Weapons Timelines for the Twilight War

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Not bad for an Air Force mechanical engineer during the war.

Hey, Kalashnikov was a tanker sergeant -- DATs don't even know one end of a rifle from the other!

[Legbreaker]

I suppose my grandfather did have his childhood behind him - used to head shoot sprinting rabbits from the hip or go hungry during the depression.

During his recruit training (much reduced from the usual 3 months down to a few weeks due to the war), he was used as an instructor after demonstrating his ability to fire a full 10 rounds accurately in less than 4 seconds - apparently sounded more like a machinegun than bolt action rifle!

I witnessed this extremely impressive feat for myself about 20 years ago (a decade or two after his prime!)

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Hey, Kalashnikov was a tanker sergeant -- DATs don't even know one end of a rifle from the other!

OK crunchy

[perardua]

I always have to stick my head in when I see any thread about the L85A2 online, it's a bad habit of mine, but I feel I must defend its reputation!
I have been using the weapon system for four years now, including on tour in Afghanistan, and have heard no complaints from any other British troops about its reliability, nor had any problems with it myself. The improvements HK made to the rifle were considerable, and have proven very effective. The results of the reliability testing showed that in virtually all environments it performed well. Whilst you may take these results with a pinch of salt, operational experience has borne out the findings.

In my experience, the only cause of stoppages has been bent magazine lips, which is due to poor magazine care (especially since it is quite difficult to bend the metal HK magazines that replaced the plastic Radway Green ones); or using the blank firing only training magazines.

Almost all of the small arms instructors I know and have spoken about it with have also said that they believe the A2 to be one of the most reliable weapons of its type in the world, and given my less than satisfactory experience with, for example, the M4 and M16, I tend to believe them.
The major complaints with the weapon in service at the moment have nothing to do with its reliability, but more to do with the weight, and the sight rail. The sight mounting system for the SUSAT is not as sturdy as other such systems, and whilst the SUSAT itself is a very tough sight, it can lose its zero relatively easily. Even the introduction of the ACOG has not solved this, as it has meant introducing a Picatinny adaptor to be attached to the existing sight rail, creating an extra point of failure. A lot of people are calling for the sight rail to just be replaced with a Picatinny rail, as this has already been done with the handguards on weapons in frontline service.

However, the L85A1, though I've only used it twice, was utter shite. Both times I had a number of stoppages in relation to the relatively weak return spring. I only ever used it on a range, so I didn't get to experience any of the other reported faults that occur should you actually decide to move with the weapon.

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by perardua

I always have to stick my head in when I see any thread about the L85A2 online, it's a bad habit of mine, but I feel I must defend its reputation!
I have been using the weapon system for four years now, including on tour in Afghanistan, and have heard no complaints from any other British troops about its reliability, nor had any problems with it myself. The improvements HK made to the rifle were considerable, and have proven very effective. The results of the reliability testing showed that in virtually all environments it performed well. Whilst you may take these results with a pinch of salt, operational experience has borne out the findings.

In my experience, the only cause of stoppages has been bent magazine lips, which is due to poor magazine care (especially since it is quite difficult to bend the metal HK magazines that replaced the plastic Radway Green ones); or using the blank firing only training magazines.

Almost all of the small arms instructors I know and have spoken about it with have also said that they believe the A2 to be one of the most reliable weapons of its type in the world, and given my less than satisfactory experience with, for example, the M4 and M16, I tend to believe them.
The major complaints with the weapon in service at the moment have nothing to do with its reliability, but more to do with the weight, and the sight rail. The sight mounting system for the SUSAT is not as sturdy as other such systems, and whilst the SUSAT itself is a very tough sight, it can lose its zero relatively easily. Even the introduction of the ACOG has not solved this, as it has meant introducing a Picatinny adaptor to be attached to the existing sight rail, creating an extra point of failure. A lot of people are calling for the sight rail to just be replaced with a Picatinny rail, as this has already been done with the handguards on weapons in frontline service.

However, the L85A1, though I've only used it twice, was utter shite. Both times I had a number of stoppages in relation to the relatively weak return spring. I only ever used it on a range, so I didn't get to experience any of the other reported faults that occur should you actually decide to move with the weapon.

Thanks for the info on this weapon. The only thing that turns me off about L85 system is it's a bullpup. Bullpups for me are slow to reload compared to weapons with magazines forward of the trigger. This might just be me since I'm a M16 lover. I also wonder if you can shoot the L85 from either shoulder or if you might injury your face like the AUG? To me not being able to do that with the AUG makes it more a range toy then a combat weapon, but I can't confirm this, because I don't have the balls to test this out with my MSAR STG-556.

[Legbreaker]

With a little practise bullpups are just as fast to reload.
With regard to the AUG, they can be quickly and easily converted for left or right handed firing simply by switching over the ejection port cover and replacing the bolt carrier with a left (or right) handed on.
I found the AUG to be a superior weapon in all ways to the M16 and even L1A1 SLR except that it was 5.56mm rather than my personal preference, the 7.62N. With the centre of balance at the pistol grip, it can be easily and accurately fired with one hand, leaving the other clear to open doors, carry other equipment, etc, etc, etc. Of course for truely accurate fire two hands is definately prefered but one is fine for FIBUA operations.

All in all it's a weapon that takes some getting used to, but once you do it's brilliant!

[waiting4something]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

With a little practise bullpups are just as fast to reload.
With regard to the AUG, they can be quickly and easily converted for left or right handed firing simply by switching over the ejection port cover and replacing the bolt carrier with a left (or right) handed on.
I found the AUG to be a superior weapon in all ways to the M16 and even L1A1 SLR except that it was 5.56mm rather than my personal preference, the 7.62N. With the centre of balance at the pistol grip, it can be easily and accurately fired with one hand, leaving the other clear to open doors, carry other equipment, etc, etc, etc. Of course for truely accurate fire two hands is definately prefered but one is fine for FIBUA operations.

All in all it's a weapon that takes some getting used to, but once you do it's brilliant!

I know you can do the left handed firing if you switch out the bolts, but that just seems to time consuming for me. In the U.S. we are trained to shoot around corners of buildings and such with exposing as little of our body as possible, or transition our weapon when patrolling which ever dierection we are covering. With the AUG you can't do that. That is my big probelm with it. The weight with bullpups is nice since it is evenly distributed.

The weird thing about the bullpups both AUG and L85 is the regular troops like and use them and the elite units don't. We had a class on the F88 from a Australian Air Force member and he talked about how great and simple it was. Then a few weeks later some of the guys I was with got to shoot(then clean of course) some of the SASR weapons. The F88 they had broke right away so only one dude shot it. But when we were cleaning the weapons a day later one of the SASR guys told us about how he thought the F88 was a POS.
I like the look of the AUG, which is why I got a MSAR. I thought I would like it over my FN FS2000, but the forward ejection on the FS2000 makes more sense to me. For me bullpups just are not as fast loading and unloading as non bullpups to me and the thought of only shooting from my right shoulder is unexceptable. It's cool to hear that people like different things though, or the world would be boring.

[Legbreaker]

There's quite a few weapons in the world that can only be fired from the right shoulder without ending up with hot brass in the face. The M60 for example is one of those weapons where if you're a left hander, you better make damn sure your sleeves are done up nice and tight!
I once saw a 25 year Warrant Officer who'd hauled the thing around as a private for a few years, then as an NCO in the SFMG platoon who missed that small detail on the range. A couple of bursts in he dropped it like it was a live snake, jumped to his feet and ripped of his shirt - a couple of dozen rather hot shells tumbled from within and he had some very nice scorch marks to his forearm.

As far as transitioning, a good Section/Squad Commander should be aware of the abilities and limitations of his men, placing them where they will naturally point towards their arc of responsibility. Everyone should of course be able to react in any direction at the drop of a hat, but if a person is naturally pointed there to begin with...

[perardua]

Originally Posted by waiting4something

I also wonder if you can shoot the L85 from either shoulder or if you might injury your face like the AUG? To me not being able to do that with the AUG makes it more a range toy then a combat weapon, but I can't confirm this, because I don't have the balls to test this out with my MSAR STG-556.

For me, the ultimate test of whether or not being able to shoot from both shoulders is an essential, rather than desirable, feature of a rifle is in the record of the forces that have chosen to go without. And, to be honest, I don't think it's a capability that has been missed in the mainstream British military. It's not something that is, in my experience, complained about by those outside the SF community.

I suspect that training and doctrine have contributed to overcoming the deficiency, and I still maintain that I would much rather carry the L85, warts and all, than any other rifle I have had an opportunity to play with so far. Well, maybe the AUG if I ever actually got to fire it! Stupid QRF duties dragging me away from the range...

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by perardua

I suspect that training and doctrine have contributed to overcoming the deficiency, and I still maintain that I would much rather carry the L85, warts and all, than any other rifle I have had an opportunity to play with so far.

Perardua, appreciate your insights on the SA80...

Am I right in thinking that the A2 version of the SA80 didn't start being issued until the year 2000, in which case in either V1 or V2 T2K British forces would have been armed with the A1 model, which seems to be looked on less favourably?

Unless, of course, one goes with the theory that a continuing Cold War accelarates the development of the A2 model (particularly in the V1 setting...).

Cheers

[perardua]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

Am I right in thinking that the A2 version of the SA80 didn't start being issued until the year 2000, in which case in either V1 or V2 T2K British forces would have been armed with the A1 model, which seems to be looked on less favourably?

Unless, of course, one goes with the theory that a continuing Cold War accelarates the development of the A2 model (particularly in the V1 setting...).

I can't say exactly when the A2 came into service, but to my knowledge almost every unit (including reservists) that deployed to Iraq in 2003 had been upgraded to the A2 on both the rifle and LSW. The upgrade itself is extremely simple, essentially consisting mainly of swapping parts that come out of the rifle for normal daily cleaning anyway. I believe that in a v1 T2k timeline, it would not have been beyond the realms of possibility for the majority of L85s in service to be upgraded to the new standard relatively quickly, as long as the will to identify the problems and manufacture the necessary parts was there. I imagine that the older, more stoppage-prone plastic Radway Green magazines would have remained in service as a cheaper and lighter alternative to the sturdier metal Heckler & Koch ones we use today.

However, I can imagine that upgrades in the T2k universe would have come slowly, if at all, and that there would still be enough military personnel who had come into service on the SLR rather than the L85 that there may be a return to the L1A1. Of course, even by 1995-6 the majority of younger infantry soldiers will never have used the SLR, and if the decision is made to include it in a campaign, it will likely be found in the hands of the old timers with fond memories of it, rather than younger personnel who may prefer the familiarity, ease of handling and sighting system of the L85. I would also perhaps suggest that those who choose to reintroduce the SLR consider porting over the existing stocks of SUSAT and CWS from the L85 to be mounted on the L1A1. This is especially important due to the relative lack of NVGs in British service during the period, a capability which is for the most part provided by the CWS mounted on the rifle.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Hey, Kalashnikov was a tanker sergeant -- DATs don't even know one end of a rifle from the other!

What's there to compare....I mean, if you had the choice of inflicting massive amounts of damage with a 120mm smoothbore, finishing off your near helpless prey with a Ma Deuce and a pair of M-240s or cranking out 5.56mm from some rinky-dink Mighty Mattel....why would you need a rifle?