PDA

View Full Version : Guns at Asian Aerospace 2006



ogukuo72
02-28-2006, 11:31 PM
I only now had time to put up some photos from my visit to Asian Aerospace last Friday.

http://images.ogukuo72.multiply.com/image/2/photos/1/500x500/1.JPG?enctoken=UmFuZG9tSVYUBuc.c7yXev7oeYqPA7H0I2u4ViR7vhpO9,ry6Jto8pUa4rTSIw2C

Here's the MMS version of the SAR-21. Basically the SAR-21 with an 16in barrel and P-rails on the top and two sides. It's much handier than the original SAR-21 design, and I like the side mounted cocking handle better than the top mounted one.

The fore-grip also made it easier to hold and maneuvre. However, the safety is still a push-button on top of the trigger guard, and the one on this particular gun is hard to press in. Unfortunately, this is quite common amongst SAR-21's. The push-button selector switch behind the magazine is still a pain. Why can't ST Kinetics do something like the Tavor thumb selector?

http://images.ogukuo72.multiply.com/image/2/photos/1/500x500/3.JPG?enctoken=UmFuZG9tSVYUBuc.c7yXev7oeYqPA7H0I2u4ViR7vhpEyDlAA3aXopJbarMXd7oT
Here's the Brugger & Thomet MP9. It really is very compact and light! With the stock folded, it can be easily kept concealed in a brief-case or a messanger bag. It ought to find a niche with Personal Protection Teams.

The folding stock looked rather reedy, but surprisingly, when it is extended, it is rigid and firm when placed against the shoulder. Folding it was easily down by the push of a button and folding the stock. The stock locks firmly against the right side of the weapon, and you can hold it together with the fore-grip, so it doesn't get in the way.

The sight is similar to the Aimpoint sights, and had a good field of vision. I didn't have a chance to dismount the sight and check out the iron back up sight though. They looked like pistol sights. But these should be fine for short range shooting.

Another thing that surprised me was the suppressor. It has a QD feature like that on the KAC M4 suppressors. It is also very light. Placing it on the weapon's muzzle, even with the stock folded, did not unbalance the weapon significantly.

Overall, I had a good impression of the MP9.

http://images.ogukuo72.multiply.com/image/2/photos/1/500x500/5.JPG?enctoken=UmFuZG9tSVYUBuc.c7yXev7oeYqPA7H0I2u4ViR7vhoL9J5EEkgIoESresiNWHCj
OK, here's the new Smith and Wesson M&P. I was really looking forward to this one especially since we had a thread discussing Smith and Wesson pistols.

First off, the pistol gave me a good impression. It feels like the Glock, but the ergonomics of the grip is good, and whereas the Glock feels boxy, this grip really feels as if it FITS your hand. For a pistol that holds a 15-round 0.40 magazine (17-round in 9mm), this is very good indeed.

The size of the pistol was also almost similar to the Glock 17's, and equally slim (at around 30mm). It also feels about as heavy (or light) as the Glock.

The trigger is about as good as one can expect from a striker fired pistol, and again feels like the Glock's, except that the let-off seemed to be a bit crisper. Not bad at all.

The SW99 was on display as well, and I had a chance to try that as well and compare it to the M&P. Even with the initial take-up, the M&P had the superior trigger. And the grip on the M&P felt better to me than the dimple dotted grip of the SW99. I think Smith and Wesson really got it right with this one.

My take is that Glock probably needn't lose much sleep, as there isn't a significant product differentiation or superiority. But police departments and military units looking for a new handgun now had a good alternative to the Glock if they so choose.

http://images.ogukuo72.multiply.com/image/2/photos/1/500x500/7.JPG?enctoken=UmFuZG9tSVYUBuc.c7yXev7oeYqPA7H0I2u4ViR7vhrPQgVVRAKtayyvxaZpkCBu
I really loved this little gun here, the Chiefs Special 9mm. It really felt small and light in my hand. My little finger could not find a foothold on the grip without the magazine, and the DAO trigger felt really good! The take up was smooth and the let-off crisp. The grip was also very slender and sat well in my hand.

I also tried the Smith and Wesson Tac-9, which is basically the M3913 fitted with a accessories bar underneath the spring housing of the frame. Personally, this is the best pistol I handled at the booth. The DA/SA trigger was very good. The DA pull was relatively light, and the SA pull was crisp. Though the pistol was not as small and light (it had a all steel frame) as the Chiefs Special, it still is compact enough and light enough for me to recommend as a carry pistol for detectives and plain-clothed officers. If I had the choice, I would actually carry this pistol over the M&P, in spite of it only having an 8-round magazine.

The good and light trigger pulls on these two guns could probably be accounted for by the hammer, which had slots on either sides. This probably lightened the hammers.

One major gripe, though. All the autos on display had magazine disconnector safeties. I hate those!

I didn't take any photos of the revolvers that S&W had on display. The revolver I was most taken by was the 340PD. I wished I had taken a photo of that! It was really light in my hand, and its High Visibility green front sight was very easy to pick up and aim with. The funny thing was that the trigger wasn't working, and the S&W rep told me that it had to be repaired.

I also tried the S&W 619, an L frame 0.357in revolver with a 7-shot cyclinder. This was the first S&W pistols on display that I didn't like. It's trigger felt long and heavy, with a rather mushy let-off and it felt wrong in the hand with the rubber grip. If you compare this with the S&W Model 10, which is also on display, it's a major disappointment. The old K-frame had a wonderfully smooth trigger. The S&W rep told me that in terms of revolver, the K-frame Model 10 is still his favourite, and he used a bobbed hammer Model 10 back home.

Resurrection
03-01-2006, 12:02 AM
Can't see any pics. How widespread is the SAR-21 within the SAF? I heard about a year ago that a lot of units were still equipped with the M16 because of lack of funding. Any truth in that?

Seraphim
03-01-2006, 12:24 AM
Cool, thanks for the write up.

Justin
03-01-2006, 10:36 AM
I don't see the pictures.

It is true that not all the units have possession of the SAR-21, for example, the Artillery guys. So far, I think it is the Infantry, Guards and Commandos that have the guns. I'm not sure if it is the lack of funds, since SAF just bought 8 F-15s from Boeing, and the expenditure of the SAF is quite hefty. I think it is the slow production of the gun that resulted in this lack of SAR-21. I think the SAR-21 is built in Singapore, but again, i'm not exactly sure.

-Justin

Resurrection
03-01-2006, 10:51 AM
Ah okay, thanks. Yeah it's built in Singapore by ST Kinetics.

XxDrAg0nxX
03-02-2006, 12:52 AM
I don't see the pictures.

It is true that not all the units have possession of the SAR-21, for example, the Artillery guys. So far, I think it is the Infantry, Guards and Commandos that have the guns. I'm not sure if it is the lack of funds, since SAF just bought 8 F-15s from Boeing, and the expenditure of the SAF is quite hefty. I think it is the slow production of the gun that resulted in this lack of SAR-21. I think the SAR-21 is built in Singapore, but again, i'm not exactly sure.

-Justin

Yeah we artillery guys are still with that darn M16... never had a chance to even touch a SAR21... not sure if thats a goood thing a not...:roll:

Resurrection
03-02-2006, 12:53 AM
Does Singapore have their own version of the M16, or is it just the regular M16A2?

LaoSexMachine
03-02-2006, 01:38 AM
Love the second from the top pic.


What are the gun ownership laws in Singapore?

Resurrection
03-02-2006, 01:40 AM
What are the gun ownership laws in Singapore?
Very, very strict.

ogukuo72
03-02-2006, 04:10 AM
Does Singapore have their own version of the M16, or is it just the regular M16A2?

We have our own version called the M16S1, but it is no more than the M16A1 made locally.

Resurrection
03-02-2006, 04:16 AM
We have our own version called the M16S1, but it is no more than the M16A1 made locally.

Have they thought about upgrading them to the A2 standard or is it not worth it (with the introduction of the SAR-21 and all)?

ogukuo72
03-02-2006, 05:13 AM
Probably not worth it. Our terrain here is primarily jungle. Not much need to engage targets beyond 300m. Even the SAR-21 is chambered for the old M193 round (although it can be had for the M855 round).

To me, the old M16A1 is pretty good already. The A2 didn't add much to the package, if you aren't going to fire beyond 300m much.

Justin
03-02-2006, 07:38 AM
Yes, our terrain is mostly jungle. The soldiers are trained to shoot at far distances, like they said, no real further than 300m. They are planning to scratch the M16s, and exchange it for the SAR-21. However, everyone knows how reliable the M16 series is, it will be unlikely that they will ditch the series immediately. The Naval boarding teams, and commandos use the M4A1, and to compete with the carbine versions of the M16, the SAR-21 is being modified for Spec Ops capabilities (with P-rails, land warrior capabilities) I also don't think they've come up with a grenade launcher for the SAR-21, even though some websites claim that it can accomodate the M203. Grenadiers still use the M16/M203 weapon system. (want pics of the land warrior? :D)

They actually brought the SAR-21 to the Gulf when there were missions being conducted there. The air-refuelling missions and the maritime security missions.

Gun ownership? You can't have one. Period. Only law enforcement/military are allowed. There is probably some exception for foreign bodyguards (i.e. US Secret Service), but Singapore usually provides its own bodyguards (from the police or Cisco(a government owned security company, partially police)) for diplomats. No civillian is allowed to carry a weapon. If a bullet is fired from a policeman with a police issued .357 revolver or a Glock17(STAR), loads and loads of paperwork has to be filled up.

-Justin

ogukuo72
03-02-2006, 09:06 AM
The top most picture is that of the SAR21 MMS, which forms the basis for the
Advanced Combat Man System, seen below.
http://images.ogukuo72.multiply.com/image/1/photos/2/500x500/1.JPG?enctoken=UmFuZG9tSVYRX8.lyDVcnBFLiDJfBzVtJKXMEELUgium1efIQjCkOjj67zJgzuOp

BTW, STAR never used the Glock 17. They used the Glock 19, but has moved on from there to something a little bigger.

The regular officers are issued with Taurus M85-3 0.38 Special revolvers with Crimson Trace Lasergrips.

ogukuo72
03-02-2006, 09:28 AM
OK, some of you are having problems with the images. I've opened an account with image shack. Hopes this works out better:
http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/8364/pict00533qg.jpg
http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/8681/pict00482qf.jpg
http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/9863/pict00434el.jpg
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/5893/pict00371gd.jpg
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/8784/pict00352ky.jpg

Resurrection
03-02-2006, 09:36 AM
Perfect, thanks! The MP9 looks pretty awesome with the stock extended.

Justin
03-02-2006, 12:28 PM
The top most picture is that of the SAR21 MMS, which forms the basis for the
Advanced Combat Man System, seen below.
http://images.ogukuo72.multiply.com/image/1/photos/2/500x500/1.JPG?enctoken=UmFuZG9tSVYRX8.lyDVcnBFLiDJfBzVtJKXMEELUgium1efIQjCkOjj67zJgzuOp

BTW, STAR never used the Glock 17. They used the Glock 19, but has moved on from there to something a little bigger.

The regular officers are issued with Taurus M85-3 0.38 Special revolvers with Crimson Trace Lasergrips.

That would be correct. My bad. Are you involved in the SAF?