L85 rifle new manufacture receivers?

Evening all, I was chatting to someone today who said that HK had manufactured a batch of new replacement receivers for the L85A2.

I would have thought that with the small size of the Army now, there would be an excess of stored L85A2's to bring up to current standard and issue without having to back engineer new receivers (with the associated expense) for worn out rifles.

If this is the case, it would seem to confirm the MOD intend to invest in and retain the L85A2 in service for a good while yet.

It depends on what YOU call receivers. Is that the upper receiver that is maintained for normal replacement? Or do you mean the lower trigger mech housing that isn't made for normal maintenance purposes? I don't know the answer officially of course but it all makes sense to me. There were xxx,xxx rifles made for an army of 120,000 at the time PLUS the Navy and RAF since 1986, 30 years don't forget. There have been a few wars and general fair wear and tear since '86 taking the numbers down considerably. So to maintain the was reserve stock it seems sensible to keep stockpiles up. And if that means building more rifles then so be it.

I don't know what you have heard about the L85A2 rifle. While most of the slagging-off of the A1 was justified - within the bounds of sensibility, there are/have been little to complain about with the A2 rifle.

Afternoon Peter,

So, 320,000 ish A1's produced, (200,000 rebuilt to A2 spec, unless more have subsequently been contacted for?? ) and as you quite rightly say, taking 30 years of hard service into account, that must have reduced the count somewhat.

The guy did tell me that the new manufacture receivers are marked A3 to differentiate the production differences apparently. Not something I have heard of, but it seems plausible enough.

I suppose with a company like HK to support and manufacture replacement Receivers, TMH's, barrels etc the A2 could remain in service for many years yet ... I wonder if HK will embark on a modern day FTR program for the A2 at some point. After all, its been quite a while (and a few long wars) since the A2 was introduced.

No point replacing the rifle until a new NATO calibre has been selected, some point after 2025 would be my guess.

John, Peter beat me to it, but would say come 2025 we will be getting something different...... And possibly similar to what we should of got in the late 80's

Afternoon Geoff,

I wonder if we will see a calibre shift by then, I suppose its up to the Americans to make that decision and we all follow along. There are some hugely promising new designs out there, including a few very interesting bull-pubs, the Desert Tech MDR for instance, with its easy change calibres seems to me to offer enormous development potential and would seem a natural fit for a military used to the bull pup concept.

All flight of fancy stuff I am sure, but I would love to see licence manufacture here in the UK too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I wonder if we will see a calibre shift by then,

---

It's hard to say, everyone in and outside the industry wants to tout their pet caliber as the new "wonder drug" for service ammunition, however as retired player in the field so to speak, I have some observations.

1. Any standard infantry caliber must be easily fed by both box magazines and linked belts, the day the LMG regresses to 30 round box magazines is the day the gunner becomes ineffective.

2. Ballistic penetration, the proliferation of first rate trauma plate based armour has rendered most sub-.50 cal small-arms less, to completely ineffective regardless of contact distance. Has everyone seen the plated armour provided to the local armies in Iraq and Afghanistan? If that equipment is in their hands, it is readily available to the "bad guys" as well. It was sporadically seen in the field a decade ago, we will see more of it as conflict progresses. Ceramic based armour offers single and in my observation, sometimes multi-strike protection, and the stuff works even against the touted .30 caliber battle rifle rounds. Depending on placement, being shot can basically be an irritation, compared to the life ender it was in conflicts past.

This video is a good representation:

https://youtu.be/tMMSA3opBk4

The world has seen a number of combat calibers since the end of WW2, and with the standardized use of of 5.56mm and 7.62 NATO for over 60 years, adoption of a new caliber would have to offer a vast performance improvement to bother to rework the entire system. Looking at the Warsaw countries, they did the same, 7.62x54R held for over 100 years, and 7.62x39mm replaced with 5.45x39mm after 30 years, military cartridge development has somewhat hit a plateau, and is largely good enough.

I liken the whole affair to suggesting that all military vehicles should not run on Diesel any longer (to simplify) but should all be switched run on corn based alcohols because it offers better cold starting characteristics. While the alcohol may offer better cold start, that alone is not enough benefit to launch a NATO wide shift in fuel use.

Wise words again from Sentryduty and Big Duke. But to be honest, the L85A2 was as good as anything else. I was there during the late UK trials and for the first of the 'new A2 rifles coming in. Very little to complain about. You can add stuff until the cows come home but under the skin it was good with little to say against it. I don't feel that I am permitted to say other things.

I've not heard of an A3 variant and I don't see why they would need to increment the model number because of new production. I suspect it's the bodies that are being new made but these have been in production for quite a while. When I worked in the armoury we probably changed 1 or 2 a month because of squashed sides or the locking pin hole was so elongated the ring fell out. I issued out about 370 over the last week and all were pretty tidy. 1 or 2 were looking a little tired but only cosmetically. The biggest problem we have tends to be misuse by the troops, kicking one across the floor to move it because your to lazy to pick it up is disrespectful. That individual will think twice before doing it again!!

Thanks for your insight into this Britplumber, I thought a change in model number seemed plausable, but perhaps slightly odd unless there were significant production differences. Interested to know who manufactures the new bodies, I assume it's HK??

I could say more but what I learned commercially regarding this might be sensitive. It's all to do with design authority and rights...........

Thanks Peter, understood. It must start to become a real headache keeping a primary issue service Firearm viable once the OEM has long gone.

Especially when a healthy reserve needs to be maintained for contingency use as well as day to day issue. No point calling up the reserves in an emergency, if there's nothing to equip them with after all.

This is the problem with today's military. There's to much integration between industry and the MOD. With out mentioning names, the biggest defence company in the UK has far to much input and control and now dictates the way we operate. In my opinion this now limits what we can do.

Oh Brit Plumber............ How right you are. Not for me to say or suggest but sometimes, it seems as though the lunatics were running the asylum

At least we won't be part of the EU Army Idea that was lurking in the realms of the EU Federal Government..........

Can you imagine the amount of argument and debate between member states there would be if an E.U. army was ever created and it was considered to deploy it anywhere?

There was almost an EU Army during the Bosnia unpleasantness where the word 'war' was forbidden! Prompting one friend of mine to look wearily over his glasses during a morning briefing to ask in despair '......before we go to spread the word to the troops and venture forth to fight the good fight........ who the xxxx is running the show*...... the EU, NATO or the UN......' The ice cold reply that answered '.......Stay behind Capt XXXX and I'll see if I can make it a tad clearer for you......' said it all. He never did quite reveal what he was told

* Running the show = What is our order of battle/chain of command

Could also depend on who was supplying the rat packs....... the full breakfast doesn't appear that much anymore, wonder if we were heading for the continental breakfast one.

Do the ration packs still contain the holy grail Oatmeal blocks? They've been in the rations since 1952

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Do the ration packs still contain the holy grail Oatmeal blocks? They've been in the rations since 1952

---

Peter, can't say I've come across them, but still contain Biscuit Browns......... last ones I had the other week were poor, out again soon......tuna pasta isn't too bad and the Chicken biryani keeps you regular..........

And those BISCUITS, AB which someone told me stood for Axxx Blocking! Those 'dead fly' biscuits were nice too. I think that they were called Garibaldi

Funny, I always thought the MRE's were bad. Designed that way to create a special breed of mean "***" soldier.

Does the British Army still have petrol cookers?

Best bit of kit ever! :thup::thup:

I've seen plenty of petrol cookers for sale as surplus but don't know if it's something that's still used by the British Army; personally I wouldn't be brave enough to actually light one myself.

When the British Army was operating in Bosnia, I seem to recall hearing on the news, that a tracked armoured personnel carrier was not used as this would appear heavy handed and so a wheeled monstrosity (Saxon?) was used instead.

As Geoff said, at least we won't be waisting scarce MOD resources on yet another great EU wrong turn!

Astonished that the French and Germans are prepared to commit their thinly spread resources to such a pointless duplication of NATO structure.

The German military in particular is in a terrible under resourced state these days, a faint shadow of its cold war composition!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

I've seen plenty of petrol cookers for sale as surplus but don't know if it's something that's still used by the British Army; personally I wouldn't be brave enough to actually light one myself.

---

You don’t have to use petrol. They are like an M1 tank and will also work with Kerosene (what you call paraffin), more or less the same as jet fuel or even diesel.

If you are lucky enough to be around some oil wells, it will burn natural gas condensate, sometimes called "casing head gasoline” or " natural gasoline." Some condensates are odorless and others stink of sulfur, like the exhaust of a Tijuana taxi... so I am told.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

The German military in particular is in a terrible under resourced state these days, a faint shadow of its cold war composition!

---

AND THIS IS A BAD THING?????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

don't know if it's something that's still used by the British Army

---

No.... but Ration Packs still issued with a hexamine cooker, but a lot take or use there own stove, the big thing at present is the jet boil cooker, looks a good bit of kit but your paying for the name, I've just bought a poor mans version for £5.00 from China or Taiwan, yet to try it but will post some pics.

No petrol cookers are not used now. They couldn't be operated successfully with unleaded fuel due to seal and leakage problems and the very limited availability of petrol in vehicles now. Hexamine cookers are always a good standby. And I have a couple of new/still wrapped for emergency use if needed. Slow or what......... by the time you get a cup of tea or coffee, the power would have come back on!

Geoff and his pals have the idea. Buy your own simple gas cooker. But, alas, if it's bitter cold, they're crap! Geoff will have learned early on, like Tankie and Skippy, the REME don't like the cold and wet. As we used to say '.........anyone can live like a cxxx'

Got to love wondering threads, we have gone from new manufacture L85 bodies, to ration packs and cooking in the field:rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

But to be honest, the L85A2 was as good as anything else.

---

If nothing else Peter, I do admire your blind patriotism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

Got to love wondering threads, we have gone from new manufacture L85 bodies, to ration packs and cooking in the field:rofl:

---

I know John, totally out of character, but at least it comes with pics, just a few below showing the old petrol cooker which was only for camping grade fuel, low grade UK petrol, says not to use USA or Canadian fuel ? The Hexi cooker and the latest ( none issue ) yet to test it but seen them in action and they are quick,

The Hexi cooker shows the base that the metal cup for the 58 Patt water bottle fits, the last pic shows the more modern version of gas cooker, folds away into a 3" x 2" x 1.5" box.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2rkrkwjh-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tfrb1aaa-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...qevslxus-1.jpg

Its alright for some Geoff, out in the sunshine, cans of beer and looking for bargains (good luck with the bike parts hunt), stuck in my bloody office!:lol:

Did you catch up with Tankie, give Mike my best mate..

Thats an empty from the early hours, if i'd have known that the wild west was not too far from Abergavenny I would of dropped in....................... picked up some kids chairs and tables for the boss who got them off ebay..... I've restricted it now to a 50mile radius, my mistake as I thought it was before Hereford.

Not heard from Mike as yet, sent him a PM last week also.

Hi Brent (thread 30). Not blind patriotism from me I have to say in my defence. I've fired a zillion SA80's of all sorts and can tell you some horror stories of the A1 rifle. But knew of some of the engineering trials and tests that were taking place at Shrivenham and involving another member of this forum whom I'm not at liberty to name/discuss. I should add that a lot, if not MOST of the re-design into the A2 was done there. H&K put everything into one tidy neat package and titivated some of the metallurgy. Incidentally, the conversion process wasn't difficult and ABRO (the new name for the big civilianised REME workshops) put in a bid to carry out the conversion process - and cheaper too.

I was invited to the very first field firing trials of the A2 rifle and at a prior meeting told the trials board people what my previous experience was. When you are an older 'junior' ranking Officer, you can do this without mincing words! But those few days firing trials converted me. I used to debrief men returning from ops during a relaxed group discussion(s) and they didn't really have or say much to complain about. Alas, they DID complain about the LSW variant! But that was soon to be slowly , er......... Anyway! Their greatest praise, without any shadow of doubt, was reserved for the GPMG.

I was often asked whether my views of the SA80/L85A2 were a case of 'well, he's got to say that.....' or singing the party line. But no. It was because the A2 rifle was as good as it gets. That's an honest answer. I think the desert cleaning regime should be totally dry and there are some other desert warfare things that could be done but that's only my opinion. As someone whispered into my ear just before I retired '......... we won't be fighting there again!' (the desert). Let's see.

So how much of the A2 version of the SA80 rifle was/is new parts and how much of the old A1 version of the SA80 was modified/reconditioned and then put into the A2, SA80?

It'd take too long to detail the new parts, modified standard parts and the remaining original parts is the short answer. Unless anyone wants to try. Then there's the original parts and the pre-A2 upgraded parts and the .................

What I'm getting at is that the A2 rifle, when it first came out, wasn't a completely brand new rifle in that at least some of the parts it contained came from the A1 rifle?

Among the new parts, bolt assembly, extractor assembly, hammer, FP, gas cylinder and plug, new improved springs throughout and magazine.

Many mods and tweaks to the original receiver (don't know about the TMH).

Further changes incorporated, piccatiny adaptor rail to fit new optics, railed forend etc

Directed feed, enlarged ejection opening, breech locking etc etc..........

Is it a hard fact that HK are remanufacturing L85A2's?

If it isn't, then I can't see why it might be true, for one simple reason - 21,707 L98A1 Cadet rifles were originally produced, and X amount (the suggestion is around 15,000) of reserve L85A2's were converted to L98A2's and reissued to Cadets as self loading rifles.

Why then, if stocks of L85A2's in reserve were short, would 15,000 or more of them be converted to L98A2's for Cadets. I just can't see that would have happened.

Yes........ but the numbers game doesn't work in this case David because those Cadet GP L98A1 single shot, straight pull rifles were reworked into L85 or L86 A2's. It simply means that the quantities remain the same (except for weeding out those 85's, 86's and 98's A1's fit only for scrap of course). It means that now, there are three major but VERY similar and simply converted* variants. The L85 A2 the L98A2 which is simply a simple change* semi auto L85 and the LSW L86 version
* one axis pin and one disconnector or interceptor sear. You don't even need to remove the trigger mech to change it/them either!

As one mentioned to me during the L98A2 trial. '.....it means that there are XX,XXX 'nearly' L85 rifles spread throughout the Country instead of being in Ordnance stores where we would be charged storeage'.

Peter
You are correct, the overall numbers stay the same - EXCEPT that the L98A1's allegedly went back into store and L85A2's were modified into L98A2's, so the MoD would be left with the remnants of the 21,707 L98A1's that couldn't be readily converted to L85/98A2's, because they have no ported barrel/gas block/gas parts in?

It might be that just certain now scarce parts have been remanufactured by HK - I would have thought that a lot of L85A2's would have shot out barrels long ago that were replaced from surplus stock (even L86A2's, if someone wanted to persevere with shooting them! :D).

Regarding petrol cookers. The new ones run on diesel. The No12 looks and functions the same as the old petrol No2.

That's amazing, cookers that run on diesel. Who'd have thought that! Are they still serviced/maintained by the Armourers PB? I suppose that while generation ago the food and hot tea always had a petrolly pong about it, now it's all got a slightly dieselly pong about it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David TS

Peter
You are correct, the overall numbers stay the same - EXCEPT that the L98A1's allegedly went back into store and L85A2's were modified into L98A2's, so the MoD would be left with the remnants of the 21,707 L98A1's that couldn't be readily converted to L85/98A2's, because they have no ported barrel/gas block/gas parts in?

It might be that just certain now scarce parts have been remanufactured by HK - I would have thought that a lot of L85A2's would have shot out barrels long ago that were replaced from surplus stock (even L86A2's, if someone wanted to persevere with shooting them! ).

---

Parker Hale manufactured L1A1 barrel / Gas blocks assemblies, cocking handles etc (on former Enfield machinery I think) to keep the veteran L1 in service through the 1980's and into the 90's. It stands to reason someone (probably HK) must be manufacturing replacement barrels for the L85A2 by now, after all the base rifle has been in service for 25 plus years and is looking at a fair few years of service yet.

Peter, the slop Jockeys are supposed to look after them but i always ended up servicing them. Same goes with the No5 Burners, which now run only on Gas.

Only H&K make parts for the L85A2 now as they are the design authority for what I am going to describe as 'certain aspects' of the rifle.

Has H&K inherited all the various original form tools and jigs etc etc necessary to manufacture the new main receivers for the SA80 or are they going to the expense of producing all new tooling?

Did H&K simply take over the Nottingham factory or did they take they take the business back to Germany?

As far as I know, all engineering work is undertaken in Germany. I was talking about this with an engineer friend of mine the other day, he said with modern manufacturing systems and rapid prototyping, its never been easier (note easier not easy) to build replacement component parts.

I doubt very much any of the old machinery is being employed for the task.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brit plumber

Did H&K simply take over the Nottingham factory or did they take they take the business back to Germany?

---

I was always under the impression they did take over, there was some tree huggers, greenies, veggies who were trying to get them out of Nottingham due to the nature of there business.......... some kind of movement if you google it, maybe this lot need to read the paper and watch the news at times and see that the terrorist is on our doorstep and sticks and stones won't stop them.

No, but hurling Pork Chops at them Might!...........:madsmile:

Feel free to throw pork chops in my direction Mike, just don't throw the apple sauce..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

Feel free to throw pork chops in my direction Mike, just don't throw the apple sauce..

---

Oh! Mr.Clark. You are a caution!.....:D

A quick question on the L85A2: Why if the bugs were worked out does the UK issue the L119A1 or other AR based rifles to the SAS, SBS and other special folks?

Not doubting the L85 has been fixed , just wondering why it seem that every special forces group seem to have the need to issue something besides the regular kit.

For example the 75th Ranger regiment in the US issues the Glock 19, which is not a standard issue pistol. They do it because it is smaller than the M9, (why not the sig228/9/M11 then?)

In any case I am wondering why that might be n the UK case?

Also is the SUIT sight still the day optic of issue or has something better come along?

Why do special forces want and use different weapons? Everyone else in the Field Army has been asking the same question since pontius was a pilot

The SUIT sight is now obsolete.

Thread 51. H&K closed the place down because their last work, the final tranche of L85's had dried up. To keep the old Pattern Room there would have meant the MoD Police staying on site costing zillions. So they closed it down and sold-up.

Regarding L85A2 Sights. The SUSAT Sight is being replaced by a version of the Elcan Spectre. ACOG Sights were used in Afghanistan.

The SA80 ACOG sights........ Thereby hangs another tale....... It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

The SA80 ACOG sights........ Thereby hangs another tale....... It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face..........

---

How’s that, Peter? :confused:

All to do with bloody minded intransigence, and letting an amateur loose in the procurement world and........ Not for public consumption I'm afraid

And, lets face it Heckle and Jeckle know a thing or two about sheet-metal pressing and barrel making.

We had little "petrol" cookers that were supposed to used to make the contents of the famous "Ten Man" ration pack "edible"

Pump them up like an old-time plumber's blowtorch or "pressure lantern" and they got hot REALLY fast.

Then, all of a sudden (ish) they were a problem. EVERYTHING started being run on DIESEL fuel.

You could huff and puff as much as you liked, but those little stoves WOULD NOT work with that stuff.

Next thing, the "fashionable" Digger was sporting a variety of Gucci, camping-store-bought, gas cookers which may just be a bit of a liability on the two-way rifle range.

The good old Hexamine solid-fuel cooker still works fine; even finer if you have friends in low places (Assault Pioneers, Engineers) who have C4 to spare. It burns VERY hot, makes a brew REALLY FAST, but also burns the bottom out of the flimsy, folded tin-plate stoves VERY fast. Was always advised to NEVER douse burning C4 by tipping it on the ground and stamping a big boot on it.

Boiling your billy with C4! :super:

C4 = Brings a new meaning to the term: 'Brewing up'!........;)

Hexamine is, basically, seriously "de-rated" explosive, apparently related to RDX, which may explain its heat-generating capacity.

The early Oz stuff was made at the old Explosives Factory, Maribyrnong. Later production seems to have come from ADI St. Marys.

Amusingly enough, one of my later-serving contacts tells me there was some supplied by the wonderfully-named, "Far Side Marketing" (Gary Larson joke?), in Turvey, Bedford, England, with the actual manufacturer not stated,.

Full name: Hexamethylene Tetramine. U.N. No. 1328.

It is interesting stuff as, when it burns there is NO liquid phase; straight from solid to gas. This makes it "relatively safe" in field use.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz

Hexamine is, basically, seriously "de-rated" explosive, apparently related to RDX, which may explain its heat-generating capacity.

---

I still have a package of Hexi tabs left over from the transition period from Hexi, to flameless heaters. While you can't really make a hot drink with a flameless heater, they do cook a ration meal very fast, and they can build an amusing "bomb" when stuffed into a discarded water bottle and allowed to build bursting pressure. Always a fun time to irritate the Sergeant-Major in the Bivi site with random explosions at all hours.

Last time I used a hexi cooker was on excercise on mount pleasant airfield. The wind was that strong it blew them out so I put it in a sheltered area around the side of 1435 flights building. What I didn't know was that the block work foundation was sealed with tar. The H83 and corned beef hash got hot very quickly. I was never asked to cook again.

The one downside to Hexi Blocks when burning them. Is they make an awful Mess on the base of the cooking vessel! :mad: It's a bugger to get off! :madsmile: