PDA

View Full Version : question about british infantry gear


FozzieBear
07-21-2004, 09:37 AM
k i was wondering do army marines and paras have a standard issue NV goggle? and a weapon sight?
oldsoak
07-21-2004, 11:12 AM
Night sights are Pilkingtons Night owl , I think - forget what the designation is - dunno what the NVG's are. Royal will be good for this info.
oldsoak
07-21-2004, 11:25 AM
Oops - I've been told that is called a "kite" not the "night owl."
:oops:
FozzieBear
07-21-2004, 11:49 AM
like the one in my avatar?
oldsoak
07-21-2004, 11:55 AM
Yep - and they are a bugger if you wear glasses.
FozzieBear
07-21-2004, 11:55 AM
looks like a buggering thing altoghether look how big it is! me thinks we needs a standard issue NVG and NV weapon optic...
oldsoak
07-21-2004, 11:59 AM
Its not bad - the few times I've got to use it , it certainly impressed me.
Dont know how it compares to the latest offerings floating around, but I certainly wouldnt mind having one if I had to become a creature of the night .
FozzieBear
07-21-2004, 12:02 PM
i seen something similarly massive on a US soldiers m16 and it was as big as his head :\
Chris1
07-21-2004, 06:41 PM
CWS is the shizzle.
Heavy but very effective.
Quick check on google and here is a pic
http://www.project-x.org.uk/images/picsa80cwsonsa80.jpg
Never got issued goggles.
digrar
07-21-2004, 11:19 PM
That's about the same size as ours.
It's got me beat why they need to be so big when the NVG tubes are so much smaller. I realise it's better to have a bigger field of view, but surely a better compromise could be made.
I like our NVG and night aiming device system, it works really well.
DE_Six
07-22-2004, 03:04 AM
I read that British army issues the PVS-14 NVG. Could be wrong, though.

The resident British soldiers/marines could tell better.

http://nightoperations.com/ii_spectrum.htm
Steve Andrews
07-22-2004, 04:58 AM
CWS is not heavy. Its probably only a tiny bit heavier than a SUSAT.
Chris1
07-22-2004, 05:01 AM
Poor phrasing.
Heavier than others commerically available today.
oldsoak
07-22-2004, 07:06 AM
My one gripe with it is that you have to press your eye against the eyecup to open up a diaphragm so you can see through it - its a way of ensuring you dont have your features illuminated by the light coming through the CWS. Problem is, if you wear glasses you end up with a nice greasy smear on them from your cam cream. There is some dioptre correction, but not much. But yep, its the jobby.
FDF_Hemppis
07-22-2004, 09:10 AM
Sorry, I'll hijack this thread a bit, but FYI:

Pilkington Kite is also used by the FDF as a night sight for this little thing:

http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v151/Hemppis/95_S_58-61_2.jpg

http://img49.photobucket.com/albums/v151/Hemppis/95_S_58-61.jpg

p-)
Roger Rabbit
07-22-2004, 11:53 AM
A slight problem with a CWS is you need to take the SUSAT off to put on the CWS.

Or is this not as much as problem as i've thought?

My way of thinking was because your eye is pressed against the CWS then when firing your going to get bruising maybe? And the actual sight to aim with might not be as effective as a SUSAT?