Time up for the SA80 rifle

[daleyd]

The SLR was retained, due to the points about needed in special round. The Slr simply used a 7.62mm blank.
When I was involved in the fun with the SA80 the RN had stated from the start it needs to be made suitable for sea service.

The SLR had a kick, made worse if your didn't shoulder it correctly.

Mind you the M14 had a mean kick.

The Lee Enfield was a good gun to use. I was lucky enough to use one. The M4 was the best Mk5 was a pig.

I was told it was more to do with the 5.56 being underpowered for RAS duties and not trusted. I know it “could” be used for RAS - as you said it had been on the cards since the beginning, the simple fact was it “wasn’t” - at least not until well after I left.

I don’t get the special round thing, as the only reason we had 7.62 ballistite rounds was for RAS - so what was the difference between holding a special round for 5.56 and holding 7.62 that were only used for RAS.

 

[The_Yellow_Ardvark]

The special round was for the SA80.
7.62mm was used in the GPMG, so nowt special had to be done.

 

[Tinbasherdan]

5.56 was never designed to kill, but to incapacitate. Then we immediately started picking fights with people who didn’t really care if their mate got shot and it didn’t really work. Likewise we quickly went to issuing the marksman rifle to give a squad the ability to reach out and touch the enemy from quite a distance.

 

[The_Yellow_Ardvark]

5.56 was never designed to kill, but to incapacitate. Then we immediately started picking fights with people who didn’t really care if their mate got shot and it didn’t really work. Likewise we quickly went to issuing the marksman rifle to give a squad the ability to reach out and touch the enemy from quite a distance.

Is that urban myth still going strong?

NATO 5.56 is designed to kill, just not to the range of the 7/62mm or the Russian 5.56. The NATO 5.56 is used to suit what the planner of a war in Europe thought was going to be, mainly urban, fast moving and building or bunker to bunker.

in the 80's the myth started that Russians had designed a round that tumbled and was use to main, than kill. Based on the proxy wars the superpowers were raging.
The American 5.56 in the M16 was unstable, designed flaws in the M16.

The SA80 did not have a easy move rom design to full service. When the 100m range results were looked into they saw the SA80 was causing ball tumble.
But at 50m the holes were still round.
What was hard to get home the 5.56 was as good as the 7.62 at modern battle ranges. Size counts.
This was made worse, as at the time we still had the Bren/LMG and the good old GPMG(belt fed happiness)using the 7,52. The Americans had the same issue.

USSR went from 7.62 to their 5.56 bu the simple fact. They rammed it home it was good as the old round.

The old 303 round was often stopped by a graet coat at 100 yards. Thats why you sometimes see old blankets hanging on bard wire or above machine gun posts.

 

[Ubique]

My first thoughts too. Barrels only 13.5 inches long, to me that’s quite short for a rifle barrel. I wonder what powder they use in their ammunition?

That'll be a CQB configuration - most of 'our' fighting is now in built-up areas, the training has reflected this since the mid-90's. Personally I thought the Diemaco C8 was a good all-rounder, doesn't suffer as many stoppages as the M16 A1/A2 and can carry a UGL The version with the thicker barrel can withstand a high rate of fire for sustained periods, something that you only appreciate when it matters....

For a 'long', you can't beat an AW338 - British engineering giving Johnny Foreigner summat to think about!

 

[Richiew]

I thought the Russians went from 7.62 to 5.45?


I've not heard of Russian 5.56.


Source: Lots of computer games played over the years.

 

[DAPPH]

Did you use the M4 platform? I agree the 7.62 SLR had a kick to it. Not sure how the calibre performs on other platforms. I used the AR15 5.56 in the States and found it to be manageable and I enjoyed the experience. Its a pity we can't use them for sporting shooting here.

SLR had a kick ? Bloody Walters , try the 303 or the Boyes anti tank rifle for a kick .

 

[DAPPH]

Is that urban myth still going strong?

NATO 5.56 is designed to kill, just not to the range of the 7/62mm or the Russian 5.56. The NATO 5.56 is used to suit what the planner of a war in Europe thought was going to be, mainly urban, fast moving and building or bunker to bunker.

in the 80's the myth started that Russians had designed a round that tumbled and was use to main, than kill. Based on the proxy wars the superpowers were raging.
The American 5.56 in the M16 was unstable, designed flaws in the M16.

The SA80 did not have a easy move rom design to full service. When the 100m range results were looked into they saw the SA80 was causing ball tumble.
But at 50m the holes were still round.
What was hard to get home the 5.56 was as good as the 7.62 at modern battle ranges. Size counts.
This was made worse, as at the time we still had the Bren/LMG and the good old GPMG(belt fed happiness)using the 7,52. The Americans had the same issue.

USSR went from 7.62 to their 5.56 bu the simple fact. They rammed it home it was good as the old round.

The old 303 round was often stopped by a graet coat at 100 yards. Thats why you sometimes see old blankets hanging on bard wire or above machine gun posts.

At a crack & thump shot locating demo in 1972 we had a 9mm browning , an SMG , the SLR , a Tomson sub machine gun, a 7.62 Parker Hale single shot sniper rifle and a 303 shot over our heads so we could get an idea of the differing sounds & round speeds /direction as the rounds passed over . then we had the fire demo on a 9 inch solid brick wall built 2 yrs previously . The 9mm chipped the brick work , the Thomson submachine gun was fired away from us by pull cord locked in a sand bagged frame, it made a hellish noise , the Parker Hale didn't fare as well as the SLR which dropped 10 rounds on target in a fraction of the sniper rifle time for three rounds . King of the castle was the 303 three shots from 100 mtrs and it was through the brick wall with ease , I wouldn't want to take shelter in a house on the receiving end of a 303 @ 100 mtrs that's for sure .

 

[The_Yellow_Ardvark]

SLR had a kick ? Bloody Walters , try the 303 or the Boyes anti tank rifle for a kick .

The Boyes .55 had a decent kick. It was a lot worse when it was converted to Browning .50.

 

[Brad93]

That'll be a CQB configuration - most of 'our' fighting is now in built-up areas, the training has reflected this since the mid-90's. Personally I thought the Diemaco C8 was a good all-rounder, doesn't suffer as many stoppages as the M16 A1/A2 and can carry a UGL The version with the thicker barrel can withstand a high rate of fire for sustained periods, something that you only appreciate when it matters....

For a 'long', you can't beat an AW338 - British engineering giving Johnny Foreigner summat to think about!

AW338?

Do you mean AWM338?

One fires plastic balls 50 yards away at grown men who sit in offices all week, and run around roped off woods on the weekend.

The other puts holes in 10mm thick steel at 1000 yards.

 

[Norsk]

The level of utter ******** being spouted in this thread is quite frankly astounding.

What is it about guns that makes grown men start yodelling complete codshyte?

 

[mtt.tr]

The level of utter ******** being spouted in this thread is quite frankly astounding.

What is it about guns that makes grown men start yodelling complete codshyte?

I can understand it if you were in a position to be using said firearms or have been , but as a layman with minimal shooting experience it's baffling.

 

[rcx132]

I don't get why we'd upgrade to a platform that's 75 years old. I swear there are much more modern designs out there.

 

[Brad93]

The level of utter ******** being spouted in this thread is quite frankly astounding.

What is it about guns that makes grown men start yodelling complete codshyte?

To who are you referring?

 

[Ubique]

AW338?

Do you mean AWM338?

One fires plastic balls 50 yards away at grown men who sit in offices all week, and run around roped off woods on the weekend.

The other puts holes in 10mm thick steel at 1000 yards.

A late night typo, AWM338 - personally I preferred it to the later AX variant (which became the L115A4)

 

[Onoff]

the bullpup design

The story of the Thorpe EM-1 / Jansen EM-2 rifles is worth checking out. Both bull pup designs from just after WW2. Very similar in concept to the SA-80. There's all sorts of politics and rumours of US appeasement, pressure etc, why the UK then went with the Belgian FAL in the form of the 7.62mm SLR.

Pretty sure Forgotten weapons has episodes on both the EM-1 & 2.

 

[rcx132]

The story of the Thorpe EM-1 / Jansen EM-2 rifles is worth checking out. Both bull pup designs from just after WW2. Very similar in concept to the SA-80. There's all sorts of politics and rumours of US appeasement, pressure etc, why the UK then went with the Belgian FAL in the form of the 7.62mm SLR.

Pretty sure Forgotten weapons has episodes on both the EM-1 & 2.

The EM1 and 2 are fascinating, I'm trying to remember if there are any working examples. They also used a round that is similar to what was being proposed recently as the 5.56 replacement.

I did some Googling today, seems many NATO countries have adopted AR-15 based weapons. Ergonomics, modularity, and logistics seem to be the most common reasons given.

 

[Norsk]

To who are you referring?

I don't know where to start honestly.

There are so many howlers on this thread just opening my phone attracted a pack of wolves.

 

[Norsk]

AR15 derivatives are probably the most refined small arm out there today or maybe in the history of mankind. That's due to the Yanks and many others having it as their service rifle as well as the enormous industry of aftermarket parts.Some of which have been adopted by the military like ambidextrous charging handles and vertical foregrips.

AR-15 type rifles have been in continuous use in the British Army since Malaya ,so that's going on 70 years.The direct impingement operating system that they use has been around for nearly 100 years. Its a good reliable system that has had the bugs worked out of it.

AR15s are modular and easy to work on/ customise to mission specific roles. Easy to shoot ,accurate and cheap to produce.You can mount optics,torches,IR illuminators,bipods,suppressors in minutes.The 5.56X45 works well enough for what is asked of it ,it does another more damage to tissue than you might believe. Plus it's easier to hit things with so a strike from a 5.56 is infinitely better than a miss from 7.62.

AR15s are filling every role from a designated marksmanship rifle all the way to being incorporated into the survival kit contained in a Jet fighters ejection seat.

How is that for versatility.

 

[Onoff]

AR15 derivatives are probably the most refined small arm out there today or maybe in the history of mankind. That's due to the Yanks and many others having it as their service rifle as well as the enormous industry of aftermarket parts.Some of which have been adopted by the military like ambidextrous charging handles and vertical foregrips.

AR-15 type rifles have been in continuous use in the British Army since Malaya ,so that's going on 70 years.The direct impingement operating system that they use has been around for nearly 100 years. Its a good reliable system that has had the bugs worked out of it.

AR15s are modular and easy to work on/ customise to mission specific roles. Easy to shoot ,accurate and cheap to produce.You can mount optics,torches,IR illuminators,bipods,suppressors in minutes.The 5.56X45 works well enough for what is asked of it ,it does another more damage to tissue than you might believe. Plus it's easier to hit things with so a strike from a 5.56 is infinitely better than a miss from 7.62.

AR15s are filling every role from a designated marksmanship rifle all the way to being incorporated into the survival kit contained in a Jet fighters ejection seat.

How is that for versatility.

Is the CAR15 designed for cars?