www.ditl.org

I think the only other country that uses the SA80 is Jamaica; Which wasn't involved in the invasion of Iraq, and these soldiers where both white.

I thought that the standard sidearm in Jamaica was a broken Red Stripe bottle.

Mikey wrote:I knew of the asymmetrical nature of the SA80, but I didn't know about the magazine-locking or falling-apart problems. I was referring to the pea-shooter nature of the 5.56mm round.

The falling apart problem I've only heard of occassionally, but the problem with the magazine catch I've experienced, albeit with the L96 single-shot version of the weapon. The only way to get it to engage was to rest the base of the magazine on the ground and physically lean on it.

Mikey wrote:I thought that the standard sidearm in Jamaica was a broken Red Stripe bottle.

I almost choked on my beer.

Seafort - yeah, I guess that does sound like a problem for one to have to deal with in the field.

Tsukiyumi - glad I could bring a smile to your face.

Mikey wrote:Seafort - yeah, I guess that does sound like a problem for one to have to deal with in the field.

As I said, that was the L96, not the L85, and I was only a cadet. Put it this way though - I enjoyed shooting with it on the range, but I wouldn't want to use the thing if I were a soldier.

I've heard similar sentiments about the M16/M4, and not just about the original 'Nam-era one which only worked normally on alternate Tuesdays under a full moon. Marines just back from Iraq have told me how temperamental they are, even to the point of one having to swap rifles with his gunny IN THE MIDDLE OF A SUSPECT APPREHENSION. Some soldiers also feel that the ability to carry more ammo doesn't make up for the lower power per round. I've never heard of the M16 having the mag problems you mentioned with the SA80, but either way - we can create such amazing technical acheivements, so why can't we create a weapon that a soldier can trust... or at least, won't endanger him?

One of my best friends served in Iraq with the Marine Corps (almost got his face blown off by shrapnel for his trouble... though the Purple Heart doesn't hurt with the ladies ), and he was kind of pissed when they promoted him to squad leader, and swapped his M249 SAW for an M16. He said the grenade launcher (M203) attached was great, but the SAW is just an all-around better weapon.

Well, yeah, but you're comparing a Yugo to an Aston Martin.

Mikey wrote:why can't we create a weapon that a soldier can trust... or at least, won't endanger him?

Dunno, though it's interesting to note that these reliability problems tend to crop up with Armalite weapons firing the NATO 5.56x45mm round (the SA80 is basically a knock-off of the AR-18). Ironically, given the notoriety of the SA80, the British Amy's standard weapon for the first half of the last century is renowned as one of the most reliable ever made, to the extent that it's still in use in many conflicts - the .303 Lee-Enfield.

Captain Seafort wrote:...the .303 Lee-Enfield.

I'd love to own one of those.

Tsukiyumi wrote:One of my best friends served in Iraq with the Marine Corps (almost got his face blown off by shrapnel for his trouble... though the Purple Heart doesn't hurt with the ladies ), and he was kind of pissed when they promoted him to squad leader, and swapped his M249 SAW for an M16. He said the grenade launcher (M203) attached was great, but the SAW is just an all-around better weapon.

I'm not surprised - the "M249 SAW" is the FN Minimi, basically a 5.56mm version of the FN MAG, the best GPMG of the late 20th century. Indeed, FN weapons generally have a very good reputation.

True, the Lee-Enfield is one of the more revered names in military firepower - and deservedly so. As a more recent example, the USN SEALs - known for certain degrees of innovation in weaponry, like the shoulder-fired cut-down M60 - often use early '50's-era M14's rather than M16/M4's.

Captain Seafort wrote:...Indeed, FN weapons generally have a very good reputation.

Fabrique Nationale seems to put out some quality hardware, no doubt.

Mikey wrote:I've heard similar sentiments about the M16/M4, and not just about the original 'Nam-era one which only worked normally on alternate Tuesdays under a full moon. Marines just back from Iraq have told me how temperamental they are, even to the point of one having to swap rifles with his gunny IN THE MIDDLE OF A SUSPECT APPREHENSION. Some soldiers also feel that the ability to carry more ammo doesn't make up for the lower power per round. I've never heard of the M16 having the mag problems you mentioned with the SA80, but either way - we can create such amazing technical acheivements, so why can't we create a weapon that a soldier can trust... or at least, won't endanger him?

There was, the FN FAL. The C-7 (Canadian M-16) is a decent weapon, though to light for my taste. It doesn't seem to have the problems that the US series do and the manstopping issue could be mitigated by better ammunition. Rather than the same stuff that was designed to pierce Soviet body armour, which is why it is such a poor manstopper.