Desert Tactical Arms

[WildBill3/75]

I have spent weeks firing the SRS from 0900 to 1700 daily, mostly .338 LM and .308, with a few .300 WM and .243 thrown in.

You do have to re-learn how to manipulate the bolt, but once you adjust to the SRS's bolt using the open palm forward technique, it is actually easier for me to operate the bolt/rapid bolt manipulate, than a stard manual turn bolt action. The reason is that my hand lifts the bolt when it comes up naturally, and the 1st metacarpal can be used to bring the bolt back.

The triggers on the SRS are nothing like a bullpup trigger, and are quite nice. They are very light, with a very short travel. The guns went through the normal teething issues any new design will go through, and I think that evolution has brought out a lot of great features in the SRS-A1, which feels like a different rifle to me. Will be interesting to see what the debut at SHOT next week.

You peeked my interest, what do you do for a living where you shoot rifles as a 9-5? I think that is everyones dream job as long as it can pay the bills.

[BjornF16]

From what I recall, they developed the munition and delivery system on their early Block 15 F-16A/B's, although the actual capability to arm it with a nuclear warhead remains dubious.

A lot of the F-16A/B's that were meant for Pakistan that got embargoed became aggressors for the USAF and USN. I remember reading about it in Aviation Leak and Spy Technology. F-16.net seems to have an in-depth account of the decades-long drama with PAF F-16's. http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article14.html

They also rigged them with the ATLIS targeting pod. Reading the article further, I see that PAF F-16's saw combat between Soviet and Afghan Air Force aircraft during the Soviet Afghan War, to include some Su-22 and MiG-23 action.

The embargoed PAF F-16's were in mothballs until 2003. We tried selling them to various countries over the years but they ultimately went to USN and USAF Aggressor squadrons after upgrades were made following removal from mothball status at Davis-Monthan AFB.

PAF never had an operational nuke in late 80's or early 90's. It would have been impossible for them to modify the F-16 Weapons Mux Bus/Avionics to communicate with a chinese nuke. At best, they could have loaded a bomb, armed it on the ground (stupid), take-off and deliver as a "manual" bomb (i.e. no avionics support for delivery).

PAF incorporated some French munitions (including ATLIS) using existing wiring and interfaces.

[LRRPF52]

You peeked my interest, what do you do for a living where you shoot rifles as a 9-5? I think that is everyones dream job as long as it can pay the bills.

I used to do accuracy-testing for DTA back in 2009 in between trips overseas. It is nice to be able to burn Lapua boxed .338 LM all day on someone else's dime.
For military use, my whole perspective on the gun was that it takes up way less room in vehicles and for dismounts, so it really sells itself in that regard.

Light-skinned vehicles are extremely limited in stores capacity, so long guns like the legacy bolt guns in even a soft case present load issues for working from the trucks and ATV's, while the SRS and German DRS-1 that inspired it present a shorter profile.

I personally am a gas gun guy to a fault, even for my long sticks, which is why I like the .260 Remington AR10 combo so much. I carried and used the M24, which I think was a mistake from inception, but SF had tried everything with accurizing the M21 with the M25 program, but it's just too much to ask for logistically to keep the M21 running and consistent. It was such that you had a hard time even getting guys to qualify in a formal sniper course, so the easy answer was a bolt gun, which is fine for laying in the prone on a flat range, but sucks bigtime humping as a dismount, especially when you need to defend yourself.

If only the SR-25 had been developed 3 years earlier, I think we would have been much better off. SF, Squeals, and JSOC were the first military customers of the SR-25 in the early 1990's, and it has taken decades for big Army and Marines to come around on the gun we should have had in the 1950's, but Army small arms development and procurement....sigh.

[GMinor]

I used to do accuracy-testing for DTA back in 2009 in between trips overseas. It is nice to be able to burn Lapua boxed .338 LM all day on someone else's dime.

Fantastic...

[Keep The Change]

I never said this platform was not accurate. The stock barrels from what I have seen are well under 1moa.

SAC, Short Action Customs also makes barrels for the DTA, which are stupidly expensive because of the proprietary DTA barrel extensions.

Being from California, you must truly be smoking some "good stuff." Or just rolling in more money than you know what to do with because if you get a custom kreiger, bartlin, brux, rock, etc spun up with the proprietary barrel extension you are in the thousand dollar region just for the barrel....That isnt even including the price of the chassis and bolt. Once its all said and done that would put you in the price region of a AI AW or a badass custom, shit that even puts you in the region of the price of a tac ops custom rifle or any of the other well known high priced customs.

Then your still stuck with crappy ergonomics, tons of cheap plastic, bullpup trigger....and so on.

You are sipping on some "kool aid" that I want no part of.

Heck I'm in the $600 range with an AR Brux barrel, 24", stainless, fluted, bead blasted. So I can imagine one for DTA would be a good chunk more.

[WildBill3/75]

I used to do accuracy-testing for DTA back in 2009 in between trips overseas. It is nice to be able to burn Lapua boxed .338 LM all day on someone else's dime.
For military use, my whole perspective on the gun was that it takes up way less room in vehicles and for dismounts, so it really sells itself in that regard.

Light-skinned vehicles are extremely limited in stores capacity, so long guns like the legacy bolt guns in even a soft case present load issues for working from the trucks and ATV's, while the SRS and German DRS-1 that inspired it present a shorter profile.

I personally am a gas gun guy to a fault, even for my long sticks, which is why I like the .260 Remington AR10 combo so much. I carried and used the M24, which I think was a mistake from inception, but SF had tried everything with accurizing the M21 with the M25 program, but it's just too much to ask for logistically to keep the M21 running and consistent. It was such that you had a hard time even getting guys to qualify in a formal sniper course, so the easy answer was a bolt gun, which is fine for laying in the prone on a flat range, but sucks bigtime humping as a dismount, especially when you need to defend yourself.

If only the SR-25 had been developed 3 years earlier, I think we would have been much better off. SF, Squeals, and JSOC were the first military customers of the SR-25 in the early 1990's, and it has taken decades for big Army and Marines to come around on the gun we should have had in the 1950's, but Army small arms development and procurement....sigh.

It's a trickle down process....the best of the best get the best of the best as far as weapons and equipment. It trickles down the tiers slowly.

I also never had an issue with sniper rifles and vehicles. The only vehicle I know of that has a potential issue is a HUMVEE.

In modern combat I agree that the role of a semi auto precision platform is optimal. Unless of course you are doing a sniper only mission, where I'd give the role to a bolt gun. Out of all the sniper systems in my disposal my favorite for engagements of 0-800m(which is basically everything) was the SR-25. That's why I picked up on the 6.5 grendel. It had the performance of a MK11 in a MK12 package.

[Nukes]

Is there some advantage to keeping new products secret until the SHOT Show?

It seems to me that a manufacturer would want to generate interest before SHOT Show so that customers would already know they need to stampede to the right booth.

Why dilute interest and foot traffic by sharing the announcements with 2,000 other companies?

[Keep The Change]

The tall sights look ridiculous. I'm not seeing why they need to be that tall. Or maybe they look taller than they are because they are so skinny.
Is that the ejection port above the magazine?
Very interesting and seems like it could be problematic.

[GMinor]

Keep in mind, this is still a prototype (ish). Full production is expected sometime in 2014 for 2015 release.

[LRRPF52]

I thought it had a forward ejection system, but it looks like a spent case is ejecting normally on the picture where it is being fired. Sights have to be tall enough for a sight picture off a cheek weld, but they are back-up sights anyway.

This thing will have optics on it as a primary aiming means.

[GMinor]

This thing will have optics on it as a primary aiming means.

This should not have to be explained.

Personally, I am excited for a semi auto DTA. I just wish the HMFIC would give me the go ahead to spend some of my $$$ on a DTA with a few caliber conversions.

[stanc]

I thought it had a forward ejection system, but it looks like a spent case is ejecting normally on the picture where it is being fired.

You mean this picture?



My understanding is that the fired case is being ejected forward from the short tube on what looks like an ejection port cover.

I wonder if 6.5 Grendel is one of the five planned chamberings?

[explorecaves]

I thought it had a forward ejection system, but it looks like a spent case is ejecting normally on the picture where it is being fired. Sights have to be tall enough for a sight picture off a cheek weld, but they are back-up sights anyway.

This thing will have optics on it as a primary aiming means.

It looks like it ejects out of the ejection port in a forward direction through the hole in the ejection port...

[babue]

I thought from the picture that the brass will be pushed or thrown through that tube forward. It will be interesting to see how this develops. I could see one of those with a couple of different caliber kits sitting next to my FS2000. If they did a 7.62x39 it would make doing a Grendel an easy caliber to add. If there are going to be 5 caliber conversions that fit the action size there should be room for a Grendel unless they go 6.8 SPC. How about 5.56 - 300 Blackout - 7.62x39 - 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC.
What else might they possibly chose??

[Nukes]

Those 5 are my bets also.

[stanc]

If there are going to be 5 caliber conversions that fit the action size there should be room for a Grendel unless they go 6.8 SPC. How about 5.56 - 300 Blackout - 7.62x39 - 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC.
What else might they possibly chose??

I think those are the five most likely options. Or maybe substitute 5.45x39 for .300 Blackout?

[babue]

I think those are the five most likely options. Or maybe substitute 5.45x39 for .300 Blackout?

For 5.45x39, one stroke of the pen and no more imports of ammo. The 5.45x39 would be dead and gone. The 300 Blackout is getting a lot of press and push, so it would make the cut. It would seem pretty simple for Wolf to make cheap 300 Blackout ammo but it seemed like steel case Grendel would not be so long in coming either.

[m796rider]

The photo shows a .308-sized magazine, so most likely .308, .260. 6.5 Creedmoor, etc, will be in the caliber mix. There has also been talk of a 10.5" version and a 30 round magazine, so DT may have something like the Colt 901 that allows 5.56-sized mags to work as well.

[cory]

The photo shows a .308-sized magazine, so most likely .308, .260. 6.5 Creedmoor, etc, will be in the caliber mix. There has also been talk of a 10.5" version and a 30 round magazine, so DT may have something like the Colt 901 that allows 5.56-sized mags to work as well.

Those are all high MV and "Precision" calibers. They don't make sense in a bull pup CQB type weapon system. I'm with babue on this one.

[GMinor]

The photo shows a .308-sized magazine, so most likely .308, .260. 6.5 Creedmoor, etc, will be in the caliber mix. There has also been talk of a 10.5" version and a 30 round magazine, so DT may have something like the Colt 901 that allows 5.56-sized mags to work as well.

Winner winner