6.8 SPC Forums banner
1 - 20 of 84 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
.
This is a followup to the thread " Brits claim the 5.56 is too weak for combat"
but I thought it deserved a new thread, since they have made their choice.

Makes sense to me. It's available now and it works.

Other notable comment relative to the other thread: "Soldiers must be good shots to begin with, and take a training course, to be a sharpshooter, which is sort of "sniper lite." "

New sharpshooter rifle(US Made) for British Army

from janes
UK selects 7.62 mm Sharpshooter weapon for Afghan ops
Andrew White Jane's Land Reporter
London



UK forces are to receive a semi-automatic 7.62 mm x 51 mm 'sharpshooter' weapon to combat Taliban forces engaging beyond the maximum effective range of the 5.56 mm L85A2 assault rifle.

In a USD2.5 million deal the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has contracted Law Enforcement International (LEI) to supply 440 LM7 semi-automatic rifles.

The urgent operational requirement follows calls from troops on the ground for a weapon that can be comfortably patrolled with, can be rapidly initiated and provide an increased range for contacts out to 800 m.

To be redesignated the L129A1, the gas-operated weapon carries a 20-round magazine, is 945 mm long and weighs 5 kg. It will be manufactured by Lewis Machine & Tool Company in the United States, with deliveries expected to begin in early 2010.

Features of the weapon include a single-piece upper receiver and free-floating, quick-change barrels available in 305 mm, 406 mm and 508 mm. It has four Picatinny rails with a 540 mm top rail for night vision, thermal and image intensifying optics. Stock options include fixed or retractable versions.

Industry sources told Jane's that LEI beat competition including Heckler & Koch's HK417 (already supplied to specialist units within the MoD), FN Herstal's SCAR (Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle) and an offering from Sabre Defence Industries.

To date UK soldiers must complete a marksmanship course to become qualified as 'sharpshooters' and are regarded as being a grade below that of a sniper. Following the introduction of Accuracy International's (AI's) .338-cal L115A3 sniper rifle, sharpshooters have been armed with AI's outgoing 7.62 mm L96 rifle. However, the latter's bolt action does not make it a suitable option for a patrolling soldier.

With the majority of contacts occurring at either very close range or at ranges out to between 500 m and 900 m, the "only organic asset" available to responding UK forces in a small-arms capacity is the 7.62 mm General-Purpose Machine Gun, with MoD sources saying that "5.56 mm weapons lack the reach to engage the enemy at those ranges".

"The 5.56 mm is sufficiently lethal at the right range, but troops need 7.62 mm for longer ranges. We should be looking at higher performance rounds with higher lethality at longer range. Research is going to filter into user requirements for the soldier system lethality programme," one MoD source told Jane's .

Another article: http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20091228.aspx

Semi-Auto Sharpshooter Rifle

December 28, 2009: The British Army has adopted an U.S. (LMT) semi-automatic rifle as a "sharpshooter" weapon, designating it the L129A1. Weighing 11 pounds (5kg), the L129A1 7.62mm rifle has a 20 round magazine and an effective range of 800 meters. The weapon is 37 inches (945mm) long and equipped with rails for scopes and such. About one soldier per squad or platoon would be a sharpshooter, armed with an L129A1. Soldiers must be good shots to begin with, and take a training course, to be a sharpshooter, which is sort of "sniper lite." But while snipers concentrate on being hidden, as well as doing the job with one well aimed shot, the sharpshooter is mainly concerned with hitting the target with one shot at long ranges. This is essential in Afghanistan, where enemy fighters are often encountered at ranges the standard 5.56mm assault rifle has a hard time dealing with.

Semi-automatic rifles are often used as sniper rifles as well. And not just recycled M-14s. The L129A1 is very similar to the American SR25 sniper rifle, adopted by the U.S. NAVY SEALs over three years ago. This weapon is officially known as the Mk11 Sniper Rifle System (SRS).

The Mk11 is a 7.62mm weapon based on the M-16 design (created by retired USAF Colonel Stoner in the 1950s). About half the parts in the SR25 are interchangeable with those in the M-16. The Stoner sniper rifle achieves its high accuracy partly by using a 20 inch heavy floating barrel. The "floating" means that the barrel is attached only to the main body of the rifle to reduce resonance (which throws off accuracy.) The semi-automatic, 41 inch long rifle weighs 10.5 pounds without a scope and uses a 20 round magazine. This is considered the most accurate semi-automatic rifle in the world. It's popular with Special Forces and commandos because it allows a good shooter to take out a number of targets quickly and accurately. The commercial SR25 has a 24 inch barrel, but the navy wanted a shorter one for better use in urban warfare. The rifle was initially purchased for Navy SEALS and marines, but is now used by snipers in all the services, including the navys new infantry force.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,772 Posts
I hope that they have better luck with thier semi auto 762 rifles then we have had with ours.... every report I have read is it isnt reliable for normal combat ops.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,769 Posts
Interesting.

Seems like a good choice to adapt to changing conditions.

It "beat" the HK 417 and FN SCAR MK-17. I wonder if that was just on price/value.


Adam - what has been the general cause of the reliability problems?

Is that with the SASS and SR-25?

Same basic design as AR-15, what is causing the difference in reliability?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,772 Posts
From what I gather the rifle just wasn't designed to fire that many rounds per day... Either way there is a reason the services are still using the bolt guns for the 762.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,565 Posts
DocGKR has posted here before that the M110's have had issues in the field. The M110 issues have come up on the forum a few times in the past. Using the M110 like you would an M4 does not work out too well. Civillians at the rifle range or hunting probably would never notice a difference, but high volume firefights revealed some issues IIRC.

From what I gather the rifle just wasn't designed to fire that many rounds per day... Either way there is a reason the services are still using the bolt guns for the 762.
That's what I recall.

I would be interested to know the functioning differences if any between the M110 and the LMT rifle besides the quick change barrel.

The selfish side of me is curious if LMT will offer these to the public?? :a08:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited)
Either way there is a reason the services are still using the bolt guns for the 762.
Cost might be part of that...just guessing though.

Since this is a DM rifle vs. a pure sniper rifle, it COULD be designed with a lean toward a higher rate of fire and enhanced reliability trading off a bit of extreme accuracy. That would make sense in the role it is designed for.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,772 Posts
They probably do ART but they are going to be pricey, I am glad they are issuing thier troops more SDM type rifles, and doing more then just issuing thier guys a accuraized A4 and telling them to use MK262 ammo like some US units are doing... I just wonder what optic choices they will use and how it will effect the guys on the ground when they need to use the rifle for more personal situations. I also wonder how much it will effect them being target since the signature of the AR10 will be a lot different then the current issued rifle.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,772 Posts
Cost might be part of that...just guessing though.
it may be a small part but I know the Army was planning on switching all of thier bolt rifles over to SR25's and I dont think they are anymore after using the rifles in the field.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,772 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
interesting read after using my google fu...
http://shadowspear.com/vb/archive/index.php/t-10682.html

Edit: hopefully as more of these rifles are fielded we will get a good idea what is causing any issues they may or may not be having.
Good info...seems like that guy would approve of the Brit's choice. I'm surprised at the 1.5-2 MOA though on the SR-25. I'd be pissed if I paid the lag tab on one and that was all I got. Maybe it was the ammo, but you'd assume that was the ammo it would be designed to shoot.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,772 Posts
M118LR is all the US snipers are issued so the ammo shouldnt be the issue.....
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,565 Posts
This is definitely a good rifle to have as a DMR. I still think it's very high profile for the British since they carry SA80/L85 bullpups. This long black rifle would stick out like a bolt gun. It is lighter and easier to pack around than their AI bolt guns though.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
2,285 Posts
.
This is a followup to the thread " Brits claim the 5.56 is too weak for combat"
but I thought it deserved a new thread, since they have made their choice.

Makes sense to me. It's available now and it works.
Yes indeed. It's considerably faster and easier to field a new rifle that fires 7.62 NATO ammo, than it is to get a new cartridge (such as 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel) adopted.

Comments that I found of interest, and relevant to the other thread:
The urgent operational requirement follows calls from troops on the ground for a weapon that can be comfortably patrolled with, can be rapidly initiated and provide an increased range for contacts out to 800 m.

With the majority of contacts occurring at either very close range or at ranges out to between 500 m and 900 m, the "only organic asset" available to responding UK forces in a small-arms capacity is the 7.62 mm General-Purpose Machine Gun, with MoD sources saying that "5.56 mm weapons lack the reach to engage the enemy at those ranges".

"The 5.56 mm is sufficiently lethal at the right range, but troops need 7.62 mm for longer ranges. We should be looking at higher performance rounds with higher lethality at longer range. Research is going to filter into user requirements for the soldier system lethality programme," one MoD source told Jane's .
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,379 Posts
I would love to know how many of those 900 m contacts were metered for distance... :a31: I think we all agree the ballistics of the 5.56 are not necessarily good for distance. (BTW Stan, I tripped across one credible source today stating a confirmed kill with 5.56 by a sniper with a rack grade rifle at 850 m today).

Anyway, let's hope they come up with a better answer than having all the troops lugging 7.62 ammo around. They get surly humping a full combat load of it around... :a20:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Yeah and was interesting too: " Any normal Iraqi could not tell the difference between the 25 and the M16 service rifle."

I would think this would be doubly true for an Afghan. It would stick out as different in a group of Brit's, but I think it would just look like an a run of the mill M-16 to them. The scope wouldn't, but there is nothing you can do about that.
 
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top