Thread: Best weapons / optimum calibres

The US have always seemed to have a 'looser' interpretation of the Hague Accord. I know that the US never signed the accord, but their lawyers interpretation does raise an eyebrow or two:

"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions."

The two on the left are Federal Trophy Bonded Bear Claw. Hmmmm!



The UK also has a nice team of military lawyers down at Shrivenham who provide a similar service. Somehow I doubt that the UK would ever adopt ammo like this.

Has any Afghan administration ever signed the accord or promised to abide by it? Signed the land mine treaty?

Originally Posted by ugly

Has any Afghan administration ever signed the accord or promised to abide by it? Signed the land mine treaty?

Therin lies the problem, Law abiding countries end up with a tactical disadvantage because our powers that be listen to the winging lefties that would have us going to war with pillows (although according to another thread they are quite effective at sorting out jundi arms dealers).

The problem as I see it is to decide what constitutes indiscrimate and wanton damaging of people such as laying mines and unguided heavy ordnance in areas of habitation and the need to take logical steps to kill the enemy. That said ammo designed to expand whilst enhancing wounding does tend to be less use when penetrating cover but is less likely to pass through the target and kill again! Less likely not never!

Then there is the ever present problem of non uniformed fighters. When dead and their weapons taken off them they then appear to be the 'innocent civilians' which our media love! What they fail to understand is that even a ten year old can have the ability to use and kill with a suitable weapon.

Originally Posted by KingOfKings

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Originally Posted by KingOfKings

Originally Posted by EX_STAB

Originally Posted by KingOfKings

Originally Posted by auscam

That should reduce ammo consumption!

TBH mate, in the grand scheme of things considering that we, as a Military force are in a full scale conflict on foreign soil, expending huge ammount of ammo daily, a cadet using 100rds a year is not really going to be a significant burden - I don't see your issue.

Why should we not give the cadets something that looks, feels and fires like the real thing, It will breed some excitement that may assist in the decision for them to join up in the future as adults.

In the new L98A2 we also have a reasonable war reserve as well, all it needs is a new change lever and you effectively have an L85A2 that is being looked after as well as used so all the problems of storage are reduced. If the weapon is being used, same as any machine then its problems are likely to be ironed out so if needed, servicable weapons should be issued without further problems created by sitting still for ten years on a shelf in Donnington!

The only component not still being made for the L85A2 is the TMH. New, modified bodies are comming soon.

so is the L98A2 an L98A1 with gas parts or an L85 with a fixed "change lever"? i.e what were they made from?

The L98A2 has exactly the same components as the L85A2 apart from the change lever.

Yes, I figured that I mean were they built out of L98A1s or were they built out of L85s?

Yes, they came from L85A1's

Urm, they are all totally new parts.. new weapons. I can vouch for that.
As modifying a weapon, it still keeps it full auto status, which the L98A2 does not keep.. The TMH is very different and reworked, "to prevent tampering", no more match stick trick..The barrels are new, the bolt carriers are new.. The only thing reused at this moment are the iron sights, which are being replace before annual camp with susats almost defiantly. Also got our LSWs back plus more.

Originally Posted by .338lapua_magnum

What they fail to understand is that even a ten year old can have the ability to use and kill with a suitable weapon.

They understand it well enough, it just suits their agenda to propagandise it.

Originally Posted by ugly

The problem as I see it is to decide what constitutes indiscrimate and wanton damaging of people such as laying mines and unguided heavy ordnance in areas of habitation and the need to take logical steps to kill the enemy. That said ammo designed to expand whilst enhancing wounding does tend to be less use when penetrating cover but is less likely to pass through the target and kill again! Less likely not never!

Illogical or not, the UK has signed the Hague accord and our legal review process has to be gone through before any new weapon system or ammunition can be adopted.

I agree that it is illogical that expanding bullets are prohibited, whereas it is 'OK' to tear the enemy to pieces with ragged steel fragments from mortars and artillery. Illogical or not, it is what we are obliged to do under international humanitarian law. Supposedly as a respected, civilised nation we set ourselves to a higher standard than others.

Logic has no place where politicans are concerned, I am required by law to use expanding ammo to humanely kill game but cannot against a person using ieds to ambush me?
To despatch wounded animals and those involved in RTC's I can use a knife!

Originally Posted by ugly

To despatch wounded animals and those involved in RTC's I can use a knife!

Sshhh...they'll be on about serrated edges next!

The Dutch are currently upgrading their C7 and C8 rifle/carbines with a free-float upper as a standard item!

This will certainly render the upgraded C7's as the most accurate standard issue rifle on the battlefield.

Originally Posted by sid101

Urm, they are all totally new parts.. new weapons. I can vouch for that.
As modifying a weapon, it still keeps it full auto status, which the L98A2 does not keep.. The TMH is very different and reworked, "to prevent tampering", no more match stick trick..The barrels are new, the bolt carriers are new.. The only thing reused at this moment are the iron sights, which are being replace before annual camp with susats almost defiantly. Also got our LSWs back plus more.

HK are making bodies, TMHs, barrels, bolts, gas parts etc all from scratch? I thought all SA80 family weapons were reworked existing A1 stock, as Nottingham made its last rifle in '94 (IIRC) and no new ones have been made since.

Originally Posted by big_les

Originally Posted by sid101

Urm, they are all totally new parts.. new weapons. I can vouch for that.
As modifying a weapon, it still keeps it full auto status, which the L98A2 does not keep.. The TMH is very different and reworked, "to prevent tampering", no more match stick trick..The barrels are new, the bolt carriers are new.. The only thing reused at this moment are the iron sights, which are being replace before annual camp with susats almost defiantly. Also got our LSWs back plus more.

HK are making bodies, TMHs, barrels, bolts, gas parts etc all from scratch? I thought all SA80 family weapons were reworked existing A1 stock, as Nottingham made its last rifle in '94 (IIRC) and no new ones have been made since.

The L98A2's just an L85A2 with a different trigger mech insert and the change lever taken off. There's absolutely no difference otherwise, except for the bodies being numbered to the TMHs.



Look closely there and you can actually see the old L85A2 and NSN marks that were painted over. The serial number tells you everything you need to know about "new production"!

off topic but when is the SA80 due for replacement is it 2025 or is it sooner and what weapons are looking the best contender.Apart from the H&K 416 and is the aug on the table.

Originally Posted by mattyw

off topic but when is the SA80 due for replacement is it 2025 or is it sooner and what weapons are looking the best contender.Apart from the H&K 416 and is the aug on the table.

I feking hope not.