British Army Equipment in the Later Twilight War

[Ironside]

I am working on expanding information on the British Army and this is a first draft of a part of it. I would be grateful for any comments or criticisms anyone cares to leave.

British Army Equipment in the Later Twilight War

The British Army has never been a particularly visible part of British society, outside of garrison towns, except during a major war; so many minor wars and actions have taken place that there is no authoritative list of them. During ‘peacetime’, e.g. when military actions and casualties are not front page news, equipment for the army is not a priority. The British Army has learned therefore to avoid throwing anything away if they can possibly help it. Obsolete or surplus equipment can be found squirreled away in obscure stores and depots which proved a great boon to the British Army during the Twilight War.

Artillery is a huge consumer of ammunition; no commander in modern history has ever had enough smoke for instance. When the 155mm ammunition began to run short old 5.5” guns were taken from storage and the School of Artillery Trials Unit to make use of the large stocks of 5.5” ammunition remaining in storage. The 51mm mortar L10 was designed from the outset to be able to use the extensive stocks of 2" mortar ammunition.

Although MBTs became rarer on the battlefield, anti-tank capability was still most important. As the supply of MILAN missiles dwindled the BAT Wombat L6 returned to the fray. Likewise, instead of the LAW 80, the 84mm ‘Carl Gustav’ was brought back into service; to the severe disgruntlement of those tasked with carrying it’s 14.2kg empty weight!

The armoured units would have been in direr straits without the Chieftains of the war reserve; some of them with the Chieftain/Challenger Rearmament programme, some without. Even the remaining 1950’s vintage Saracen and Saladin armoured cars were used to great effect.

Ironside

[dragoon500ly]

Looks good so far, and I'm looking forward to further posts!

Its always funny how much "older" equipment remains stashed away in warehouses and depots. I can name several posts in the US that still had stockpiles of M-1 Garands and BARS, still in the original crates, and still waiting to be issued.

[helbent4]

Looks good so far, and I'm looking forward to further posts!

Its always funny how much "older" equipment remains stashed away in warehouses and depots. I can name several posts in the US that still had stockpiles of M-1 Garands and BARS, still in the original crates, and still waiting to be issued.

Lee,

A friend said he saw thousands of US-made FN-FALs (built as the T47) in storage back in the 90's. However, I seem to recall at that point when bases were closed and facilities reorganised a lot of the old gear was disposed of. Another friend who had been a guerrilla in Africa said M14 rifles started arriving in bulk at that time via clandestine aid and the black market and were much preferred over the Kalashnikovs. The former were well-maintained and well-made, while the latter were the worn-out dregs from Central and Eastern European arsenals.

That said, the massive base-closures and disposal happened in response to the end of the Cold War and largely formed part of the "peace dividend". As T2K is an alternative timeline, it's quite possible this course wasn't taken and all or most of the old ordnance is still around!

Tony

[Adm.Lee]

Looks good so far, and I'm looking forward to further posts!

Its always funny how much "older" equipment remains stashed away in warehouses and depots. I can name several posts in the US that still had stockpiles of M-1 Garands and BARS, still in the original crates, and still waiting to be issued.

Heh. I read of a pre-WW2 US infantryman who was at Fortress Monroe (or some other Virginia-area coastal fort). While renovating or remodeling some part of the fort, they broke through a stone or cemented wall to find several cases of factory-fresh Civil War-era rifled muskets, still in preservative grease. The author was still pissed that he couldn't keep one, but they were sold to the officers instead.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the British 25-pounder field gun recalled to service either because I think the British were still producing ammunition into the 1980s for it to sell to former Commonwealth countries that still used it as their main artillery.

Given the situation in Northern Ireland at the time, the British Army apparently had a very large fleet of Saracen APCs but there are other vehicles that would probably have been still in use even though they were discontinued in the real world such as the Fox armoured car (withdrawn from service in 1994 I think)

As for war stores, I would suspect that there would be huge stocks of L1A1s, Sterlings and 7.62mm Brens along with lesser stocks of SMLEs, Stens and Vickers Guns. By way of an example, here in Australia the army was disposing of war-stored SMLE rifles as late as 1991 or 92 in Western Australia (I don't know about the other states).

[Legbreaker]

There was, and to my knowledge still is, a large warehouse of SMLE rifles stored up near the Queensland/NSW border. I can't say for sure, but I would guess that there are/were Brens, Vickers, Owens, Austens, etc to be found there too.
Our Company armoury even had an old Martini Henry rifle which got pulled out and put on display every year for the Company ball.

[helbent4]

Leg,

For that matter, a friend of mine related how when they were clearing out some basement rooms at a militia armoury here in Vancouver they found uniforms and kit dating back to WWII.

A different friend said his reserve unit saved weapons that had been written off or otherwise forgotten. Like FN C1A1s and C2A1s that had been rebuilt, 81mm mortars that were forgotten when the regiment (the Seaforth's) got rid of it's mortar platoon, C6 GPMGs and C9 SAWs that had been declared inoperative but rebuilt over time by bored armourers.

For that matter, the cadets apparently use FNs (C1A1s) and SMLEs chambered for .22 ammunition, and the Northern Rangers certainly use the SMLE through the north.

Tony

[pmulcahy11b]

For that matter, the cadets apparently use FNs (C1A1s) and SMLEs chambered for .22 ammunition...

Tony

In my T2K timeline, the various governments have weapons like these farmed out to young teenagers and hunters.

[Legbreaker]

Although the letter of the law says certain weapons and classes of weapons are illegal and through a number of amnesties, buyback schemes, etc they've all been removed from public hands, you can bet on finding all sorts of goodies squirrelled away out of sight.
Here in Australia, semiautomatic rifles and shotguns have been illegal (or HEAVILY restricted) since the early 90's. I personally know of a few caches here and there though of unregistered weapons which if found by the police would get the owners a serious stint in prison.
It's funny really that the weapons themselves are illegal, but the ammo is still freely available (provided you have a liciense). Even some parts can be had fairly easily over the counter.
Depending where in the country one is, sometimes you can get away with carrying an officially illegal firearm - the police themselves in outback (aka country) areas often have a few tucked away for hunting on their days off (sometimes obtained when handed in by concerned citizens for "destruction".

[Rainbow Six]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the British 25-pounder field gun recalled to service either because I think the British were still producing ammunition into the 1980s for it to sell to former Commonwealth countries that still used it as their main artillery.

Given the situation in Northern Ireland at the time, the British Army apparently had a very large fleet of Saracen APCs but there are other vehicles that would probably have been still in use even though they were discontinued in the real world such as the Fox armoured car (withdrawn from service in 1994 I think)

As for war stores, I would suspect that there would be huge stocks of L1A1s, Sterlings and 7.62mm Brens along with lesser stocks of SMLEs, Stens and Vickers Guns. By way of an example, here in Australia the army was disposing of war-stored SMLE rifles as late as 1991 or 92 in Western Australia (I don't know about the other states).

Fox was indeed withdrawn in the mid 1990's IRL, but in a Twilight Timeline (particularly v1), I think it's highly likely that it would have stayed in service, particularly with the Territorial Army Recce units. You'd also likely see a number of Ferrets.

As well as older equipment remaining in use, there's also the possibility that newer equipment might have come into service earlier if the Cold War had carried on (for example IRL Challenger 2 didn't go into service until 1998, although first deliveries took place in 1994). In my T2K World I also brought forward the introduction of the A2 version of the L85 so that it came into service in time to equip front line units (as a knock on effect this obviously led to increased numbers of A1's in reserve stocks).

You're right about the Army having a number of different vehicles because of the situation in Ulster...off the top of my head I would expect that as well as the Saracens some Humber Pigs and Shorland armoured cars (Long Wheel Base Land Rovers fitted with some armour plating and a machine gun turret) might make an appearance on the mainland during 1998 and 1999. Tigger may well be able to suggest others...

Just a few thoughts...

Cheers

[Canadian Army]

Leg,
For that matter, the cadets apparently use FNs (C1A1s) and SMLEs chambered for .22 ammunition, and the Northern Rangers certainly use the SMLE through the north.

Tony

The Cadets Canada and Canadian Rangers use the Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk I in the .303.

[Targan]

I personally know of a few caches here and there though of unregistered weapons which if found by the police would get the owners a serious stint in prison.

Same here.

[dragoon500ly]

Back in 1943 the US Army Ordnance Dept was looking for a very heavily armored tank to use for attacking heavily fortified enemy positions as well as being invelnerable against all known enemy tanks. It was to have a maximum armor protection of 8 inches (300mm) and was to be armed with the newly developed T5E1 105mm cannon.

Five pilot models of the T95 Gun Motor Carriage were to be built, but due to their complex construction, only two were built by March 1945, when the project was canceled. One was destroyed by fire during one of its trail runs, one is at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland and the third is at Fort Knox, Kentucky. That's right, three models were built although the official records stated two.

When I first heard this story, I was able to look at the one on display at Ft. Knox, and I've seen photos of the remains of the burned out one. Never have had the chance to get to APG, but I have been told that there is one on display there, near the Elefant.

The story goes on that the third one was located inside a set of older warehouses that were being torn down. So the US Army managed to lose a 95-ton prototype....

Kind of makes you wonder just what is stored in government warehouses?

[Rockwolf66]

Looks good so far, and I'm looking forward to further posts!

Its always funny how much "older" equipment remains stashed away in warehouses and depots. I can name several posts in the US that still had stockpiles of M-1 Garands and BARS, still in the original crates, and still waiting to be issued.

Funny my shitbird doesn't belive me when I told him that Force Recon still had usable High Standard Supressed pistols in their inventories as late as 1997.

According to him he had worked with recon and all they used were M16s and Beretta M9s.

Even though i found the High Standard to be front heavy it pointed well and I wouldn't want to be a local jack rabbit.


As far as British Equipment goes I would not be very suprised if they were not improvising various munitions. heck you would probably see the few Omani vetrans left acting as senior advisors to the home guard and distributing such nice info as how to use a cup of gasoline to get longer range out of a mortar without blowing the tube.

[Legbreaker]

Not sure if that would do much for the range tables - hard to hit a target with an indirect weapon if you don't have the maths ready...

[helbent4]

The Cadets Canada and Canadian Rangers use the Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk I in the .303.

That sounds about right. I've seen references that the Lee-Enfields issued to the Canadian Rangers was .303, not 7.62x51mm.

I have seen references who cite that the Lee-Enfields that were used by Cadets were re-chambered to .22LR (now they use air rifles). Several people I know who were in Cadets mentioned C1A1s, but it's possible this was only a local thing and not widespread, something in the past (like, 80's or 90's) or they were bullshitting. At any rate, for the purpose of my game I assume there were still stocks of FNs out there up until the 90's, when they were repurposed for national defence.

As for American weapons, I was reading how a large cache of Springfield '03s were found in 1977 and 1996 and distributed for JROTC/ceremonial use/civilian sale. So yeah, I would guess there's a lot of that stuff out there.

Tony

[perardua]

British cadet forces have Lee Enfields chambered for .22 rounds for target shooting, and up until recently had the L98 Cadet Rifle, a bolt action (and utterly useless) version of the L85. The thinking behind the L98 was that a bolt action rifle would be less attractive to possible theft, and harder for a cadet to do damage with than a sem-automatic weapon, should they make some kind of mistake. Despite what some people seem to think, no regular, unless they are former cadets or serving as an instructor or liasion with cadets, should ever have the misfortune of being in the same room as one of these weapons. Still, at the bare minimum they could be cannibalised for parts for L85s, as there is a reasonable amount of compatibility.

However, in real life the L98 has been replaced with a version of the L85 limited to semi-automatic fire only, the idea being that it is actually safer as this weapon can be fitted with a blank firing attachment, and not having to re-cock the weapon (with an awkwardly placed and designed cocking handle) each time means that more control can be maintained over the weapon. This weapon would also be more attractive in a Twilight scenario.

[Rockwolf66]

Not sure if that would do much for the range tables - hard to hit a target with an indirect weapon if you don't have the maths ready...

Well IRL since the British Troops fighting in Oman durring the late 1960~1970s were not officially at war they were not sent the last two propellant bands that the mortars they were using needed to get the maximum effective range. So the Brits improvized by poring gasoline down the mortar barrel to give the round an extra kick. Now such acts are very dangerous especially when you have friendly troops assaulting the target of the mortar.

[Legbreaker]

It'd certainly work for increased range, but accuracy must have STUNK!

[HorseSoldier]

As well as older equipment remaining in use, there's also the possibility that newer equipment might have come into service earlier if the Cold War had carried on (for example IRL Challenger 2 didn't go into service until 1998, although first deliveries took place in 1994). In my T2K World I also brought forward the introduction of the A2 version of the L85 so that it came into service in time to equip front line units (as a knock on effect this obviously led to increased numbers of A1's in reserve stocks).

A lot of that stuff gets wonky when you start figuring in the Cold War not ending -- like with the L85A2, had West Germany not ditched the G11 project and slashed military spending fire-sale style, HK wouldn't have gone bankrupt, and wouldn't have been bought out by Royal Ordnance and probably wouldn't have gotten the contract to upgrade the L85. No Gulf War means the L85 wouldn't have been so hashed up when the rubber really met the road, which might not have provoked the powers that be to start looking at fixes.

On the other hand, Gulf War or not, a product-improved version of the L85 or a completely new replacement weapon was very overdue (as pretty much everyone in the British Army knew by the time of the Twilight War). I could see an upgrade program being implemented, possibly during '95 when the Sino-Soviet War kicks off or maybe even an emergency crash program when the balloon went up in Europe and troops began mysteriously losing the L85s and reequipping themselves with anything else that would shoot.

[waiting4something]

I have a question with seeing several photos of British troops using M-16's from the early 80's like in the Falklands to 2000's like in Afganistan. It seems like there is sometimes a guy here and there armed with a M-16 when everyone else has a L1A1 or L85. Why? What is the purpose? Is it a normal thing? I could maybe understand them using one fitted with a M203 before Britian got there own standard GL, but in some pics it's just a M-16 with no GL on it. What's the deal with that? Not all the pics are SAS guys either, some where Royal Marines and I think regular Army. Just curious to these strange sightings.:confused:

[HorseSoldier]

I have a question with seeing several photos of British troops using M-16's from the early 80's like in the Falklands to 2000's like in Afganistan. It seems like there is sometimes a guy here and there armed with a M-16 when everyone else has a L1A1 or L85. Why? What is the purpose? Is it a normal thing? I could maybe understand them using one fitted with a M203 before Britian got there own standard GL, but in some pics it's just a M-16 with no GL on it. What's the deal with that? Not all the pics are SAS guys either, some where Royal Marines and I think regular Army. Just curious to these strange sightings.:confused:

I'm not an expert on the ins and outs, but my understanding is that in addition to the SAS, M16s and then the UKSF version of the M4 are fielded to the SBS, Para pathfinder units, and some Royal Marine and Army units functioning in the patrols/recce role (i.e. may be wrong, but my recollection is that the cadre from the Moutain Leader school in the Royal Marines had M16s issued during the Falklands in their battlefield patrolling role).

[Legbreaker]

Here in Australia the standard issue rifle was the L1A1 SLR, however in most full time units, there tended to be 3-4 M16A1s per section (One with the section commander, one with an M203 in the hands of No1 rifleman and one or two with the Scout group). Considering that a section was nine men and one of those carried an M60, that means up to 50% of all rifles (more when you take into account Plt and Coy HQs carrying the lighter weapon) were not standard issue.

Same could be true in the UK I would think, but I understand the bulk of Australia's M16s came through our involvement in Vietnam (yes, some of the rifles really are that old).

[waiting4something]

Thanks guys for the prompt replies. Those questions always puzzled me. I always kinda thought maybe it was just some kind way for them to play with different weapons so they didn't get bored or something like that.:D

[TiggerCCW UK]

British cadet forces have Lee Enfields chambered for .22 rounds for target shooting, and up until recently had the L98 Cadet Rifle, a bolt action (and utterly useless) version of the L85. The thinking behind the L98 was that a bolt action rifle would be less attractive to possible theft, and harder for a cadet to do damage with than a sem-automatic weapon, should they make some kind of mistake. Despite what some people seem to think, no regular, unless they are former cadets or serving as an instructor or liasion with cadets, should ever have the misfortune of being in the same room as one of these weapons. Still, at the bare minimum they could be cannibalised for parts for L85s, as there is a reasonable amount of compatibility.

However, in real life the L98 has been replaced with a version of the L85 limited to semi-automatic fire only, the idea being that it is actually safer as this weapon can be fitted with a blank firing attachment, and not having to re-cock the weapon (with an awkwardly placed and designed cocking handle) each time means that more control can be maintained over the weapon. This weapon would also be more attractive in a Twilight scenario.

Ah, the L98 - what a truly horrendous piece of :censored::censored: When I started with the cadets we used the .303 Mk 4 Lee Enfield, which I really loved, but in fairness it was a bit of a handful for a 12 year old :p We also used the L81A1, which was a variant of the Parker Hale M82 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Hale_M82)

Personally I really like the L81A1, despite ARRSE's damning view of it here http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/L81A2_Cadet_Target_Rifle

In fairness, I'd have been using it before they discovered any of the problems, and I was comparing it directly to the L98, but I did like it, and unlike the L98 I could pretty much hit anything I pointed it at - I'm pretty happy that I managed to rank second in Northern Ireland with it, consistently shooting 2" groups at 600 yards with ring sights. The L98 on the other hand I could barely hit a barn wall with, even if I was inside the barn:D

When did they convert the .303 to .22? We occasionally used a .22 rifle, but I've no idea what type it was. And I should point out that I left the cadets way back in '92 so I've no idea what happened after that, plus things may have been a wee bit different here in NI.

[TiggerCCW UK]

You're right about the Army having a number of different vehicles because of the situation in Ulster...off the top of my head I would expect that as well as the Saracens some Humber Pigs and Shorland armoured cars (Long Wheel Base Land Rovers fitted with some armour plating and a machine gun turret) might make an appearance on the mainland during 1998 and 1999. Tigger may well be able to suggest others...

Just a few thoughts...

Cheers

Off the top of my head other vehicles that might be available would be some of the Saracens and Pigs, as well as a load of the 'Piglets' - the armoured landrovers that preceeded the Snatch/CAV100, the Tangia armoured landrovers that the RUC/PSNI use plus all the armoured cars they use - by this I mean they are armoured variants of ordinary cars, as opposed to the normal definition of armoured cars. Tactica APCs were in used with 321 EOD over here, but I'd imagine they'd be a specialist set up inside which might not be so much use in a general role - as an aside I think the British Nuclear Constabulary (responsible for policing non military nuclear sites, as opposed to cops with nukes) used Tacticas as well. Pretty much any vehicle that served in NI, from land rovers to four tonners to diggers would have had an add on armour package, so I think there might be a lot of that available. I don't remember seeing Fox's or Ferrets over here, but I know they were deployed, although I think it was out in the cuds more than the cities. I can remember seeing rows of Saladins and Saracens parked up at Gosford Castle in Armagh. Saxons were used here, although in T2K I think they'd very rapidly have disappeared back to frontline service. Also the Tavern APV might have appeared, although I think it might be too late for use in a standard T2K timeline - which would be no great loss! It was the most modern vehicle used in NI, and they have already been scrapped and sold off through Witham Specialist Tenders as apparently it was absolute bollocks. It was based off a commercial cash in transit van, had huge reliability problems and massively limited space inside.

Heres a few links for inspiration;

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?38545-British-Army-in-Northern-Ireland-Pics

http://www.regimental-art.com/northern_ireland.htm

http://www.clash-of-steel.org/gallery/sub_index.php?index=vehicles

http://www.arrse.co.uk/rlc/104151-northern-ireland-british-army-equipment.html

http://www.warwheels.net/TavernAPVindex.html

[TiggerCCW UK]

Forgot to mention the Shorland - I've never seen one here, although I know both the RUC and UDR used them. Not sure when they were retired.

[Rainbow Six]

I could see an upgrade program being implemented, possibly during '95 when the Sino-Soviet War kicks off.

That was exactly the justification that I used. That said, the A1 version remains by far the most common variant, particularly since most of my focus has been on what's been happening in the UK itself rather than in Europe, where most of the A2's ended up.

[Rainbow Six]

Forgot to mention the Shorland - I've never seen one here, although I know both the RUC and UDR used them. Not sure when they were retired.

I've always been guilty of overlooking the Shorland...

Edit....one of my all time favourite T2K British vehicles would have to be the Alvis Stalwart converted into a gun truck...

[helbent4]

I have a question with seeing several photos of British troops using M-16's from the early 80's like in the Falklands to 2000's like in Afganistan. It seems like there is sometimes a guy here and there armed with a M-16 when everyone else has a L1A1 or L85. Why? What is the purpose? Is it a normal thing? I could maybe understand them using one fitted with a M203 before Britian got there own standard GL, but in some pics it's just a M-16 with no GL on it. What's the deal with that? Not all the pics are SAS guys either, some where Royal Marines and I think regular Army. Just curious to these strange sightings.:confused:

It's quite likely that British troops in the early 80's used Colt M16s.

By 2000 those were probably replaced by Diemaco C7 rifles and C8 carbines, licence-built versions of AR-15 pattern weapons that are considered to be "product improved" over the original Colt designs.

"The MoD has recently acquired some £2.2 million plus worth of Diemaco C8 SFW carbines and C7A1s for special forces troops, this is in addition to the C7 rifles already used by grenadiers with M203s."

http://www.cybershooters.org/january_2001_editorial.htm

"Elements of 5 Airborne Brigade and also the Royal Marines and 22 SAS have used the Diemaco C7 and C7A1 rifles for some time, and they are also taking delivery of these carbines now as well..."

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-907.html

"Throughout much of the 70s, 80s and 90s, the main assault rifle of the SBS was the M16. A modern day SBS trooper is more likely to use the Canadian Diemaco C8 SFW carbine."

http://www.specialboatservice.co.uk/sbs-weapons-c8.php

"C8 carbine The [British SAS] Regiment's primary assault carbine"

http://www.whodareswins.com/weapons-and-tactics.html


http://www.rm45.com/l119/C8andAG36.jpg


"L119A1 is acutally [sic] the Canadian Diemaco C8SFW. Building upon the C8 and C8A1, Diemaco created the Special Forces Weapon (SFW), which provides an interesting combination of ideas. Featuring a longer, 16-inch barrel of a heavier profile than the C8/A1, the SFW is designed to provide a fire support capability in carbine form. The profile of the barrel is not uniform, oddly enough bulging out at the end, whereas the M4 profile barrel steps down. The front sight base is strengthened for mounting of the H&K AG-C grenade launcher. The British Ministry of Defense acquired a number of SFWs, primarily for the SAS, giving them the Land Force designation L119A1. Because of the barrel profile, another Diemaco specific mount is required at attach the M203 grenade launcher (though the British have decided to use the HK AG-C/L17A1)."

http://www.rm45.com/l119/l119a1.php

Granted, none of these are "official" sources, but googling "UK L119A1" seems to bring a lot of hits for C8s in British service. I would imagine that during the Twilight War, if a suitable replacement or upgrade of the SA-80 had not been put into service then Diemaco rifles and carbines might well be issued to British troops, as it was a proven design that was already in limited use.

Tony

[TiggerCCW UK]

As far as I remember some of the close obs platoons used M16's over here, and IIRC the M16 was issued to certain units in Newry after an overpenetration incident when a squaddie with an SLR returned fire on a provie gunman and shot straight through the walls of a house and nearly hit a civilian. I'm unsure why this was deemed a particular problem in Newry as opposed to Belfast, Stroke sity or any other urban area.

[Ironside]

Thanks for the replies people; I would have responded earlier but RL raised its ugly head.

@StainlessSteelCynic

Small arms did slip my mind, I'll rectify that in the next draft. I left out the 25pdr deliberately as my major source for that - Encyclopedia of the British Army 3rd Edition by Terry Gander 1986 - mentions that the 25pdr would soon be withdrawn due to diminishing ammo supplies, more having to be ordered from India or other country using it. I had no idea that the ammo was being produced in Britain. I'd be very grateful if you could share your info on that.

[perardua]

The L119A1 is a Diemaco, as far as I can tell, having spent some time on the ranges with some SFSG lads while on tour who let us have a go.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Thanks for the replies people; I would have responded earlier but RL raised its ugly head.

@StainlessSteelCynic

Small arms did slip my mind, I'll rectify that in the next draft. I left out the 25pdr deliberately as my major source for that - Encyclopedia of the British Army 3rd Edition by Terry Gander 1986 - mentions that the 25pdr would soon be withdrawn due to diminishing ammo supplies, more having to be ordered from India or other country using it. I had no idea that the ammo was being produced in Britain. I'd be very grateful if you could share your info on that.

To be a little clearer, I have probably been confused with the fact that Pakistan Ordnance Factories still produce the 25-pounder ammo however my original information was that the Honourable Artillery Company was still operating the gun into the early 1990s. I haven't found my book yet but I have found the same info given in the wiki article on the HAC in the Post-War section
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honourable_Artillery_Company

[helbent4]

The L119A1 is a Diemaco, as far as I can tell, having spent some time on the ranges with some SFSG lads while on tour who let us have a go.

Perardua,

Diemaco is an interesting story. Both new and licenced weapons (SA-80, AUSTEYR-88) seem to have considerable teething difficulties; Diemaco took a design and within a decade had made improvements on the original so much that more C7s-C8s were sold to more foreign governments than the M16/M4 designs, and in more versions. In a move that is neither surprising nor ironic, Colt acquired Diemaco and it is now known as "Colt Canada".

There were rumours in the 90's that the Diemaco C7 and C8 would replace the L85A1, but for many reasons this didn't come about. For one thing, a lot of time and money had been sunk into the SA-80. Also, the idea might have been to run out the clock until the next generation infantry weapon was developed, likely an OICW-type system.

In the T2K timeline, it's possible that after being adopted by special units in the 90's, the L119A1 would become more widespread in British units due to quality and availability, at least as a stopgap while the L85A2 is developed and deployed.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

I can't say any of the early model F88 Austeyrs I was issued had any teething problems. All worked well without faults.
The only thing I could say about it is that the bolt hold open device (a simple slot for cocking handle) didn't exactly instill a lot of confidence in the user after handling the L1A1. It seemed too easy to accidentally knock it, allowing the bolt to fly forward and chamber a round (or potentially trapping a finger in the chamber while conducing night time safety checks).

[pmulcahy11b]

The only thing I could say about it is that the bolt hold open device (a simple slot for cocking handle) didn't exactly instill a lot of confidence in the user after handling the L1A1. It seemed too easy to accidentally knock it, allowing the bolt to fly forward and chamber a round (or potentially trapping a finger in the chamber while conducing night time safety checks).

The bolt hold-open of the M16 is like that. It's especially apparent when you go from Inspection Arms to Order Arms -- the butt goes to the ground and the bolt immediately goes forward. But it also makes for a quicker reloading time -- just trip the bolt catch after putting in a new magazine.

[Legbreaker]

Having used both weapons, I have to say the catch on the M16 is definately the flimsier. At least with the F88 you can keep your hand in a position that will block the cocking handle if it does dislodge itself (just don't let any instructors see your hand anywhere near it).

It seems strange that with the L1A1 SOP was that you engaged the hold open device, yet kept your hand on the cocking handle (in case the catch failed), but with the Steyr you got in serious shit for doing exactly the same thing. :confused:

[Rainbow Six]

To be a little clearer, I have probably been confused with the fact that Pakistan Ordnance Factories still produce the 25-pounder ammo however my original information was that the Honourable Artillery Company was still operating the gun into the early 1990s. I haven't found my book yet but I have found the same info given in the wiki article on the HAC in the Post-War section
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honourable_Artillery_Company

I can't be 100% certain on this, but I think the HAC's Gun Troop had a mainly ceremonial role.

There's some more info on them here (not all of this would be correct in a T2K timeline).

http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/Honourable_Artillery_Company

Cheers

Dave

[perardua]

A couple of the NCOs I was talking to on the range were of the opinion that the L119 was no more reliable than an L85A2, but offered the advantages of being able to be fired from the left shoulder, being not obviously British (plenty of people use Diemacos, whilst the L85 is rather distinctively ours), and most important of all, being different from the rest of the forces, which they admitted was part of the draw of being SF.

[helbent4]

A couple of the NCOs I was talking to on the range were of the opinion that the L119 was no more reliable than an L85A2, but offered the advantages of being able to be fired from the left shoulder, being not obviously British (plenty of people use Diemacos, whilst the L85 is rather distinctively ours), and most important of all, being different from the rest of the forces, which they admitted was part of the draw of being SF.

Peradua,

I could see this, the main advantage of the C8/L119A1 is that it was a proven design that was available immediately as a replacement for the L85A1, not that it was more reliable (once the SA80's kinks were worked out).

Leg,

I'm not going to get into the concerns with the early AUGs, as these mainly exaggerations and the AUSteyr does not belong on a "worst weapons" list. (There were a few changes that did improve things drastically but the design was sound.) Personally, I'd have been fine if Canada chose the AUG over the AR-15, but there it is.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

Personally I'd have been happy if they kept the 7.62N L1A1 instead of the 5.56 F88, but that's just me and my desire to see a target obliterated rather than tickled to death.... :schuss:
I do like the ergonomices of the F88 a bit more though as it's much easier to use on handed than just about any other weapon I've every laid my greasy fingers on. Some say it's an uncomfortable weapon to use, but I think that's mainly because it's a bullpup and nothing is where you'd expect it to be on a conventional weapon. Adequate training fixes that. It's also one of the easiest weapons to carry on patrol because of it's centre of balance being right at the pistol grip.
It's only other drawback, at least in the earlier versions, was it's inability to fit a GL or alternate sights and accessories (this wasn't much of an issue at the time though as VERY few accessories were available, let alone issued).

[pmulcahy11b]

I've never fired a bullpup weapon, so...how does a bullpup compare to a conventional rifle? And has anyone here used one in combat?

[helbent4]

Personally I'd have been happy if they kept the 7.62N L1A1 instead of the 5.56 F88, but that's just me and my desire to see a target obliterated rather than tickled to death.... :schuss:


Leg,

You would have a lot of agreement from members of the Canadian Forces (Reg Force and militia) who transitioned from the 7.62x51mm FN C1A1/C2A1 to the 5.56x45mm C7/C8. There is still a lot of nostalgia for the old "FN".

Tony

[Targan]

Personally I'd have been happy if they kept the 7.62N L1A1 instead of the 5.56 F88, but that's just me and my desire to see a target obliterated rather than tickled to death.... :schuss:

I hear ya.

[Legbreaker]

Fortunatley I avoided combat, but I've trained intensively with the L1A1, M16A1, F88 and M60 (plus a few other less relevant systems). I'd have to say that I like the L1A1 for it's hitting power and solid contruction (now there's a weapon you can really smack somebody about with!), and the M60 is definately my favourite (what's not to like about a belt fed machinegun?), but for general patrolling and assault, the Steyr is the better weapon (note I'm ignoring the M16).

In it's base form (without accessories) it's perfectly balanced as I've already indicated around the pistol grip. It can be fired accurately one handed (although I'd advise tucking the stock into the shoulder anyway) which leaves the off hand to do other tasks such as open doors, carry equipment, etc.

The 30 round mags are ok, certainly better than the 20 rounds of the L1A1, and the weapon of course is capable of automatic fire. It is however not suited to automatic due to it's light weight - still, it's a good option to have for close range "panic" fire.

[LBraden]

The L1A1 was a good weapon, one of the downsides of the new L85 is that it has a plastic butt, which is relevant to this:

During one of the numerous riots that happened in Northern Ireland in around 1982 my father was involved in a bit of defending, well... during said riot he got a hurling ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurling ) stick though this plexi-glass riot helmet shield, left him with a good cut above his left eye.
Now, being sensible the army sent him to hospital to get patched up, except someone forgot to remove his ammo, so under SOP, no anaesthetic, which meant my father had 5 stitches with no pain relief.
So when he got discharged some bright spark passed him a new helmet and told him to get back to the fight.
To the day my father died, he was sure he got the bloke back, by swinging the rifle round and picking this bloke off the ground by usage of his groin region, my father is sure of this as 1) The gentlemen was wearing black balaclava, black bomber jacket, cammo trousers and 2) carrying a hurling stick.

Only problem he had, was he broke the wooden butt of the SLR, and hated the new plastic one because you could not "slightly alter" the butt to fit your shoulder properly, with a simple bit of wood carving

But I will say this, if ya want to stop a raging bull, and your marksman just put 10 rounds in its head with his SLR, make sure the Gimpy is loaded.

[helbent4]

But I will say this, if ya want to stop a raging bull, and your marksman just put 10 rounds in its head with his SLR, make sure the Gimpy is loaded.

Lee,

A friend told me about how he was on a winter exercise in the bush with Cadets and was charged by a starving wolverine. The beast was so low that only the top of the skull was visible above the snow as it humped furiously towards them. The .22LR bullets fired from their rechambered Lee-Enfields only enraged it without penetrating the skull. The soldier/instructor knew to aim lower and was armed with an FN, finally stopping it.

Tony

[perardua]

I've never fired a bullpup weapon, so...how does a bullpup compare to a conventional rifle? And has anyone here used one in combat?

I've spent my entire military career (pretty much) armed with a bullpup rifle in the form of the L85A2, apart from some brief range days with Diemaco's, M4s and M16s at various times. I have used the L85 on operations (in my case also fitted with a UGL), and appreciated the compactness of the weapon (especially in vehicle based patrolling, and the limited amount of urban work we did), as well as the fact that, like the Steyr, it's very easy to use one handed while performing other tasks with the left hand.

The inability to fire from the left shoulder has never been a problem in my experience, but then my AO was mostly flat desert anyway. Something that was also brought to my attention is that for a weapon 785mm/30.9 inches long, you get 518mm/20.4 inches of barrel. Compared to the M16A2, which according to Wikipedia is 1010mm/39.625 inches long but with a 508mm/20 inch barrel, the advantages of the bullpup design in reducing overall weapon length without the loss of barrel length are obvious.

I also wonder if the lack of experience with firearms in the majority of the general UK population helped with the adoption of a bullpup design - the majority of people have never used a 'conventional' layout weapon anyway, so recruits joining the armed forces will have their first experience with an L85. I know that when I have later used rifles like the M16 series on exchanges and suchlike I have not grasped the layout as quickly as someone used to a conventionally laid out rifle might.

Unrelated to the bullpup design, but just as a general point, the weapon is unfortunately rather heavy, especially when fitted with a SUSAT (now being replaced by a combined ACOG/reflex sight) and LLM (visible/IR laser/torch thingy), and even more so when you stick a UGL on the end. However, this does mean that the barrel suffers relatively little climb in automatic fire (not that there is ever normally any good reason to be firing bursts of any length), and with the addition of the ops issue vertical foregrip/bipod, makes it very accurate.

[perardua]

Oh, and the L7A2 GPMG is the king of machineguns. But that's not really relevant! :p

[dragoon500ly]

Oh, and the L7A2 GPMG is the king of machineguns. But that's not really relevant! :p

It is relevant because the truth hurts!!!

The Belgian FN-MAG design, and its clones, the L7A2 and the M-240 have to be the best machineguns, almost as good as a M-2HB....and they will probably soldier on longer than the famous "Ma Deuce"!

[perardua]

It's better than a .50 purely because I can carry and fire it without assistance! Apparently Heckler & Koch is doing an update of the GPMG for the British forces, made from significantly lighter materials and with a picatinny rail on the top cover, or at least so I read in the various trade magazines we have in the crew room.

[dragoon500ly]

It's better than a .50 purely because I can carry and fire it without assistance! Apparently Heckler & Koch is doing an update of the GPMG for the British forces, made from significantly lighter materials and with a picatinny rail on the top cover, or at least so I read in the various trade magazines we have in the crew room.

Granted, the GPMG is can be carried and fired by one man...

But there is still something, special about setting up a Ma Deuce on a tripod, setting the H&T...and loading a 500 round belt until the old bitch! Then firing that belt at on old truck...and then taking a look at just how much damage a .50 AP round does...

It's almost as much fun as watching Tom & Jerry cartoons with my daughter!

[perardua]

We shot up old tank hulks on Lydd ranges with the .50 when we did our training with it. Good times, even if I did slip and burn myself doing a barrel change. GMG's pretty good too, though reassembing the bolt after cleaning is like doing a rubik's cube.

[Legbreaker]

The FN MAG or whatever you want to call it has one drawback from what I've heard (we only had the M60) was that there was nothing up front to hold onto when the weapon was hot. Made it a little difficult to carry about in an attack.
Great weapon on a mount or stationary position, but try moving and fighting with it and you run into issues.

Now as for destroying things, the .50cal has nothing on a hundred kilos of ANFO.... :D

[perardua]

Carrying handle, or just wear gloves. The American version has a heat shield anyway, I think.

[Legbreaker]

Yes, I'd heard the carrying handle was the only thing that could be used, however it's not exactly in the best position for that sort of activity.
A heatshield is in my opinion, an absolute MUST. Sure you can wear a glove, but that reduces your manual dexterity and slow reaction time in the event of a stoppage. Any glove thick enough to cope with the blistering heat is unlikely to allow the fine motorskills required to reload, etc.

[perardua]

To be honest, for speed of movement in and especially out of firing positions (which with a GPMG, are going to be prone) whilst on the attack, the carrying handle is actually better than carrying it in a conventional fashion. Grab gun, run to next position, gun down, you go down behind it, then when you get up you just grab it by the handle and leg it forward again. That's how we used it in the light role, and is how it's supposed to be done on the annual weapons assessment for GPMG when advancing and withdrawing. SF role is a different matter.

Seemed to work at the time.

[pmulcahy11b]

It's better than a .50 purely because I can carry and fire it without assistance! Apparently Heckler & Koch is doing an update of the GPMG for the British forces, made from significantly lighter materials and with a picatinny rail on the top cover, or at least so I read in the various trade magazines we have in the crew room.

FN USA has built a version of the M240, which I believe is in limited issue now, which has a good portion of the steel parts replaced by lighter titanium. It's on my pages, and it's a lot lighter than a standard M240.

[Targan]

Now as for destroying things, the .50cal has nothing on a hundred kilos of ANFO.... :D

Indeed.

[helbent4]

FN USA has built a version of the M240, which I believe is in limited issue now, which has a good portion of the steel parts replaced by lighter titanium. It's on my pages, and it's a lot lighter than a standard M240.

Paul,

In addition, I believe improved components from the Canadian C6 GPMG (licence-built MAG-58) were used to upgrade US-made M240s to extend their service life prior to introducing titanium parts.

Tony

[Legbreaker]

As most probably know, I carried the M60 during most of my service. I carried it more like a rifle, a hand on the pistolgrip and the other on the forestock - the carry handle was used only in non-tactical situations.

One of the other machinegunners in my plattoon went so far on one exercise as to remove the bipod completely from the weapon. Although this obviously reduced accuracy and stability for longer ranges, he was certainly strong enough to manage it (built like an ox!). The spare barrel retained the bipod though enabling longer ranged fire after a quick change (he had an excellent No2 so this only took a few moments - sooo jealous!) :mgwhore2:
It had the advantage that in poor light conditions, it was often mistaken as a rifle and so the "enemy" paid less attention to him than they would have otherwise (machineguns are prime targets to take out as are grenadiers and commanders).

[HorseSoldier]

The M60 is definitely a better design than the MAG/M240 for being up and moving in an assault, though neither is as good as a PK in that respect.

For most anything else, though, I'll take a 240 over a 60 every time.

[helbent4]

The M60 is definitely a better design than the MAG/M240 for being up and moving in an assault, though neither is as good as a PK in that respect.



HS,

A GPMG can't be good at everything, I guess that's why they have SAWs!

Tony

[HorseSoldier]

Unrelated to T2K L85s, but I see the in real life the MoD is switching over to MagPul E-Mags. If the HK mags supplied for the L85A2 are anything like the ones we got issued a few years back that'll be a huge improvement, both in terms of weight and durability.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The M60 is definitely a better design than the MAG/M240 for being up and moving in an assault, though neither is as good as a PK in that respect.

For most anything else, though, I'll take a 240 over a 60 every time.

Personally I believe that the MAG58 is superior in almost all respects to the M60 but the M60 is easier to carry and wield. As for the PK, I've found it has similar carry characteristics as the MAG58 but worse for me, having been trained on left-hand feed MGs (M60, MAG58, L3A3) the right-hand feed of the PK is a bit difficult to get used to

[Ironside]

Sorry to be such a time before posting my second draft; real life getting in the way. As far as I can determine by the mid 1980s the 25pdr was for cermonial use only. With great regret, I've left them out. As always any and all comments and criticisms welcome.

British Army Equipment During the Later Twilight War

The British Army has never been a particularly visible part of British society, outside of garrison towns, except during a major war; so many minor wars and actions have taken place that there is no authoritative list of them. During ‘peacetime’, e.g. when military actions and casualties are not front page news, equipment for the army is not a priority. The British Army has learned therefore to avoid throwing anything away if they can possibly help it. Obsolete or surplus equipment can be found squirreled away in obscure stores and depots which proved a great boon to the British Army during the Twilight War.

Artillery is a huge consumer of ammunition; no commander in modern history has ever had enough smoke for instance. When the 155mm ammunition began to run short old 5.5” guns were taken from storage and the School of Artillery Trials Unit to make use of the large stocks of 5.5” ammunition remaining in storage. The 51mm mortar L10 was designed from the outset to be able to use the extensive stocks of 2 inch mortar ammunition still in store.

Although MBTs became rarer on the battlefield, anti-tank capability was still most important. As the supply of MILAN missiles dwindled the BAT Wombat L6 returned to the fray. Likewise, instead of the LAW 80, the 84mm ‘Carl Gustav’ was brought back into service; to the severe disgruntlement of those tasked with carrying it’s 14.2kg empty weight!

The armoured units would have been in direr straits without the Chieftains of the war reserve; some of them with the Chieftain/Challenger Rearmament programme, some without. As the Integrated Fire Control System of the Chieftains wore out or failed, the old L21A1 Ranging Machine Guns were replaced in turrets originally designed for them, making such tanks great assets. Even the remaining 1950’s vintage Saracen and Saladin armoured cars were used to great effect.

In the field of small arms, the L85 was supplemented by the L1A1 Self Loading Rifle and the L86 by the L4A4 Bren gun to the great joy of many, as the post Gulf War Fault Rectification Program had not nearly been completed by the start of the Twilight War.

Even the webbing equipment of the late war British soldier benefited from the institutional hoarding tendency of the British Army. Modern webbing was almost replaced by ’58, ’44 and even ’37 pattern webbing by war’s end. The previously loathed Boot DMS that let down the British so badly in the Falklands was welcomed as much better than no boot at all, when no more Boots, High Combat were to be had. The steel helmet Mk V had never been completely replaced by the GRP helmet, some Home Service Force personnel were issued with them during the Russo – Chinese phase of the Twilight War. Subsequently the Mk V helmet became a much more common sight. Contrary to popular belief, the WWII style Mk II helmets seen in England were not WWII vintage, but were manufactured in Oxford* from original dies discovered in a Regimental Museum basement!

I’ll be adding soft-skin vehicles next; I’m waiting for a reference book to arrive.


*I’m not following canon for the British Isle, I much prefer Rainbow Six’s take on it. I hope he doesn’t mind.

Ironside

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Fair enough although the material for the HAC indicated that it last used the 25-pdr (besides ceremonial duties) on a field exercise on Salisbury Plain in 1992

[Rainbow Six]

*I’m not following canon for the British Isle, I much prefer Rainbow Six’s take on it. I hope he doesn’t mind.

Ironside

Ironside, I don't mind at all. Feel free to use any parts of my material that you like - that's what it's there for and I'm glad you like it and that it's being used.

(Just as an FYI I am working on an updated version of my timeline at the moment - there aren't any major changes (it's more by way of tidying up a few bits I wasn't entirely happy about in the original), although HMG presence in the north east has ended up weaker - basically Catterick remains in Government hands but the troops have had to withdraw from Newcastle, Sunderland, etc. I'm also working on the US presence in East Anglia, which was probably the weakest part of the original material.)

Re: the 25 pounders, I would say that if you do want to include them it's probably not stretching credibility too far to suggest that there might have been a small number in storage at Larkhill?

Cheers

Dave

[Ironside]

Fair enough although the material for the HAC indicated that it last used the 25-pdr (besides ceremonial duties) on a field exercise on Salisbury Plain in 1992

Ah, I didn't know that. I still wonder about the ammunition supply for wartime use though. Any thoughts?

@ Rainbow Six I am working on something for East Anglia as it's where I live. I do think that the Gipping/Stour estuary would be targetted during the anti-infrastructure nuclear exchange. As the port of Felixtowe became the UK's largest container port in 1980 (3rd largest in Europe) and with the port of Harwich on the other side of a quite narrow gap I think it would be an obvious target.

[Legbreaker]

My thoughts re the 25 pounders is that they are likely to have been brought back into use, those that still exist in working order anyway.
There may not be a lot of prewar 25 pdr ammo laying about, but that's far simplier to produce than whole new 105mm guns.

[Ironside]

I do agree with you Legbreaker that 25pdr ammunition is simpler to manufacture, and I would like to see the 25pdrs back in action. That does brings up a question I have wondered a lot about. How much ammunition is being manufactured? Particularly artillery ammunition.

[Legbreaker]

Well, HE and a number of other types of ammo were being produced a hundred years ago in what we today term as extremely primative factories so I imagine that provided the materials are available, and the knowledge, tools and manpower necessary, it should be feasible to turn out a usable quantity of shells in Organised areas.

The earlier, simplier weapons probably have the advantage over modern weapons with their high tech ammo too in that all a gun really needs (whether it be a .22 right up to monster artillery piece) is a projectile of some type and a charge to push it. As already stated in this thread, there's almost certainly been a return to early 20th century anti-tank weapons like the 6 pdr gun. I don't know that recoiless weapons would be as widespread though due to the increased complexity of the round.

Unguided rockets would be useful weapons too for artillery purposes. Precision goes out the window of course, but if all the gun tubes are worn out, it's better than throwing rocks....

[LBraden]

I keep seeing a lot of "oh this in storage" well, what about world war II

"They are making these new fighters in every piano factory and garden shed in the country" -- quote from Goering, and realistically, if the "Excrement has hit the oscillating device", YES the British have the ability to do that. so no matter how old or bad the equipment is, we will pull it, and even now, I can assure you that a lot of the people will do that, or become marauders and will quickly find the wrong end of "country justice".

So really, after "Damn it, no more tea" day, the UK will radically change, but I can say with both knowledge of late 80's and current day (if following 2013), realistically, the UK could rebuild something of a cottage industry of munitions.

[Legbreaker]

The problem I see is that in the early 20th century there were a lot more people employed in manual jobs. In the latter decade or two of the century (and even more so now) technology and automation has taken over.
This lack of hands on experience could cause a few issues once the power is no longer supplied and all the computer driven machinery has taken EMP damage.
It's by no means a deal breaker, but I can see significant delays in retooling compared to those that may have been faced a hundred years earlier.

[pmulcahy11b]

I might also point out that both US and Soviet industry were barely able to produce a tinker's dam until World War 2 broke out. The US became an industrial powerhouse and a superpower in World War 2. Prior to TDM, factories left and right would be taken over by the need to produce war items, like Singer sewing machines were producing small arms during World War 2. The limiting factor would be the greater complexity of today's weapons. Those taken-over factories might still be producing war goods after TDM, particularly the smaller ones.

[Rainbow Six]

I am working on something for East Anglia as it's where I live. I do think that the Gipping/Stour estuary would be targetted during the anti-infrastructure nuclear exchange. As the port of Felixtowe became the UK's largest container port in 1980 (3rd largest in Europe) and with the port of Harwich on the other side of a quite narrow gap I think it would be an obvious target.

Will look forward to seeing what you come up with...you just can't beat local knowledge...:)

Looking at the map Felixstowe and Harwich do certainly seem to be fairly obvious targets, particularly when you consider that Dover and Folkestone both got hit. Generally I've always tried to leave the canon nuclear strikes as they were listed in the Survivor's Guide to the UK, although a number of what would seem to be obvious targets were missed (e.g. Portsmouth, Plymouth, Faslane).

One could argue that perhaps a single missile was intended to take out Felixstowe and Harwich (given their proximity that would seem to be possible) and it missed, landing in the north sea instead? Alternatively perhaps targets that were missed out were plastered by conventional attack earlier in the War, so deemed not worth nuking (yes, admittedly unlikely!).

Cheers

[Rainbow Six]

The problem I see is that in the early 20th century there were a lot more people employed in manual jobs. In the latter decade or two of the century (and even more so now) technology and automation has taken over.
This lack of hands on experience could cause a few issues once the power is no longer supplied and all the computer driven machinery has taken EMP damage.
It's by no means a deal breaker, but I can see significant delays in retooling compared to those that may have been faced a hundred years earlier.

Leg, totally agree with you here.

[HorseSoldier]

I also agree -- post-industrial economies have gotten so efficient at the manufacturing that does occur (as well as agriculture) that most people are employed in fields that simply don't provide helpful skills if you roll the technology base back to 1900 (or earlier). There is, of course, the possibility of retraining people, but in T2K the big choke point is keeping them alive and organized at all after the TDM and subsequent winter eradicates food distribution networks.

[helbent4]

I might also point out that both US and Soviet industry were barely able to produce a tinker's dam until World War 2 broke out. The US became an industrial powerhouse and a superpower in World War 2. Prior to TDM, factories left and right would be taken over by the need to produce war items, like Singer sewing machines were producing small arms during World War 2. The limiting factor would be the greater complexity of today's weapons. Those taken-over factories might still be producing war goods after TDM, particularly the smaller ones.

Paul,

This is an important point. Most small arms and much in the way of munitions up to a point can be produced in what are essentially basement shops. Factories are more needed for bulk production in wartime. Given the right materials, enough in the way of weapons and explosives (including for artillery) can be supplied to fuel a "low-intensity" conflict.

Tony

[Ironside]

@ Rainbow Six

I have to say that I assumed that the nuclear strike map in Survivors Guide UK like other target maps only showed sites that had hits by 0.5 Mt or greater. This would explain some fairly obvious missed targets. I thought that Felixtowe/Harwich port could be destroyed by a sub-Hiroshima sized warhead of ~5kt

@LBraden

I must confess that I haven't got around yet to thinking about manufacturing and Legbreaker makes very valid points. The point I wanted to make was that as the British army has never been generously supplied it tends not to throw anything away.

[Rainbow Six]

I have to say that I assumed that the nuclear strike map in Survivors Guide UK like other target maps only showed sites that had hits by 0.5 Mt or greater. This would explain some fairly obvious missed targets. I thought that Felixtowe/Harwich port could be destroyed by a sub-Hiroshima sized warhead of ~5kt


That is quite possible (the target maps only showing .5Mt or greater targets has come up before, either on the forum or its predecessor, and has been generally accepted as a reason for "missing" targets).

However, referring to the SGUK, the section on Anglia specifically states that the region escaped nuclear attack in the 1997 exchanges. Reason given for this was that the region was a farming area with no heavy industry therefore there were no viable targets. So this spares not only Felixstowe / Harwich, but also the host of RAF and USAF airbases in Norfolk and Suffolk (to be fair it makes no mention one way or the other of the 1998 exchanges so one or both may have been hit then).

To be honest, I've stated on more than one occasion that I have always found the SGUK to be a disappointment, and that's why I chose to write my own alternative timeline. Whilst that timeline obviously deviates from the canon established by the SGUK in several ways, as I said earlier changing the canon nuclear strikes was one area that I didn't get into for a couple of reasons.

However you've given me good reason to think again about Felixstowe and Harwich with regard to how I deal with East Anglia in my own material, and as I said, I'd be very interested in what you come up with...

Cheers

[helbent4]

That is quite possible (the target maps only showing .5Mt or greater targets has come up before, either on the forum or its predecessor, and has been generally accepted as a reason for "missing" targets).


R6,

I wasn't privy to those prior discussions but it makes sense.

Although, one thing to keep in mind is in the canon target list many governmental, military and civilian targets were spared because the warring nations (primarily USA and USSR) wanted to avoid sparking a general thermonuclear war. Mainly industrial and particularly power and fuel infrastructure was targeted. So maybe at least some of those "missing" targets were deliberately skipped.

Tony

[LBraden]

Aye, but under the "canon" T2K British source book (not sure which one I have) it basically states that where I currently live in Castleford is, shall we say, FRAKKED, thanks to the quaint situation of the targets and wind direction, the red dot is Castleford, strategically unimportant in the 80's thanks to Thatcher closing down the pits.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/leebraden/Odds%20and%20Ends/th_Image3-1.png (http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/leebraden/Odds%20and%20Ends/Image3-1.png)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castleford

[helbent4]

Aye, but under the "canon" T2K British source book (not sure which one I have) it basically states that where I currently live in Castleford is, shall we say, FRAKKED, thanks to the quaint situation of the targets and wind direction, the red dot is Castleford, strategically unimportant in the 80's thanks to Thatcher closing down the pits.


Lee,

Okay, is that a good or a bad thing?

(Somewhat less importantly, are we allowed to curse like adults on this board? Just curious, because I never picked up any BG-reboot slang. Except I did like "Felgercarb" when I was a kid! ;) )

It's funny, when doing the research for my T2K game I passed over the "canon" source (Legion McRae's source material) because in it the port of Vancouver was a target, and went with the core rulebook where the oil refineries and storage facilities were targets instead. In the former case my childhood neighborhood in Burnaby would have survived but it didn't come through as well in the latter case, being located near the petroleum storage facilities and refineries near Burnaby Mountain.

It's true, you can never go home again, although my family home had already been torn down to build a "monster home" in the early 90's.

Tony

[Rainbow Six]

R6,

I wasn't privy to those prior discussions but it makes sense.

Although, one thing to keep in mind is in the canon target list many governmental, military and civilian targets were spared because the warring nations (primarily USA and USSR) wanted to avoid sparking a general thermonuclear war. Mainly industrial and particularly power and fuel infrastructure was targeted. So maybe at least some of those "missing" targets were deliberately skipped.

Tony

Tony, you make a valid point there; that's partly the reason why I haven't made any major changes to the canon strikes*, as there are probably dozens of places that could have been hit in the UK but weren't, but as you rightly state an out and out attack was never the intention

There's also the possibility that some targets were meant to be hit but the missiles intended for them missed, and in the absence of satellites to carry out accurate damage assesment no follow up strikes took place.

* To be fair, I have made a handful of changes - I've "spared" Edinburgh and Birmingham, but added a sub 0.5 MT strike on Rosyth (which incinerated the town I grew up in!) and am considering adding a sub 0.5mt strike on RAF Greenham Common. Based on Ironside's post I'm also thinking about hitting Felixstowe / Harwich, I just need to give some thought as to how that would affect my plans for East Anglia...

If I follow through with all of those that's a net gain of 1 strike - I don't think I would want to go much further than that.

Cheers

Dave

[Rainbow Six]

Aye, but under the "canon" T2K British source book (not sure which one I have) it basically states that where I currently live in Castleford is, shall we say, FRAKKED, thanks to the quaint situation of the targets and wind direction, the red dot is Castleford, strategically unimportant in the 80's thanks to Thatcher closing down the pits.

Yep, the north of England probably got the worst of it in the canon list...if it's any consolation I'm in Aberdeen, so am equally stuffed...

[dude_uk]

Interesting topic and It’s a bit of an oddity, the end of the cold war and “Options for change” affects equipment stocks massively. However by mixing and matching we can get a rough estimate for what would remain in 1995 when the Soviets invade China.


Even the webbing equipment of the late war British soldier benefited from the institutional hoarding tendency of the British Army. Modern webbing was almost replaced by ’58, ’44 and even ’37 pattern webbing by war’s end. The previously loathed Boot DMS that let down the British so badly in the Falklands was welcomed as much better than no boot at all, when no more Boots, High Combat were to be had. The steel helmet Mk V had never been completely replaced by the GRP helmet, some Home Service Force personnel were issued with them during the Russo – Chinese phase of the Twilight War. Subsequently the Mk V helmet became a much more common sight. Contrary to popular belief, the WWII style Mk II helmets seen in England were not WWII vintage, but were manufactured in Oxford* from original dies discovered in a Regimental Museum basement!


You seem to be under the impression that Britain stops making things from about 1989! Maintaining weapons for the purposes of 'just in case' is a very British army thing to do (The amount of Lee Enfield's the Army was keeping still greased up and ready to go circa 1980 is proof enough). Keeping Personal loading equipment is not.

With regards to helmets one of the more successful procurements was the GRP 'battle bowler' The British army was almost entirely equipped with this by 1990. So by 1995 your looking at decent war stocks that this remains the common sight helmet by UK forces both at home and abroad.

Also by 1989 point the army was having its replacement webbing PLCE rolled out by this point. Due to a manufacturing or design error the anti infer-red coating was not included in the manufacturing. It started out in Olive green and then the second correct run was made in DPM. The olive green version would probably have been passed on to TA. Its possible that Pattern '58 would still be seen. But patterns 38-44? not really.The numbers still in working condition and in large quantities would not be there for starters.

Combat boot high was not a great success, but definitely improved upon its predecessor. It was replaced by the 'Assault Boot' around 1991. So if anything combat boot high would have been in reserve not DMS boot (Which where probably all skipped).

By 1995 your looking at the entire British army (153,000 regulars 80,000 TA 10,000 HSF plus war stocks) being equipped with PLCE, GRP helmet and the assault boot.

The fact of the matter is that there are two points when Britain can begin re-manufacturing its equipment.

1) When the soviets cross the border with china, Britain along with the U.S and West Germany places its forces on alert. Possibly the British army of the Rhine is put on a war fitting and the stocks and equipment levels are probably checked on a dramatic scale. This gives the UK one year to find out all its equipment worries drama's and begin to purchase or replace new stocks.

2)There is also one year of complete war fighting before the 'Thanksgiving day massacre'. Its highly unlikely that British industry would not have been put on a war footing in that time and the replacements for weapons and equipment begin being made.

Plus the need to beginning training a slightly enlarged army would require more stocks. I'm doubting (But open to the idea) that conscription is introduced, but I believe that recruitment would be more 'aggressive' than normal coupled with perhaps more bored youths being enticed.


Your pretty much spot on weapons front though, whilst the UK forces in Eastern Europe and further abroad would have remained with the L85/L86 (If they worked!), The need to arm the police (Plus the odd traffic warden!) would have require them to be dusted off along with the sterling SMG. I've equipped a lot of post TDM Battalions with the SLR.

I'll include my thoughts on vehicles front later but its very interesting topic and I also highly recommend Rainbow six's thoughts on Britain. His thoughts on Scotland and the south-west are excellent

[Ironside]

@dude_uk

Thank you for your valuable comments; I'll be taking them on board. I'm not as knowlegable about the post Cold-War British army as I ought to be. Thank you particularly for your ideas on manufacturing as it's a subject I need to consider.

I too have my doubts about conscription; as I think that the enlarged wartime BAOR is getting close to the limit of UK logistics capacity without enormous investment.

This forum is so valuable to be able to bounce ideas off people. Thanks guys.

Simon

BTW I can just see the DMS Boots ending up with Trotters International Trading Co. ;)

[LBraden]

Lee,

It's true, you can never go home again, although my family home had already been torn down to build a "monster home" in the early 90's.

Tony

Actually Tony, I was born in a small hill town in Derbyshire called Glossop, which is not far from Manchester, so that may have taken a good stint of radiation, but knowing the hills round there, may have protected it a bit because of the weird wind patterns round there.


Also, I noticed 'Thanksgiving day massacre' mentioned, due to my bad memory, is that when the nuclear exchange happened in T2K?

[helbent4]

Also, I noticed 'Thanksgiving day massacre' mentioned, due to my bad memory, is that when the nuclear exchange happened in T2K?

Lee,

I think that's from The Morrow Project, although it could be a term from Twilight 2000, now I think of it. It's hard not to see TMP references in many other post-apoc RPGs!

Tony

[dude_uk]

Also, I noticed 'Thanksgiving day massacre' mentioned, due to my bad memory, is that when the nuclear exchange happened in T2K?

Yeah, its not actually called as that in canon. But it was referenced in a document by someone on these forums. The name just seemed to fit and it stuck.

From the Twilight 200 timeline-

27 November: Soviets send a surgical strike of nuclear weapons to knock the Americans out of the war; in Florida, they target Mayport Naval Station, Jacksonville; MacDill AFB in Tampa; Eglin AFB near Pensecola; and the Satellite Recon Launch Facility at Cape Kennedy. A fifth attack on Homestead AFB south of Miami fails due to EMP interference. EMP blasts knock out all operating radio and television channels, and the power grid and power stations. Washington DC is hit by nukes from a Russian sub in the Atlantic. President John Tanner is killed by an accident during takeoff of the NEACP aircraft. VP Pemberton, at the White House, declares a state of war shortly before Washington DC is hit. NORAD HQ at Cheyenne Mountain takes a direct hit; the Pentagon and SAC HQ at Offut AFB, Nebraska, are destroyed.

[Legbreaker]

The Thanksgiving Day Massacre (TDM) is a term from T2K, however it's rather misleading in my opinion.
The first actual strategic strikes against continental USA occured the day after Thanksgiving, which is a purely American holiday and means next to nothing to anyone anywhere else in the world.
Note however that the first use of nukes was nearly six months earlier in June or July 1997 (can't remember exactly which but I think it was the 7th day of the month).
Note also that the TDM event was just the beginning of continental US strikes which continued for some time (how long isn't specified) and there was a second, weaker (and presumably shorter) exchange a few months later in 1998.

It is actually refered to as this in canon, where exactly I can't recall but I think it's in Howling Wilderness.

[Rainbow Six]

Dude_UK, thanks for the feedback...much appreciated...;)

[dude_uk]

BTW I can just see the DMS Boots ending up with Trotters International Trading Co. ;)

"But dell what we going to do with 150,000 sets of boots?!" :D


Got some numbers for you to crunch on Tanks and APC numbers. Other vehicles I leave to you for the time being, good luck on counting those bedfords! what was the Book on British vehicles you were waiting for?

Main battle tanks
Challenger 2 Estimate numbers 297 (4 regiments of 50 tanks + 1 Training regiment)
In our timeline Challenger 2 was ordered in 1991. Just after the end of the cold war with an initial order of 127 Tanks and a total order of 386. Reflecting the fact the British army maintained only one division in a unified Germany. In the twilight 2000 timeline it is possible that the order would have been larger or that the challenger 2 would have been run alongside challenger 1.
This would been the tank that Vickers defence systems would have been making when war breaks out, how many that Vickers can crank out in Newcastle and Leeds after an emergency order is placed is entirely up to up you. There would be about a divisions worth in Germany in 1995.

Challenger 1 Numbers 372 (7 regiments+ 2 training regiments)

The challenger 1 was in 1979 poised to replace the Chieftain on a one for one basis. Initial orders were completed in 1985, however in 1987 the Regular NATO tank competition “Canadian Army Trophy” was held. The British team fared badly owing to the team, who were unable to practice and unused to the tank, the tanks somewhat rudimentary fire and control system also was to blame. The British team was humiliated by their West German and US rivals. The Ministry of defence decided on that the selection of a new tank was needed. The challenger 1 however proved itself in the gulf war, losing not a single tank to enemy action and dominating their Iraqi Opponents.
The challenger would have been the initial workhorse of the British army in 1997, comprising two of the three armoured divisions. However as time goes on, the challenger 1 would have been seen less and less due to being replaced by either challenger 2 or Chieftain. Initially as tanks are destroyed or require maintenance.

Chieftain Numbers between 850 and 1200 (24 regiments)

In our timeline Chieftain was sold off in massive quantities come 1995. But In the twilight 2000 the chieftain would almost certainly have been needed to equip the newly formed British 2nd Corps and its comprising divisions. This is the tank that would be most common in the United Kingdom Land forces (The command that was responsible for British internal defence) should any armour truly survive the nuclear exchange. One thing you are looking at is the formation of perhaps new regiments for this job.


APC’s/ AFV’s

Warrior MCV-80 1,048 (18 regiments)

The warrior was much like the challenger, designed to replace the Fv-432 APC on a one for one basis in British Army of the Rhine’s armoured Infantry Battalions. Britain’s 1st Corps would have had this as the main transport for armoured infantry at the start of hostilities. The AFV was still being manufactured for export for the army of Kuwait at the start of the war, so replacements would have been possible to manufacture. Once again the amount produced for war replacements will be up to you.

Fv-432 APC (2,228)

Produced in vast amounts for a variety of roles from personal protection to ambulances in the 1960’s, the FV-432 would have been a very common sight amongst British forces during the war. Whilst only used in BR 1 corps in non-APC role, it would have been needed to equip British 2nd corps. As casualties mounted it would have been seen more action. It would have been fairly common site in the United Kingdom.

Saxon APC (320-500)

Ordered in the 1980’s for the 2nd Infantry division, the Saxon was designed as very much a ‘battle taxi' designed to get 2nd Infantry Division into North West Germany very quickly. With ample amounts of FV432 and Warrior, The Newly renamed 2nd Armoured Division would have left the UK equipped with FV432 and its Saxons would have found its new home with internal security duties. It would have been unsuitable for it to be used in the armoured infantry role in the rolling plains of eastern Europe to the minimal amount of protection..

[pmulcahy11b]

I used Corcoran jump boots with treads on them in the field -- better ankle support.

[Ironside]

Sorry I haven't done any more with this, but am snowed under with RL stuff, and now snowed under by real snow lol.

@dude uk I like the vehicle stuff you have posted, I agree that the Chieftain would be the most likely British armour to survive.

The book was 'British Army Transport & Logistics', interesting, but not as helpful as I had hoped.

[Rainbow Six]

On the subject of books, can anyone recommend any on the Territorial Army pre Options for Change, in particular anything that details TA units' wartime assignments (which ones went to BAOR, which were planned to stay in the UK, etc)? I've had a quick look on amazon and waterstones websites and there seem to be a few titles available, but they're all a bit pricey and I don't want to spend thirty quid on something that's not going to cover what I'm after.

Cheers

[pmulcahy11b]

@dude uk I like the vehicle stuff you have posted, I agree that the Chieftain would be the most likely British armour to survive.

Perhaps with some of them modified with the Stillbrew modifications?

[waiting4something]

I got a question. Why does Ireland use a different rifle then the rest of the UK? I mean Ireland is still part of the UK, so why don't they all use the same stuff? If Twilight 2000 would have happened would they still be using L1A1's instead of the the AUG? Would they go with the British flow and use a L85? Or would they get the AUG anyway? What's the deal?:confused:

[Fusilier]

I got a question. Why does Ireland use a different rifle then the rest of the UK? I mean Ireland is still part of the UK...

It's not a part of the UK. The Republic of Ireland is a sovereign nation.

[waiting4something]

Whoah!:o Yeah, I guess they have been since 1922 or something like that.:D But are they really seperate or is that like one of those feel good titles to make people happy. Like if the UK says jump, does Ireland ask how high? Most the maps of the UK I saw always had Ireland in them and not until I looked it up did they have Ireland in a seperate color scheme.

I mean Ireland has to still have a super close relationship still. And even if Ireland isn't down with the crown, I can't see them saying they are gonna sit back and not fight along with their union jack brothers when the UK wants them to.

Sure, this was embarassing to admit I never knew this, but when I looked this up I found out I was not alone.:cool: It's no reason to get insulted, Ireland is just a low key country. When I think of Ireland I think of happy people drinking and fighting with each other. The important lesson here is Ireland is not part of the Uk.;)

[Legbreaker]

Ireland is most definitely NOT part of the UK although they are a part of the Commonwealth (as are such independant nations as New Zealand, Australia, India and South Africa).
Northern Ireland on the other hand IS part of the UK, although they have been seeking independance for, well, forever....

[Fusilier]

Ireland is most definitely NOT part of the UK although they are a part of the Commonwealth (as are such independant nations as New Zealand, Australia, India and South Africa).

No that isn't correct either...

The Republic of Ireland hasn't been a member of the Commonwealth for over half a decade.

[helbent4]

Sure, this was embarassing to admit I never knew this, but when I looked this up I found out I was not alone.:cool: It's no reason to get insulted, Ireland is just a low key country. When I think of Ireland I think of happy people drinking and fighting with each other. The important lesson here is Ireland is not part of the Uk.;)

Waiting4Something,

As Fusilier is Canadian I'm confident he's probably not personally insulted or upset in the least when it comes to Ireland. In fact, no one seems out of sorts, so don't sweat it. :)

The Republic of Ireland was created by an act of armed rebellion, not some kind of slow devolution from the UK or other political process. A useful analogue might be that of the USA and the UK after the American Revolution. They share many ties but are no longer the same country.

They are not a client state of the UK nor are they politically or socially dominated by them in the same way that, say, Moldova is dominated by Russia. Ireland does have strong economic ties with the UK,as well as social ones. In the 90's, Ireland enjoyed an incredible economic boom where there the Irish became some of the most wealthy per capita in the world. It was called the "Celtic Tiger", although that bubble did burst in the recent banking cataclysm. At the time of the war Ireland was still part of the Commonwealth so that is relevant to the T2K timeline.

Northern Ireland, on the other hand, is still very much part of the UK in the same way that Scotland, Wales and England are, although it has more extensive home rule due to decades of political turmoil. If you are thinking of a part of Ireland that is dominated by the UK (part of the same national structure) you are probably thinking of Northern Ireland.

Tony

[Fusilier]

I wasn't at all.

[Legbreaker]

I'm not Irish so what I'm saying might not be completely accurate, however from what I can see, Ireland was a member of the Commonwealth up until April 1949.
There appears to be a few exceptions and so forth regarding this status though with Ireland still being able to participate in the Commonwealth Games and it's citizens born prior to 1949 able to claim British citizenship. There's a few other things as well that differentiate Ireland from every other non-commonwealth country and there appears to be a move towards Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth.

[Fusilier]

what I can see, Ireland was a member of the Commonwealth up until April 1949.

Which is why I said over half a decade.

There appears to be a few exceptions and so forth regarding this status though with Ireland still being able to participate in the Commonwealth Games and it's citizens born prior to 1949 able to claim British citizenship. There's a few other things as well that differentiate Ireland from every other non-commonwealth country and there appears to be a move towards Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth.

Those exceptions aren't explicit to only Ireland. A few other states have had the same inclusions but it doesn't make them members or half members or anything like that.

[Legbreaker]

From what I read, only Mozambique has similar status with the Commonwealth as Ireland. Of course that's taken from wiki, so who knows how accurate it is.

[Tegyrius]

While I was poking at 1st Armoured for the Czech book, I noticed that the Royal Engineers have received or are about to take delivery on rather a lot of new heavy equipment (Trojan, Titan, Terrier). How much of that stuff was in development back in the '90s and plausibly could have been rushed to production?

- C.

[Legbreaker]

You'd have to say it was at least in development in the mid 90's for it to make the late 1997 cut off for new technology. It would be extremely difficult, if not impossible to introduce anything new after the nukes except on a prototype and handmade basis.

[pmulcahy11b]

1st Armored? Is this a site I should know about?

[Tegyrius]

No specific site, Paul. I was just making a general reference to the research I did on 1st Armoured Division.

Leg - yeah, I just don't know which of those vehicles, if any, started development that early. I know the REME had CARRVs during Operation Telic, so I suspect it's possible at least a few prototypes would have been around in time for the T2k timeline.
- C.

[Legbreaker]

Hmm, with the first production hull of the Terrier only entering production on the 27th of January 2010, I'd say there's absolutely no chance of it, or the other two vehicles even being conceived in the T2K timeline. I tend to estimate that even in wartime you're looking at a minimum of 18 months from design to the first production models. Therefore these particular vehicle would almost need to be on the drawing board even before hostilities commenced and the requirement for them became known.
Of course that's just three vehicle types - you'd have to look at each one individually to work out if it's a possibility (and I think Paul's probably done 95% of that legwork already).

[Tegyrius]

Hmm, with the first production hull of the Terrier only entering production on the 27th of January 2010, I'd say there's absolutely no chance of it, or the other two vehicles even being conceived in the T2K timeline. I tend to estimate that even in wartime you're looking at a minimum of 18 months from design to the first production models. Therefore these particular vehicle would almost need to be on the drawing board even before hostilities commenced and the requirement for them became known.
Terrier was admittedly the fringe case. It looks like Titan and Trojan weren't contracted until after the turn of the millennium, so all three are out. Pity; I have a soft spot for CEVs and ARVs.

- C.

[Legbreaker]

Pity; I have a soft spot for CEVs and ARVs.
You and me both. Probably comes from having to do those jobs by hand back when I was an assault pioneer....

[James Langham]

Going back to the small arms, the M16 was also issued to troops undergoing jungle training in the 1980s in Belize.

One reason I was always told that the cadet units were issued the L98A1 was that a semi-auto version was developed but someone then pointed out the ease to convert to full auto (only). This seems to have been forgotten on the A2 version (where the idea still works). The L86A1 (LSW) was however issued. As an interesting aside the cadet iron sight was actually better than the army's! It was adjustable from 100-500m in 100m increments whilst the army's was set to 300 only (both also had an alternative larger aperture).

The Sea Cadet Corps and Air Training Corps STILL have No4 rifles (.303) in drill purpose versions as seen on Remembrance Day parade every year. I'm not sure if they hold any live fire versions.

[Tackleberry]

First post on here so hi all. I last played TW2000 years ago, but have always wanted to get back into it.

Having carried the L1A1 around various Airbases in Germany in the 80's and then had to use the L85 in both the A1 and A2 guises i have a little info on them. The L1A1 was a beast and was difficult for an average shot to accurately hit at 300m. The L85 is much more accurate, but the kinetic energy of the SS109 5.56x45 round is so much less than the 7.62x51, so do you want to hit him and wound him repeatedly, or risk the misses but put him down with 1 shot?

The Air and Sea cadets both still use the No8 .22 single shot bolt action rifle, and will for a while yet.
All 3 cadet services use the L98A2 and the L81A1 7.62x51 target rifle.

The UK got rid of all of its L1A1's in the early to mid 90's to Africa, with only a couple of hundred still lying around.

The UK would have benefitted from the Small arms factory at Radway Green, Alsager surviving the strikes, so they would have enough ammo in the UK anyway.

[Legbreaker]

I can't speak for the L85, but I never had a problem consistantly posting high scores with the L1A1 at 300+ metres.
And I was quite small at the time (about 65kgs).

Provided the training is there, anyone should be able to consistantly hit at 2-300 metres with most weapons. If a soldier can't manage that, then they have no business being on the battlefield.

[Targan]

I can't speak for the L85, but I never had a problem consistantly posting high scores with the L1A1 at 300+ metres.
And I was quite small at the time (about 65kgs).

Me too. I was hitting man-sized targets consistently on the range at 600m with the SLR. Not 100% accuracy or head shots every time, sure, but regular centre-of-seen-mass hits at 600m weren't all that difficult. Rain or shine, still air or gusts, 7.62 maintained good accuracy in all conditions. I'd shoot 7.62 over 5.56 any day.

[Tackleberry]

As an ex RAF Techie, I was just pointing out with my training, 1 day on a 25m range every 6 months, it was difficult to learn the know how to be able to hit a target consistently at 300m with the SLR.

Its only because I was an Armourer that I had the chance to shoot at 300m, not many non RAF Regt got the opportunity to learn how to shoot at proper distances. Its all down to how many rounds you have the chance to put down range.

More recently I have been able to fire at ranges of upto 1Km and can hit targets that I would have only "suppressed" in my youth.

Now 19 out of 20 rounds on a truck size target with a SCAR H at 900m, with a 4x ACOG sight.

Then 6 rounds out of 20 on 2 man size (fig 11) targets with an L1A1 at 300m, through iron sights.

It shows what a little training can do.

[Legbreaker]

1 day on a 25m range every 6 months, it was difficult to learn the know how to be able to hit a target consistently at 300m with the SLR.

That's not training! That's criminal! :eek:

[Tackleberry]

That's not training! That's criminal! :eek:

That was the RAF in the 80's. The only reason that it was every 6 months was it was RAF Germany and there was a requirement for the Quick reaction force to defend the Nukes.

In the UK, on the non strike bases it was 20 rounds every 12 months.

I'm more concerned that the situation is worse now with the majority of the RAF not live firing, but firing on the laser simulator instead. Now that is criminal.:(

[perardua]

That's not training! That's criminal! :eek:

The RAF long ago decided that in the contest between whether someone was a soldier or a tradesman, the tradesman aspect of their role came first. Certainly at present most RAF personnel will fire on a 25m range twice a year in order to maintain their Common Core Skills/Armed Guard status, unless they are deploying, in which case they will get more training and generally shoot up to whatever Annual Combat Marksmanship Test standard applies to non-infantry.

Obviously the RAF Regiment trains much more regularly, and to much higher standards, but then, we have to make sure the guins don't get disturbed when they are fixing their planes :p

[perardua]

I'm more concerned that the situation is worse now with the majority of the RAF not live firing, but firing on the laser simulator instead. Now that is criminal.:(

DCCT ranges can't be used for qualification purpose, as I recall, only practice. So they should still live fire. And as mentioned, anyone deploying will get a lot more live firing before they head out.

[Tackleberry]

Obviously the RAF Regiment trains much more regularly, and to much higher standards, but then, we have to make sure the guins don't get disturbed when they are fixing their planes :p

Or having a kip.:D

[perardua]

Bunch of jack bastards, the lot of you.

[Rainbow Six]

Or having a kip.:D

LOL...cheers mate...just had to wipe the coffee of the computer screen...

Nice one...:)

[TiggerCCW UK]

We're being over run by crab air..... :-)

As far as the accuracy of the L85 etc goes, most of my experience was with the L98 cadet GP rifle, and to be honest I could barely hit the side of a barn with it. From inside the barn. At the same time, using the L81A1 target rifle I was shooting consistent 2" groups at 600 yards with iron sights. I didn't use the L85A1 much (for some reason they were a bit leery of giving sprog cadets automatic weapons...) but I found it to be similar with iron sights, but the SUSAT definitely made a difference.

[perardua]

We're being over run by crab air..... :-)

As far as the accuracy of the L85 etc goes, most of my experience was with the L98 cadet GP rifle, and to be honest I could barely hit the side of a barn with it. From inside the barn. At the same time, using the L81A1 target rifle I was shooting consistent 2" groups at 600 yards with iron sights. I didn't use the L85A1 much (for some reason they were a bit leery of giving sprog cadets automatic weapons...) but I found it to be similar with iron sights, but the SUSAT definitely made a difference.

Someone has to represent the British military!

The L98, in my opinion, has little to do with the L85 (either model) other than being the same general shape, and should never be spoken of again due to it's possibly satanic origins. Awful, awful weapon. The L85A2, on the other hand, as I will keep saying, is an accurate and extremely reliable rifle with the added feature of being unlikely to be stolen, as no-one else wants one.

[Tackleberry]

Ex Crab air, I deal mainly with the Provisional wing of the AA (REME) at the moment.

The L85A2 is possibly the most accurate 5.56 assault rifle I have fired, but its also the heaviest. The new magpul plastic mags are the D's B's, 2/3rds of the weight of the H&K metal ones, and you can tell how much you have left in the mag.

The Bullpup configuration means that the barrel is still 21" long so the MV is high enough to still do damage at 300/400m, the same cannot be said for the M4/M16 clones that have 16" or 11" barrels.

Another decent weapon is the new L129 Sharpshooter, the matched barrel really gives the edge in accuracy, it outshoots the HK417 IMO.

[Tackleberry]

Someone has to represent the British military!

The L98, in my opinion, has little to do with the L85 (either model) other than being the same general shape, and should never be spoken of again due to it's possibly satanic origins. Awful, awful weapon. The L85A2, on the other hand, as I will keep saying, is an accurate and extremely reliable rifle with the added feature of being unlikely to be stolen, as no-one else wants one.

The L98A2 is just a L85A2 without the change lever, easy to change back if the balloon goes up again.

[perardua]

Having left cadets before the introduction of the L98A2, it's not something I have any knowledge of, though it seems like a pretty sensible weapon for cadet use. But the L98A1 creates unreasonable anger in me to this day. Not that it matters, I'm all about the 81mm...

[TiggerCCW UK]

Likewise I never used the A2 variant of either the L98 or the L85, merely the old bolt action A1. I can remember the first time I came across them, at Ballykinler when we were down for a practice session prior to the NISAM. My initial impression was 'Wow!', primarily becasue they looked so much nicer and shinier than the old .303's I was sued to using. Sadly that soon went to the board. I lifted the L98, pulled back the cocking handle to carry out my NSP's and immediately encountered a problem - the cocking handle came off in my hand....

Although I was only a cadet, and later instructor (asthma kept me out of the regs), we did touch lucky a few times and get to play with some toys we really shouldn't have - SLR's, Mini-14s and Sterlings (then RUC issue), MP-5s, an M16A1 on one occasion, GPMG's, Brens etc, and with pretty much everything I ever shot I did better than the L98 :) Even handguns! I have however heard good things about the A2. On the flip side of that I have to say I never found much of a difference in the quality of my shooting with the L85A1 in comparison to the L98A1, just didn't like it at all, and found it very butt heavy and unbalanced, but as I say I never used it that much. Perardura, you're right the L98A1 was satans spawn - given a choice between it and a .303 I know which I'd rather have.

And gents, I'm only slagging about the crabs - its good to see more brits on here, and I recognise and appreciate your service.

[Tackleberry]

The L98A1 was a piece of junk and was probably more dangerous than giving cadets L85's.
While cocking the weapon, if it didn't fall apart as has been previously mentioned, it had a habit of making the end of the barrel rise above the target line on the range. Sometimes even above the wall behind the range.:confused:

The biggest advantage of the L85 was the SUSAT sight, and now the ACOG or ELCAN sights that really improve the accuracy. From just being able to hit the target at 300m, now you can choose where you want to hit them, if you have the time.

[TiggerCCW UK]

I liked the SUSAT, although I only used it a couple of times. I heard some problems about it though, that it had a tendency to rust up in jungle conditions and that because squaddies used it so much there was a risk of losing peripheral awareness, but I guess thats true of any type of scope.

Does anyone know if there are many .303's left in stores anywhere in the UK? I could see Home Guard type militia units getting them if there are.

[Tackleberry]

I liked the SUSAT, although I only used it a couple of times. I heard some problems about it though, that it had a tendency to rust up in jungle conditions and that because squaddies used it so much there was a risk of losing peripheral awareness, but I guess thats true of any type of scope.

Does anyone know if there are many .303's left in stores anywhere in the UK? I could see Home Guard type militia units getting them if there are.

The only .303" rifles left are in museums or private collections. All of the weapons the Cadet forces have should have been returned as there is a new DP version of the L98 for the Cadets.

There are pallets full of scrap DP .303 rifles in the stores at Donnington.

[TiggerCCW UK]

Thats a shame :( I wonder how many are knocking around in private hands, and how plentiful ammo would be for them.

[Rainbow Six]

Thats a shame :( I wonder how many are knocking around in private hands, and how plentiful ammo would be for them.

I know a pub in Edinburgh which used to have one in a display case (along with a whole host of Sherlock Holmes memorabilia - the pub was just along the road from Arthur Conan Doyle's birthplace and played on that to catch the tourist trade). I can only but presume it was either a replica or deactivated!

[TiggerCCW UK]

I know a pub in Edinburgh which used to have one in a display case (along with a whole host of Sherlock Holmes memorabilia - the pub was just along the road from Arthur Conan Doyle's birthplace and played on that to catch the tourist trade). I can only but presume it was either a replica or deactivated!

The pub might be like 'The Winchester' in Shaun of the Dead...

[James Langham]

The L98A1 was a piece of junk and was probably more dangerous than giving cadets L85's.
While cocking the weapon, if it didn't fall apart as has been previously mentioned, it had a habit of making the end of the barrel rise above the target line on the range. Sometimes even above the wall behind the range.:confused:

The biggest advantage of the L85 was the SUSAT sight, and now the ACOG or ELCAN sights that really improve the accuracy. From just being able to hit the target at 300m, now you can choose where you want to hit them, if you have the time.

At least the L98A1 will be rare in TW2000 as it was planned to convert them to L85A1s.

[Legbreaker]

.303 SMLE's? I have two with match grade floating barrels... :p

Shame they're stuck a thousand kilometres away and I have no way to get them across the water to me... :(

[Ironside]

I was hoping to come back with more stuff by now but my health issues mean I'm going to have to take more time off. I'll be back when I can.

[pmulcahy11b]

I was hoping to come back with more stuff by now but my health issues mean I'm going to have to take more time off. I'll be back when I can.

That bodes ill...the last person on this board who had a serious health issue was TR:(

[Legbreaker]

I suppose a high percentage of forum members with health issues is to be expected since a large number are ex servicemen who've picked up injuries or mental illness. :(

I myself earned a couple of dodgy knees - relatively minor considering....

[Panther Al]

I suppose a high percentage of forum members with health issues is to be expected since a large number are ex servicemen who've picked up injuries or mental illness. :(

I myself earned a couple of dodgy knees - relatively minor considering....


Stress: and the results from it. Go from Fallujah and its fun times right into a crooked Recruiting BN within months of each other, and it does a whammy. More the blowback from when you finally crack (No, you can't see mental health because you are behind mission...) than the stress itself in my case.

[Legbreaker]

Very true, the stress itself is often rather minor when compared to what the military puts you through when you fall apart. In my experience in the early to mid 90's there was almost no support available for stress and mental issues and anyone who did try and ask for help was treated as total scum.
Times are changing, but the culture of "hard men only" still exists.

The Army's method of dealing with mental illness is to medically discharge the effected soldier asap and then ignore them. Basically dump them unsupported back into civilian life after years of a structured and regimental environment. Unsurprisingly many don't cope, stressed as they already are and end up taking extreme measures up to and including taking their own life.

It's a deplorable situation. Been through it myself but came out the other side in basically one piece.