Talk:Jungle style

Firearms Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry C‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

Cleanup

This article seriously looks like it was written by a four year old/action junkie. it needs to be cleaned up. i've already done a lot of cleaning up myself. 66.59.49.88 (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tiredcleangate3 edits

You cannot piggyback non-referenced info onto an established reference. The source (http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw-8.html) that you provided in the comment section of your edit does not support your claims. It make no mention of the SIG 550 magazine and absolutely no mention whatsoever of the HK36.

Also, even if it did, the information is irrelevant to this article. As the SIG and HK magazines are only presented as examples of the jungle style magazines. If you must give SIG credit for the HK magazine design then please do so on the HK36 page with accurate references that support your claims.--RAF910 (talk) 16:06, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RAF910 edits

To quote the opening paragraph, "This article seriously looks like it was written by a four year old/action junkie. it needs to be cleaned up. i've already done a lot of cleaning up myself. 66.59.49.88 (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)"[reply]
It still does, the phrasing is cumbersome and amateur, eg. jamming instead of stoppage.
To say the two magazine types are only presented as examples is disingenuous, as the Swiss Arms Stgw 90 & H&K G36 are presently the only mainstream issue weapons with this clip-together capability as standard, the phrase 'some firearms manufacturers' would generally imply more than two.
It is usual in these cases to list in chronological order, to do otherwise would imply a different precedence. The source (http://www.thegunzone.com/556dw-8.html) gives the pecuniary advance for pilot production along with the then projected delivery date, which was in fact kept. The wiki pages for both wpns G36 also give the respective production dates.
Raising a prone profile is a major disadvantage and common knowledge among soldiers. Deleting it offhandedly might tend to indicate a lack of experience in this field, which while not necessarily your fault, I would respectfully suggest that consideration to the knowledge and experience of others should be shown. Admittedly this is not always easy to gauge but I attempt to do so myself.

Field trials & endurance tests (http://www.biggerhammer.net/sigamt/550/550techinspection/) of the Swiss wpn commenced in 1981 and final type approval documentation took place in 1983 (http://memim.com/sig-sg-550.html) long before H&K started G36 design, even according to the Wiki.

Tiredcleangate3 (talk) 21:37, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And, the Ramline magazines for the Ruger 10/22 predate both the HK and the SIG. The article is not about who gets the credit. They are only examples. Also, the references do not support you claims.--RAF910 (talk) 15:43, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Holder, Magazine T3-A1

Can anyone confirm/cite from an official source the "Holder, Magazine T3-A1" part? I haven't seen one ever referenced in official texts. Thanks. --Surv1v4l1st ^{▌Talk|Contribs▌} 23:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "Holder, Magazine T3-A1" was experimental. The capital "T" = Trail. The Army never officially adopted it. Although, it was made and sold commercially. A simple Google search will find that they are widely sold.--RAF910 (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did a little digging and found an unofficial source that references. I've added it to the article, but if it's not valid, please revert it. It does mention the T3-A1 by name, and this article seems to be nearly an exact quote of the source. Finally, if this source isn't a good fit for Wikipedia, I'd appreciate feedback; I'm a newbie at this, and want to make Wikipedia better, not make work for others. Thanks! EducatedRedneck (talk) 17:58, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

L-shaped Jungle Style

I've seen a few images - mainly from the 1970s, and mainly in the context of Israeli service - of Uzi magazines held in an L-shaped bracket. One magazine is inserted as normal, the other magazine is attached to the bottom of the first at right-angles, pointing forwards (if full) or backwards (if empty). e.g. this stock image of supposedly an Israeli secret service agent, or this image of an Israeli soldier during the Yom Kippur war. It seems widespread enough to have been standard doctrine - but I can't find a good source. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]