British Army goes back to the 7.62?

NATO forces and the British Army are not going back to 7.62 for general issue. What they are doing is getting the best of both worlds by placing a 1/2 MOA 7.62 rifle in the hands of the best shot in the section. They will still have dedicated snipers but they don’t generally deploy with the section but tend to be in a more independent roll. The section will now have the ability to reach out a bit further and more accurately but they will still be able to carry the quantity of ammunition they require to deliver suppressive fire where it is needed.

Lets get one thing straight the SA80 A2 is one of the best assault rifles available and eclipses the M16 in reliability by at least a factor of 2.

Eddited to add

The SLR was a 4MOA rifle, it has had it's day.

Dave
 
First of all I never said the SA80 was good I said the SA80 A2 is good. The Paras and Marines use the A2. SAS and SBS are a relative minority in the British Army. You would need to ask them that question. They started to use the M16 derivatives when the SA80A1 was in service. the A1 was unreliable unless you spent a significant amount of time maintaining it and even then it was still prone to stopages. Perhaps they are sticking with what they know?
 
Dave, just stirring the pot a bit.

I understand the principles here, the yanks seem to have reissued accurate M14's to "designated marksmen" for similar reasons to this.

The SA80A2 is a pretty decent rifle, I know H&K were contracted to do the upgrades and made a good job of it compared to the earlier versions.

I still think the 5.56 is a poor anti-personnel round which was dumped on NAto by the yanks.

The replacement for the 7.62 should have been a round with a case the size of a 250 savage and a 6.5-7mm bullet of around 120grs. The British had an experimental 7mm round developed for the old EM2 which was still-born.
 
The problem that the military have identified with 5.56 is that it's not incapacitating the bad guys in the way that 7.62 will due to it's terminal ballistics - especially with FMJ bullets. Would you expect any large-ish deer to drop to shot if hit - even fairly in the engine room - with a .223 FMJ?
 
boys,boys it's nothing to do with 5.56 7.62 303 or anything to do with the best rounds for the job,it's all to do with politics,greed,and contracts and oh backhanders of course,therefore we'll should all agree to disagree as there will always be different opinons!!

my opinon slr could'nt be beaten!!
 
used sa80 and slr .slr was far too bulky for fighting in urban areas plus was only semi auto so sa80 was much better in this situation but if i was in a fire fight in an open situation i would much rather have the slr can take a man out at a fair old range with one of those even with open sights
 
mrkipling said:
my opinon slr could'nt be beaten!!

+1 Mr Kipling.. ;)

Would still be my choice..

We had no problem humping the ammo,the GPMG and the Bren

I had my own Australian Lithgow on my ticket which i was extremely sad to loose :cry: :cry: The Mounts were welded to the top slide so was easy to remove scope and fit alternative top slide for iron sights

The Lithgow Small Arms Factory is a military small arms factory located in the town of Lithgow, New South Wales in Australia.

Opened on June 8, 1912, the factory initially manufactured Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk III rifles (and bayonets thereof) for the Australian military during World War I, expanding production during World War II to include Vickers machine guns, Bren Guns, various artillery pieces and field guns, and (from the 1950s) the L1A1 SLR rifle, before branching out into sporting goods (including civilian firearms and golf clubs), tools, sewing machines, and similar products.

The factory was later acquired by Australian Defence Industries (now Thales Australia) and, as ADI Lithgow, continues to manufacture the F88 Austeyr rifle currently used by the Australian military, as well as small arms ammunition and propellants for both the military and civilian markets.

There is a museum on site with a large collection of military and civilian firearms manufactured at the factory throughout its history.


And as for the Bren ;) Never mind the weight.. Just enjoy the confidence :lol: :lol:

Terry
 
Lets get one thing straight the SA80 A2 is one of the best assault rifles available and eclipses the M16 in reliability by at least a factor of 2.

Are you smoking something?

Nobody, but nobody will buy the thing. In fact the only people that use it are the Jamaica Defence Force who were GIVEN it and even there where the Jamaica Police have a choice, unlike the JDF who don't, the M16 or its variant is preferred.

I trust that you have never shot the HBAR (Heavy Barrel) version of the M16? The SA80 also is unsafe in certain melee situations - a soldier was shot by his own weapon performing a buttstroke in training.

I've handled both SA80 and the M16 and the whole balance of SA80 is just wrong nor is it helped by the butt getting lighter as the thing is fired!

Without its "optical sight" it has an even worse sight radius with iron sights than the SMLE and that is not good at all for those units that are issued it with that arrangment.

It also cannot be fired from the right shoulder around cover which is a defect of all bullpup weapons.

However whilst I would condemn it for all the above I would not do so because "Special Forces" don't use it as SFs have a habit of always "wanting to be different" IMHO.

AS to the thing being put right by H & K that is disgraceful that having spent so much money on this junk (to enrich those cronies of Mrs Thatcher who did very well out of the sale of Royal Ordnance) money has to spent again to put it just about half right.
 
The major problem with the L1A1 was that it was hinged. And worse it was abused by using that hinge to tighten a sling for parade use!

So I'd agree that it maybe wasn't the most accurate way to construct a rifle. I used the AR10 and that wasn't hinged. We could get 1 MOA with that!
 
I have a lot of experience with the A2 and a little with the Slr (mainly fam days). The A2 is a very good weapon system in urban enviroments, very quick and easy aiming weapon it's also very accurate with the SUSAT and even with irons helping in longer ranges however it does lack the knockdown power of the 7.62 in the Slr, which even though outdated is still a good weapon. In a firefight over open ground I would probably take my good old GPMG, the ol' girl was heavy and a bitch to cart around with all the ammo but she'd make em get their heads down! To awnser Storms post about the SF boys, I know a couple of boy's from SFSG and one from SB the main thing that set's the M16/M4 family up on the SA80 is the quick field strip you can perform (even on the run though not advisable) just pop the back pin drop the top reciever and remove bolt carrier for quick clean and good oiling it's also very modular. The SA80 on the other hand does take a bit more to field strip (and you need to catch the recoil spring as you pop the rear pin) also has more bit's to drop in the grass IMHO. Also how long did it take for you to lose the callous on the back knuckle of your right thumb from the pistol grip it's been 4 years and I still have a bit of mine!

Snag
 
I have never shot the SA80 or it's varients however I did make some of it's parts. Enfield contracted it out and a lot of it was made in redhill in Surrey by a company called Automatic Tooling Company (ATC). The boss who is called Guy Lord is a rip off merchant of the first degree and he saw to it that as many corners were cut as possible to increase any profits.

Parts that should have been scrapped were shipped as good, so a bad design was further "enhanced" by shoddy bits. I was only a contractor workign for an agency sent to work at ATC what I would like to know is where all the darned triggers went? :confused:

They had a section of two women and one guy making the triggers, they came in batches of about 900 to a box/batch and they would do about 3 to 3 1/2 batches a week and had being doing so for over 5 years. In fact the drill table (cast iron) was worn out from the drill jig and actually had dents worn in it where the jigs sat. I could go on about some of the things seen there but why depress you all.
 
Add another vote in favour of the SLR :D I remember shooting the Association Cup with it - was it 500 or 600m at a Fig 12 head & shoulders target for the first practice? And that with open sights - you certainly can't knock the accuracy.

With the bonus that there was a point in fitting a bayonet to it and at the last resort the whole thing had the weight to bat someone over the head with (I saw a wooden butt broken this way once but that's another story)

pheasant sniper 1 said:
We had no problem humping the ammo,the GPMG and the Bren

Terry - you're ageing yourself! If I had any idea I wouldn't have given you so much grief over the white sika - no wonder you couldn't catch up with it :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
Surely there must be large numbers of perfectly usable SLR's in storage, or were they all flogged to India?[/quote]
a rifle that was used on bloody sunday in derry 1972, and was ment to be destroyed, turn up in serria leone when sf rescued british soldiers held captive by militants in 2000 :oops:
 
I think the point is the SA80A1 was crap no question. The A2 is now very good, there is no point dwelling on the past problems. I remember speaking to one of the guys from the H&K factory in 2001; he was just back from Tobago doing trials with the G36 and he reckoned the A2 was slightly more reliable than the G36 but hey what would he know??

I then took one of his shiny new G36 and G36Ks on the range every day for two weeks without cleaning it and never had a single stoppage now that is reliable. I remember going on the ranges with the A2 when it first came out 3K + rounds fired between the rifles on the range without a single stoppage.

I used the SLR in its last years of service and as I said the SLR has had its day. I would be disgusted if they dragged them back in to service when there is much better kit available especially for a sharp shooter roll. The SA80A2 people seam quick to criticize from their armchairs is far more reliable than the SLR ever was.

Dave
 
I have to say that the A2 is fantastic and I've used a fair few service rifles over the years. When I was last on the range at Barry Budden which is a sandy bitch and generally the A1's worst nightmare I didn't have a stoppage with the a2.

I'm a long way out now but I'd bet that HK are proud of what they achieved from the bag of bits that was the L85A1.
 
The A2 is a v v good piece of kit, especially with all the modifications (bipod legs, acog sights etc etc). The stopping power debate misses the point that usually there will be more than one man trying to drop the target so it will never be a 1 x 7.62 v 1 x 5.56. These new rifles are just the ticket as most killing engagements happen at long range (500 - 1000m, beyond any IW range).

The M16 is a plastic piece of **** that feels wobbly and i don't trust. The good bit of kit in theatre is the .338, now that is doing well at 1500m plus!! :p :p :p :p :evil: :evil: :evil:
 
God but this debate never ends ... especially amongst us old farts. The young blokes using the A2 never can get their heads around this one as the A2 is actually a bloody good rifle - fact. I've had a chance to compare on a few occassions and the difference is huge and i'm still close mates with guys using it now.

OK, so the A1 was a piece of crap but looking at it from an engineer's point of view, it wasn't the fault of the original design. It was the victim of continual cost cutting, handing out contracts to the lowest bidders and a general 'make do' attitude. A real case of a rolls royce design but trying to make it out of a morris minor budget. Remember that the Govt hadn't replaced a service rifle in decades, defence spending was cut to the bone and the invoices for the last of the Trafalgar and Upholder class subs were rolling in.

The SLR a great weapon - you've got to be joking! By the time they were replaced they were a real joke - worn out bores, rattling old pieces of crap and the usual responce was to re-parkarise them to make them seem new. It had gotten to a point were guys were finding it hard to pass the shooting tests due to the rifles; rather than their shooting abilities. Often they'd shoot at the stones below the targets so as to at least record hits. Oh how excited we were to crate them up and unwrap our shiny new SA80s....silly boys!

The one thing SLR's did excel at was working as 'the key' in Northern Ireland. You could get a lovely swing and hit the hinges just so against the butt and the doors would literally fly off :evil:

Incidentally, i was in the Paras so was also issued with a couple variants of the M16. Those who cliam it's a great rifle have never taken it out to the field - the 'Mattell' can be a bloody nightmare. I also hear in the rumour-mill that the yanks still aren't happy with the M4.

I'll tell you what i thought was a great piece of kit that should never have been phased out - The Bren. Never as good at putting down mass fire as the GPMG but the Bren was amazingly accurate - sometimes too accurate. You never needed to walk the rounds onto the targets - they usually went straight in.

I gather the marines never let go of theirs. Clever lads (just don't tell them i ever said so ;) ).
 
Back
Top