No announcement yet.

Steyr Versus SA 80

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Is there any other armies in the world which use the SA80, but there are countries which use the Steyr- just an observation-.


    • #17
      I think Jamaica uses the SA80 in small numbers.
      "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."


      • #18
        You could be right.


        • #19
          It was the old issue insect repellant that melted the plastic on the SA80, the present issue stuff is the same as the US army's and doesn't melt the weapon.
          Prior preparation prevents piss poor performance.


          • #20
            From the little handling of the Steyr that you did get, Cal tanker, what did you think?

            SA-80 always had a bad rep but I have heard nothing but good things about the SA-80A2. Early days yet though and I have heard nothing about it during the Gulf War, which could be a good thing- there were plenty complaints about the boots!!!
            The LSW has been replaced by the Minimi however, something the Irish DOD should keep in mind when looking for the GPMG replacement at section level.


            • #21
              I have recently seen an article stating that FN is working on a 7.62 minimi. I do believe that 5.56 is not a powerful enough round in the squad auto wpn role.Further the Minimi is not all that much lighter than a GPMG (minimi with 200rd drum and gpmg with 50 round starter belt).
              When I breeze into that city, people gonna stoop and bow.
              All them women gonna make me, teach 'em what they don't know how


              • #22
                Anyone who seriously goes for the BA seems to get to fire the SA80, also many RDF members have used it with blanks for film purposes, odds are that a significant minority of members have fired it or handled it.

                Ex Pat.
                Isnt the Minimi's mechanism just a reduced MAG anyway? Surely a 7.62x51 Minimi would just be a refurnished MAG?
                "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke


                • #23
                  Never fired the sa 80 , heard it is crap. The facts supporting this are its constant upgradings and griping of soldiers. A lot of the early jammings were down to the use of propellent from only one factory in the prototypes. When production models reached line units they had rounds manufactured to different standards (a problem which also effected the m16a1 ) , the early British mags were a failure and the mod used U.S. m16 mags for a time.

                  The fact that only Britian uses the sa 80. Interestingly N.A.T.O. removed the sa80 from its exports lists, meaning new members cannot opt to arm their troops with them.( sad when the ultimate Warsaw Pact weapon the ak47/akm is now on the list. )
                  As for the sight, it would give a great view of the guy charging your fox hole as you try to clear that jam........
                  "take a look to the sky right before you die, its the last time you will"


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Come-quickly
                    Anyone who seriously goes for the BA seems to get to fire the SA80
                    What do you mean CQ? Do the BA give all potential recruits a "familiarisation day" for want of a better word? I've never heard of this before, very interesting. Do you know what else they "expose" them too? Is this after they sign up or is it further enticement, the "hard sell" to close the deal? Is it just for Reg British forces or do TA applicants get it too?

                    Just looking for info.

                    No-one, I think, is in my tree...


                    • #25
                      Firing the rifle does seem to happen on regimental visits, which take place at least once, the whole process takes six months to a year to get from initial interview, which is just for career guidance purposes anyway and the actual Regular Commissions or Admiralty boards (to Sandhurst and Lympstone respectively [god bring on thursday so I can afford to rejoin the gym]); Therefore unlike our own dear Defence forces they keep you busy with mock interviews and physicals as well as regimental visits so you don't forget what you've started..
                      "It is a general popular error to imagine that loudest complainers for the public to be the most anxious for it's welfare" Edmund Burke


                      • #26
                        Or maybe NATO removed the SA-80 because the production line had closed. I was very surprised to note that they re-opened it for the carbine version. (Which itself should say something: They're opening the thing for an entirely new mission which can be met by other weapons currently available. For example, US tankers have expressed a liking for the MP-5.. if the MOD has gone to that trouble or expense, they may have done something well.)

                        The official British AAR from the Iraqi war only ever mentions the A2 in a positive context. It states that the few problems with the A2 found in Afghanistan were ultimately removed by a correct cleaning regimen. (The original used to be about 15 pages long, before they recently 'soldierised' it)

                        The LSW is not being replaced by Minimi. Rather the Minimi is being brought in as a second team weapon: It seems that the British had a problem with the LSW being too accurate for the suppression role: With its abilities and sights, teams were using it more as a sniper rifle!

                        I remain unmoved by comments such as 'Rumour has it it sucks'. Many of these rumours can exist long after the initial problems they faced in earlier versions have been long gone. Examples were the M-16 and the Shilleleagh.

                        I really would only take note of people who have used the thing in the last eight months (in the desert!) and see what they have to say, particularly if they're new recruits and not so affected by the stigma of the earlier version.

                        The AUG seems to be a nice enough weapon. Bear in mind, I've only ever fired one bullpup, the M-17, and the general balance seems about the same. The forward hand grip I need to get used to as well. The sight seems basic, but looks like it'll do the job. I have not as much as handled an L-85, so I am not qualified to comment on its merits.

                        Driver, tracks, troops.... Drive and adjust!!


                        • #27
                          I have recently seen an article stating that FN is working on a 7.62 minimi.
                          Correct, here it is:

                          And here is the spiel:

                          "The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."


                          • #28
                            having spoken with aformer BA NCO on the subject he often felt that occasionally they would have been better off with bows and arrrows.

                            having fired the weapon does not make any body an expert. You have to have used it on exercise and operationally and have expierince of comparitive weapons to be able to declare to all and sundry that you are an expert.

                            In fairness to alot of younger BA guys they don't have anything to compare it with as they would never have used the likes of the SLR.

                            It is a true sign of professionalism when they make the best of what they have got....and continue to get the job done regardless of poor equipment.This is very true of our own DF for many years.
                            Covid 19 is not over's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe


                            • #29
                              Being a former British NCO implies that he has had no operational experience with the A2 either... Unless he retired in the last.. oh.. 8 months or so.

                              A lot of people who used to use an old weapon find a certain affinity with it over the new-fangled things which appear later. For example, SLR over SA-80. M-14 over M-16. Colt .45 over Beretta/SIG 9mm. And so on, simply because the old one worked, and they were happy with it: Anything different was automatically considered inferior. Believe it or not, I'm happier going into battle with the M-16 than the FAL, though I believe the FAL to be an outstanding rifle of greater reliability and punch.

                              Frankly, from what I'm reading, I'd rather an L-85A2 than the M-4 I'm going with.

                              Driver, tracks, troops.... Drive and adjust!!


                              • #30
                                California Tanker im not so sure about the merits of the SA-80 or whether they have fixed all of its problems. Yes there are a 1 or maybe 2 good components but I still belive its a flawed weapon and poor design.

                                I was talking to a friend who was in the OTC (officer training corps in Northern Ireland) about the weapon about a year and a half ago. They were issued with brand new SA-80's in their boxes with all the ties that come with them. I think it was after the major modificiations.

                                Any way, they still said that they had numerous problems with it, and spent most of the day trying to fix them. For example, zeroing the sight is a tedious task. There is 2 screws on each side which have to be loosened and then the others tightened and then the screws which were loosened first tightened again(sorry about all this i hope u follow). He was saying that it was a real pain in the ass, zeroing the sight.

                                The other thing he was saying that the weapon kept jaming and there was a great deal of cleaning to be done.

                                There were other bits and bobs that i cant remember but the jist of the conversation was that it wasnt though highly of.

                                This is only 1 persons experience and they could have well sorted it all out by now. However history will probably record the weapon as a failure, largely because of a poor (stupid?) design. It is after all 20 years old and they are still modifying it just to get it on a level with other weapons. The BA have served in numerous conflicts in its history and it has let them down.

                                Various components may have their merits but as a wepons platform its crap. If a solider needs a better sight, he can simply attached one on.