The AUG-Steyr is a crappy gun ...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The Advertiser 29/12/1999
Accidental soldiers in firing line
By Ian McPhedran

Lack of discipline and poor weapons training are being blamed for a dangerously high number of accidental rifle discharges by Australian soldiers in East Timor.

According to some sources, up to 50 so-called unauthorised discharges have occurred since Australian troops arrived in the territory late September.

Defence refused to discuss the extent of the problem, claiming that the number of accidental discharges in an operational area was confidential due to "operational security".

A defence spokesman would not confirm or deny reports that a very senior officer had been docked a week's pay after he shot a round through his office ceiling

He would not be drawn on claims that one round had been accidentally fired through the fuselage of a Hercules C130 transport aircraft.

The spokesman also would not say whether any injuries had been sustained from unauthorised discharges.

Penalties for discharges in an operational area can include loss of pay and restricted duties as well as remedial training.

A government source said the high rate of UDs had nothing to do with the controversial Australian-made Steyr rifle but was due entirely to a lack of training and discipline.

No one has been killed in East Timor by an unauthorised discharge, but in Somalia in 1993 the only Australian fatality came from an accidental discharge.

Lance Corporal Shannon McAliney, 21, died in April, 1993, when the rifle he was asked to hold for a comrade discharged, hitting him in the chest.

Another two soldiers were slightly injured when a Steyr discharged in the back of a behicle early in the Somalia deployment.

The mostly plastic Austrian designed Steyr rifle has been dogged by controversy and complaints that it does not perform well in wet, tropical conditions.[/quote]

That the Oz-made Steyr can fire seemingly at will, even when a finger is nowehere near the trigger, has been known for some time. Some years back the "Army" magazine ran an article which indentified the problems that surrounded the Steyr. This article included comment on the huge number of "unintentional" discharges that occurred when troops were live-firing the firearm.

Forgetting the mechanics of the firearm, it is a disgrace that the penny-pinching politicians of both major parties have over the years cut military spending. Australia now has some troops that are not handling
small-arms correctly, creating a danger to both themselves and others.

The SAS refuse to use Oz-made Steyr rifles, because of their inherent unreliability, just like they refused to take delivery of "environmentally-friendly" Land-Rovers that wouldn't pull your sister off a sailor!!

B
 
Bruce never have heard of these problems in the u.s but then again I wont spend that much on a 223 when I can get a 308 for the same price. Only bad thing I've heard of has been british soldiers hating patroling on the right side of the street as the ejection port will eject into your face when you are shooting out of doorways.[for right hand shooter shooting left handed to take advantage of cover]

Thanks for info.
 
A full blown Recovery Vehicle couldnt pull my sister off a sailor! But thats another story for another forum...

That Oz-Aug sounds rather disturbing. Is it made to the same specs as a regular AUG? Are they not putting in a safety feature? Are they not keeping them in good repair?
There is some technical issues here not reported in the article.

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
 
George:

Love to meet your sister one day ... but that's another story ;)

I'm sorry I can't answer your questions. I'm not in the military and just don't have the answers.

Personally, I can tell you I have a friend (Special Air Services Regiment) who tells me the AUG Steyr is a "heap of sh*t". They refuse to use them. Why? A couple of reasons. One: They dunked them in seawater and they refused to fire. Two: After "2 or 3" (he wouldn't be more specific) magazines on full auto, they experienced overheating problems which caused binding of some of the plastic (nylon, I believe) parts and even evidence of melting. They will stick to their H&K MP5s.

As an aside, at the Perth Royal Show I went to the Army stand. They had one Steyr AUG "skeletonised". The young "grunt" (he couldn't have been more than 19) assured me that it was "deadly" out to 600 metres! When I politely enquired if it wasn't just a .223 loaded back to 2900 feet per second, he said "Huh? -- No, mate, it's deadly out to 600 metres".

B
 
The Australians seem to have a problem
with imported military equipment.

They just built a series of Swedish Subs
that have major problems.

They should all wear funny hats and carry big knives. Oops, better watch it - the colleague in the office next door is Australian.
 
I trained with some Aussies over in Hawaii when I was in the Army...the problem is that the Australian Govt wanted to go cheap, so they bought the rights to produce AUGs in Australia rather than buy the AUGs directly from Steyr...and they have had nothing but problems due to the poor QC in their plants. Steyr AUG is a fine gun...when made by Steyr.
 
I recall seeing where those AUGS would just blow up in your face.....No wait that was just that Remo Williams movie.
 
AUG's aren't crap, the user is crap! I would love to own an AUG some day and I totally disregard this article because it points out the lack of safe handling on behalf of those who experienced discharges.

There is no such thing as an AD, your finger was on the trigger or you screwed up some how.
 
The old Land Rover (not the Yuppie Disco ) Series I, II, III and the newer 90" and 110" wheelbase vehicles are suppose to be quite good. I've owned a Series III and II (both now belong to my brother) and while they're not rockets (sometimes you follow the 18 wheeler uphill), they're tough and reliable. What did Rover do to make them so environmentally friendly and gutless? I know the Brit SAS Rovers were capable of going 140 mph on flat smooth terrain!

------------------
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt
 
Pete80:
The Austrian AUG is accepted as a fine weapon -- the problem here seems to be the Australian AUG. (And, as you point out, lax training.)

This came in this morning on the SSAA e-mail alert:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Australian & NZ Defender Magazine (Issue No 27) reported several months ago on the Army's purchase of 2000 M-4 model M-16 carbines as stand-bys because the F-88 Steyr has a major malfunction problem if it's fully immersed in water.

Many Australian SF units have refused to use the F-88 because it's a heap of sh*t. According to A & NZ Defender a lot of units have been hauling around Vietnam-era AR-15s instead!

As someone who did their service with the old 7.62 SLR I wouldn't trust the F-88 in a fit, over and beyond the fact that the 5.56 wouldn't stop your grandma's cat much past 100m.

--------------------------------------------

I was speaking to a chap who just got back from Timor, he reported to me that there had been a hundred UDs.[/quote]

4V50 Gary:
The LandRovers here won't run 140 kilometers an hour, let alone 140 mph. A small(ish) (3.9L four cylinder Isuzu, turbocharged) diesel engine hauling heavy bodies around does not make for happy campers. That said, the SAS do have some Rovers, but I believe they are in the process of changing over to a custom-built vehicle. (For more info on Aussie army vehicles, see http://www.4wdonline.com/Mil/Aus/Aus.html

B
 
Ditto on the problem being with the Aussie AUGs and not the Steyr ones. The Aussies went cheap and did not buy the whole package, and they are paying the price. I'm sure they are shorting their troops on the training as well. My AUG has been 100% and is very simple to maintain.
 
I would love to own a Land Rover Defender 90... Thing is a hot rod.

So the OZ Army is going to drop the AUG for the M-16. If I was the Wizard of Oz and could make that choice - I would opt for the FAMAS perhaps or the Brits bullpup... Of course I would have to have some extensive trials - ending with the selection of the G36 series of arms.

Oh - Bruce - You can HAVE my sister. She is a bleeding heart liberal wench... Please - Take her back with you to Oz. You have my blessing! My money is on you feeding her to a crock after the second day.

------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud


[This message has been edited by George Hill (edited December 30, 1999).]
 
George, trust me, they do NOT want the Brit Enfield bullpup...that thing is the BIGGEST POS ever to disgrace a battlefield. Read some of the reports from Desert Storm...nothing but trouble. Personally, though I like the AUG, I don't think a bullpup is a great choice for a main-issue military rifle due to the limitations for firing it behind cover. They are probably better off going to the M16.
 
Sounds like a mix of floating firing pins and soft primers to me. I've had an accidental AR15 discharge because of that. It was in a shooting match and the gun was pointed down so no one got hurt. I've also seen an M1 garand accidental discharge at shooting match, same problem, floating firing pin and soft primers. I believe that accidential discharges is the reason Winchester has changed their primers, the new gold primers seem to be a little harder than the old silver ones.

The king of the accidental discharges has got to be the SKS. Once again, floating firing pin and soft primers. That SKS firing pin has a lot of mass. Remington used to make a small primered 7.62x39 round, it was notorious for slam fires. My little friends and I were just thrilled by the fact the we could shoot 10 rounds with three pulled of the trigger. We were able to do this with both Chineese and Russian SKS's, the bolt carriers were cleaned, inside and out. the same SKS's would not slam fire Russian or Seller and Beloit ammo.
 
Back
Top