Gub'mint workers, you've got to love 'em
This new rifle sounds like that updated version of the M-14. You know the rifle McNamara killed for the M-16. I think this is the updated M-14 the SEALs are using.
The SA-80 has been a POS. The old FN FAL’s rock.
I am really hot on a DSA Arms updated clones of the FALs.
http://www.dsarms.com/SA58_FAL-Rifles/departments/8/
STG 58’s are a little more moderate in cost:
http://www.dsarms.com/STG58-Austrian-FAL/products/9/
They don’t have any L1A1 rifles in storage somewhere?
Isn’t the SA80 based on the Armalite 18 (AR-180), and didn’t the SA80 turn out to have a huge failure rate in the other desert enveronments?
More:
http://www.janes.com/news/defence/land/jdw/jdw091229_1_n.shtml
Industry sources told Jane’s that LEI beat competition including Heckler & Koch’s HK417 (already supplied to specialist units within the MoD), FN Herstal’s SCAR (Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle) and an offering from Sabre Defence Industries.
With the majority of contacts occurring at either very close range or at ranges out to between 500 m and 900 m, the “only organic asset” available to responding UK forces in a small-arms capacity is the 7.62 mm General-Purpose Machine Gun, with MoD sources saying that “5.56 mm weapons lack the reach to engage the enemy at those ranges”.
“The 5.56 mm is sufficiently lethal at the right range, but troops need 7.62 mm for longer ranges. We should be looking at higher performance rounds with higher lethality at longer range. Research is going to filter into user requirements for the soldier system lethality programme,” one MoD source told Jane’s .
Assorted thoughts:
-I’m surprised that the Brits didn’t have a supply of 7.62 rifles of their own already. They already use the round for their L96 sniper rifle, and their light machine guns, so why not keep a few hundred “battle rifles” around?
-I would imagine U.S. troops have had similar complaints about the M4/M16 in Afghanistan. Wide open spaces and long lines of sight, and all that. I’ve heard a number of M14’s have been issued to deal with that problem.
-I’m not sure I completely buy this part of the story:
“It means that insurgents - who use 7.62mm ammunition for their AK47 rifles - back off and shoot at British troops from longer distances.” Half the battles in Helmand province, where British troops.”
The author seems to be suggesting that 7.62x39 outranges 5.56 and is comparable to 7.62x51. I’m not an expert, but I find that questionable. Or is it more about the SA-80 than the 5.56 round?
I’ve always been a fan of 5.56mm rifles because they served me so well in combat. Its not that a single round is either superior or inferior to a 7.62mm round that counts. What counts is how many rounds you are packing when the shooting starts.
The 5.56 wins by this metric and I can tell you that when my guys were getting down to their last magazine and the resupply bird was having to snake its way through the mountains and the clouds, I was very glad that we were carrying 300 rds per man. The round and the rifle, especially with recent improvements, work fine for normal infantry use.
Now, sniper work is another matter. The 5.56 doesn’t cut it for reasons well explained in the article. The same goes for having to punch through a white Toyota to get the RPG dude hiding behind it. You need some 7.62 rifles along with 7.62 machine guns to get certain jobs done.
It's heavy as a young elephant, but it's accurate and packs quite a punch.
We're back to marksmen now, with a volunteer army that's properly trained, instead of worrying about a bunch of draftees who had never held a firearm and couldn't handle a rifle my 9 year old daughter could shoot. (To be absolutely fair, one concern was the ability to carry more ammunition - but 'spray and pray' has had its day, thank goodness.)
And the 7.62 itself was a downsize from the old .30'06 Springfield. That round packed quite a wallop on BOTH ends, but if you shot somebody with it they stayed shot, even out at extreme ranges.
All I have to say is that 52 years later, troops are finally using the original AR10 design that Armalite and Eugene Stoner intended.
Reporter and editor should be fired, obviously haven’t a clue as to what they are talking about.
Heh, I have a 7.62 X 54 Finnish Mosin (bolt action) with an 1894 Russian receiver, with sights that go beyond 1200 meters.
I think that these are Lewis Machine Tool (LMT) manufactured rifles that are similar to the AR-10/SR-25 rifles in 7.62x51 NATO. The upper is a monolithic design similar to the 5.56x45 LMT Monolithic Rail Platform. It is a direct impingement gas operated design.
That’s exactly what I tried to tell them when they took my M-14 away and gave me the M-16.
We did the same thing for sniper use. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M110_Semi-Automatic_Sniper_System
The Army’s Squad Designated Marksman program is training soldiers to take care of the 300-600 targets by themselves with the .223.
The Enfield bullpup SA80 carbine used by the brits DOES NOT use standard 556 NATO ammo, rather, they are issued “Radway Green”, an M855 bullet loaded in a 556x45 case to rather mild pressures and resultant lower velocites.
The carbine thusly loaded is even worse off than an M4 with standard M855 ammo.
M855 NATO tends to yaw (turn sideways)shortly after impact, and then fragment at 90 degrees at impact velocities of about about 2400 fps, with about 13 inches of total pentration (to about 200m downrange from an M4, 275-300m from the full sized M16A2).
The 762x51 rifle mentioned in this article is the US M110, an AR type direct impingment system rifle that is issued in limited numbers to US troops to allow extended range capability (not true sniper capabiliites) to the infantry squad. Especially since the issued ammo is M80 ball-which is less effective in some ways than M855 556 ball. It would be much more effective if M852 match or M118 LR (sama same) was the ammo used; 175 grain OTM at 2650fps compared to 147 FMJ at 2800fps.
Imagine, being issued WATERED DOWN 556 ammo.... Who’d a thunk it possible.
THE .256" BRITISH: A LOST OPPORTUNITY
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/256brit.htm
Look's like it would have been in the 6.5 Grendel / 6.8 SPC class of cartridges...
;>)