SA80 to stay

RE: SA80 in Afghanistan

Personally having used a few diferent Rifels when I was in the navy, I’d have gone with the AUG Styer. Although many Australians want the old SLR’s back which were good as well but the mian difference is round size, the SLR is of 7.62mm where as the Styer is 5.56mm.

The only bad thing about the styer is the amount of plastic. Now whilest this is good against the weather, it’s not good against a group of armed terrorists who want to shoot it out, the plastic in the styer tends to start melting if used for full auto rapid fire and you use two 50 round clips, at 100 rounds it will be time to pull out the 9mm side arm cause the Styer is nothing but a puddle of molten plastic.

Give me coffee and no-one gets hurt!

RE: SA80 in Afghanistan

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 19-09-02 AT 01:52 AM (GMT)]”I´ve actually got something that gets stiff when mild finger pressure is applied “

}> …yeah just don’t try telling us it has a 20 inch barrel and there is no blank firing attachment… }>

Bullpups do have their problems but also advantages as well.
The FAMAS and Groza seem to be good reliable rifles.
One of the main problems with the M16 was that the troops were told it was a new superdooper rifle that didn’t need cleaning… so of course they didn’t. (Every soldier in combat has to balance spare time between eating sleeping and maintaining equipment… reduce maintainence time and you have more time for the other two… )
Despite the reliability of the AK series Soviet soldiers were always trained to keep their rifles spotless… they were jumped on if they didn’t.
The big problem with the M16 is that there are no decent folding versions and the only way to get a small version for use in heliborne or APC based troops is to sacrifice barrel length in the M4A1 carbine.
Like the FN FAL the recoil spring is located in the butt stock so the versions of the M16 with retractible stocks are more like adjustible stocks that reduce length by 2-3 inches rather than a folding stock that reduces length by up to 1/3rd like the AKS-74 or G36.
The Argentines had a folding stock full auto capable version of the FN FAL so a proper folding stock version of the M16 should be possible.
Perhaps instead of trying to create a unique rifle the British should just copy the mechanism of something that is reliable and just fix it up ergonomically like the Israelis did with the Galil.

SA80 vs M16 & Co.

Ink
at the time the SA 80 was being developed the M16 was actually a so-so weapon- no great shakes. The Galil would have been an infinitely better choice. The 5.56mm version of the HK G3 would also have been far better.

RE: SA80 in Afghanistan

Hi Garry
about 1700 rifles were deployed to Afghanistan. Approximately 30 failures were experienced. The soldiers were told that if they cleaned the “new” SA80 in accordance with the “new” cleaning methods then there shouldn´t be a problem. The Marines aren´t exactly a bunch of idiots and it´s difficult to believe that they wouldn´t look after a rifle properly. All in all a sad affair. I´m dismayed that no heads are going to roll regarding this whole affair. Even as the weapon was undergoing troop trials more than a decade ago MoD observers witnessed troops running around with rifles that had the forearm held on with duct tape. One observer was allowed to inspect a SA 80 that had been field stripped. He was suprised to discover that the walls of the receiver(the “box” that carries all the innards including the bolt carrier)could be squeezed inward with only mild finger pressure. He was told that the receiver was a lot stiffer when everything was reassembled
I´ve actually got something that gets stiff when mild finger pressure is applied 😉
You like Bullpups? I don´t. A standard stock, receiver and forearm arrangement is a lot more ergonomic.

RE: SA80 to stay

I remember hearing that some special forces troops in Afghanistan used AK-47s but can’t remember if the chaps in question were US or UK.

Re: The SA80; The defense establishment has now spent too much money developing, procuring and upgrading the SA80 to back down in favour of a foreign rifle. Originally the SA80 was developed in order to provide Brittish armed forces with a rifle displaying a “Made in Great Britain” sticker rather than with one that could out perform the competition (otherwise the Galil or the M-16 would have been selected).

RE: SA80 to stay

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 18-09-02 AT 06:29 AM (GMT)]Do you or anyone have any information about how the SA-80A2 failed in Afghanistan?
Did they use M16 mags to save money or something?… or is it just rubbish.

(I think it is really sad… it looks like a good rifle… how have they stuffed it up?… note I also quite like the FAMAS… but sorry I don’t really like the Steyr AUG.)

RE: SA80 to stay

money money money, must be funny………..in a rich mans world

and of course rumours are rumours……

coanda