civilians also allowed to buy the ultimax???