It's always entertaining to read internet comments about the SA80 family from people who are under the impression they know about it and of course 90% of it is wildy off the mark.
I've put thousands of rounds through the older L85A1. Mine never had a problem with stoppages or parts breaking. Some rifles though simply refused to run as they were just not welded up straight in the first place, I can remember a 2Lt who would stick half an oil bottle into the working parts for night shoots on the ambush range because his rifle would not cycle and fire bursts without it as the bolt was rubbing on the body of the weapon. It was very much an ablative process where repeated defence cuts allowed wriggle room and the ropey non runners could simply be withdrawn and destroyed as less rifles were needed. The biggest thing that effected reliability was the continual loading and unloading of magazines for guard duty. Meaning some mags were loaded then unloaded twice a day, every day of the year. Those ruined mags all made it back into circulation with rifle companies at some stage.
@@zoidersthis sort of eye witness testimony is what I always base my opinions off that it was made by the lowest bidder so the original was either bad or just ok with mag problems being the worst but with more modern variants the problems appear to be less noticeable or nonexistent idk if you can speak to that but it’s what I’ve always heard
The HKA2 pattern shown here was clearly intended to be fitted to all L85A2, but in the event they retained many of them and just ground out the 'L85A1' marking. I suspect it was done on a replacement basis i.e. if a h/g was serviceable it was retained, but haven't checked on this.
It's best to train with a variety of weapons. Remember the Ukrainians have their bull pup design as well. Helps train into a variety of manual of arms. 🎩🎯🎱♠️🏁🇺🇲🇺🇦🔱🌻💮🌼🌸🍀🔫
Can I just say how awesome it is that the UKR soldiers at 1:40 have the Predator as a shoulder patch. I don't know if it is an insignia of their unit, presumably it is, but I think it is really cool
Lots of negative comments about SA80, I suspect mostly from never served, keyboard warriors. I used SLR when I first joined the Army, then moved to SA80/ L85 in the eighties. I was involved, in a small way, in the trials process. The main problem we had with early models was build quality, NOT reliability. I personally had no more or less stoppages with it than with SLR. I have used it on exercises and OPERATIONS all over the world. Never served, keyboard warriors, go back to your bedrooms and STFU about things you know nothing about. My last word, rant over.
Hi Jimmy, would love to hear more about your involvement with the trials, drop me an email if you'd like to share more. If the comments have taught me anything it's that I need to do an actual video on SA80. armourersbench@gmail.com
@@TheArmourersBench it was involvement at Company level. The weapon was issued to the Company, not the whole battalion, and we used it for about a year and a half in Cyprus. Live firing was monitored, rounds fired, number of stoppages etc, and then we were invited to give our opinion. The majority of us liked it's handiness, and especially it's accuracy. The main problem we identified was build quality, along with a couple of design flaws, the main one being the magazine release catch.
Thanks Jimmy, what battalion were you with? They still do similar now, the A3 was sent to Cyprus too and the new IR optics. I've heard that about the build quality and mag release before.
@@TheArmourersBench 1RRF. When we left Cyprus the remainder of the Battalion converted to L85 and some of the flaws that had been picked up had been corrected. The obsession with not oiling the weapon in sandy conditions did not help. This was not picked up until GW 1, Op Granby. I was a Skill At Arms instructor, and lack of oil is the main cause of stoppages in any environment.
If you enjoyed this video please consider supporting us via Patreon, ALL videos are published there before they're posted publicly so if you want early access and some other perks check out: www.patreon.com/thearmourersbench thanks!
UA-cam is underrated for time saving - people with an eye for these specific details teach us all in a few minutes what would take hours of reading/scrolling ourselves 🙂 Obviously people should trust but verify 🚫🐑 but even so 👍🏼
Apart from weight issues, the modern SA80 is quite decent for a gun. The jokes are kinda moot at this point. Also I actually did some research about PIAT in Indian hands post WW2, and well, I was wrong, cause apparently our troops changed the PIAT with RPG-7s by them. Only some were used in Longewala but I can't seem to find the primary source of that. That's why I didn’t contact you.
They are indeed moot at this point you're right. Thank you for looking into it, if you have any sources on Indian PIAT use at all please do drop me an email. I am very eager to get some decent info.
@@WanderlustZero I know that both India and Pakistan retained it after independence from the UK but finding good sources of information on their use is extremely difficult.
Note their "weapon in the air" building entry technique, as opposed to the "to the ground" usa technique (as far as I know). Portuguese special forces use the upward technique too. If you see footage from northern Ireland you will see this and Portuguese paras in the Congo, but I think they have it from the colonial wars in Africa. I can think of possible reasons but know of nothing concrete except the ground facing might be seen as "safer" and the ceiling as "readier" also as I was taught to treat the ceiling as a source of threat and only to face down when coming in through the roof.
It will be the safety foibles of a particular NCO rather than any specific doctrine. These lads are generally new to soldiering and no one wants a BFA in the face. They are stacking up at the door with rifles in the correct high port but once inside its room by room by pairs and the muzzle will be forwards but slightly down in the alert ready position.
US and Britains latest building entry techniques sre massively different from each other. The Americans go in quickly with numbers whilst the Israelis and british carefully scan the room from the doorway first (very basic description)
@@Ukraineaissance2014 numbers are bound to be effective but dangerous to all involved. Portuguese learned in heavily contested African single story villages. Their special forces were in Afghanistan too but aggressive peacekeeping in the Congo has been the tough one. I noticed one of their patches on a Kraken member in 🇺🇦. Must have dual nationality as kraken don't accept foreigners. I mention Portugal, because I'm a dual citizen but also because they have their own rich and uninterrupted experience quite distinct from other armies in Europe, forged in really tough colonial wars in the 60s and 70s. Particularly Guinea Bissau - just about everyone there came back with PTSD.
@@zoiders I very much doubt it's not standardised. The USA are very rigid about this and you need to register colleagues weapons in the corner of your eye.
Bring in the commenters who last vaguely heard something about the SA80 in 1991 from the usual types who hate any kind of change and still think it's relevant to share
You’re making me lazy mate. I saw the pics pop up on social media and was going to look into it but thought ‘nah, I’ll just wait for a TAB video about it’
The A3 is a direct upgrade of older A2s rather than new build rifles. The rifle hasn't been in produ tion since the mid 1990s so there's only a finite number available, I'd be surprised if they transfered many A2s if at all! Thanks for watching.
Is it possible that these may be surplus l98a2s as used by the british cadet forces. This is possible as the MOD has easy access to these rifles and as a standard they come with the polymer green hand guard and stock iron sights. The only difference to the l85a2 suggested is that is has no fully automatic capability and thus no fire selector switch. These rifles would therefore be logistically simple to procure and perfectly capable for training purposes
I couldn't see if the had the change Lever on the left side or they were missing, it would be the only indication of whether they are the Cadet L98A2s, other than firing and the markings on the rifle.
I suspect they're just L85A2s, not sure howany L98s are available. Not impossible though, their are I think 4 training centres training Ukrainian troops at the moment so A2 configuration may vary from centre to centre too. We've seen some with SUSAT, some with irons etc.
@@TheArmourersBench most are readily available with notification to the county HQs or through the HQ at Frimley Park. Whether they are using them, is another thing. There are cadet counties which have reduced or cancelled their annual camps to ensure the excerise areas are clear for the UK forces to use.
this was my immediate thought. those variants come stock with the polymer hand guard and iron sights and would be easily accessible and very capable for training purposes
@@elitedavidhorne8494 Cadets have semiautomatic L85a2's but also have access to LSW's pretty sure. But that was quite a few years ago. All with susats and old furnishings.
Watching Ukrainians using British equipment still makes my skin crawl. I served during the Cold War and know what they got up too. It's a shame we couldn't send Boris the Bold to fight in Ukraine, or better still his wife.
This isn’t the fucking Cold War anymore dude, despite Russia’s claims. You want to help the Russians, fine, but that doesn’t mean Ukraine doesn’t deserve help.
The first version was just awful.. But after modification by HK it turned out ok ish. I prefer the SLR simply because if you hit something it usually stayed hit!
Probably not a lot of X39 blanks floating around the UK. Would probably be more beneficial to use some M16 variant, as they are likely to see them in actual service (sooner or later).
@@garagenigel Wrong, heckler and Koch is owned by Germany and the EU. That's why most rifles are made in Germany like the MK18, MK17, 416 and 417 etc... Even the Americans rely on heckler and Koch to make some of their weapons. The SA80s was built in Britain but was faulty due to it jamming so it had to be sent to heckler and Koch so they could fix the problem.
So, do you foresee the UK off-loading a bunch of SA80s to UKR as on-going support to their efforts to resist Putin's invasion, or do you think UKR is going to order a trainload of the VHS ("Hellions" as sold here in the USA) from Croatia?
No I don't forsee the transfer of SA80s, purely because the UK doesn't have that many to transfer for it to be meaningful. I do think we'll see a transition to 5.56x45 chambered weapons down the line though. What that will be remains to be see, likely the M4A1, some of these have already been sent over by the US.
The one thing the MOD and the Army Staff will simply not do is allow the British regular army to have what they have always wanted which is an M16 type rifle, either the FN made ones or Canadian ones. Its all about playing stupid mind games and they will never admit to being wrong about the L85 program. If they do finally cave in and purchase new rifles I suspect they will negotiate a licence with CZ for the new Bren.
@@Ukraineaissance2014 You think that because you have never used either. Just wait until you find out how many M16s and variants the army have quietly purchased over the years to equip lads doing jobs beyond the scope of the normal grunt work.
@@zoiders wait until you find out about all the M16s we bought when the SLR was still in service... Btw when you say M16 replacing L85 do you mean C8???
@@Pocketpatriot I challenge you to stand 100 in front of someone shooting an m16 or an sa80 with 5.56 mm round. If you survive, you can tell us about the pea shooter and we will listen.
@@masaukochitsamba7808 yeah that's a smart answer. I think you might have missed my point, 7.62 means death, 5.56 means possible death, what would you prefer? 7.62 obviously. I also prefer a weapon to be solid and not made from weak plastic and flimsy thin metal.
Unless our military is going to start given the Ukrainian military L85's, I don't see why they are learning to use them. Plus, I'm sure some of the soldiers dislike the rifle, especially those who are left-handed. Apart from the weight, and the fact I can't shoot it left-handed, it's not a bad rifle. I'm glad when I did my training for the reserves in November and February, they were issued with the SUSAT. Otherwise, I would have struggled shooting it on the range. I taught myself how to shoot with both eyes open. I most likely would have struggled if I had to use iron sights
Matching Grenade launcher is the M320 UK Designation L123. Remember the ammunition is also made in Ukraine it is the nato standard 40x46mm Grenade. Also there's the L86 LSW if still in service
Not so. The British UBGL is derived from the much older HK79 system. The US system the M320 is merely a US variant of the HK weapon that was adopted later. Its annoying when people assume US made systems are the parent design for other nations kit. The L123 was in service before the M320.
@@TheArmourersBench Technically the L17A2/L123 is the AG-SA80. The HK launcher is the AG series, with the gun that it mounts to making up the end of the name. That is why you have the AG36, AG416 and so on.
@@mattwordsworth9825 they are mediocre rifle that weigh about twice as much as they ought to and the only reason they haven't been replaced is because the U.K. MOD is cheap.
@@travistucker1033 yet they have a longer barrel compared to the M4 which means better accuracy over range while being smaller in length compared to the M4 because of its bullpup design. Alot more sturdier too. Also the A2 has a good reputation amongst the British military
You've never held or fired an SA80. Russia couldn't even supply their regular and proxy forces properly and gives them outdated WW2 Firearms. How many M16s ends up in every Soldier and Insurgent alike? They're still useful because they're being trained to handle them with or without optics, attachments and modifications. If you don't train with your Rifle, you're ineffective. Simple as that.
Please don’t saddle Ukrainians with the SA80’s. Actually the A2’s wouldn’t be too bad and they’re just for training. It’s great that UK is training Ukrainian troops.
@@kalicom2937 I referred to both names at the start of the video. The terms appear to be largely interchangeable with the British Army using both and normally referring to it as SA80 in public releases.
@@TheArmourersBench The SA80 term describes a series of weapons that includes the L85, L86, L22 and the L98. There is no such thing as an SA80A2 and they are not interchangeable terms - despite what Army press releases may have you believe. But hey, you carry on making inaccurate videos, no skin off my nose.
The SA80 isn't very good, BUT you can learn the important basic marksmanship principles very well on it, and those apply to everything. You can also learn night vision stuff with it, and a little bit of more modern sling management (though not as modern as there is) But, as I understand it, it's got a great cheekweld and stuff like that.
@@mattwordsworth9825 My standard for "good" isn't met by a rifle with a manual of arms that horrific. It can't be. They work since the A2, but the controls of the rifles never changed. The rifle is also not particularly accurate, 5 MOA is the factory standard. Not a problem, but AKs are often that accurate, and usually a little more. There's nothing an SA80 does better than anything else in existence.
@@jimmyjohnson7027 Because things are good or bad tools for real reasons, which require direct knowledge. This knowledge can be gained secondhand, and I did. I am not some idiot memeing about its reliability-I don't care. Hasn't been a big issue in decades.
@@superfamilyallosauridae6505 Apart from not having a mag release button under your finger just what do you think is awkward about the "manual of arms"? the change lever? I have news for you - no one is bothered about the automatic setting. Your comments on accuracy show you have never really fired one either. The AK scatters rounds everywhere like a mad womans shit past 200. The L85A1 would make first round hits at 500. I know this because I have been on the battle lanes in Wales and used one at all ranges as well as in the dark (your pet AK can't do that). You however are just making shit up. "5 MOA" indeed you goon. 😂
A2 and A3 are OK. Too heavy. Awkward manual of arms. But are OK. Shoot OK. A1 shot ok on a range to be fair. It is typically British. We buy something poor to save money in the hope of selling it on to make money. And then spend more than replacing on getting it to where it should have been in the first place. Still saying that all of them should be junked for a batch of C7/8's.
Yeah, because when it was shopped around it was still in need of refinement and by the time the A2 worked out the majority if the flaws it hadn't been in production for a decade.
@@TheArmourersBench I think you may have surpassed my own level of Stockholm Syndrome for this rifle :) To be honest, I really don't think it would have been a commercial success regardless of how 'finished' it was.
@@TheArmourersBench My old athletics coach worked there at ROF, Nottingham amongst others, he used to share a few funny engineer's stories, seemed like old brass can be dull.
If the British decide to give the Ukrainians the A1, yeah that will help the Russians. If they decided to give Ukraine the A2 then the Ukrainians will gain another good Assault rifle.
@@TheArmourersBench None, unless in museums or private hands as most A1s were upgraded to A2 and now some are upgraded to A3. Those not suitable for upgrade were chopped up although some were made into solid DPs with welded up actions (not to be confused with the L103A2 which is a strippable DP, used for training and WHTs at cadet centres.)
It's always entertaining to read internet comments about the SA80 family from people who are under the impression they know about it and of course 90% of it is wildy off the mark.
Yes, I’m guilty of that, although my comment in the first video was just a joke. It is an excellent firearm.
I've put thousands of rounds through the older L85A1. Mine never had a problem with stoppages or parts breaking. Some rifles though simply refused to run as they were just not welded up straight in the first place, I can remember a 2Lt who would stick half an oil bottle into the working parts for night shoots on the ambush range because his rifle would not cycle and fire bursts without it as the bolt was rubbing on the body of the weapon. It was very much an ablative process where repeated defence cuts allowed wriggle room and the ropey non runners could simply be withdrawn and destroyed as less rifles were needed. The biggest thing that effected reliability was the continual loading and unloading of magazines for guard duty. Meaning some mags were loaded then unloaded twice a day, every day of the year. Those ruined mags all made it back into circulation with rifle companies at some stage.
Its banging gat hatters are just mong children
Ian firm forgoten weapons siad that is the worst assault rifle ever made. We trust hm nit some butthurted brits.
@@zoidersthis sort of eye witness testimony is what I always base my opinions off that it was made by the lowest bidder so the original was either bad or just ok with mag problems being the worst but with more modern variants the problems appear to be less noticeable or nonexistent idk if you can speak to that but it’s what I’ve always heard
The level of detail is incredible 👏 👌!!! Never knew about the 2 types of plastic handguards.
Glad you found it interesting!
The HKA2 pattern shown here was clearly intended to be fitted to all L85A2, but in the event they retained many of them and just ground out the 'L85A1' marking. I suspect it was done on a replacement basis i.e. if a h/g was serviceable it was retained, but haven't checked on this.
It's best to train with a variety of weapons. Remember the Ukrainians have their bull pup design as well. Helps train into a variety of manual of arms. 🎩🎯🎱♠️🏁🇺🇲🇺🇦🔱🌻💮🌼🌸🍀🔫
Can't hurt I guess!
Whats uo with all the emojis matw
@@mcbeanaz it's a hidden message. See if you can figure it out.
Can I just say how awesome it is that the UKR soldiers at 1:40 have the Predator as a shoulder patch. I don't know if it is an insignia of their unit, presumably it is, but I think it is really cool
Probably one of my fav bullpup rifles
Would you be willing to do a video on Soviet landmines that are showing up in Ukraine?
Edit: Also thanks for the video! It was very informative!
Glad it was informative! I can certainly try, while not my area of expertise I do have some friends who are expert. I'll talk to them.
Lots of negative comments about SA80, I suspect mostly from never served, keyboard warriors. I used SLR when I first joined the Army, then moved to SA80/ L85 in the eighties. I was involved, in a small way, in the trials process. The main problem we had with early models was build quality, NOT reliability. I personally had no more or less stoppages with it than with SLR. I have used it on exercises and OPERATIONS all over the world. Never served, keyboard
warriors, go back to your bedrooms and STFU about things you know nothing about.
My last word, rant over.
Hi Jimmy, would love to hear more about your involvement with the trials, drop me an email if you'd like to share more. If the comments have taught me anything it's that I need to do an actual video on SA80. armourersbench@gmail.com
@@TheArmourersBench it was involvement at Company level. The weapon was issued to the Company, not the whole battalion, and we used it for about a year and a half in Cyprus. Live firing was monitored, rounds fired, number of stoppages etc, and then we were invited to give our opinion. The majority of us liked it's handiness, and especially it's accuracy. The main problem we identified was build quality, along with a couple of design flaws, the main one being the magazine release catch.
Thanks Jimmy, what battalion were you with? They still do similar now, the A3 was sent to Cyprus too and the new IR optics. I've heard that about the build quality and mag release before.
@@TheArmourersBench 1RRF. When we left Cyprus the remainder of the Battalion converted to L85 and some of the flaws that had been picked up had been corrected. The obsession with not oiling the weapon in sandy conditions did not help. This was not picked up until GW 1, Op Granby. I was a Skill At Arms instructor, and lack of oil is the main cause of stoppages in any environment.
That's really interesting, I wonder if that's a hold over from experience in North Africa where they swore by not over oiling.
If you enjoyed this video please consider supporting us via Patreon, ALL videos are published there before they're posted publicly so if you want early access and some other perks check out: www.patreon.com/thearmourersbench thanks!
UA-cam is underrated for time saving - people with an eye for these specific details teach us all in a few minutes what would take hours of reading/scrolling ourselves 🙂
Obviously people should trust but verify 🚫🐑 but even so 👍🏼
Excellent work and good benchmark for a TAB video - concise and correct
Thanks a lot, appreciate it!
It's called FISH + CHIPS.
fighting in someone's house + creating havoc in public spaces.
😎
Apart from weight issues, the modern SA80 is quite decent for a gun. The jokes are kinda moot at this point.
Also I actually did some research about PIAT in Indian hands post WW2, and well, I was wrong, cause apparently our troops changed the PIAT with RPG-7s by them. Only some were used in Longewala but I can't seem to find the primary source of that. That's why I didn’t contact you.
They are indeed moot at this point you're right.
Thank you for looking into it, if you have any sources on Indian PIAT use at all please do drop me an email. I am very eager to get some decent info.
@@TheArmourersBench omg a video about Indian PIAT would be amazing
@@WanderlustZero I know that both India and Pakistan retained it after independence from the UK but finding good sources of information on their use is extremely difficult.
Note their "weapon in the air" building entry technique, as opposed to the "to the ground" usa technique (as far as I know). Portuguese special forces use the upward technique too. If you see footage from northern Ireland you will see this and Portuguese paras in the Congo, but I think they have it from the colonial wars in Africa. I can think of possible reasons but know of nothing concrete except the ground facing might be seen as "safer" and the ceiling as "readier" also as I was taught to treat the ceiling as a source of threat and only to face down when coming in through the roof.
USA uses in the air. If u breach a door ur wepon is up. As long as it not flagging anyone.
It will be the safety foibles of a particular NCO rather than any specific doctrine. These lads are generally new to soldiering and no one wants a BFA in the face. They are stacking up at the door with rifles in the correct high port but once inside its room by room by pairs and the muzzle will be forwards but slightly down in the alert ready position.
US and Britains latest building entry techniques sre massively different from each other. The Americans go in quickly with numbers whilst the Israelis and british carefully scan the room from the doorway first (very basic description)
@@Ukraineaissance2014 numbers are bound to be effective but dangerous to all involved. Portuguese learned in heavily contested African single story villages. Their special forces were in Afghanistan too but aggressive peacekeeping in the Congo has been the tough one. I noticed one of their patches on a Kraken member in 🇺🇦. Must have dual nationality as kraken don't accept foreigners.
I mention Portugal, because I'm a dual citizen but also because they have their own rich and uninterrupted experience quite distinct from other armies in Europe, forged in really tough colonial wars in the 60s and 70s. Particularly Guinea Bissau - just about everyone there came back with PTSD.
@@zoiders I very much doubt it's not standardised. The USA are very rigid about this and you need to register colleagues weapons in the corner of your eye.
Ukrainian now fall to the rabbit hole of love and hate SA80
Bring in the commenters who last vaguely heard something about the SA80 in 1991 from the usual types who hate any kind of change and still think it's relevant to share
You’re making me lazy mate. I saw the pics pop up on social media and was going to look into it but thought ‘nah, I’ll just wait for a TAB video about it’
Hahah, love it. Thanks Marlon!
Are they training with the SA80 because it is a bullpup and this ensures weapons handling/reloading similar to the Ukrainian bullpup?
he covers this in the video
No, it's probably more to do with the L85 having a blank firing adaptor that's safe to use on UK ranges
Even just used for training, they are handy.
I have no friends to share this video with.
Make friends by sending people this video.
@@TheArmourersBench I shall try this and report back
2:56 Boris Johnson?
Yep, likely his only ever appearance on this channel haha
Used to see bits of these on footpaths in ulster)) Could nearly make up a whole gun
😂
Could even be semi automatic l98s commandeered from cadet units
I wonder if the British will send SA80A2s to Ukraine since they have the SA80A3s now.
The A3 is a direct upgrade of older A2s rather than new build rifles. The rifle hasn't been in produ tion since the mid 1990s so there's only a finite number available, I'd be surprised if they transfered many A2s if at all! Thanks for watching.
If they're just being used for FIBUA the iron sight SA80s might be L98s
You can put an iron sight on an L85 too. But you cant put L98 irons on L85s or vice versa. They are different sights.
Is it possible that these may be surplus l98a2s as used by the british cadet forces. This is possible as the MOD has easy access to these rifles and as a standard they come with the polymer green hand guard and stock iron sights. The only difference to the l85a2 suggested is that is has no fully automatic capability and thus no fire selector switch. These rifles would therefore be logistically simple to procure and perfectly capable for training purposes
I couldn't see if the had the change Lever on the left side or they were missing, it would be the only indication of whether they are the Cadet L98A2s, other than firing and the markings on the rifle.
I suspect they're just L85A2s, not sure howany L98s are available. Not impossible though, their are I think 4 training centres training Ukrainian troops at the moment so A2 configuration may vary from centre to centre too. We've seen some with SUSAT, some with irons etc.
@@TheArmourersBench most are readily available with notification to the county HQs or through the HQ at Frimley Park. Whether they are using them, is another thing.
There are cadet counties which have reduced or cancelled their annual camps to ensure the excerise areas are clear for the UK forces to use.
Yes some of the MoD ranges I shoot at have reduced civilian availability due to it too!
Are those the .22 version or the straight pull version?
I wonder what type of plate carrier they are using they look a little simplistic.
Ukraine, much like my basement, has a strange mix of weapons from all over the world, ha.
Theres a possibility they could be cadet a2's, locked to semi? Maybe because of shortage? But they are for sure a2's.
this was my immediate thought. those variants come stock with the polymer hand guard and iron sights and would be easily accessible and very capable for training purposes
That would mean policing up L98A2s from every county armoury in the country. The answer being no.
I'm an older cadet and we had bolt action versions of the SA80. Did they change the cadet version to self loading?
@@elitedavidhorne8494 Cadets have semiautomatic L85a2's but also have access to LSW's pretty sure. But that was quite a few years ago. All with susats and old furnishings.
where are all these surplus sa80s coming from? I wonder if the UK will be getting the m4 sooner
They did make quite a few of them and the number of servicemen has reduced significantly. But let's hope its replaced in the next decade or so.
Watching Ukrainians using British equipment still makes my skin crawl. I served during the Cold War and know what they got up too.
It's a shame we couldn't send Boris the Bold to fight in Ukraine, or better still his wife.
This isn’t the fucking Cold War anymore dude, despite Russia’s claims. You want to help the Russians, fine, but that doesn’t mean Ukraine doesn’t deserve help.
The first version was just awful.. But after modification by HK it turned out ok ish. I prefer the SLR simply because if you hit something it usually stayed hit!
Most British soldiers never shot at anyone with the SLR! A different story with L85!
Now are the guys in shorts and t-shirts, are they SF or interpret.
Likely civilian interpreters.
@@TheArmourersBench possibly, I know when I was in service a lot of SF instructiors didn't always where a uniform.
Well from recent video we know that there's at least some instructors from 42 Commando.
Civilian Linguists, many of whom were refugees are employed in the ATRs
Interesting
Probably not a lot of X39 blanks floating around the UK. Would probably be more beneficial to use some M16 variant, as they are likely to see them in actual service (sooner or later).
Indeed, there's M4s in Ukraine already!
Can you do a video on American made weapons in Ukraine?
Absolutely, working on 5.56x45 chambered weapon videos at the moment. It's just a matter of finding time to do these! Thanks for watching.
They should of gone with heckler and Koch weapons.
Technically they did, the A2 was an HK upgrade project!
@@TheArmourersBench The sa80 was fixed by heckler and Koch. I did some research.
Heckler and Koch was bought by the British government especially to upgrade the A1 to A2!
@@garagenigel Wrong, heckler and Koch is owned by Germany and the EU. That's why most rifles are made in Germany like the MK18, MK17, 416 and 417 etc... Even the Americans rely on heckler and Koch to make some of their weapons. The SA80s was built in Britain but was faulty due to it jamming so it had to be sent to heckler and Koch so they could fix the problem.
@@garagenigel Why remove your comment brexiteer?!
So, do you foresee the UK off-loading a bunch of SA80s to UKR as on-going support to their efforts to resist Putin's invasion, or do you think UKR is going to order a trainload of the VHS ("Hellions" as sold here in the USA) from Croatia?
No I don't forsee the transfer of SA80s, purely because the UK doesn't have that many to transfer for it to be meaningful. I do think we'll see a transition to 5.56x45 chambered weapons down the line though. What that will be remains to be see, likely the M4A1, some of these have already been sent over by the US.
The one thing the MOD and the Army Staff will simply not do is allow the British regular army to have what they have always wanted which is an M16 type rifle, either the FN made ones or Canadian ones. Its all about playing stupid mind games and they will never admit to being wrong about the L85 program. If they do finally cave in and purchase new rifles I suspect they will negotiate a licence with CZ for the new Bren.
@@zoiders nobody wants an M16 type in the regular army, the SA has been a great weapon since the A2.
@@Ukraineaissance2014 You think that because you have never used either. Just wait until you find out how many M16s and variants the army have quietly purchased over the years to equip lads doing jobs beyond the scope of the normal grunt work.
@@zoiders wait until you find out about all the M16s we bought when the SLR was still in service...
Btw when you say M16 replacing L85 do you mean C8???
Sa80 was the worst thing I ever had, I done Belfast before that with an SLR, that was a real weapon with proper rounds, not a 5.56 pea shooter.
😂😂😂 cheers grandad 🇬🇧🤦
Getting shot with that 'pea shooter' is just as serious as getting hit with a 7.62x51
@@PORRRIDGE_GUN 7.62 ends the fight, 5.56 doesn't
@@Pocketpatriot I challenge you to stand 100 in front of someone shooting an m16 or an sa80 with 5.56 mm round. If you survive, you can tell us about the pea shooter and we will listen.
@@masaukochitsamba7808 yeah that's a smart answer. I think you might have missed my point, 7.62 means death, 5.56 means possible death, what would you prefer? 7.62 obviously. I also prefer a weapon to be solid and not made from weak plastic and flimsy thin metal.
Blank firing attachment
Indeed it is.
Looks like they are just training with them, unlikely we'll see any SA-80 systems in Ukraine itself.. but who knows!
Indeed, Thanks for watching.
With SA80 .. poor souls...
Dear god those UOR A2s are all manner of uggo aren't they? 🤢
The A3s looking pretty smexy though 😘
They couldn't be trained with AK's, so the next best rifle would do.
Poor sods
Why was Johnson sticking his nose into an arena that he has no experience in or knowledge of?
He thinks he's Churchill.
@@TheArmourersBench So he's a loony.
They're only using them for training purposes.
Indeed, I talk about that in the video. Thanks for watching.
@@TheArmourersBench I know mate, but some peeps have small brains.👍✊️🇬🇧🇺🇦
Hopefully they watch the vid 👍
Unless our military is going to start given the Ukrainian military L85's, I don't see why they are learning to use them. Plus, I'm sure some of the soldiers dislike the rifle, especially those who are left-handed. Apart from the weight, and the fact I can't shoot it left-handed, it's not a bad rifle. I'm glad when I did my training for the reserves in November and February, they were issued with the SUSAT. Otherwise, I would have struggled shooting it on the range. I taught myself how to shoot with both eyes open. I most likely would have struggled if I had to use iron sights
Ukrainian special forces use a very similar weapon and the whole army will probably have to move towards NATO ammo
@@Ukraineaissance2014 can you shoot it left-handed though?
As I say in the video, it's likely because they have BFAs that are safe to use on UK ranges.
A - you need to wear your glasses
B - you can easily hit a figure 11 from 100 out to 300 with irons
Range safety....that's the only reason!
Matching Grenade launcher is the M320 UK Designation L123. Remember the ammunition is also made in Ukraine it is the nato standard 40x46mm Grenade. Also there's the L86 LSW if still in service
They have already received M320s from the US, they were sent with shipments of M4s that arrived a coue of months ago.
Not so. The British UBGL is derived from the much older HK79 system. The US system the M320 is merely a US variant of the HK weapon that was adopted later. Its annoying when people assume US made systems are the parent design for other nations kit. The L123 was in service before the M320.
Yes, the L123 is the AG-36, which I think has also been paired with the Bundeswehr's G36s.
@@TheArmourersBench Technically the L17A2/L123 is the AG-SA80. The HK launcher is the AG series, with the gun that it mounts to making up the end of the name. That is why you have the AG36, AG416 and so on.
That's true!
biggest heap of junk ever is sa 80 😅😅😅
A moment if silence for those ukranians that got handed one of those rifles and now have to deal with how shit It is
Hasn't Ukraine suffered enough?
They're training with them to teach the Ukrainians that it could always be worse; they could be issued a L85.
Have you ever used L85?
@@jimmyjohnson7027 nope, but I have use an M4. Anything else would be a downgrade.
The SA80A2 and A3 rifles are very effective and dependable rifles. Don't let useless and crap A1 cloud that fact.
@@mattwordsworth9825 they are mediocre rifle that weigh about twice as much as they ought to and the only reason they haven't been replaced is because the U.K. MOD is cheap.
@@travistucker1033 yet they have a longer barrel compared to the M4 which means better accuracy over range while being smaller in length compared to the M4 because of its bullpup design. Alot more sturdier too. Also the A2 has a good reputation amongst the British military
I prefer FISH to FIBUA. Fighting In Someone's House. Also, CHIPS. Causing Havoc In People's Streets.
Fighting In Somebody's House
Fighting In Built Up Areas
FISH and CHIPS was much easier to memorise
Fucking hell! Do we want the Ukrainians to lose? Lets give the SA80A1 to the Russians. Hahaha
As I say in the vid, they're just being used for live fire training exercises, not headed to Ukraine. Thanks for watching
@@TheArmourersBench
Aye mate, I said it for comical effect.
Cheers for making the video👍🏻
😆👌
Stalker irl
You've never held or fired an SA80.
Russia couldn't even supply their regular and proxy forces properly and gives them outdated WW2 Firearms.
How many M16s ends up in every Soldier and Insurgent alike? They're still useful because they're being trained to handle them with or without optics, attachments and modifications.
If you don't train with your Rifle, you're ineffective. Simple as that.
Please don’t saddle Ukrainians with the SA80’s. Actually the A2’s wouldn’t be too bad and they’re just for training. It’s great that UK is training Ukrainian troops.
The UK has been training Ukrainian troops since 2014 - the taking of Crimea.
It is not an SA80, it is an L85A2. Just sayin'
Indeed, as I mentioned in the video.
@@TheArmourersBench Pretty sure you said SA80A2.....
@@kalicom2937 I referred to both names at the start of the video. The terms appear to be largely interchangeable with the British Army using both and normally referring to it as SA80 in public releases.
@@TheArmourersBench The SA80 term describes a series of weapons that includes the L85, L86, L22 and the L98. There is no such thing as an SA80A2 and they are not interchangeable terms - despite what Army press releases may have you believe.
But hey, you carry on making inaccurate videos, no skin off my nose.
I'm very aware of the family of weapons. No worries, I shall indeed continue. Thanks for watching.
The SA80 isn't very good, BUT you can learn the important basic marksmanship principles very well on it, and those apply to everything. You can also learn night vision stuff with it, and a little bit of more modern sling management (though not as modern as there is)
But, as I understand it, it's got a great cheekweld and stuff like that.
How do you know that it not very good? Have you ever used it?
The A1 wasn't very good (understatement) the A2 and now the A3 are very good rifles
@@mattwordsworth9825 My standard for "good" isn't met by a rifle with a manual of arms that horrific. It can't be. They work since the A2, but the controls of the rifles never changed.
The rifle is also not particularly accurate, 5 MOA is the factory standard.
Not a problem, but AKs are often that accurate, and usually a little more. There's nothing an SA80 does better than anything else in existence.
@@jimmyjohnson7027 Because things are good or bad tools for real reasons, which require direct knowledge. This knowledge can be gained secondhand, and I did. I am not some idiot memeing about its reliability-I don't care. Hasn't been a big issue in decades.
@@superfamilyallosauridae6505 Apart from not having a mag release button under your finger just what do you think is awkward about the "manual of arms"? the change lever? I have news for you - no one is bothered about the automatic setting. Your comments on accuracy show you have never really fired one either. The AK scatters rounds everywhere like a mad womans shit past 200. The L85A1 would make first round hits at 500. I know this because I have been on the battle lanes in Wales and used one at all ranges as well as in the dark (your pet AK can't do that). You however are just making shit up. "5 MOA" indeed you goon. 😂
British SA 80 = 🤔🤔🤔
I think the British low key want Russia to win if they're giving them these rifles.
They're not taking them home with them lol
@@TheArmourersBench The A2 and A3 have been good enough in the harsh conditions of Afghanistan. 😉
You can put current gen night vision on a L85A2 or L85A3. Good luck doing that on clapped out Russian AK74 or 101.
I need to get Jonathan Ferguson on to chat SA80.
A2 and A3 are OK. Too heavy. Awkward manual of arms. But are OK. Shoot OK. A1 shot ok on a range to be fair. It is typically British. We buy something poor to save money in the hope of selling it on to make money. And then spend more than replacing on getting it to where it should have been in the first place. Still saying that all of them should be junked for a batch of C7/8's.
There is a good reason why almost no one else besides the British use this rifle...
Yeah, because when it was shopped around it was still in need of refinement and by the time the A2 worked out the majority if the flaws it hadn't been in production for a decade.
@@TheArmourersBench I think you may have surpassed my own level of Stockholm Syndrome for this rifle :) To be honest, I really don't think it would have been a commercial success regardless of how 'finished' it was.
Hahah my retainer for ROF is still valid right? Right?
@@TheArmourersBench My old athletics coach worked there at ROF, Nottingham amongst others, he used to share a few funny engineer's stories, seemed like old brass can be dull.
Urgh...giving Ukrainian soldiers that piece of crud is helping Russia, not Ukraine!
Used to see bits of these on footpaths in ulster)) Could nearly make up a whole gun
If the British decide to give the Ukrainians the A1, yeah that will help the Russians. If they decided to give Ukraine the A2 then the Ukrainians will gain another good Assault rifle.
Not many A1s left I don't think.
@@TheArmourersBench None, unless in museums or private hands as most A1s were upgraded to A2 and now some are upgraded to A3. Those not suitable for upgrade were chopped up although some were made into solid DPs with welded up actions (not to be confused with the L103A2 which is a strippable DP, used for training and WHTs at cadet centres.)
These poor guys have to shoot with these shity rifles 😁😂
The A2 handguard was an upgrade too. The A1 handguard was discarded as it was too flimsy.
I can’t hear about Defense Minister Ben Wallace without thinking about the former NBA player
Fun to see all the western gear going to central Europe to fight eastern Europe
Haven't the Ukrainians suffered enough?