No idea what the one on the left is. Some kind of AP round?
2nd from left 7.62x39mm
3rd from left 5.56 NATO
Far right 7.62 NATO
Enfield EM-2 / Rifle, Automatic
Enfield EM-2 / Rifle, Automatic, caliber .280, Number 9 Mark 1 (Great Britain)
Just a little test see if any of you can name them left to right
No idea what the one on the left is. Some kind of AP round?
2nd from left 7.62x39mm
3rd from left 5.56 NATO
Far right 7.62 NATO
That looks like a space ray-gun toy.
Then again...I wouldn't wanna be looking down the barrel.....
The cartridge on the left is the .280/30 EM2 round - a 7mm round based on the .30-06 case (shortened - hence the "30" designation). This rifle/ammo combination was trialled experimentally by British forces in the mid-1950s.
The rifle bares a superficial resemblance to our SA-80, but there the similarity ends.
The project was dropped following US pressure on NATO to adopt the US-designed 7.62x51mm round. As a result of this, Britain adopted its own version of the FN FAL - the home produced L1A1 used 1958-early 1990s. Unlike the SA-80, the L1A1 worked, was soldier-proof, accurate and a bloody good rifle.
Agreed, the SLR was an excellent piece of kit as it was "squaddy proof". The first version of the SA80 was a terrible weapon. I fired that weapon for several years and its tendency to jam, even on the range, was horrible. I remember being on a range when the command "Make Ready" was issued. The firer next to me cocked her weapon only to have the cocking handle come off in her hand. I forget the countless times it jammed on me. I've never gotten my hands on an SA80A2.
One weapon I did get to fire was the old Parker Hale M85 7.62 weapon, with telescopic sight. The first time I fired that was on a wet, windy day on a 400 metre range in the middle of Leicestershire. We were issued a ten round magazine, three rounds for spotting, then seven for qualification. I got one of my spotting rounds in the chest of the Figure 11 target at 400 metres. The other nine missed the target, and the board surrounding it, completely. I made several attempts at qualifying on that weapon at later dates, but failed miserably each time. However with an SA80 on a 25 metre range, I had no trouble.
this sounds to me like it was incorrectly put together.Originally Posted by CX20
the cocking handle is meant to come off when stripping down the weapon.
but
your right, the original ones back in 85-90 were crap. However, a lot of modifications were made before the big A2 mod (which was after my time, so neither have I)
I never had any signifcant problems with it in four years of service.
The SLR may of been 'squaddy proof' but it was also long, unweidly and could not fire automatic. It was before my time, although I have fired the SLR, but I would not of wanted to be mechanised, jumping in and out of vehicles with that.
Chris1
The SLR may have ben unwieldy and not fired automatic, but when the user slotted someone with it, he went down and stayed down, and..........what is very important, the squaddies trusted it - can you say the same of the SA-80, I think not.
The current 5.56x45mm NATO std. round is fine in the ideal weapon, but IMHO the SA-80 is not the ideal weapon, according to 1st hand accounts I have received the "A2" version still has problems - give the guys a decent weapon (H&K G-36) which will work. Our (i.e. British) SF troops have field trialled the G-36 in Afg. and love it - OK, so they get different issue to the line squaddies, but that is good testimonial, if it is good enough for the SAS/SBS it must be bloody near perfect.
yes actually, I can.
I was a rifleman.
I trusted my rifle.
I trusted it because I cared for it and I knew that if someone decided to shoot at me, I could respond in kind without worrying his round will blow a hole in me and mine will give him a bit of a rash.
As for the A2, I can forward on to you, from the mouths of those who have used it operationally in sandy places (and I'm not on about brighton beach either) that it is an excellent weapon, which could compete with any issued rifle out there .
I can remember 2 similar occasions (not due to incorrect assembly) on field firing ranges. I'm also an old git who came in with the SLR (and loved it). Much as I hate to admit it, I've got to agree with Chris 1, the L85A2 is streets ahead of the A1.
I still don't like it, but most of that is memory of the A1. It's still a bitch to clean - too many nooks and crannies and fiidly little bits (the TMH hasn't changed much). But that's the point - you don't clean it, you just pour more oil in (yes, in the desert too) and it works.
The initial problems we had in Afganistan were down to cleaning the weapon too much! Keep it ditrty (carbon's a lubricant), pour the oil in and it works fine.
Even so I'd still rather use the C7/C8 or the G36 (not that I've used the G36 in the field).
Royal
Thanks for your comments - particulary from one who has been there and done it with all three (SLR, A1 & A2) of our Brit weapons. My experience really stopped at the SLR, but I've fired most of the others albeit only on ranges.
As a matter of interest, I did get the chance in the 70s to fire the original Enfield IW (individual Weapon) in 4.85mm, the pre-service development version of the SA-80, it appeared much better made and more robust than the issue weaps - where did they go wrong? I still don't understand why (other than for political reasons) the goverment went ahead with the A2 modification program, when by all accounts it cost more than the purchase of a simlar number of H&K G-36 weapons.
I've not fired the IW, though I did have a play with one at the Pattern Rooms a few years ago. It was far better made (as pre production models usualy are), though I'm not sure about the caliber (I've still got a soft spot for 7.62mm).
You got it on the nail. We've been told so many times over the years that the L85 was a good weapon. They (the politicians) had to prove it. It's not a great weapon but at least it's useable now.
This rifle is better than AUG?
Royal said
Now.............politicians and L85 in the same sentence? Common use........Yes, now that you mention it..............!You got it on the nail. We've been told so many times over the years that the L85 was a good weapon. They (the politicians) had to prove it. It's not a great weapon but at least it's useable now.
PLA
L85 better than the Steyr AUG - really can't comment, both have had their problems, AUG not really combat tested in large numbers, although the Australians have presumably used in GW2 - open verdict I'm afraid.
By the way, Delta Whisky 58 & Chris 1. The SLR could be fired on auto (although of course it was an illegal mod and we never did it (honest), just like using 30 round LMG mags with beefed up springs).
You could depress the safety sear with a matchstick or place a ball bearing behind the firing pin.
Yep, can confirm..............been there, done that. Of course, the FN FAL on which the L1A1 was based was designed with selective fire capability in the first place.The SLR could be fired on auto (although of course it was an illegal mod and we never did it (honest), just like using 30 round LMG mags with beefed up springs).
You could depress the safety sear with a matchstick or place a ball bearing behind the firing pin.
Posting Permissions
