Avoiding SA 80

uk 75

uk 75

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
27 September 2006
Messages
5,744
Reaction score
5,633
I found a weird 80s BBC series online called "The Old Men at the Zoo". It is seriously weird even by BBC standards.
Set in "the near future" an international crisis forces London Zoo to ask the Army to destroy its dangerous predators (worth a thread on its own). Infantry are shown terminating them with Sterling manufactured Armalites.
This got me thinking. Might the whole sorry SA80 saga have been avoided if this weapon or even US M16s had been bought instead?
 
Sure, the timing would be right - Sterling Armaments started producing AR-18 5 years before the L85 was approved for service. Over time, I would image this Sterling service rifle evolving along the same lines as the AR-18-inspired Howa Type 89 - so, first fore-grip rails adopted; later, polymer furniture and FN SCAR-influenced adjustable rear stock (to deal with body armour).

An alternative scenario would be extending XL80 development time - sufficient long to thoroughly work out the bugs - before launching L85 production.
 
Just pay the freaking AR18 license fee, instead of having engineers that have never designed a rifle in their lives muddle through and have it built at a place that will be closed at the end of production (so nobody gives a damn about quality)...

Presto.

SA80 actually works from the beginning. Now, that SUSAT optic on top is still a boat anchor, but that can be fixed later.
 
uk 75 said:
This got me thinking
Click to expand...
Steady now!
uk 75 said:
Might the whole sorry SA80 saga have been avoided if this weapon or even US M16s had been bought instead?
Click to expand...
Sterling even knocked up a bulpup out if AR-18 parts. In part as a joke in part as criticism and part to make the point they had the knowledge of this type of rifle system (AR-18). While the Government's favoured didn't.
There's several Forgotten Weapons episodes on this.

There's nothing wrong in principle with a AR-18 system driven by a short stroke gas system.
Nothing wrong with the concept of the bulpup rifle.
Nothing wrong with the idea of stamped metal elements to the rifle.
We might criticise the use of plastic. But it was becoming the trend.

So it's only in the specific details that the SA-80 is worthy of criticism as is the details of it's manufacturing.
 
Last edited:
Another weird film with a rifle the Army could have used is Lifeforce from 1984.
Soldiers are shown using the Steyr AUG.
 
zen said:
Steady now!

Sterling even knocked up a bulpup out if AR-18 parts. In part as a joke in part as criticism and part to make the point they had the knowledge of this type of rifle system (AR-18). While the Government's favoured didn't.
There's several Forgotten Weapons episodes on this.

There's nothing wrong in principle with a AR-18 system driven by a short stroke gas system.
Nothing wrong with the concept of the bulpup rifle.
Nothing wrong with the idea of stamped metal elements to the rifle.
We might criticise the use of plastic. But it was becoming the trend.

So it's only in the specific details that the SA-80 is worthy of criticism as is the details of it's manufacturing.
Click to expand...
Their problem was too many non-gunsmiths messing with components that they did not understand.
 
riggerrob said:
Their problem was too many non-gunsmiths messing with components that they did not understand.
Click to expand...
Jim Sullivan, who was called in at great expense to try to fix the SA80, had words for the level of skill involved in the design.

It wasn't pretty.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom