Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

ExPB14_JAS-39_Gripen.jpg

ExPB14_Mirage2000.jpg

6_EXPB14_20140729_088_3_RSAF_F16s.jpg

5_EXPB14_20140729_143_3_RSAF_F-15SGs.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





What Assault Rifle - British Army Should Replace SA-80 A2 With?

This is a discussion on What Assault Rifle - British Army Should Replace SA-80 A2 With? within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by RAFregimentkid G36K?? That wouldn't have been my first guess for a replacement, I would have said M416 ...


View Poll Results: Replace the SA80 with?
M16 series(also covers HK416, etc) 7 16.67%
AK series(also covers Galil, etc) 2 4.76%
FN SCAR 8 19.05%
FAMAS 0 0%
FX05/G36 8 19.05%
Steyr AUG 4 9.52%
Somthing else 13 30.95%
Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old February 24th, 2013   #121
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 225
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RAFregimentkid View Post
G36K?? That wouldn't have been my first guess for a replacement, I would have said M416 but I reckon we can wait till 2020 since we've spent so much improving it since 2008. I do like the G36 series of weapons though.
The G36k replacement talk was before the A2 upgrade. The govt. chose to go for the upgraded version of the L-85, the L85A2, instead of the G36.

So they contracted Heckler & Koch ( the same company that makes th G36) to conduct the upgrade program on the L-85. The reliability issues have been taken care of, but the rifle is still not as light as the G36....
Eeshaan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24th, 2013   #122
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 225
Threads:
Oh by the way, I believe that if they really want to go for another rifle now, they should go for the HK 416 series.

it functions just like the M16, but bereft of all the reliability and jamming problems that the weapon was infamous for. Also, it is a rather modular weapon, with different variants ( with a larger caliber 7.62mm version the 417).

IMHO if they wanna go for a bullpup rifle, they should go for the Tavor 21. But that's just me being biased hahaha.

Personally I don't think the govt. will want to spend more money on a new rifle procurement programme if the current one is functioning just fine and doing it's job without too much of a hassle.
Eeshaan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013   #123
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 226
Threads:
What would be wrong with purchasing more sharpshooter rifles to slowly replace the current assault rifles and also go with the mk48 saw which is also 7.62 rather than 5.56.
the concerned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013   #124
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 5,513
Threads:
You think the entire army should have sniper rifles, & it should give up on personal automatic rifles?
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013   #125
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,060
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
You think the entire army should have sniper rifles, & it should give up on personal automatic rifles?
I don't know about that but it is clear the traditional concept of a standard service rifle is changing. There are more specialist weapons within modern armies than at any other time, SAW, AR, DMR, grenade launchers many more than I could list. I suppose the a standard rifle is actually less important than it once was and it is probably only a mater of time before it disappears.

Maybe it will be recast as a standard PDW of some sort, suitable for CQB and self defence rather than a larger, heavier assault rifle or carbine. Effective out to 300m suitable for building entry etc. light enough to be a secondary to a long rifle, AR or grenade launcher, suitable for use by vehicle and weapon crews. Just an idea.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013   #126
Moderator
Major General
RobWilliams's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,196
Threads:
The requirements of the standard service rifle are always changing, but personally I can't forsee the end of the standard service rifle. There's always going to be a requirement for a standard rifle, even if it is financial to not pay for all the extra toys.

It's a funny thing, making the transition from SLR to L85A2 then heading elements back to the 7.62, kinda makes you wonder about the future of the L86A2 as I understand that's what used to be the DMR for the infantry.

As an aside, the L85A2 does come in an even shorter carbine variant, the L22 carbine, I've read reports of Apache pilots storing them in the cockpit which seems unusual.
RobWilliams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013   #127
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 225
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by swerve View Post
You think the entire army should have sniper rifles, & it should give up on personal automatic rifles?
I think he's referring to something like the M14 or the SLR. A slower rate of fire, but with a heavier round for better penetration. A heavier caliber round, not a sniper rifle in general, I think

Last edited by Eeshaan; February 26th, 2013 at 09:47 AM.
Eeshaan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2013   #128
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,060
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eeshaan View Post
I think he's referring to something like the M14 or the SLR. A slower rate of fire, but with a heavier round for better penetration. The a heavier caliber round, not a sniper rifle in general, I think
Really it all comes down to who and where you are fighting. 300m from 5.56 is fine in close terrain but as Afghanistan has shown having the ability to reach out to 600m is a must for open terrain. A standard service rifle needs to be a small and light as possible to permit the carriage of gear specific to the current environment. That's why I was suggesting a PDW then issue SAW or GPMG, DMR and GL as required.

I note the USMC has introduced a new AR, the M27, to replace the SAW at fire team, squad and platoon level. Based on the HK416 this weapon will likely eventually also be deployed as a DMR in addition to its current SAW/AR role, which will see perhaps two per fire team. That said its is still not as small and handy as a carbine or assault rifle needs to be so is unlikely to be standardised as the new service rifle.

Its a hard one, there are many very good reasons to standardise but probably just as many not to. The short term answer is probably a family of weapons with a high level of commonality in components and ergonomics available in different barrel lengths and weights, as well as calibres. Long term, well I suspect that will depend on cost and technology.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013   #129
Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,307
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobWilliams View Post
The requirements of the standard service rifle are always changing, but personally I can't forsee the end of the standard service rifle. There's always going to be a requirement for a standard rifle, even if it is financial to not pay for all the extra toys.

It's a funny thing, making the transition from SLR to L85A2 then heading elements back to the 7.62, kinda makes you wonder about the future of the L86A2 as I understand that's what used to be the DMR for the infantry.

As an aside, the L85A2 does come in an even shorter carbine variant, the L22 carbine, I've read reports of Apache pilots storing them in the cockpit which seems unusual.
I think that's a standard fit now - if you look at the interview with Prince Harry, he points out the storage cubby/holder what have you just to the right of the CP/G seat. Ed Macy refers to carrying one on his flights, which was then quite unorthodox but it looks to have caught on.

I always got the impression from Ed's books that his E&E plan was to kill main and disfigure anything that wasn't blue force in a 500 meter radius of him and sit on a pile of corpses, ready for rescue. Which I admire immensely
StobieWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013   #130
Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,307
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by the concerned View Post
What would be wrong with purchasing more sharpshooter rifles to slowly replace the current assault rifles and also go with the mk48 saw which is also 7.62 rather than 5.56.
Um..because we're sitting on hundred thousand plus perfectly functional assault weapons, with enough rails, sites, UGL's etc to fit out more troops than we can field in a combat operation ?

And why go Mk48 SAW when we're knee deep in GPMG's ?
StobieWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013   #131
Defense Professional / Analyst
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The land of Oz
Posts: 822
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StobieWan View Post
And why go Mk48 SAW when we're knee deep in GPMG's ?
26 cm shorter, 3,6kg lighter comes to mind. Ever performed fire and movement with a Mag-58?
Marc 1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013   #132
Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,307
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc 1 View Post
26 cm shorter, 3,6kg lighter comes to mind. Ever performed fire and movement with a Mag-58?
We've already got SAW in the inventory however - you'd be replacing the 5.56 SAW with a 7.62 version, which seems to duplicate the GPMG function. I take your point about the Mk48 being lighter but that looks like a shed load of cash to replace weapons already in service that seem to work.

Added to which, the Mk48 is a bit heavier than the SAW...


I'd sooner hang on and see where LSAT goes, see if that's useful and make a decision from there.
StobieWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013   #133
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 226
Threads:
Doesn't the sharpshooter also have the ability to carry stuff like ugl's. Is all the automatic fire neccesary when you could have longer range selective fire and if you need sustained fire why not increase the ratio of saw's. what i was trying to get at is we already know that the 7.62mm does the job we need why spend more money on a competition when we already have the answer.
the concerned is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013   #134
Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,307
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by the concerned View Post
Doesn't the sharpshooter also have the ability to carry stuff like ugl's. Is all the automatic fire neccesary when you could have longer range selective fire and if you need sustained fire why not increase the ratio of saw's. what i was trying to get at is we already know that the 7.62mm does the job we need why spend more money on a competition when we already have the answer.
Because 7.62 was a poor compromise from birth - read back over the thread to see why - there's a very good potted history by Mr Gubler for instance.

From memory the DMR is the Stoner SR-25 with minor tweaks - it's very accurate but it's not particularly handy for CQB, getting in and out or aircraft or vehicles, and whacking a UGL on the front is really going to weigh things down.


I suspect it's also quite a bit more expensive than the alternatives. We're seeing some good performance from recently fielded rounds in 5.56, particularly when driven through a relatively lengthy barrel as with the SA80 - lets just hang on and see what pops up in the coming years. I've mentioned LSAT as being quite interesting because it seems to be delivering a 30% reduction in ammunition weight for the same calibre, using relatively straightforward solutions. We're talking a sub 5Kg SAW equivalent, with reduced recoil.

We could wait just a bit and see if that delivers.
StobieWan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2013   #135
Moderator
Major General
RobWilliams's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,196
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StobieWan View Post
From memory the DMR is the Stoner SR-25 with minor tweaks - it's very accurate but it's not particularly handy for CQB, getting in and out or aircraft or vehicles, and whacking a UGL on the front is really going to weigh things down.
Law Enforcement International LM7

In terms of weight, a L85A2 loaded with an 'optical sight', probably a SUSAT comes up to near as makes no difference 5kg. The LM7 is 4.5kg without a sight & unloaded so adding that hefty sight & 20 rounds of burly 7.62's going to make it heavier i'd bet. Add on a UGL which the same source puts at 1.12kg and you're gunna have a fun* time carrying that around.

*warning, may not actually be fun
RobWilliams is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:06 PM.