Search for New Canadian Ranger Rifle (merged)

[Old EO Tech]

I'm curious - what legislation or regulation specifies this?

If there is anything it would be CTAT/Demilitarization/Controlled export regs etc.  That being said since these are not US rifles in origin, I don't see a reason they could not be sold by Crown Assets to anyone with a FAC....but that's not to say some bean counter is not making up some stupid rule.

I'd actually have to look up the De-mil code tomorrow on the CGCS to say for sure.

 

[stealthylizard]

Personally, I'm hoping that some of them get set aside for cadet use - either as DPs or brought back for use in large bore training.  DPs, in particular, are hard to come by at the corps/squadron level.

Many moons ago.....  When I was a cadet we trained with the FNC1A1.  Then they took those away and gave us the Lee Enfield No. 7 (chambered for a .22 round).  Last I heard, less many moons ago, my old corp had switched to pellet guns for range practice.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

They should just buy Mosin-Nagants. There are tons out there in new condition, complete with spare parts, warehouses full of surplus ammo.

The rifles are made for the harsh northern climate and the ballistics are comparable to the .303 British.

From the right dealer, you could get 500 new rifles and ammo that would last them 50 years for under $200,000 for the lot.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

A lot in my AOR have gone to air rifles because of restrictions and lack of working ranges.

Many moons ago.....  When I was a cadet we trained with the FNC1A1.  Then they took those away and gave us the Lee Enfield No. 7 (chambered for a .22 round).  Last I heard, less many moons ago, my old corp had switched to pellet guns for range practice.

 

[jpjohnsn]

Many moons ago.....  When I was a cadet we trained with the FNC1A1.  Then they took those away and gave us the Lee Enfield No. 7 (chambered for a .22 round).  Last I heard, less many moons ago, my old corp had switched to pellet guns for range practice.

When I was a cadet, we trained up on the No. 7 using the indoor range in our armoury.  The Grey and Simcoe Foresters ran a course for senior cadets to use the FNs and we did range weekends in Borden before it was deemed that shooting large bore was an army cadet thing and air cadets weren't allowed to any more. 

Because approved indoor ranges - and ranges in general - available to cadets are rarer than hen's teeth we now train them on basic marksmanship with pellet rifles.  The ones we use top out at 495 fps so they aren't firearms under the Act and we can set up a range pretty much anywhere there's room.  I'll admit that pellet rifles have a stigma attached but I can run a range day pretty much any time I want with 10-12 cadets firing each relay with the air rifles on the main floor of the armoury vs the dozen-ish cadets per night using .22s on the 3 person indoor range we used to have.  When we do get to put a .22 in their hands for biathlon (or the army cadets who get an opportunity to fire the C7s), they have some basic skills when they begin training.

Mind you, I'll take .22s, C7s or even .303s over pellet rifles every day of the week but, as it stands, using the air rifles, my cadets shoot 10 times more often in a year than I ever did when I was a cadet shooting the .22.

If thousands of Lee-Enfields suddenly get freed up, we could start putting them in the hands of cadets as DPs - which are becoming hard to come by in our supply system - or, better still, expanding the big-bore shooting program.

 

[Lightguns]

The other issue is the incredible lack of 303 ammo available these days, unless the CF has a huge horde, there is none available.  I spent 3 months looking for 150 grain to take apart to build a moose round for my SKS and it cost me way more than I thought I would ever pay for 303!

 

[KevinB]

If is did not have to be bolt action...
(some bright bulb decided that fact)
If it could have a suppressor
(sound travels mighty well across the snow/ice)

 

[Fishbone Jones]

No, No Kev :tsktsk:

They also use them for hunting. Canada, being one of the few uncivilized countries, does not mandate silencers for that past time and as we all know are prohibited. Donkeys making laws based on 1940-50s gangster movies.

It would have to be easily detachable so they could have it on for military duty, but they would have to take it off and switch to a 5 round magazine for hunting

;D

 

[KevinB]

It's a Duty Gun -- you can do anything with a duty gun...

The problem I see with this, the Pistol etc programs coming out of Canada, is no one actually know how to write a proper requirement document (and beleive me its just as bad down here).

By specifying characteristics beyond performance thresholds and objectives you will end limiting the possibilities.


This SOW could have been done so simply.

Rough Scratch Pad

Weight with iron sights and 1 empty magazine 4.5kg (T) 3.5 (O)
Will Shoot Military and Commercial ammunition that is capable of:
Accuracy 2 MOA @ 300m (T) 1 MOA @ 300m (O)
Performance thru intervening barriers as per (FBI/NIJ Spec [which I forgot] of 12" with 86 PER of expansion of 155% original caliber and 92% retained weight  (T) with MOTS ammunition
Performance in bare gelatin of 18" and 86 PER expansion to 175% original caliber with COTS Hunting ammunition (T)
Mount MOTS Day Sight via 1913/STANAG mounting rail (T)
Chuck in the boiler plate for operational temperatures and environmentals, and add a X MRBS and Y MRBF
Manual of Arms similar to current CF in Service Weapons Fleet (O)
(someone could have an awesome CTA .300WM that could be ideal for this role - so don't shut a door that may help).
FINISH TREATMENT: LOW IR, MATTE Non Black coloring, that will not freeze to skin above -65C

Took me around 5 min to type and within an hour I could give you about 400x better than the current shlock.


lastly Colt Canada TDP is a non starter for most Arms Companies for reasons I ranted on before.  Hint Canada - want a Center of Excellence for Small Arms to preserve national production - CROWN CORP -- by CC back and remain it Canadian Arsenals..

 

[Fabius]

From looking at the required specifications I am left wondering how many commercial off the shelf hunting rifles actually meet them.
In particular the requirement for the rifle to have a fully adjustable (windage and elevation) protected rear sight with the elevation hand selectable out to 600m and be able to mount a 3-9x optical sight. Looking at my various hunting rifles, I don't see room for anything like that on the receiver.  My only conclusion is that they are looking for something like the Ruger Gunsight Scout Rifle, with the ability to mount an optic forward of the receiver.

I am very interested to see who they manage to convice to actually place a bid.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

It's a Duty Gun -- you can do anything with a duty gun...

The problem I see with this, the Pistol etc programs coming out of Canada, is no one actually know how to write a proper requirement document (and beleive me its just as bad down here).

By specifying characteristics beyond performance thresholds and objectives you will end limiting the possibilities.


This SOW could have been done so simply.

Rough Scratch Pad

Weight with iron sights and 1 empty magazine 4.5kg (T) 3.5 (O)
Will Shoot Military and Commercial ammunition that is capable of:
Accuracy 2 MOA @ 300m (T) 1 MOA @ 300m (O)
Performance thru intervening barriers as per (FBI/NIJ Spec [which I forgot] of 12" with 86 PER of expansion of 155% original caliber and 92% retained weight  (T) with MOTS ammunition
Performance in bare gelatin of 18" and 86 PER expansion to 175% original caliber with COTS Hunting ammunition (T)
Mount MOTS Day Sight via 1913/STANAG mounting rail (T)
Chuck in the boiler plate for operational temperatures and environmentals, and add a X MRBS and Y MRBF
Manual of Arms similar to current CF in Service Weapons Fleet (O)
(someone could have an awesome CTA .300WM that could be ideal for this role - so don't shut a door that may help).
FINISH TREATMENT: LOW IR, MATTE Non Black coloring, that will not freeze to skin above -65C

Took me around 5 min to type and within an hour I could give you about 400x better than the current shlock.


lastly Colt Canada TDP is a non starter for most Arms Companies for reasons I ranted on before.  Hint Canada - want a Center of Excellence for Small Arms to preserve national production - CROWN CORP -- by CC back and remain it Canadian Arsenals..

My apologies if I missed it, but what are Canadian Government contractual obligations to Colt Canada?

How quickly could we transition to a government arsenal crown corporation if the political decision was made?


Thanks in advance, Matthew.

 

[RedcapCrusader]

My apologies if I missed it, but what are Canadian Government contractual obligations to Colt Canada?

How quickly could we transition to a government arsenal crown corporation if the political decision was made?


Thanks in advance, Matthew.

Regardless of whom the contract is awarded to, PWGSC will require that the parts and plans are given to Colt Canada to be assembled in Canada. Why this is, not sure, possibly a security measure but it causes much of the potentially excellent competitors that won't give the parts and plans to Colt to be disqualified in favour of a lower bidder that will.

 

[The Bread Guy]

In case you're interested, some Q's from potential bidders, and some A's, attached.

 

[Ostrozac]

My only conclusion is that they are looking for something like the Ruger Gunsight Scout Rifle, with the ability to mount an optic forward of the receiver.

Agreed. It seems to me that someone in the procurement world really wants the Ruger, but since Colt and Ruger don't see eye to eye, we are going to continue this song and dance for another decade or so.

Seriously, this isn't a fighter plane. It isn't an icebreaker. It's not even a hand grenade. Canadians buy bolt action rifles from LeBaron every day. As procurement issues go it should be a no-brainer.

But still it drags on.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The army can make wiping your arse complicated, why do expect this to be any different?

 

[KevinB]

Agreed. It seems to me that someone in the procurement world really wants the Ruger, but since Colt and Ruger don't see eye to eye, we are going to continue this song and dance for another decade or so.

Seriously, this isn't a fighter plane. It isn't an icebreaker. It's not even a hand grenade. Canadians buy bolt action rifles from LeBaron every day. As procurement issues go it should be a no-brainer.

But still it drags on.

Honestly Canadian's (Tax payers - and the Ranger's) would probably be best served by a rifle allowance.

It appears to me the CF is trying to buy a hunting rifle more than anything - and have it follow the same method as a service rifle.
  IF it is to be truly a Northern Service Rifle - then perhaps more thought and a less constrictive box should have been used.

 

[medicineman]

  IF it is to be truly a Northern Service Rifle - then perhaps more thought and a less constrictive box should have been used.

Kevin, you know better than trample on someone's leading change bubble with common sense... :tsktsk:

;D

MM

 

[The Bread Guy]

Latest Q&A in the seemingly-never-ending saga that is replacing a Lee-Enfield with another bolt action rifle attached.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I was just fondling the FR-8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FR8 Based on the Mauser in .308 (sort of) a unique feature of this rifle is that it was designed to fire NATO rifle grenades. Having the new Ranger rifle capable of firing a rifle grenade or attaching a underslung grenade launcher might be a useful feature. We have no idea what's going to happen in the next 20-40 years these rifles are going to be around for. I know Rangers only do "blah,blah" and Canada will never fight a COIN style ground war in Afghanistan either...

Civilians already own 37mm launchers and like playing with them. Launchers/practice rifle grenade can be kept at the training facilities and taught as opportunity dictates. The launcher version would also be good for illumination and signalling rds and kept on a sled during patrols. I would support this idea if the costs per rifle were small and didn't add anymore delays. If we buy a commerical design, then don't do this, but if they decide to design a rifle from scratch, then it might be a worthwhile feature to include the mounts. 

 

[KevinB]

If they need a launcher - it should be a stand-alone -- the mounted GL is really not the best practice.  The cons outweight the pro's