back to 7.62 ?
Discussion
Very informative article, and mirors my thoughts as a lifetime target and sporting shooter, and a stint in forces (with ARs) - the most valid point being that 5.56 is not considered suitable even for deer, so no surprise it struggles in combat. Presumably 7.62 became to be regarded as more of an open battlefield round, with 5.56 being considered suitable for closer range. (UK armed police rounds are de-loaded 5.56 calibre, and I have fired them and frankly you would have trouble stopping a fox with one - but that's a side point)
7mm is a very effective round, fast and flat (not dissimilar to 300 win mag). I am not surprised the 5.56 is now considered too light a round - even a very light flesh wound with 7.62 has mighty severe consequences. This means less reliance on accuracy of fire, especially at longer ranges (not every soldier is a crack shot) If a new general battlefield weapon is to be developed then 7mm (or full reversion to 7.62) would seem sensible - although whether you could get NATO to agree is a moot point - and I guess the whole agenda is driven by US thinking anyway.
Remember in life that you can never have too much money, too fast a car, too big a cock, or too much firepower.
7mm is a very effective round, fast and flat (not dissimilar to 300 win mag). I am not surprised the 5.56 is now considered too light a round - even a very light flesh wound with 7.62 has mighty severe consequences. This means less reliance on accuracy of fire, especially at longer ranges (not every soldier is a crack shot) If a new general battlefield weapon is to be developed then 7mm (or full reversion to 7.62) would seem sensible - although whether you could get NATO to agree is a moot point - and I guess the whole agenda is driven by US thinking anyway.
Remember in life that you can never have too much money, too fast a car, too big a cock, or too much firepower.
Merlin28 said:
I am sure it will be a fine weapon but what does annoy me is the government doesn't seem to plan for the future we always seem to be getting kit well after an operation has started. I wonder who's next possibly Falklands, Iran, Korea?
The thing is, you can't buy every bit of kit that you might need in the future, then let it sit around doing sweet FA when we are in a completely different theatre of Ops.The MOD have sorted their game out over the last few years. There is a system in place known as UOR urgent operational requirement.
Downside to the SA80 - too heavy for what it is.
Tango13 said:
Thanks for that, a well written article, some of the armchair warriors on here would do well to read it.
I had heard the SA80 started out as a larger caliber rifle but wasn't sure sure if i'd imagined it, that piece confirmed that I hadn't lost all my marbles.
Who are the armchair warriors you're talking about? Pretty much every post in this thread appears to be written by people with first-hand experience of the subject matter.I had heard the SA80 started out as a larger caliber rifle but wasn't sure sure if i'd imagined it, that piece confirmed that I hadn't lost all my marbles.
IMO - And that's 7 years of opinion based on operational experience, if anyone wants to flame me as a keyboard warrior... The weak point is the small plastic working parts cover.. Mine has broken ten times in that time.. The little locating lobe at the top, snaps off when made ready aggressively or in a contact, where the heat makes it very brittle.
Fix that... I'd love it, bar the weight. Plus the ACOG is a very nice addition IMO, but then again I've shot with that privately prior to joining, so automatically found the susat very restrictive.
Fix that... I'd love it, bar the weight. Plus the ACOG is a very nice addition IMO, but then again I've shot with that privately prior to joining, so automatically found the susat very restrictive.
Papa Hotel said:
Tango13 said:
Thanks for that, a well written article, some of the armchair warriors on here would do well to read it.
I had heard the SA80 started out as a larger caliber rifle but wasn't sure sure if i'd imagined it, that piece confirmed that I hadn't lost all my marbles.
Who are the armchair warriors you're talking about? Pretty much every post in this thread appears to be written by people with first-hand experience of the subject matter.I had heard the SA80 started out as a larger caliber rifle but wasn't sure sure if i'd imagined it, that piece confirmed that I hadn't lost all my marbles.
In the right hands the SA80A2 is an excellent weapon very accurate and very reliable, so what if it weighs a kilo more than the enemy. The new plastic mags are a big improvement, the picotini rails and down grips less so but that's personal preference. I'd feel confident hitting the enemy 400m, which is comfortably further away than his effective fire.
inman999 said:
In the right hands the SA80A2 is an excellent weapon very accurate and very reliable, so what if it weighs a kilo more than the enemy. The new plastic mags are a big improvement, the picotini rails and down grips less so but that's personal preference. I'd feel confident hitting the enemy 400m, which is comfortably further away than his effective fire.
Unless he's got an SLR, or indeed anything firing a fullfat rifle round. Quite a few Terry Taliban have made nuisances of themselves with Lee Enfields of various vintages.Now thats a rifle! My father was rated on a Lee Enfield at one mile, which was extremely unsusual for national service conscripted soldiers.
Also, a friend of his was in the SBS... His favoured weapon was a Fabrique National FAL, selective fire with a thirty round box. If you were double-hard you could rock 'n' roll them!
Also, a friend of his was in the SBS... His favoured weapon was a Fabrique National FAL, selective fire with a thirty round box. If you were double-hard you could rock 'n' roll them!
Said to raise a smile, although it is true. The SBS was very different then though - early sixties Aden cris time, and no one knew what it was. In fact, I had to have it explained to me when I was younger, although with the Iranian embassy all over the television is was easy to grasp that they were similar.
He could do a maximum of three tours and then RTU. He chose two operational and finished in diplomatic protection before leaving, which was common.
He could do a maximum of three tours and then RTU. He chose two operational and finished in diplomatic protection before leaving, which was common.
GC8 said:
Now thats a rifle! My father was rated on a Lee Enfield at one mile, which was extremely unsusual for national service conscripted soldiers.
Also, a friend of his was in the SBS... His favoured weapon was a Fabrique National FAL, selective fire with a thirty round box. If you were double-hard you could rock 'n' roll them!
The SLR is a crib of the FAL with the ability to fire full auto deleted; Royal Ordnance bought a licence from the Belgians.Also, a friend of his was in the SBS... His favoured weapon was a Fabrique National FAL, selective fire with a thirty round box. If you were double-hard you could rock 'n' roll them!
Sorry, I'm in geek mode today.The SLR used to gain 6 moa elevation if there was a speck of water on the cartridge (or if the cartridge was soaked) so if it was raining you were best off getting all the ammo drenched and adjusting the sights to account for the 6 moa, than if you tried to keep the ammo dry, as some would get wet (inevitably) and screw up your aim.
wst said:
The SLR used to gain 6 moa elevation if there was a speck of water on the cartridge (or if the cartridge was soaked) so if it was raining you were best off getting all the ammo drenched and adjusting the sights to account for the 6 moa, than if you tried to keep the ammo dry, as some would get wet (inevitably) and screw up your aim.
Now, I did not know that. My old man used to snigger a bit at my SA80, my only regret in life is that he didn't live for me to rubbish his SLR with that info!In my experience the SA80 is one of the worst firearms the Army ever bought (I was in at the introduction). It jammed, was difficult to strip and clean and was totally unreliable and innacurate. It may have improved now, but somehow I doubt it as when I have the adoo shooting at me I don't want a weapon that is ineffective over 200m when they're using AK47 or larger!
The SLR was reliable, solid and relatively easy to clean even after a dunking in muddy and peaty water, also good in sandy conditions. We could lay down covering fire effective at ranges of 500+ m and some of our better guys could shoot a 95+ at 700m!
If you needed it for CQB we fitted a shorter barrel and the automatic switch (not general issue), this made it the best CQB weapon available at the time, better than the AK47 and all others. The only argument for the SA80 was the lighter ammo, thus easier to transport, and more shells for the same weight, but much less effective.
The SLR was reliable, solid and relatively easy to clean even after a dunking in muddy and peaty water, also good in sandy conditions. We could lay down covering fire effective at ranges of 500+ m and some of our better guys could shoot a 95+ at 700m!
If you needed it for CQB we fitted a shorter barrel and the automatic switch (not general issue), this made it the best CQB weapon available at the time, better than the AK47 and all others. The only argument for the SA80 was the lighter ammo, thus easier to transport, and more shells for the same weight, but much less effective.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff