It Followed Me Home From Bisley

[Simon]

There's no two ways about it, it does look like a certain part of a Dogs anatomy on top of my L42.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Peter Laidler]

What sort/manufacturer is it? Is that an L39 fore-end?

[browningautorifle]

I always hated those big night sights on top of a rifle. They look and handle awkward and were marginally effective...

[Bruce_in_Oz]

The early passive night-sights were, indeed, bulky and heavy.

However, they provided an enormous advantage in the extension of "office hours" on the battlefield.

Even just used for observation, they were, and still are, extremely valuable. Even if you eat carrots until your skin turns orange, you will never see as well as with this equipment.

The issue of concealing the muzzle-flash seems to have come late to a lot of folk; cut loose at the effective range of these early devices on a rifle with a bare muzzle, and a couple of things will happen:

The muzzle flash will temporarily "flare out" the image-intensifier elements, thus rendering follow-up a bit dubious. The flash and accompanying blast will be fairly obvious to even the most casual observer.

The US M-21 with the old Sionics muffler was very effective as the "can" disrupted and disguised the flash AND the blast. The idea is to seriously degrade the ability to locate a firer via the old "crack and thump" method. With standard ball ammo there is no disguising the "crack", but if the "thump" form the firing point is "scrambled" by the can, things get very tricky.

If you are shooting in "open woodlands", the multiple echoes of the supersonic "crack" off the trees simply adds to the confusion, especially if the muzzle-blast is diffused.

Note that there is a "muffler" kit for the Accuracy International beasties; the tactical requirement has not gone away.

[browningautorifle]

The early passive night-sights were, indeed, bulky and heavy.

I know, I carried them. I'm not speaking of visuals here. Yes, the were nice if they worked, which was only some of them some of the time. The new NVG and such are no comparison...

[Simon]

Don't know what the model of the NV sight is Peter. I guess it is the product of a NATO aligned Country though as I mounted straight onto the IWS bracket.

[Peter Laidler]

We didn't have those IIW's so far as I recall. Just the Dutch Oude-de-Delft generally used on the L:34 and the R-P/SS20 for the big stuff.

I seem to have stuck in my memory banks that when Australia trialled the L42 they wanted a GPMG(?) flash eliminator fitted to several barrels to counter the flash. Whether these did materialise, I don't know but it would have been a fairly simple job as Oz was using the GPMG/M60 in '74 in any case.

Added later: Just spoke to Chris XXXX who was part of the trial who said that the reason we didn't fit a F/E was because accuracy dropped off noticeably. Should have thought of that!

[Gil Boyd]

Simon,
Nice green shed fitted with double doors
Looks a nice piece

[Simon]

Green Shed? Pfffft! I'll have you know that's the Hunting Lodge situated at the western extremities of the estate Or in other words the Summer house at the bottom of the Garden.

Simon,
Nice green shed fitted with double doors
Looks a nice piece

[Surpmil]

Nice. First time I've seen an IWS bracket numbered to the L42 as well.