SA80, is it STILL a duffer?

[petermac]

It's been a while since I heard or read anything about the SA80. The system has had a huge amount of money spend on it for modifications and retro-fits and I was wondering if the thing works at the end of it.Does it still dump magazines? Does it fear an undusted room?

I'd be interested to know.

Peter

[roughshooter]

My experience

I'm not really that up to date with the SA80 but I can tell you about my personal experience in 1999. I was in Saudi Arabia in the desert. We had to carry the damn thing round in a plastic bin liner because it would jam solid if exposed to the dusty desert air.The yanks I was working with found this hilarious because their M16's were fine.

I do know that the MOD Police have scrapped it in favour of the HK G36 after modifying 20,000 SA80's....a good way to spend tax payers money and all UK special forces have long abandoned the thing, personally I hate it.

Regards Craig.

[petermac]

It certainly is a misbegotten little horror. I was working in London recently and decided to have a wander up to Grosvenor Square to see the concrete barricades (they've ruined the view) and the Police on duty in the square turned out to be Airforce ones on secondment. They were totting HKs and rather alarmingly had hollowpoint ammo.

Given that there has been a 'war' declared on 'terror' (although not a de facto one) I wonder how the use of expanding ammunition accords to our being signatories to the Hague Convention which takes a dim view of the stuff? Still, rather that than see some innocent bystander get plugged with a shoot-through I suppose.

I can't understand why we've kept on modifying the gun when it is obvious that it'll never be a runner. Even the Falkland Island Defense Force who have to work very closely with the regular garrison decided to go for the Steyr rather than having the SA80 and I don't think its particalary dusty in the South Atlantic.

Peter

[Gary Cain]

Terrorists are not soldiers, remember they are being arrested and tried in civilian courts for criminal offences. That means any type of ammunition is acceptable.


Gary

It certainly is a misbegotten little horror. I was working in London recently and decided to have a wander up to Grosvenor Square to see the concrete barricades (they've ruined the view) and the Police on duty in the square turned out to be Airforce ones on secondment. They were totting HKs and rather alarmingly had hollowpoint ammo.

Given that there has been a 'war' declared on 'terror' (although not a de facto one) I wonder how the use of expanding ammunition accords to our being signatories to the Hague Convention which takes a dim view of the stuff? Still, rather that than see some innocent bystander get plugged with a shoot-through I suppose.

I can't understand why we've kept on modifying the gun when it is obvious that it'll never be a runner. Even the Falkland Island Defense Force who have to work very closely with the regular garrison decided to go for the Steyr rather than having the SA80 and I don't think its particalary dusty in the South Atlantic.

Peter

[Simon O.]

Why do we still have it? politics. As i understand it though the SA80A2 is better than the old A1 i used but not by much.

Of course to some the weapon is fine, any problems with it are down to the soldiers, not the weapon itself

[Frogprince]

IMO politics has everything to do with it. As I understand it in the Gulf War the SA 80’s went into storage and the L1A1 FAL's came out and were used instead because they were more reliable.

In the U.S. politics resulted in the M14 being the immediate replacement for the M1 Garand. Politics also kept the M16 from being adopted which had to be “back doored” into Viet Nam. The M16 has its own issues and may be replaced, but I find it very interesting that you never see Israeli forces with their own in-house rifle the Galil - instead you see them with the M16 or one of its derivatives. FP

[Sani]

Like any weapon the SA80 has its ups and downs, the plus side is that its a good close quarters weapon with its bull pup design.....sorry I cant think of anymore pro's, the weapons poop. The MOD wouldnt even fork out a little extra for the left handed attachement....its over complicated design leaves it open to all kinds of problems in extremes of weather.
Whoever said politics has something to do with it, is right, the design of the SA80 was tested during the 50's and was deemed crap....by the time it came to the British forces replacing the SLR, the only weapon that was under a British contractor was: the SA80.

Must admit though, the SA80A2 has ironed out some of the problems its father had, but I would still prefer an M16 or M4A1Carbine anyday.

[Chris Boonzaier]

I find it very interesting that you never see Israeli forces with their own in-house rifle the Galil - instead you see them with the M16 or one of its derivatives. FP

Why do you think that is? To expensive?

[Simon O.]

IMO politics has everything to do with it. As I understand it in the Gulf War the SA 80’s went into storage and the L1A1 FAL's came out and were used instead because they were more reliable

Not true. However at the time the SA80 was not fully introduced throughout the army, non-combat units for example still retained the SLR, SMG and LMG (Bren gun).

I think the real proof is in it's export sales....virtually 0 and those units or organisations which have any say in what they use. eg. the SAS\SBS.

Intresting to see that the army has in recent years started to use the Browning 0.5" again, after having used it through WWII and after...then ditching it..only to discover in the '90s that it was a damn good and useful weapon anyway. In the last couple of years the army has suddenly bought a whole lot of M249's ...because the LSW is pants and finally, after years of saying "why haven't we got something like that?" a grenade launcher for the SA80 has finally appeared.

[Gary Cain]

Havn't a clue. You see the Galil all over south america. I do see some leg's with the Galil in Israel as well but the para's for the most part are equipped with the M16 or derivative.


Gary

Why do you think that is? To expensive?

[petermac]

I had heard that a number of Brens were taken out of storage recently and were tested on a range in Norfolk. If true, I wonder why?

[Chris Boonzaier]

Havn't a clue. You see the Galil all over south america. I do see some leg's with the Galil in Israel as well but the para's for the most part are equipped with the M16 or derivative.


Gary

The South African army loves its version of the Galil and have a whole bunch of derivatives. Maybe the M16`s are "sponsored" in some way.

[Johnnie]

Most of the Brit vets I work with here in Afghanistan say the SA-80 is crap, although the A-2 version seemed to have solved some problems. Wouldn't want to carry one for serious social work myself.
Regards,
Johnnie

[Simon O.]

I had heard that a number of Brens were taken out of storage recently and were tested on a range in Norfolk. If true, I wonder why?

Good weapon. i remember those we had up until the early 90s were dated 44 or 45, modified post-war to take the NATO 7.62mm round.

[Rob Brown]

Right ive read every ones posts, and a few of you dont really know what you are talking about, and just seem to take straight away what people have told you.

Having experience with the SA80-A1 and A2, I can tell you the SA80 A2 is a superb weapon now.

The reason why we ditshced the SLR, was because 5.56mm ammo is easier to carry therefore being able to carry more ammo into battle.

The SA80 A1 I have used in desert conditions and yes it is prone to jamming. So therefore we had problems.

The SA80 A2 however can fire all day in the desert and I have had no problem with it.

I have used it at Bisley for the Army's shooting competition and the British team in the International Competition in Arkansas came out 1st and second (Regular and TA respectively) with SA80's.

It is highly accurate as an Infantry Weapon and is capable of hitting targets out to 800m when used as a section and 600m when used individually.

The LSW is not crap, we needed a weapon that could put a sustained amount of fire down hence why operational forces now use the "LMG" as it is now called by British Forces, not the Minimi or M249, they are slightly different from our version. The LSW has a longer barrel, so can be used to put interval shots down on the enemy to keep him pinned at a longer distance than the rifles capability while the LMG has less accuracy, we always need the LSW.


The Falklands Defence Force, chose the Steyr before the A2 even came out, so yes it would have been my choice at the time, but now I prefer the A2.

And finally as Simon said, its not just down to the weapon, it's the person firing and maintaining that weapon that affects performance.


Hope Ive cleared some quibbles here.


Rob