New British wepons?

[killjoy77]

Hey dose any one know if the British military is going to change from the L85A2 for a more modern wepon like the HK416 or FN SCAR?

thanks Josh

[Braith-Wafer]

Dunno lad

Myself, I wish we had our own version of the FAMAS. If i wanted a front magazined rifle, Id go for the Mod L/LC Carbine or a Blowback Operated M16 Rifle if its possible.

[Braith-Wafer]

Or maybe somthing totally new as long as its pure british.

Howabout an SA80 but with the reciever/TMH made from the Aerospace Grade Alloy as used on the M-16's?, It would be far lighter in weight and cheaper to manufacture.

[Matzos]

Hey dose any one know if the British military is going to change from the L85A2 for a more modern wepon like the HK416 or FN SCAR?

thanks Josh

I cannot see them changing weapons after putting all that money into upgrading the SA80/L85A2

[Bombardier]

Me niether ! (Y)

[Stoats]

interesting discussion of this topic here: http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=69541.html

It is unpolluted by BashaBasher/Bashabasher/Bling-bling/Braith-Wafer/Browno/ Bonney Eberndu/Canashea/Grenadier Toebanger/Gutaway/
Jabroni/ Jetwave Dave/Rickshaw/Riddick/Scranny Head/ Slim/Sniffle Snaffle/ Sniffle-snaffle/Trambuan/Waithbraite

[Unregistered]

Or maybe somthing totally new as long as its pure british.
Howabout an SA80 but with the reciever/TMH made from the Aerospace Grade Alloy as used on the M-16's?, It would be far lighter in weight and cheaper to manufacture.

No. I don't care if it's made of kryptonite; just get rid of the f***ing thing.

[Cutaway]

Dunno ladComing from an old sweat with several months of ACF evenings and even more years of psychotherapy.

Myself, I wish we had our own version of the FAMAS.
More observations of this type, ie not based on the outdated and ridiculous method of in-depth testing, years of experience and a thorough practical knowledge of engineering, weapons design and infantry tactics, can be found by e-mailing wowmanitlookscoolbutitwouldbebetterinblowback@phuc kwit.com (wowmanitlookscoolbutitwouldbebetterinblowback@fuc kwit.com)

If i wanted a front magazined rifle, Id go for the Mod L/LC Carbine http://img511.imageshack.us/img511/792/6938143063621843440ed59jm1.gif

or a Blowback Operated M16 Rifle if its possible.http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/6532/spankvg8.gif
Now stop being a very silly boy !

[Stoats]

Or maybe somthing totally new as long as its pure british.

Howabout an SA80 but with the reciever/TMH made from the Aerospace Grade Alloy as used on the M-16's?, It would be far lighter in weight and cheaper to manufacture.

The receiver is pressed steel. If you make that out of pressed aluminium alloy it will be even weaker than it already is, and more expensive. If you machine it from solid it will be even more expensive, even bigger, and probably even heavier.



As unregistered says, just get rid of the dam thing.

In other good news, Norway has just adopted the HK 416 (basically a flattop selective fire AR 15 with a conventional gas piston). If HK have done as good a job on the reliability of the AR as they did with the reliability of the Tonka toy, then it will be absolutely storming. It's a shame they went for that silly quad rail forend though (although it is conceivable that you can take it off, I've not had one in my sweaty little mitts to have a look so I'm working from photographs)

[Matzos]

No. I don't care if it's made of kryptonite; just get rid of the f***ing thing.

People have got to understand the way the British government works, the military could ask for a 'bow & arrow' but it would take about 5-10 years to get it in service and it would be way over costings.

When in the UK has the military every received the item they really wanted and in the time scales required!

We now have the L85A2, I can never see them [government] changing it. It like be just a case of updating it over a period of time.

[Braith-Wafer]

Take it one of these should be the SA80 replacement, But should be adjusted to our own standard like the Swedish did with thier weapons:

* An M16 type rifle(This also covers the HK416)

* FN FNC/Bofors Ak5

* IMBEL MD-97(Its just a 5.56 FAL, SLR lovers would like this)

* G36?

A Brit issued M16 or FNC would probably looks like these below:

http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/728/Enfield_M16.jpg

http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/728/FNC_UK.jpg

[Matzos]

Before the SA80/L85A1/L85A2

Was the Enfield Em-2 No.9 Mark 1
Never saw service

Caliber: 7x43 mm (.280 British)
Action: Gas operated
Overall length: 889 mm
Barrel length: 623 mm
Weight: 3.41 kg with empty magazine
Rate of fire: 450 - 600 rounds per minute (depends on source)
Magazine capacity: 20 rounds
http://www.militaryimages.net/ims/pic/6SYYE9/74.jpg

[Braith-Wafer]

Before the SA80/L85A1/L85A2

Was the Enfield Em-2 No.9 Mark 1
Never saw service

Caliber: 7x43 mm (.280 British)
Action: Gas operated
Overall length: 889 mm
Barrel length: 623 mm
Weight: 3.41 kg with empty magazine
Rate of fire: 450 - 600 rounds per minute (depends on source)
Magazine capacity: 20 rounds
http://www.militaryimages.net/ims/pic/6SYYE9/74.jpg

If this rifle was sucsessful, REVIVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. But in 5.56mm, and with some 21st century features like plastic grips/handguards/picatinny rails etc

[Stoats]

Yes, let us revise a late 1940s design built using 1940s manufacturing technology that never saw service anywhere so we don't actually know how it would have performed in combat. Great idea. Brilliant use of umpteen million pounds, you should get a job in governmentlaughsol;

By the way, aside from the military contracts with Germany and Spain, and a few miniscule police contracts, HK can't give the G36 away (they just sold a whole load to Bapty's, the film armourers, for 4/5 of sod all).they are currently concentrating on the 416 and 417

[Cutaway]

People have got to understand the way the British government works, the military could ask for a 'bow & arrow' but it would take about 5-10 years to get it in service and it would be way over costings.

Mad Jack Churchill for example ?
;)

[SuperSLime]

Mad Jack Churchill for example ?
;)

Ha ha, love it!

I shoot the longbow myself. I'd just love to see the expression on Tommy Taliban's face the moment before an arrow smacked him in the chest.

Mad Jack. What a bloke.

Although, to get back on subject, I note that he had to buy his own bow and arrows!

[SuperSLime]

A Brit issued M16 or FNC would probably looks like these below:



A Brit-issued M16 would be a Diemaco C7 and would look like a Diemaco C7. I know that, you see, because Britain already has thousands of C7s.

And why on Earth would we adopt the FNC then stick an SA80 front end on it? You may find this surprising, but I have personally used the HK53, MP5 and G3, and for some reason the army had resisted the temptation to glue SA80 furniture onto them.

Think before you touch the keyboard.

[SuperSLime]

* IMBEL MD-97(Its just a 5.56 FAL, SLR lovers would like this)



No we wouldn't. We like the SLR.

[SuperSLime]

Dunno lad

Myself, I wish we had our own version of the FAMAS. If i wanted a front magazined rifle, Id go for the Mod L/LC Carbine or a Blowback Operated M16 Rifle if its possible.

The FAMAS is a piece of junk.

Why would you want a 5.56mm carbine as a standard rifle? They are only useful in specialised roles; they lack power and range.

If someone issued me a blowback M16 I'd f**king well desert. Firing a rifle cartridge out of a blowback operated weapon? Are you demented or what? That would cause a breech explosion with the first round.

I assume that what you actually meant was delayed blowback. Are you seriously suggesting converting a gas-operated weapon with a rotationally locked bolt to delayed blowback? Have you any idea how many parts would have to be replaced? You are demented.

[SuperSLime]

A Brit issued M16 or FNC would probably looks like these below:



http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/728/FNC_UK.jpg

Look at a picture of an FNC (for example, the one that you so badly photoshopped to make this abortion of an image). Look at where the sights are. They are mounted directly on top of the receiver. Why would anyone fit SA80 iron sights to it? They would be far too high, and completely unusable. Why do you assume that any new weapon adopted by Britain will use SA80 parts? Does the SA80, for example, use SLR parts? No.

There are two options with you. Either you are just trying to annoy those of us who, unlike you, know something about weapons. Or you are incredibly f**king stupid.

[SuperSLime]

Or maybe somthing totally new as long as its pure british.

L85A2: Uses (American) AR-18 action reworked by H&K

L85A1: As above but without H&K input

L1A1: Licence-built (Belgian) FN-FAL

No4 Mk1: Uses bolt action from the (American) Lee Model 1879

SMLE: As above

Lee-Metford: As above

Martini-Henry: Uses (Swiss) Martini lever action

Snider-Enfield: 1853 Pattern Rifled Musket fitted with (American) Snider action.

So, the last purely British service rifle was the 1853 Pattern Rifled Musket. I can think of far more important criteria for a weapon than where it was designed.

[Stoats]

My word, I hadn't seen those abortions before -- SA80 iron sights on a conventional weapon? Just shoot me now...
Super slime, welcome to the "poking stupid people with sticks" forum, this must be about the only place on the Internet he has not been banned from for posting idiocy.
Might I also add to your list?
Bren: Czech design
Lewis: invented by an American
Vickers: Modified Maxim (who was an American)
STEN/sterling: fundamentally any second-generation submachine gun is just a variation on the theme of the German MP 18/MP 28
GPMG: Belgian MAG
Minimi: Belgian
Browning high-power: invented by an American, living in Belgium
Patten 14 rifle: a modified Mauser (German)
Now, what actually were British designs which went into service ?
Webley and Scott automatic pistol: an absolute abortion
Webley revolvers: crap compared to the equivalent Smith & Wesson's
Enfield number two revolver: practically a Webley, see above. idiotic choice of calibre.
Until the SA 80, what Britain's small arms expertise entailed was taking an existing design and making it better. With the SA 80, they took an existing, working design and made it worse.

[SuperSLime]

My word, I hadn't seen those abortions before -- SA80 iron sights on a conventional weapon? Just shoot me now...

Yes, it's astonishing what goes on in some people's heads, isn't it? Not very f**king much, apparently. Sometimes I think you should need a licence to use the internet.

Super slime, welcome to the "poking stupid people with sticks" forum

I enjoy doing that for a while. Then I sprinkle salt on them and watch them shrivel up.

Might I also add to your list?

And let's not forget that "them" prefer to use an assortment of H&Ks (German), SIG pistols (German) and C7s (Canadian). Rather than ridiculous AutoMags, blowback Gatling guns and obsolete Swiss rifles, I might add...

Until the SA 80, what Britain's small arms expertise entailed was taking an existing design and making it better. With the SA 80, they took an existing, working design and made it worse.

Did they ever! It's weird how it took German engineers to make the damn thing work.

Of course it's still clunky, heavy and prone to shedding bits. I'm sure it would be much better with the TMH made out of a Titanium/Plutonium alloy with chocolate rivets, right kids?

[Braith-Wafer]

Yes, let us revise a late 1940s design built using 1940s manufacturing technology that never saw service anywhere so we don't actually know how it would have performed in combat. Great idea. Brilliant use of umpteen million pounds, you should get a job in governmentlaughsol;



I wouldnt underestimate it just becouse the design is 1940s. It may be a capable weapon but only got turned down due to money/political reasons. Read on thehighroad.org that the .280 Brit Service round worked well for the weapon but the 7.62 NATO conversion of the EM-2 affected its recoil/accuracy and making the weapon expensive. I do understand the reason for taking the SLR but on the other side, we may have had a greater rifle that may have been adopted/improved by another nation?.

The .280 round may have been weaker than the 7.62 but more powerful than the Kalashnikov M43 round. We still could have took the NATO round but use it for the likes of the GPMG/Sniper rifles. The US kept the .30 carbines alongside the 7.62 calibre M14s so why didnt we make a similar move?.

http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=122211

[Stoats]

Look, since you clearly understand nothing about manufacturing techniques, I will explain it in simple terms.

That rifle is produced using pressed steel -- essentially an obsolete technology for firearms manufacture -- and uses an obsolete locking mechanism (DP 28 flaps). Yes, it died a death for political and cost reasons -- it is probably also the world's largest bull pup assault rifle.

The M1 carbine was not in front-line service alongside the M14.

It doesn't matter ifyou make it out of whatever fancy space age materials you just heard about on some science-fiction website, it does not change the fact that the design is obsolete.

Ballistically, the cartridge is ideal. However you can have exactly the same ballistics in a smaller package nowadays (6.8 SPC) because powder technology has unsurprisingly advanced in the last 60 years.

Now stop fantasising about resurrecting obsolete designs you Walt.

[Cutaway]

...

There are two options with you. Either you are just trying to annoy those of us who, unlike you, know something about weapons. Or you are incredibly f**king stupid.


There's always Option C.

c. All the above.




Edit.
On reflection Option C would imply some level of intelligence, but that is heavily outweighed by Option B.
Going by previous posts under his many & varied guises and the informative replies thereto, it would indicate that Option A rattles about under the No Go gauge so I'd have to surmise that only leaves Option B.

[SuperSLime]

It's a shame they went for that silly quad rail forend though (although it is conceivable that you can take it off, I've not had one in my sweaty little mitts to have a look so I'm working from photographs)

I noticed in the latest issue of "Kit" that a quad rail forend is now available for the L85A2 and selected units will be issued with it.

Hopefully they'll also issue rail covers, because I can't imagine that holding onto a bunch of ribbed steel rails would be a lot of fun. Especially on stag, at 3am in early January, when you've forgotten your gloves...

[SuperSLime]

We could always adopt this, albeit in a less hideous colour scheme, and call it the L1A2...

http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/data/500/SA58camo1.JPG

And she can give me a refresher on how to use it.

[Reloader]

And she can give me a refresher on how to use it.

I take it you are referring to the weapon?? ;)

[SuperSLime]

I take it you are referring to the weapon?? ;)

Ha ha, reminds me of Full Metal Jacket.

"This is my rifle, this is my gun..."