These were never production guns, and they were tried in numerous calibers, most notably in .280. In the 1980s, the British MOD adopted a design that was a relative of these projects- the SA80 Assault Rifle, in its type as the L85A1 IW (Individual Weapon) and the bipod supported heavy barrel L86A1 LSW (Light Support Weapon) variant.
Why make a “Bullpup”? The basic idea is that with a much more compact package than a standard rifle, you can keep the full barrel length, vastly improving the ballistics over a shorter barreled rifle. The first instinct in making a shorter rifle would be shortening the barrel length but that leads to several problems. The first and major one is the lost energy and changes to the stability in the projectile. Reports are currently coming back from the fighting in Afghanistan, of US soldiers with M4 carbines shooting “Bad guys” center of mass, and they don’t drop. They are not incapacitated. This is counter to the mission, which is to kill or incapacitate the enemy. This can get our guys compromised, which means “Killed”. This is unacceptable.
 |
| L85A1 IW Assault Rifle |
The M4 carbine uses a barrel that is 14.5" long, which changes the internal ballistics, the external ballistics, and what is becoming more apparent, changes the wound and terminal ballistics of the 5.56x45mm (NATO) cartridge. The M4 Carbine is the direct offspring of the M16A2 Assault Rifle series of full size rifles. It is now under fire in the desert fighting. So is the SA80 series, once again. More on other problems later in this article.
 |
| SA80A1 Assault Rifle |
During Operation Desert Storm, and in the Sierra Leone battles, the British troops armed with the SA80A1 Assault Rifle system were very vocal about the problems they were having with rifles that were unreliable, or flat out didn’t work in the desert environment. Many comments were made about them grabbing Kalashnikovs or M4 carbines if they could, and abandoning the SA80A1 because they didn’t trust it. Soldiers tend to vote with their actions if something doesn’t work right, it causes them grief or puts them in harm’s way, so they improvise, overcome and adapt.
 |
| L85A1 IW |
Historically, if that means tossing your Reising Model 50 into the river and grabbing a Garand from a fallen brother, then so be it. Students of military history are well familiar with stories like these, and most veterans can identify with this. This principle is universal to soldiers, whether it be fighting, digging ditches, or doing KP. If it doesn’t do its job, it gets DX’d.
In 1996 the firm of HK Oberndorf undertook an analysis of the system and finally landed a contract for well over $100 million to perform an upgrade and modification program on 200,000 of the SA80A1 series of rifles intended to become the SA80A2 Assault Rifle. These included modifications fications to thirteen parts of the rifles: Breech Block, Breech Bolt, Cartridge Extractor, Cartridge Ejector, Recoil Spring, E x t r a c t o r Spring, Firing Pin, Cocking Handle, Magazine, Gas plug and Cylinder, Hammer, Barrel Extension, and the Barrel on the L86A1 LSW, not the barrel on the L85A1. It is not the purpose of this article to review the HK SA80A2 upgrades, we do not have one available for testing.
 |
| SA80A2 Assault Rifle |
The media has been buzzing about problems with the SA80A2 in Afghanistan, and we have not been able to
pin down any specific problems from the general comments made. Reports on the failure of the M4 Carbine to perform are abundant as well, and there is at least one comment shared with your faithful correspondent
from someone who was there for comparison testing, that the M4 Carbine failed miserably, while the SA80A2 Assault Rifle had virtually no problems. All of this will come out in the wash of course.
 |
| SA80A2 With Grenade Launcher |
What we do have available to us, is one each of the L85A1 IW, and the L86A1 LSW. I have spent a number of years gathering accessories and taking pictures of variants, as well as speaking with operators and engineers. Basically, keep these guns cleaned and well lubricated. I recommend liberal treatment with TW-25 on the lower internals, and on the bolt carrier rails as well as the bolt group’s moving components. In other than desert theatres, they seem to perform well.
 |
| L86A1 LSW |
A bit about the rifles. These are obviously bullpups, which is a plus as well as a minus you keep the full barrel length in a shorter package, but you move the ejection ejection process close to your face and left handed shooters have a major problem with this location. I found the balance point to be somewhat awkward, it is behind the pistol grip. This means that you have one hand out front on the forend, the other on the pistol grip, and the majority of the weight is rocking the rifle out of balance to the rear and down. A good firm support
against the shoulder is required to counter this pressure. Without that control, the rifle will rise much more severely on automatic fire.
The receiver is bent up sheet metal. While treated and properly manufactured, it is still sheet metal, and subject to denting inwards. In some locations on the receiver, this can either misalign a part, or, more likely, interfere with the travel of the bolt carrier. Many interior components are sheet metal as well. Most of the parts appeared fairly robust, with some questions about the internals in the trigger area- many appeared to be formed sheet metal, which this writer never considers a good idea in a high wear area.
 |
| M4 Carbine With Grenade Launcher |
Altogether, the SA80A1 system gets a thumbs down as a modern military issue weapon from SAR. This is mainly because of the reported troubles in the field, and the fact that a modern army may be fighting in virtually any conceivable environment, not just a local, known one. There are many other systems available today.
Without reviewing the SA80A2 upgrades, it is hard to make any comments on that, other than to acknowledge the excellence of HK’s reputation on engineering.
No comments:
Post a Comment