Realistically, the compass on the rifle would still be accurate to within a couple of hundred mils - there's not a huge amount of ferrous metal in a rifle. That's still accurate enough to nav off, even in a desert. Still pretty dumb though.
What Assault Rifle - British Army Should Replace SA-80 A2 With?
- Thread starter Cutaway
- Start date
My understanding is the events in B20 are disputed and quite severely at some points, sometimes it's not even confirmed most of the firefights even happened. But as it is I don't really know either way and as long as it exists then opinion of him will always be divided. It's why I tried to bring it down to basic firearms knowledge, for all the rumours about lying for profiteering he should still know his guns as a servicemen with nearly 18 years under his belt 
Good link Abe!
Good link Abe!
I'd be guessing that they handled the upgraded version
Gen 1 was a dog from all accounts and took some major changes from H&K as part of redevelopment
The A1 certainly was - quite a tatty bit of kit, unpleasantly easy to operate magazine release that sat on the inside as the weapon was slung at the chest so it wasn't unusual to see troops in Northern Ireland walking around with the mag taped into place as the fine for losing a live mag vs the risk of being in a contact needing more than twenty or so rounds never balanced out.
That plus the awkward cross bolt selector, the dodgy trigger interrupter, various other parts being sub standard...a dog is being kind - if it was a dog, you'd put it down.
Even so, I've talked to plenty of folk who've used the A1 and quite liked it - horses for courses - if you'd been carrying a shagged SLR, on it's last legs, then an A1 probably looked pretty good by comparison. I've spoken to Black Watch, RMC, and RAF - not an extensive selection but in the main, even the A1 seemed relatively well received by the people who're shooting it, even with it's faults.
A2, different beast again, particularly with ACOG and rails. Even tiny things like the trigger which now appears to be designed to withstand direct impacts from ATGW's never mind the occasional bit of squeezing, the whole weapon looks much more robust and better put together.
That plus the awkward cross bolt selector, the dodgy trigger interrupter, various other parts being sub standard...a dog is being kind - if it was a dog, you'd put it down.
Even so, I've talked to plenty of folk who've used the A1 and quite liked it - horses for courses - if you'd been carrying a shagged SLR, on it's last legs, then an A1 probably looked pretty good by comparison. I've spoken to Black Watch, RMC, and RAF - not an extensive selection but in the main, even the A1 seemed relatively well received by the people who're shooting it, even with it's faults.
A2, different beast again, particularly with ACOG and rails. Even tiny things like the trigger which now appears to be designed to withstand direct impacts from ATGW's never mind the occasional bit of squeezing, the whole weapon looks much more robust and better put together.
On Bravo Two Zero, Michael Asher does a pretty solid demolition job on both Ryan and McNab's accounts and better yet, the-then RSM for the SAS wrote an autobiog under his own name, which is a fabulous resource for commentary on those books plus Sabre Squadron (written under the name of Cameron Spencer) I can't recall the bloke's name now but he did point out quite simply that in the case of B20, none of the really exciting stuff that happened in the book was mentioned in the after action review, conducted in front of the entire available SAS after their return to the UK.My understanding is the events in B20 are disputed and quite severely at some points, sometimes it's not even confirmed most of the firefights even happened. But as it is I don't really know either way and as long as it exists then opinion of him will always be divided. It's why I tried to bring it down to basic firearms knowledge, for all the rumours about lying for profiteering he should still know his guns as a servicemen with nearly 18 years under his belt
Good link Abe!
So, either both men had repressed memories of events which only came out after extensive hypnotherapy by the publishers or....
I was thinking about LSAT
Caseless ammo could cut 25 lbs. from gear - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times
And yes, taking the A2 and junking it in favour of another 5.56 rifle in the near term...nah...
Interesting little nugget of info from earlier in the year.
Supply of Modular Assault Rifle System
Although IIRC it's mainly for more civilian roles than military like Police, Home Office + Foreign Office etc so it'll most probably be a replacement for the G36 series for SO19 and the like, it's an interesting development IMO. Not saying that it'll be a springboard for replacing the A2, just that it's interesting
Of course because no one who only speaks Arabic in the Middle East has ever been known to not tell the truth…
People who weren’t there always write better accounts of events…
It is only through the prism of relativism and ignorance that an account that has some questions is turned into conspiracy and untruth. One can give them the benefit of the doubt. They engaged in action inflicted casualties and took them. That the AAR does not cover blow by blow is no surprise especially since in the meantime the patrol commander had been imprisoned.
Lethality debates tend to be a little bit more complex than that. In this case said Private could probably have been armed with a bolt action .22 and still achieved the same kills for shots. Does that mean we should replace all assault rifles with bolt action .22s? If its anecdotes at 20 paces then there are plenty examples of 5.56mm not getting the job done.
But science shows that standard 5.56 will not fragment at combat ranges (especially via shorter barrels) and without fragmentation or CNS placement has a much lower chance of causing incapacitation as bigger more powerful rounds.
Ok, I reckon we should put the B20 debate to bed. It's going nowhere and isn't particularly relevent to the topic at hand anymore.
In regards to the actual topic, unless we see something that offers a significant advantage over the 5.56 and that the US adopts it as a standard calibre there isn't a particularly pressing need to replace the L85A2 + L86A2 and I don't see any major beneficial incentive of doing so especially if we're talking about current designs.
In regards to the actual topic, unless we see something that offers a significant advantage over the 5.56 and that the US adopts it as a standard calibre there isn't a particularly pressing need to replace the L85A2 + L86A2 and I don't see any major beneficial incentive of doing so especially if we're talking about current designs.
Well to be fair to him, he had to sell some books...
Still, he did 17 years service, reached the rank of Sgt within "the Regiment" and was made a patrol commander.
He obviously wasn't a complete Walt...
Fair point but the SA80 has a tolerably long barrel length - and the example quoted was one given by Andy McNab when describing that hideous rolling contact where a multiple from the PWRR rolled up to what they discovered was the Ba'ath party HQ and basically had to fight their way clear until they could hole up someplace and await rescue.
So, it's an anecdote at least relevant to the weapon being discussed, cited by a former SF soldier who'd interviewed the people involved - I'm sure if on the balance of things, he'd come to the conclusion that the SA80 didn't get the job done, he'd have mentioned it.
You're perfectly correct in that there are bags of stories of 5.56 not getting things done, and I suspect if we saw Grendel .50 being issued tomorrow, we'd be looking at Grendel fail-to-stop stories about the day after tomorrow - that's just the nature of these things I suspect.
Well maybe not directly "fail to stop" comments, but there will be distinguishable trade offs between the different calibres and it's probably more dependent on the shooter themselves whether those trade offs are or aren't worth it.
It's why the 5.56/7.62 debate has raged for as long as it has, different drawbacks with different shooters backing different concepts.
It's why the 5.56/7.62 debate has raged for as long as it has, different drawbacks with different shooters backing different concepts.
Oh, no I'm serious, there'll be someone somewhere that will pop up to say they put metal down range and the other guy just kept coming/just kept running. It's just the nature of the beast - the post GW II survey on weapons effects found that the bulk of the 5.56 "fail to stop" reports correlated with troops either shooting at distance at hard to hit targets or middle distance shots by troops with fairly basic training in firearms.
In other words, people were far more likely to blame the round/weapon than what might have more likely been a failure to hit.
That's not to say the M4 doesn't have it's shortcomings with rounds developed for longer barrels (excess flash, too low a velocity to make the bullet break up on impact etc) - Abe is perfectly correct (as he almost invariably is!) to point to that factor, which is why a lot of recent development has been put into improving performance from shorter barrel weapons in 5.56.
Of course, for Aghanistan, we could legally just start loading JSP's and have done with it (they're not legally recognised combatant forces...so...meh to the Hague conventions...)
Back on the A2, there's a stack of 'em that are fully loaded with all the add on extras you'd want, we have a much reduced force from the original size of the Army at the height of the cold war - if there's enough of a pool of weapons to permit cost effective reworks on them, I'd see if we can hang on for a bit longer, see if LSAT or something similar takes off. 30% lighter ammo sounds worth it to me.
Other than that, it'd be nice to get a downward ejecting bullpup (FN2000 and perhaps the Tabor fit that description) Home production is no longer an issue because I believe the manufacturing capability went away some time ago, so it'd be MOTS and pick the nicest one. Given the recent advances in materials, something with better resistance to corrosion, lighter and stronger to give a weapon with margins in reserve to tack on the extras the troops have come to expect at a lower all up weight would be useful.
In other words, people were far more likely to blame the round/weapon than what might have more likely been a failure to hit.
That's not to say the M4 doesn't have it's shortcomings with rounds developed for longer barrels (excess flash, too low a velocity to make the bullet break up on impact etc) - Abe is perfectly correct (as he almost invariably is!) to point to that factor, which is why a lot of recent development has been put into improving performance from shorter barrel weapons in 5.56.
Of course, for Aghanistan, we could legally just start loading JSP's and have done with it (they're not legally recognised combatant forces...so...meh to the Hague conventions...)
Back on the A2, there's a stack of 'em that are fully loaded with all the add on extras you'd want, we have a much reduced force from the original size of the Army at the height of the cold war - if there's enough of a pool of weapons to permit cost effective reworks on them, I'd see if we can hang on for a bit longer, see if LSAT or something similar takes off. 30% lighter ammo sounds worth it to me.
Other than that, it'd be nice to get a downward ejecting bullpup (FN2000 and perhaps the Tabor fit that description) Home production is no longer an issue because I believe the manufacturing capability went away some time ago, so it'd be MOTS and pick the nicest one. Given the recent advances in materials, something with better resistance to corrosion, lighter and stronger to give a weapon with margins in reserve to tack on the extras the troops have come to expect at a lower all up weight would be useful.
Granted, to get a slot deserves the approp respect. The rest of it is about noise filtering.....
Did a lot of MOUT work in the US during Ex Caltrop Force - we were the first line unit to receive the Steyr, so had to learn very smartly that when swapping shoulders you needed to point the weapon at an angle approaching 90 degrees with the ejection port pointed down - red hot brass up your left nostril wasn't fun. Even doing that you'd occassionally get hot brass down the front of your shirt which also probably gave Psy the idea for dancing Gangnam style (I knew I'd seen that dance before).
Then again, the much shorter length, full auto at the squeeze of the trigger, the simple sights and ruggedness of the weapon offset this one disadvantage.
The problem has arisen because neither the 5.56mm or 7.62mm were adopted via a scientific regime. They were the case of the slight modifications of existing rounds combined with immense American industrial pressure. When starting with a clean slate a bullet between 6.5mm and 7mm is usually selected. They combine the required lethality with a controllable recoil.
The UK, and everyone else in NATO, adopted the 7mm (.280) until US pressure demanded 7.62mm (despite US testing showing the 7mm was superior). The FN FAL was first designed as a 7mm rifle. 7mm was selected because this round was also to equip sustained fire machineguns (SFMG) and this bullet was better in this role and more than good enough as a rifle than rival 6.5mm and 6.8mm options which British testing indicated was a bit better in a rifle but not so good in the SFMG.
The story behind 5.56mm had even less military involvement as it was a civil hunting round used in a light rifle to test improvements in combat accuracy thanks to high velocity and was around when an easy to produce rifle was needed by the US Army for VietNam and the rest is history. 5.56mm has gone through two generations of being beefed up as a bullet but still is nowhere near as effective as the original British 7mm round would be. Especially as a general purpose round as 7mm was a highly lethal long range MG bullet. Because of its high section density it would outrange 7.62mm in MGs in both accuracy (shorter time of flight) and lethality (more terminal energy at long range).
One of the advantages of the OAVD is you can adopt a butt in the crook of the elbow posture for shooting around cover so when the rifle is in the left arm shell casings are not going to be hitting the face.
Ace_Existance
New Member
Cost too much to replace L85A2 and A1
You guys have not consider the cost of replacing the weapon, everything in this world needs money even weapons. Does the British army and marines need to replace it ?
Lets say they do, then the best option is to buy something cheap but robust like that of the AK, but with the accuracy of the M16A4, then it will be the best weapon for any nation. Cheap and deadly and resistant to mud and sand like the AK.
Thank you.
You guys have not consider the cost of replacing the weapon, everything in this world needs money even weapons. Does the British army and marines need to replace it ?
Lets say they do, then the best option is to buy something cheap but robust like that of the AK, but with the accuracy of the M16A4, then it will be the best weapon for any nation. Cheap and deadly and resistant to mud and sand like the AK.
Thank you.
We haven't considered the cost because there's no point. In my mind there would be 2 stages to replacing the L85A2; there being an operational requirement which demands an upgrade to the L85A2 which can be proven and then there's the cost. No requirement means no cost, cost may influence the choice but only if the requirement is there.
Considering the operational requirement which some think means a replacement being put forward is iffy at best, then any speculation about a potential replacement is just that; speculation.
There's no point looking for financial put downs when the circumstances which would dictate a replacement are ambiguous at best, so we may as well stick to hypothetical situations which may have a niche in terms of ballistics + operation etc if we want to have anything remotely close to sensible and interesting discussion. Otherwise we may as well shut the thread down right now.
EDIT: According to the Guardian, all of the "SA80's" (if this includes the L86A1/A2 or not is not known as they too are part of the SA80 family) as of 2002 the cost of more than 350,000 rifles the total was £470mn as of 2002 including spares and maintenance. I'm sure that considering the MOD has a budget surplus of £8bn over the next decade, the fact the number of rifles needed to buy is far lower + the general "anti-defence-ism" of the Guardian could easily mean inflated values that the money would be available. If the requirement was needed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/oct/10/military.jamesmeek
Considering the operational requirement which some think means a replacement being put forward is iffy at best, then any speculation about a potential replacement is just that; speculation.
There's no point looking for financial put downs when the circumstances which would dictate a replacement are ambiguous at best, so we may as well stick to hypothetical situations which may have a niche in terms of ballistics + operation etc if we want to have anything remotely close to sensible and interesting discussion. Otherwise we may as well shut the thread down right now.
EDIT: According to the Guardian, all of the "SA80's" (if this includes the L86A1/A2 or not is not known as they too are part of the SA80 family) as of 2002 the cost of more than 350,000 rifles the total was £470mn as of 2002 including spares and maintenance. I'm sure that considering the MOD has a budget surplus of £8bn over the next decade, the fact the number of rifles needed to buy is far lower + the general "anti-defence-ism" of the Guardian could easily mean inflated values that the money would be available. If the requirement was needed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/oct/10/military.jamesmeek