SA80

[[R-DEV]strima]

Originally Posted by Top _Cat the great

SO what about the M16, it appears you all are 100% sure about the SA80 recoils but are you 100% sure about the M16's recoil.

Also hear alot of sht about how fcked we would have been if they had issued (early i know) the SA80 in the Falklands, just SA80 bashers or true???????

Never fired the M16 so I don't know, gessing they'd be pretty similar though.

The SLR was invaluable down the Falklands.

1. Heavier round dealt with the weather conditions down there especially at longer ranges.
2. Argies used the FN FAL which is almost identical to the SLR so ammo could be picked up easily, yes we were very close to running out.

I've fired both down the Falklands and it's six and two three's. SLR for the power and accuracy at longer ranges. SA80 for the sight and amount of extra ammo you can carry.

We were very lucky in the Falklands, it was down to the sheer determination of the boys on the ground to get the job done, the goverment expects, we produce.

[Fullforce]

Originally Posted by Top _Cat the great

P.S how similar is the G3 to the SLR in accuracy/recoil and general handeling - any of your oldies miss it??? Also hear alot of sht about how fcked we would have been if they had issued (early i know) the SA80 in the Falklands, just SA80 bashers or true???????

Surely a soldier armed with a 4x SUSAT, 5.56 Automatic rifle (bullpup, too, for longer barrel) would be more effective than a soldier armed with a non-mag iron sighted normal rifle, with only a single shot option? Albeit 7.62, but that caused problems of its own.

Although i'm sure Evilhomer will disagree with me

EDIT: Interesting points Strima, regarding the FN FAL and the round, weather etc.

Originally Posted by strima

Recoil is a little less on the A2 as H&K made the weapon heavier. Helps with shooting but it can be a bitch when tabbing round the plains......

The H&K mag is twice as heavy aswell......(or am I getting weaker as I get older????)

H&K don't make the L85 Enfield do.

[MrD]

With the L85 rifle you are faster to aim and fire at an enemy. However your range is limited and damage potential too.

The Fal rifle could fire a lot further, hit people with the force like being 'kicked by a horse' and tended to kill rather than wound.

Against a similarily equipped enemy, but in the hands of a highly professional soldier (Brits) the Fal rifle still gives you an advantage (the Argentinians had far too many conscripts)

6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

so why are people not more interested in a calibre between 5.56 and 7.62??????

I know their is talk of a 6.8 but it appears to get little interest from militaries.

I understand the whole, we have millions and millions of 5.56rounds about therefore it would be too costly to replace our standard calibre round - decent reason. But for/in the long run, such a round should be considered very seriosuly i think.............although being a halfassed pacifist, i am shoudl really be happy if they stick with the 5.56!

[MrD]

Money

the money it costs an enemy where a 5.56mm round wounds rather than kills. 2 x stretcherbearers to take the wounded soldier off the field, a MASH unit, a hospital ship, recuperation and pension costs. If the soldier is instead hit with a 7.62mm round and dies there and then, they could potentially leave the body to rot into the ground and recover for death duties later on.

Of course, for the guy using the rifle, the ability to carry more rounds is a good idea!

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

I miss placed that reason in my mind. But in 30 years time, there will be alot more body armour and with average types taking 6 + 5.56 it shoudl be amusing! Aim for the arms i know, but still.

Any one know body armour uptake in average modern militaries???/
And would Generals and Soldiers considered it a real problem fighting with a 5.56 again full bodied armoured enemies.


Talking about full body armour, cos it is those people who have stretcherbearers and not insurgents, so if you weapon bullet is designed for armies who care, will they surely not also have body armour and alot more in the near future.

[[R-DEV]Gaz]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Fullforce

H&K don't make the L85 Enfield do.

Enfield make the base body componants, which is sent to H&K who fit the internals (80% of the rifle lol) and do the test firing.

So it's more of a H&K weapon than an Enfield.

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

Is it not these guys who make the base componants: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Sys..._and_Armaments

Enfield close down and became part of Royal ORdinance which was then bought by Bae, which they form into the above.

So although Enfield started out on the SA80 while it was still going, it is now effectively long gone

[[R-DEV]Gaz]

Old enfield employees are the ones I was talking about, but you are right that they are now part of BAE

[[R-DEV]strima]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Gaz

Enfield make the base body componants, which is sent to H&K who fit the internals (80% of the rifle lol) and do the test firing.

So it's more of a H&K weapon than an Enfield.

Beat me to it.....

I personally think the weapons has improved massively since H&K got their grubby mitts on it.