New British Army Rifle?

[Sixshot6]

I see us possibly doing something with the French who are also beginning the process of replacing the FAMAS

It simply can not happen & quite frankly there should be little need to replace the Famas if not for our own stupidity.

The initial Famas was very accurate & in the hands of good soldiers was working fine all over the world, including Africa, with its barrel designed for the French ammo it was intended to fire. The only major weak point was the mag. It was fairly poor become it was initially designed to be disposable. In practice it was not for budget reasons, ending-up causing 99% of malfunctions.

So the Famas Gen2 version was produced accepting better Nato mags and sorted the problems. By then the nato ammo standard was adopted and rifling was also changed to accommodate it. Unfortunatly, at that stage, France had closed its ammo factory & ended out-sourcing ammo procurement, first to Israel & then Saudi . Ammo was now no good for the weapon that required French steel cases and new problems re-started. Users started to hate a previously well liked weapon.

Today this "globalisation" has gone one step further and we even closed our light armements production capability so for the 1st time in our history, France will have to buy a foreign rifle to equip its troops (*) ... Top candidates are probably the HK 416, FN Scar, SIG 5something, but also the Croatian VHS and the AXR160 (built in partnership with the French Humbert) .

It would be quite funny if one of the "major" army ended-up relying on a 2 millions tiny country to arms its troops because it can not do it itself because of the terrible short-sightedness of its leaders who all claim the heritage of Gen De Gaulle who put National independence above all ...


(*) we did buy a small batch of SIG for the UN contingent in Lebanon in the late 70's .

So France is as short sighted as the UK then? Wait you said Saudi Arabia? Mind beats when we bought Pakistani ammo over proven South African stuff, you just can't make this crap up anymore.

[meles meles]

oomans: The L85 as designed was a great bit of kit. Machined from solid steel, of a good quality, accurate and reliable. The Treasury baulked at the cost and passed it to the ROF (then owned by BAE) with instructions to 'value engineer' it. Forgings and machined parts were replaced by pressed metal stampings, spot welding and plastic. The cost reduction was enormous, in the short term at least. For the next decade or two it fell apart and even greater sums of money were spent on getting it to be reliable again. Eventually, it was built almost to pattern and reincarnated as the A2 version. The A2 is rugged and reliable and very accurate. It now outperforms almost any other standard issue weapon worldwide for reliability and accuracy, even the M16 stable*. Its remaining weaknesses are a lack of spares and insufficient punch, though the latter is the fault of the cartridge, not the rifle. That being the case, it needs replacing.

The solution ? Dust off the EM2 plans and start producing it again, along with the Tarden and the original cartridge. The trials are done, the weapon proved, ditto the cartridge and both have already already been accepted for service. The EM2 could be easily built , quickly and cost effectively by any reasonably modern CNC machining company. Don't let BAE or any similar company near it. We could have a good, proven, effective rifle and cartridge in service in under 12 months.






* We have first paw experience of this under battle conditions, not range play.

[Gundoc]

We'll. the latest revamp has addressed some the shortcomings, triple welding the body around the breach area, longer rail with stronger welds, engineering a design to make it easier to replace the rear locking pin clip. Those points plus the theatre entry spec flash hider and rail, plus the new sight have made it a bit of kit that isn't too shabby.

Add on the fact that we have a new suppressor coming in for infantry and it's a pretty good system all round.

Last time I spoke with the IPt there were no plans replace it. It's good enough to plink fig 12's at 4&500m, works as long as the user doesn't allow the insides to go rusty and isn't the heaviest or most cumbersome rifle out there.

Shame about the hideous trigger

[the running man]

Haven't the Germans been complaining about the g36 in Afghanistan? A pea shooters more accurate I read...

Ide like to see this done properly this time around,.45 app side arm for all serving troops and something bigger than a 5.56 so our troops can actually do something with it...

I know the 5.56 argument of wounding one man takes 2 more to carry him off leaving g 3 less on the battlefield,and after years of thought I don't believe in it,6.5 grindelwald or go back to the 7.62........

[bradaz11]

why didnt germany use the g3 rather than the g36?

or even the g33 etc for 5.56

[Sixshot6]

why didnt germany use the g3 rather than the g36?

or even the g33 etc for 5.56

They did use the the G3. Nato requirements forced a change of hand to be fair though and I'm sure there was a good reason to get the G36 going. Even if it was just to give a leg up to HK and possibly use up some money they got that must have been earmarked for R&D? I'm only speculating here on the last part, but having seen near enough up close how some councils worked with budgets that would not surprise me in the slightest.

[DaveB]

The A2 is rugged and reliable and very accurate. It now outperforms almost any other standard issue weapon worldwide for reliability and accuracy, even the M16 stable*.

Granted the L85A2 is a significant improvement on the A1, and it is generally reliable now, but as to it outperforming all other comers ... Sorry, but you haven't convinced me. I can name a good dozen rifles I would rather go to war with then the L85A2. If you like it, you are welcome to it, but I wouldn't give it house room.

[Mattnall]

I know the 5.56 argument of wounding one man takes 2 more to carry him off leaving g 3 less on the battlefield,........

Doesn't work if you are the ones winning the battle and advancing, just takes two of your guys to carry the wounded off, and loads of supplies and resources to fix him up before you can throw him in the cage. I don't suppose many of our recent enemy care too much for the fallen of their own side (except to bury them before morning) and our fallen wounded they want to get so they can make some more videos.

[sysreq]

There is also the justification the with 5.56 more ammunition can be carried, unfortunately it seems that you have to use 3 times as much to get the job done.....

One of these days the procurement process will actually get right, just by fluke they have to get right at some point...

[Airbrush]

There is also the justification the with 5.56 more ammunition can be carried, unfortunately it seems that you have to use 3 times as much to get the job done.....

One of these days the procurement process will actually get right, just by fluke they have to get right at some point...

I would argue that for the average military shooter it's easier to hit the target first time with a 5.56 than 7.62.