At last somebody has realised that 223 and the SA80 are probably the WORST cartridge and crappy rifle combination going...BUT any info on what this "new" rifle is please? A picture would be marvellous!

"Soldiers in Afghanistan will be issued with a new infantry combat rifle for the first time in 20 years

Soldiers in Afghanistan will be issued with a new infantry combat rifle for the first time in 20 years

Soldiers in Afghanistan will be issued with a new infantry combat rifle for the first time in 20 years, the Ministry of Defence has announced.

More than 400 Sharpshooter rifles, which fire a 7.62mm round, are being purchased as part of a £1.5 million "urgent operational requirement".

The first batch will be sent to frontline troops later this year.

Quentin Davies, Minister for Defence Equipment and Support, said: "Troops in Afghanistan are already bristling with a variety of weapons they can use when fighting the Taliban.

"The Sharpshooter rifle adds to this arsenal and provides them with an additional, highly-precise, long-range capability.

"This is a concrete example of where we add to our range of equipment to ensure our brave forces have the best kit available to them on the frontline."

The MoD said the weapons were the first new infantry combat rifle to be given to troops in more than two decades.

Colonel Peter Warden, Light Weapons, Photographic and Batteries Team Leader at Defence, Equipment and Support, said: "The Sharpshooter rifle is very capable and has been bought to fulfil a specific role on the frontline in Afghanistan.

"It is a versatile weapon which will give our units a new dimension to their armoury.

"Initial feedback to the rifle has been very positive and the Army units deployed in Afghanistan are very keen to get their hands on it."

SAS has been issued the H&K 417 for already 6 months...

What's the caliber of the 417?

The H&K 417 is chambered in 7,62x51 Nato. It seems they're going back to a man's rifle

Way bad recoil! The 416-17 piston drive systems really cause a lot of muzzle flip...No BUENO for full auto and rapid-fire scenarios - especially at range!

But....At least the Brits are moving in the right direction!

JW

This won't be replacing the SA80 "en mass", but each Infantry Section will get one or possibly two for the "dedicated marksmen"...At the moment these guys are using the LSW version of the SA80 in that role, but the 5.56mm Nato round just doesn't have the hitting power at long range.

Interestly, in some Regiments, it seems very few bog standard SA80's are carried in combat.

I think it was the Para's, but there was a bit on the news that showed an 8 man section going out on a Fighting Patrol. The were armed with:

2 GPMFG's (FN MAG's)
2 LMG's (Minimi's)
2 LSW' Light support weapon based on the SA80
2 SA80 plus UGL

Additionally, a 60mm mortar and numerous what looked "66's" but are infact an updated version known as the "Light Anti-Structures Missile"

Even without the advances made in calling in Fire Support, they reckoned a typical Infantry
section of today has more firepower than a Infantry Platoon in the Falklands War....

I read a short photo article in the Times newspaper, or maybe the (London) Evening Standard recently about the new army rifle. There was a photograph of a soldier in European theatre DPM pointing what looked like a bolt action, telescopically sighted rifle towards the camera.

I interpreted this as the army providing / expecting higher levels of individual marksmanship and a short - medium range 'sniper' rifle capability. It looked to me they were giving a couple of 'varmint' heavy barrel, "accurate" rifles, like the Steyr SSG, Sauer 200 seris Jagd Match etc to each patrol in Afghanistan.

Oh well....seems it paid off to keep the old M14 rifle i bought as surplus 25 years ago..

I even managed to let the Home Guard to borrow me a G3 rifle more or less for life...

Pondoro

The G3/H&K 91 is one of my favorite rifles.

I have shot my second biggest deer, and my second biggest anteloe with one.

The hk416 and 417 were tested by the us army asymetric warfare group with great success they strongly recommended it .My associate lieut.FARAH of the argentine army commandos bougth some for the BUENOS AIRES POLICE SWaT UNIT and hes greatly imprssed with the carbines.Juan

juan

I have found, that over the years, most anything H&K makes is "pretty good".

quote:

Originally posted by robthom:
I read a short photo article in the Times newspaper, or maybe the (London) Evening Standard recently about the new army rifle. There was a photograph of a soldier in European theatre DPM pointing what looked like a bolt action, telescopically sighted rifle towards the camera.

I interpreted this as the army providing / expecting higher levels of individual marksmanship and a short - medium range 'sniper' rifle capability. It looked to me they were giving a couple of 'varmint' heavy barrel, "accurate" rifles, like the Steyr SSG, Sauer 200 seris Jagd Match etc to each patrol in Afghanistan.

When the AWM was adopted the AW was pushed down to platoon level.

I presume the HK417 is lighter and more accurate than the L1A1 but would not the UK have reserves of L1Al's to issue to the troops? it is/was a good rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by sjm:
I presume the HK417 is lighter and more accurate than the L1A1 but would not the UK have reserves of L1Al's to issue to the troops? it is/was a good rifle.

I doubt it; the MOD tends to sell or give away the old stuff in fairly short order...

The main problem with our old L1A1's was scope mounting...For some reason I could never figure out they put the mounts/optics onto a spare dust cover and then wondered why the optics never stayed in zero.

Typically you could feel about a 1/16" play forward/backwards on the dust covers, so why they picked this method I just don't know.

Pete is correct about the 308 FN/Fal.

I had 2 of them, but I never tried to scope them, as a buddy had one and had the ,problems peter has stated.

Also he had problems with using a bipod, becayse of the bipod being attached to the barrel proper...

Again this is why I really like the H&K 91/G3.

The barrel is free floated, and the H&K scope mount attaches to the reciever and holds its zero.

I have an H&K 91 that I have been shooting, and hunting with,since 1977, and the scope has never needed to be re sighted in.

I know that after market mounts are available now that promise zero movement but like Australia most likely all the L1A1's are chopped up or given away but still a L1A1 modernised with kevlar/synthetic stock,modern mounting system with picatinny rail to mount most sight/optic options maybe a new flash hider to reduce length, plastic magazine like the HK417, etc, I believe the FN FAL /L1A1 still has a lot of life in it.

I scoped my FAL, using a Picatinny B-Square mount (which actually replaces the dust cover). I never got the accuracy I hoped for. I think the sliding dust cover (even bolted down like the B-Square) cannot bring more rigidity to an open top, folding rifle. Before scoping, my FAL grouped in 2 MOA with the issue peep sight and scoped, it did... just the same. All in all, it was a disapointment.

Andre,

The problem is that your looking at 2MOA from a sportsmans perspective.

2MOA to a soldier is about "minute of torso" out to say 400m, and that I might say is quite poor judging by our L1AI's.

We had guys on our shooting team who could hit a "falling plate" (about 30cm x40cm???) out to 600m fairly regularly with their SLR's. And those were standard weapons, with nothing done to them apart from replacing the standard battle sight with a smaller rear peep sight..

Regardless, out to 300m to 400m, that infantry had an excellent weapon.

I'm not sure about the FN Fal, but I suspect with the SLR, accuracy was limited because the barrel was not free floating..In fact it was quite the reverse with the front of hand guard being secured to the gas plug housing, which itself was fitted directly to the barrel.

Still, I would rather carry an SLR than the SA80; it was a real "battle rifle" of the old school...

Regards,
Peter

I think this is what is beibg discussed:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...-half-mile-away.html

Interesting that they are saying the AK47 has a "longer range" than an SA-80...Out to say 400m, the 5.56 Nato fired from an SA-80 will have a considerably flatter trajectory. Added to that the SA80 has optic sights and is known for its accuracy.

Contrast that with the AK-47 firing a 7.62x39 at a sedate 2300fps, so it has a rainbow like trajectory, no optic sight and pretty poor accuracy, so I struggle to see how it out ranges the SA-80.

All the coalition forces in Afgan have complained about the range and killing power of the M4.

Many US forces have been equipped with M 14's, some highly modified.

Other 308/7.62 rifles are being looked at as well.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
All the coalition forces in Afgan have complained about the range and killing power of the M4.

Many US forces have been equipped with M 14's, some highly modified.

Other 308/7.62 rifles are being looked at as well.

The SA80 is not handicaped with the short barrel of M4, so it can squeeze a bit more performance out of the 5.56mm Nato round.

Interesting the USA's re adoption of the M14..

As a battle rifle, I think the FN FAL was probably a touch better weapon, but because of the problems mentioned previously with the FNFAL, I think the M14 is probably a better platform to develope into a "sharpshooter" rifle...

The H&K G3 is another battle rifle that comes to mind, but I don't know anything with regards scope mounting on those...

Pete I have been shooting an H&K 91 since 1977, I have also used on for a work gun as well as a H&K 93 and a 33K.

The H&K is one of the easiest military rifles to scope. The factory mount goes on and off and returns to zero.

I have shot several deer and a few antelope with my scoped 91.

All the H&K rifles I have shot have ben very accurate as well.

quote:

Originally posted by Andre Mertens:
I scoped my FAL, using a Picatinny B-Square mount (which actually replaces the dust cover). I never got the accuracy I hoped for. I think the sliding dust cover (even bolted down like the B-Square) cannot bring more rigidity to an open top, folding rifle. Before scoping, my FAL grouped in 2 MOA with the issue peep sight and scoped, it did... just the same. All in all, it was a disapointment.

The B-Square is not one of the better mounts out there. If you are still interested, you might try the A.R.M.S #3 or the DSA mount. Both are good and utilize the same basic concept but with higher quality.
However, you might run your rifle through a machine rest first to see what it is capable of beforehand. 2MOA from a factory FAL would not suprise me, depending on ammo. The tilting bolt and non-free float barrel do have their limitations. But, the FAL was designed as a battle rifle and reliability trumped accuracy. And if anything, the FAL is reliable.
"Minute of man" is all that was required.


BTW, is the rifle in the photo as you received it from FN (other than the scope mount)? If so, that is the first time I have seen an early FN barrel with bayonet lug with a short combo device as well. Those early lugged barrels usually had plain muzzles and came with wood, not plastic. With the combo device threaded on, the lug is useless. Interesting variant. Is it select fire as well?

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:
SAS has been issued the H&K 417 for already 6 months...

One of the best Manufacturer and Caliber combination ever made.....
waiting for a Sig reply....Thanks for Sharing. G

Andre

I do not know what 308 ammo you are shooting but if you are getting an honest 2 MOA from your FAL that is not bad.

I know you are in Belgium, but if you can try some Federal Match 168gr ammo, or some Winchester 168gr Ballistic Silvertip ammo or a reload with the Sierra 165HPBT Gameking, or Nosler 165gr Ballistic Tips, or Sierra 168gr Matchkings over 39.5gr of IMR 3031.

All of the above shot very good in the 2 FAL's I had. And those loads have shot great in every 308 I have tried them in.

What size groups does you scoped FAL shoot at 200 yards? 300 Yards?

quote:

Originally posted by Pete E:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
All the coalition forces in Afgan have complained about the range and killing power of the M4.

Many US forces have been equipped with M 14's, some highly modified.

Other 308/7.62 rifles are being looked at as well.

The SA80 is not handicaped with the short barrel of M4, so it can squeeze a bit more performance out of the 5.56mm Nato round.

Interesting the USA's re adoption of the M14..

As a battle rifle, I think the FN FAL was probably a touch better weapon, but because of the problems mentioned previously with the FNFAL, I think the M14 is probably a better platform to develope into a "sharpshooter" rifle...

The H&K G3 is another battle rifle that comes to mind, but I don't know anything with regards scope mounting on those...

The Stanlag claw mount and Z24 Hensoldt 4x scope are great.

Jpat

Those Hendsolt scopes are great.

I spent some time on the NZ Army Rifle Team and we just used bog standard Lithgow made SLR's. Without sling or support, you could group reasonably well with good ammo, say a 10 shot 4" group at 100 yds, but you did run into more than a few that could group very much closer.

With the help of a friendly QM, and an ammunition allowance squeezed from the unit allocation, I tried about 10 SLR - taken at random from the unit rack - and found one that could do consistent 10 shot 2” groups at 100yards. I tweaked a few things, especially the rear sight and I was set. This was repeated a few times through my career as I was posted from unit to unit and had to leave the rifle behind. In general though, given that the rifle was properly zeroed and the rear sight did not flop around, any SLR chosen at random would enable a Marksman rating. A good one such as I had, would enable a Marksman rating just by hitting within the central scoring rectangles of the fig 11 target.

Oh yes, they were reliable and we trusted them. The Australian and New Zealand infantrymen who used them in Vietnam, had no complaints.

I fired 416 and 417s and of course im greatly impressed .In a mountanous windy country ,i would prefer that all my operators use 7.62.
When i served in the esc exploracion c aerot 4 we have some faps-heavy barrel fals-with scopes on picatinys ,the scopes werent good but when i mounted a leupold on it the accuracy was acceptable among 2 inch groups at 100 mts.Juan

quote:

Originally posted by ChetNC:

quote:

Originally posted by Andre Mertens:
I scoped my FAL, using a Picatinny B-Square mount (which actually replaces the dust cover). I never got the accuracy I hoped for. I think the sliding dust cover (even bolted down like the B-Square) cannot bring more rigidity to an open top, folding rifle. Before scoping, my FAL grouped in 2 MOA with the issue peep sight and scoped, it did... just the same. All in all, it was a disapointment.

The B-Square is not one of the better mounts out there. If you are still interested, you might try the A.R.M.S #3 or the DSA mount. Both are good and utilize the same basic concept but with higher quality.
However, you might run your rifle through a machine rest first to see what it is capable of beforehand. 2MOA from a factory FAL would not suprise me, depending on ammo. The tilting bolt and non-free float barrel do have their limitations. But, the FAL was designed as a battle rifle and reliability trumped accuracy. And if anything, the FAL is reliable.
"Minute of man" is all that was required.


BTW, is the rifle in the photo as you received it from FN (other than the scope mount)? If so, that is the first time I have seen an early FN barrel with bayonet lug with a short combo device as well. Those early lugged barrels usually had plain muzzles and came with wood, not plastic. With the combo device threaded on, the lug is useless. Interesting variant. Is it select fire as well?

The standard DSA mount is OK but the screws suck, as they're cheese heads rather than socket heads.
The Para mount I use had the recoil spring guide rod mount break & I've yet to shoot it since receiving the replacement part.

There's a long running thread on the FAL Files about accuracy & more than 100 members claim they have shot consecutive sub 2" 5 round groups with the rifle loaded from the magazine.

quote:

Originally posted by Pete E:
I'm not sure about the FN Fal, but I suspect with the SLR, accuracy was limited because the barrel was not free floating..In fact it was quite the reverse with the front of hand guard being secured to the gas plug housing, which itself was fitted directly to the barrel.

Regards,
Peter

Peter,

Since we've diverted from the original topic...what exactly is the difference between an SLR and an FAL? Where they were made?

Jason,

Sorry for the delay, but I didn't see your question.

The most obvious difference is that the SLR as issued to us Brits was a semi auto only. There was also differences in the Flash hider/bayonet mount. The FAL was also available in a wider range of models ie those with a heavy barrel or folding stock.

At an engineering level, I believe that the SLR was spec'd in imperial measurements so many of the parts are not interchangeable with the FAL.

There were other changes too, and I've heard it said that most of these changes were minor ones put in place so Enfield didn't have to pay a licensing fee to FN to use their design.

The rifles we used were British built, but I am not sure about those used by other countries such as Canada, Austaila or Indian for instance; I have a feeling that many of those were built locally, but I am not 100% sure.

Regards

Peter

The Australian L1A1 was made at the
Small Arms Factory, Lithgow, NSW, Australia.


As stated above, if you picked a good one they are very accurate.

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:
The Australian L1A1 was made at the
Small Arms Factory, Lithgow, NSW, Australia.


As stated above, if you picked a good one they are very accurate.

Any idea about the version the New Zealanders used? Did they produce it locally or was it built at Lithgow?

quote:

Originally posted by Pete E:

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:
The Australian L1A1 was made at the
Small Arms Factory, Lithgow, NSW, Australia.


As stated above, if you picked a good one they are very accurate.

Any idea about the version the New Zealanders used? Did they produce it locally or was it built at Lithgow?

I would say Lithgow as
1. I don't think they have a facility that could make them.
2. The quantities they would need wouldn't be worth it as they have such a small Def Force.
3. They did the same with the F88 Steyr's, purchased them from us.

quote:

Originally posted by Pete E:

At an engineering level, I believe that the SLR was spec'd in imperial measurements so many of the parts are not interchangeable with the FAL.


Peter

"Inch" rifles was simply a convenient way of saying Commonwealth/UK pattern and didn't have as much to do with engineering measurements as it did the origin of the design specs.
"Metric" rifles were patterned mainly in continental western Europe. Again, it's just shorthand.
Many parts are interchangeable. Those that aren't are due to differences in how the rifles were spec'd not necessarily measured.
Though there are dozens of minor differences between manufacturers and models, one of the easiest ways to tell the difference between and inch and metric pattern rifle is in the magazine. Inch pattern rifles have a large boss tacked on the front of the mag to engage a depression in the mag well of the rifle. Metric rifles simply use a small "beak" that has been pressed into the mag body itself.
As for parts guns built in the US, anything goes and many rifles are a hodge podge of parts we lovingly call "FrankenFals".
Yes, Oddbod, I have been a member over a FALfiles for around a decade now. It is a disease.


Chet

Pete
Our FNC1 was very close to the FAL with a few little tweaks. Semi auto only.
The rear site being the main diff.. adjustable from 200-600 m.
We were the 1st to use the FAL.

Canadian Arsenals Limited built them here.. STD versions like the L1A1 not metric IIRC.
I really liked that rifle.. man I could make it sing on the drop plate range.
Also shot the C2 which was a less than successful squad Lite auto.
Our bayonet was a POS tho hated that thing.