Brits having problems with "bullpup"


March 31, 2003, 03:55 PM
Any body know whats going on with the British "Bullpup" (forgotten designation). I've now seen two "clips" of combat action video's showing a brit combat troop fire one shot, and then attempt to clear the firearm by "popping its top" and double racking the action, and then attempt to "digitally" (with fingers) attempt to clear the action, and then put the gun away for another weapon. Latest one was on Fox titled "Firefight for bridge across Euphrates River". Other was on Saturday, during firefight with Fedayeen near Nasiriah.
Inquiring mind wants to know ???????
Haven't seen any problems with M-16's.

If you enjoyed reading about "Brits having problems with "bullpup"" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
March 31, 2003, 04:11 PM
The SA80/L85 is a horrible piece of crap. :) Do a search here and you will find lots of good info on it. Plus there is a good article in the latest issue of SWAT dealing with this topic.

March 31, 2003, 04:26 PM
i think i'd drop it in the track of a vehicle and pick up an AK for the duration.

Sir Galahad
March 31, 2003, 09:00 PM
I saw the video and I believe you're not seeing a Brit. You're seeing a U.S. soldier clearing a malfunctioned M-249 SAW. Look hard. See the feed pawl cover opened?

El Tejon
March 31, 2003, 09:07 PM
Though that was a 249???

April 1, 2003, 01:00 AM
The guy kneeling against the corner of a brick wall was an American, having problems with his M249. Read his lips when he has to pop the top cover. ;) That was the battle for the Euphrates bridge.

Haven't seen any other weapon malf scenes.

April 1, 2003, 01:09 AM
That's the downside to belt-fed weapons. When they have a problem, or you need to reload, it takes a long time (comparatively). Reloading a belt-fed weapon while running is...well, it's dang difficult, is what it is.

April 1, 2003, 01:20 AM
I saw it, I thought, "what the **ll?" His friggin' weapons totally jammed up! I hope this is only an anomaly.

April 1, 2003, 03:21 AM
all weapons will stop occasionally - that's why they teach stoppage drills.
It seems unlikely that all the SA80s out there are the A2 version - there aren't enough of them yet (and they aren't going to rework all of them anyway, probably for cost reasons). This war will probably be make or break for the rifle, there's a lot more infantry fighting than last time.

April 1, 2003, 09:10 AM
On another board someone posted that some Brit troops are calling the SA80, "The Civil Servant." They said, "It doesn't work and you can't fire it."


April 1, 2003, 09:50 AM
Now that you mention it, Your right, it is/was an M-249. It looked like a SA80 the way he was holding it, and he did set it down on the bi-pod. I know the M-249 has had problems which is why we delayed taking into inventory; with our objections to NATO over it. Seems the politicians/diplomats won out over the experts again. Same thing happened with the "french" Chauchaut in WW-I.
You may be right about getting a AK-47! He seems to have set it down and abondoned it ! It appeared in the first uncut version that he reverted to his M9.
However, the first "failure" I saw, I know was a SA80.

April 1, 2003, 02:29 PM
Goose, the M249 is no Chauchaut. Most of the guys who I've talked to who use them say that they are great guns and that they work just fine.

All guns jam. Some just do it more often.

April 1, 2003, 04:28 PM

Those things (SA80's) have a terrible reputation... There's been talk of scrapping the whole project and swapping over to something else...

Can you say G36? :D

April 1, 2003, 10:54 PM
yes, it is the SAW, not the SA80, the guy is American, and I think he might be saying some naughty words while he attempts to clear the weapon. The first time I watched it, I was horrified. The second time I was chuckling a little.

He lived both times.

Mike ;)

April 1, 2003, 11:40 PM
Weren't the Brits working on a .260 caliber assault rifle when the .308 was forced apon them? I believe it was on the FN-FAL platform, with .308 full-auto was uncontrollable.

Maybe if they had been allowed to go on with their research they might have set a standard in assault rifle and/or lmg calibers and ended up with a longer range round with the same approximate compactness as the .223.

I've never liked nato or the u.n., nothing more than a gang of critics with no plausible solutions to anything.

I just get tired of seeing us and our allies ending up with partial-birth abortion rifles because of political considerations. When lives are at stake the best, most durable and most dependable needs to be designed and produced, not what makes the politicians happy.

I mean, just look at the weapons of recent yore, the Garand or M-14, or FN-FAL or HK rifles, they might be the result of some political pressure but they d*mn sure work when needed.

April 2, 2003, 05:27 PM
ayup the british were working on a 7mm intermediate cartridge (.276 pedersen?) before they were forced to adopt the 7.62x51mm to conform with NATO.

it was also chambered in a bullpup rifle, not much different in appearence to the SA80. when they standardized on the 7.62x51mm, the rifle could not be upsized. so they adopted their version of the FN FAL...L1a1

April 2, 2003, 06:16 PM
amprecon, IIRC they were working on a 7mm round that was to be used in a bullpup.

4v50 Gary
April 2, 2003, 07:01 PM
The British 7mm round was a Brit round and not based on the .276 Pedersen. It would have been a good intermediate cartridge, but the U.S. at that time didn't want to settle for anything less potent than the 30-06.

If you enjoyed reading about "Brits having problems with "bullpup"" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!