Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Bloke on the Range videos

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Probably!

I asked a WW2 armourer how they fixed No1/4 receivers where the bolt head was jumping the rail. Was it gauged and then cast?

"No. We put an axe head in the mag slot and hit it with a lump hammer. That bent the rail back into contact."

And, what happens if you twist the receiver during rebarrelling? Was it gauged and then cast, etc?

"No, you just put a bar through the receiver and twist it back the other way."


Sadly, the chap passed away before I could complete my gunsmithing apprenticeship....
Well sometimes the agricultural approach is all that's needed. If you want a more recent parallel, torqueing up of barrels on SA80 was always, "wazz it round till the expensive Torque wrench goes 'click', and if the barrel gas block isn't vertical then graunch it round until it is".
 

tiv

LE
Well sometimes the agricultural approach is all that's needed. If you want a more recent parallel, torqueing up of barrels on SA80 was always, "wazz it round till the expensive Torque wrench goes 'click', and if the barrel gas block isn't vertical then graunch it round until it is".
At Enfield an intermittent accuracy problem with the L1 was traced to just such an approach to fitting the flash eliminator if the right spacer ring was not fitted. Graunching it up was causing the flash eliminator to deform sufficient to deflect the bullet and a new alignment gauge was introduced to check for misalignment.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
At Enfield an intermittent accuracy problem with the L1 was traced to just such an approach to fitting the flash eliminator if the right spacer ring was not fitted. Graunching it up was causing the flash eliminator to deform sufficient to deflect the bullet and a new alignment gauge was introduced to check for misalignment.
I well remember old Mr Bilborough in the Small Arms Wing at Bordon telling me that on my Basic course when I asked him what was the point of 21 different sized spacers for the bloody flash eliminator sir?

With the L85, the five (or eight?) different thickness breeching washers took all the deformation between the barrel and the breech, and there was no problem, so long as the cartridge headspace was OK. One of the few occasions where using CHS gauges was worthwhile....
 

HE117

LE
Purely for information. I have tucked away in my box of bits in the attic a fired 9mm blank plastic round. It's red.
... and an abomination in the face of the NATO STANAG ammunition marking scheme Sir!
 

HE117

LE
Given that the LAW80 was a “wooden” round, why would that have been a problem?
..because at the end of the day, all ammunition and components have to be dealt with, preferably safely. Having at least some idea of what a round of ammunition is likely to do could literally be the difference between life and death..

The concept of a "wooden round" is a salesman's con IMHO. At some point, somebody, somewhere has to deal with components or sub components of these devices, and for folk to assume they do not need marking and documentation is bordering on criminal. The ability of the common soldiery (.. and officeiery!) to feck about with ammunition knows no bounds...

From a disposal point of view, 94s were a nightmare. Apart from the dodgy main armament, the fired launchers could quite easily contain unfired spotter rounds ( as a USAF EOD bod found to his cost in Kuwait!). You should NEVER mark up explosive items in a way that could cause confusion with inert ones..

The book says that "silver bullets" are inert, so for some idiot to put live silver bullets in a weapon system should be a hanging offence...

... and breathe!
 
Last edited:

HE117

LE
I'll dig it out over the weekend and post a pic :)
You're OK.. I've seen them!

...still an abomination!
... like 16 bore that is not blue, or 20 bore that is not yellow!
DON'T get me started on snap caps!
 
Last edited:
I've had several ex mil comments like this, clearly misremembering ranges...

1612102888745.png
 
Just waiting for the import paperwork to come through, but I may have acquired a 90's designed AR18-derived bullpup with a half-decent control layout :razz:

1612114387420.png
 
Designed by a bloke who used to work on Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons?
Actually mostly the work of the same dude that did the Leader T2, and you can see a lot of the eye for production engineering in it, cos it's a drawn aluminium tube as a receiver. Bushmaster then modified the design to suit what they were already producing, so a lot of the bits are AR15, including the bolt head. But that see-through scope rail is as 90's as the music press narrative of rivalry between Blur and Oasis...
 
Actually mostly the work of the same dude that did the Leader T2, and you can see a lot of the eye for production engineering in it, cos it's a drawn aluminium tube as a receiver. Bushmaster then modified the design to suit what they were already producing, so a lot of the bits are AR15, including the bolt head. But that see-through scope rail is as 90's as the music press narrative of rivalry between Blur and Oasis...
As a very minor nit-pick I think it's an extruded receiver rather than drawn. With extrusion you force aluminium through a die like toothpaste out of a tube, and you get a long tube or form which you can then cut to length as required. A lot of long complex bits of aluminium are formed this way. With drawing you take a sheet of aluminium and stretch it between two halves of a die into the shape that you want.

If I'm telling my grandmother how to suck eggs, then I apologise, but I wanted to point out that the use of extrusion technology really shows some serious and clever effort when designing for manufacture using modern processes. I saw an interview with the designer of the Leader T2 (I can't recall his name) and I was very impressed with what he had to say about the design from a manufacturing standpoint.

I don't know how well the rifle performs in practice, as a lot of that will be down to details plus specific price and functionality trade offs. In terms of manufacturing technology however, a combination of extrusion and plastic injection moulding are much more advanced and more modern than either stamping (as in the AR-18 ) or casting/forging (as in the AR-15). Your new rifle may have a retro look, but in terms of manufacturing technology it looks to be quite advanced. I'm looking forward to seeing your view on it when you get your hands on it. It probably needs to be looked at in terms of how it was made as well as just how it shoots.
 

Funbaby

Old-Salt
I see Bushmaster M17s pop up for sale over here for around 1000 bucks; not too spendy and not on the Roberti Roos naughty list.

I bet they get hot fast with all that lovely aluminum and I imagine the supply of replacement parts is pretty limited.

Still, slightly jealous.
 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top