UKSF Loadouts

[abbadon101]

Belt kit set up comes from seeing what you use airsofting and what you don't. Airborne webbing is great for carrying your kit for 24 hrs including food and cooking kit but for airsoft its excessive.

 

if you want a simple UKSF loadout, a set of tropics and an Arktis chest rig would be pretty bang on (coupled with a L119A1/M16). With a bit of shopping around you could likely find all that for less than £50. 

 

If you want to do something more modern and gucci then you can but you need to think about what you will be doing wearing it. No point lugging stuff around that you don't need.

 

I also use a JPC (and SOHPC) with my set up. But 90% of my fighting kit I carry goes on my belt.

 

 

I then have a day sack with all my spares and munchies in. 

[AFV]

Cheers Dave that helps alot. 

 

The main reason why i looked at airborne because i prefer to put stuff in my belt (e.g BB's,speed loaders ect) as its more quickly accessible then having to take your backpack off and rummage around for the necessary stuff.

 

Im very much a 'run and gun' airsofter, so having a lightweight kit if priority to me. Thats the main reason why im looking at the JPC & the TAC recce vest. 

 

After looking at your loadout Dave im currently thinking:

 

TAC Recce Vest: 3 Double M4/M16 pouches

                            1 Foldable Dump Pouch

                            1 Admin Panel

                            1 Medic Pouch

 

Crye Low profile Belt: 4 Bulldog Utility Pouches (medium)

                                    2 Double M4/M16 Pouches at 2 o'clock & 11 o'clock

 

Then i'l make my own backpack with integrated camel back.

 

Is that okay or do i need my head bashing again? 

[Shardik]

Is that 14 mags?

[spetsnazdave87]

I think it sounds better mate, if you make sure you've got the CT mic and UK-correct gun, that would help. 

 

I'd also ditch the admin panel as although they are used everywhere it's a bit 'airsofter'; maybe fold the bib down?

 

I always found the rear pouches on PLCE next to impossible to access without taking the webbing off, so I'd consider a daysack far easier than that option myself.

[AFV]

@Shardik: Thats 10 mags. 6 on rig, 4 on belt

 

Dave, seeing as im going as recce, i think the admin pouch has its advantages. Also where can i find daysacks because im having trouble finding a supplier.

 

As for Rifle and sidearm im thinking:

 

HK-416c (Marui recoil shock 416D modified with VFC 416c parts)

 

As for sidearm im thinking 1911 (RMC still use it ......a little)

[spetsnazdave87]

@Shardik: Thats 10 mags. 6 on rig, 4 on belt

 

Dave, seeing as im going as recce, i think the admin pouch has its advantages. Also where can i find daysacks because im having trouble finding a supplier.

 

As for Rifle and sidearm im thinking:

 

HK-416c (Marui recoil shock 416D modified with VFC 416c parts)

 

As for sidearm im thinking 1911 (RMC still use it ......a little)

 

 

A 417 would be far more accurate. It's in heavy daily use as a battle rifle. The 416c is barely (if at all) out of trials and is designed for CQB, it would be pants at anything apart from CTR/vehicle PDW role.

 

You'd be better off for visible UKSF with a 16'' diemaco or 417. Sidearm, definitely a P226 or at a push glock 17. 1911 is a definite no no.

[abbadon101]

Rifle wise you want either a L119A1 or a HK 417. Also none of the Uk forces are using a 1911, they were only issued briefly as a naval sidearm during the second world war.

 

Sidearm wise pretty much the only option is a P226, because apparently the Glock wasn't well received by UKSF.

 

Without the L119 or 417 it will look like an airsoft loadout and little else.

[AFV]

A 417 would be far more accurate. It's in heavy daily use as a battle rifle. The 416c is barely (if at all) out of trials and is designed for CQB, it would be pants at anything apart from CTR/vehicle PDW role.

 

You'd be better off for visible UKSF with a 16'' diemaco or 417. Sidearm, definitely a P226 or at a push glock 17. 1911 is a definite no no.

Whilst i am considering a 417, like i said, im a 'run an' gun' airsofter. The 416c is designed for UKSF and has the same effective range as a M4 but has greater reliability.

 

Recce/SRR wise, it could go either way between the entire 416/17 family. I could use the 416/17 and act as a standard operator, or i could use the 416c and say that im doing close proximity recce. 

 

Sidearm wise, i wasn't confident in the 1911 authenticity. But personally i've got negative views on the Sig (9mm < 45acp imo).

[abbadon101]

You do know this is airsoft right and everything has pretty much the same range and stopping power?

 

Also if you are a "run and gun airsofter" what are you wanting to use recce type gear? Surely something DA based would be better suited to your style of play?

 

And when it comes to the weapon, without the L119 or the 417 it won't be recognizable as a UKSF loadout. The few (and I mean very few) pics of SRR show all of them using L119's.

[spetsnazdave87]

. But personally i've got negative views on the Sig (9mm < 45acp imo).

 

Oddly enough, your views aren't shared by UK SF.

 

The 416c is designed for UKSF but it doesn't have the same reach as a 16'' Diemaco or 417. Which as you've mentioned earlier is the idea of the recce bit. 

 

The 416 was not adopted. Something to do with the gas system or something.

[AFV]

Oddly enough, your views aren't shared by UK SF.

 

The 416c is designed for UKSF but it doesn't have the same reach as a 16'' Diemaco or 417. Which as you've mentioned earlier is the idea of the recce bit. 

 

The 416 was not adopted. Something to do with the gas system or something.

 

Really?!

 

It uses the G36 gas system i believe and its reliable. Can't see why not to adopt it over the M4. 

 

@Abbadon yes i know range and power is the same but it helps to know the effective range of your (prefered) rifle.

[abbadon101]

The 416C was designed with input from both UKSF and USSOCOM. But as far as I am aware hasn't been spotted with either yet.

[AFV]

The 416C was designed with input from both UKSF and USSOCOM. But as far as I am aware hasn't been spotted with either yet.

True, but if we only went by 'what we see in photos' then UKSF loadouts would be severely limited. Not trying to be derogatory or anything but i think it is pretty safe to assume that UKSF and US SOCOM do probably have some guys with 416c, i think there's a picture somewhere of US law enforcement with 416c.

 

 

voila:  http://s1173.photobucket.com/user/nevex13/media/weaponquestion.png.html

[Habakure]

Hello to all. Haven't posted in here for a while (after giving up on a gbb L119a1). I've just clicked that picture link AFV, and I can't see a optic or sights? Am I going blind (due to my illness)?

[AFV]

Hello to all. Haven't posted in here for a while (after giving up on a gbb L119a1). I've just clicked that picture link AFV, and I can't see a optic or sights? Am I going blind (due to my illness)?

 

Your not going blind, it has no optics. However it has it front and rear flip up sights flipped down so it can be mistaken. 

[spetsnazdave87]

So basically your theoretical recce troop of X squadron SBS has gone up a mountain with no vehicles, are living out of their webbing, and have decided to bring with them a compact carbine designed for CQB environments.

 

If you're doing a kit where you're operating out of a vehicle, maybe. But you've already described a scenario to justify your use of airborne webbing that would make a 416c a completely pointless choice of weapon.

 

The SAS/SBS are not choosing not to adopt the 416 'over the M4'. They have never used M4s. They use the Diemaco C8 family of weapons. 

 

I have no idea what the hell a picture of a US police officer that looks like a mature johnny bravo using a 416 has to do with anything either.

 

Tbh dude we're really trying to help you out but you seem obsessed with ignoring pretty much every existing basic for a UKSF loadout and justifying it with 'maybe, possibly, theoretically'.

[abbadon101]

Nope and it has no relivance here as it is apparently a US LEO.

 

Ninja'd

[AFV]

So basically your theoretical recce troop of X squadron SBS has gone up a mountain with no vehicles, are living out of their webbing, and have decided to bring with them a compact carbine designed for CQB environments.

 

If you're doing a kit where you're operating out of a vehicle, maybe. But you've already described a scenario to justify your use of airborne webbing that would make a 416c a completely pointless choice of weapon.

 

The SAS/SBS are not choosing not to adopt the 416 'over the M4'. They have never used M4s. They use the Diemaco C8 family of weapons. 

 

I have no idea what the hell a picture of a US police officer that looks like a mature johnny bravo using a 416 has to do with anything either.

 

Tbh dude we're really trying to help you out but you seem obsessed with ignoring pretty much every existing basic for a UKSF loadout and justifying it with 'maybe, possibly, theoretically'.

But im not using airborne anymore.......

 

Look im just spitballing ideas that pop into my noggin. I've got no problem with using a 417 and i understand why it would be a better choice over the 416c also i thought the Diemaco family where a sub-branch of the M4 platform.

 

As for the situation that i described, UKSF and US Socom regularly went into the mountains in Afghan with little ground transport, so im not really being completely fictional.  

[Habakure]

LEO always makes me think of haywire. Fantastic movie. I might try and resurrect my uksf loadout, as am getting goose bumps just thinking about it. Would have to be a hk417 though, as I've got an ar15 type aeg already and wouldn't welcome the vying for my attention, that owning two, would bring.

 

Okay so I have the following (could any of these be used with a hk417):-

Mich 2000 (green) it has union flags on already (two)

RAV in ranger green (flyye) with a serpa holster at a 3 o clock position, for the p226

Gen 3 multicam pants

A few ranger green pouches

 

I've got the comms noted for future purchase and I'd like to use a DPM top, but can be talked out of it.

[abbadon101]

Mich is good for the older (but not too old TBH) look, RAV is good to go, but personally would go with a blackhawk recon harness with the 417, gen 3's are ok but 2's (if you have them) are better.

 

TBH its not bad. From there on the devil is in the detail. 

[Habakure]

Regarding the blackhawk recon harness, is this it (quick Google fu):-

http://www.blackhawk.com/product/STRIKE-Commando-Recon-Chest-Harness,721,129.htm

 

I noticed that, there appears to be two types and they are with/without integral mag pouches (is this correct)?

 

Edit:- also, I have this lid spare (bought it on a whim):-

http://www.jkarmy.com/eng/magento/combat-gear/helmet-1/tmc-plastic-dummy-af-helmet-tan-airframe-pre-orde-free-shipping.html

 

Again, I can be talked out of using it. I do have one of these (but with a better head harness, thingy. Has a knob to adjust head width):-

http://www.jkarmy.com/eng/magento/combat-gear/helmet-1/emerson-fast-helmet-mh-type-civilian-ver-bk.html

 

Would something like that, be more used with a hk417 or am I best without a lid and have a cap/hat?

[abbadon101]

The one without the pouches would be better as they only fit M4 mags really.

[Habakure]

Yeah, I thought that. Might have a search for some pictures on google, see what I can find.

[titchikov]

Random question, what's the most recent, up to date pic of an SAS MOE/breacher available?

[abbadon101]

Most recent would be the TFB pictures from around 2003/4 as far as I know.