It was but I kinda miss it & understand it now.
It being section 1 made things so much easier on transport & storage.
Yep awful for target shooting, awful for blank firing as it was the most dangerous blank former in the British army needing to be fired at 45 degrees & muzzle blockages on fieldcraft exercises pretty much a given but it I kinda miss it’s quirkiness & I think it has more personality/character than the A2.
Wouldn’t mind firing one again.
As you say, the new weapon system will be modular no doubt so the ability to drop a new receiver on and chamber it at .22 rimfire or 5.56 center would be lovely.
Pipedream though I suspect. I’d happily take a few thousand L85 A3 for us to use.
It’s highly unlikely the L85’s replacement will be 5.56 mm. The Americans have gone for 6.8 x 51 mm for better performance against body armour and, as with the last two calibres adopted by the US military, NATO is likely to follow.
Totally agree that a modular design with a small bore conversion kit (as we used to have for the L85A1) makes much more sense than a separate weapon system for indoor ranges.
I can’t see a .22 version being bought. They would only fulfil part of the requirement (the target shooting part) but we also need something sturdy enough to work for fieldcraft, and to use blank ammunition. The rifle would also probably be too different from the service rifle to be viable from a service and support point of view. If you were going to do that, it would be easier to keep the L98A2 in service instead. The advantage of the L98A2 as it stands is, in the event of WW3, the rifles can be taken in, have a little tinkering done and then be issued to troops.
There’s little appetite within the MOD to support a weapon system that requires different tooling to service rifles. Hell, they wouldn’t even let us keep the L86s.
My understanding - from conversations with the manufacturers - is there are issues with conversation kits. So for a rifle to be S1 it needs to be built as such.
That said AR pattern rifles are fairly cheap so procuring dedicated units for miniature range use shouldn’t be out of the question. Unless we gold plate it.
The L98 conversion kits were removed from service and there is an L Pattern rifle that is factory converted to .22. This was done by HK for the Biathlon team.
Could we use those on sqns, (have to buy lots) as the L144 replacement?
Then some commonality between that and the L98.
Yes but still S5
There are a variety of S1-legal, semi-automatic .22 rifles on the market.
This is a typical example for only £595. Add on a cheap sight for another £200-£300 if needed.
It wouldn’t be much good for “target rifle” per se, but it would be an intermediate step between AR & the L98A2 - with a useful cross-over of magazine drills.
That’s the type of thing I was thinking of.
It seems a good and cost effective way to build up drills and range discipline, the drawback of the SA80 was it was one of a kind, and a ‘native’ .22 would have been too expensive.
(Interesting to note a .22 costs about the same as a better make of Airsoft rifle!)
Shooting is one thing we are failing in . I have just about every cadet who wants to shoot but there is no courses or wht in the last year and a half there has been no shooting opportunities for my cadets still . Its all very quiet and for example took a group of cadets couple of hours away to do a WHT but then after that not 1 opportunity to shoot . So turned out to be waste of time and then it expired.
The rare opportunity for say an L98 wht which there is one in november if i remember right but it will be hugely over bidded so chance of getting cadets are sadly reduced because of numbers. Then its whether a live firing is put on or not within the 6months after.
Even camps L98 etc is an option which i have alot who would of liked to do it but they need the WHT to do it at camp, so just in this viscious cycle really.
Even if another squadron would allow us to have however many cadets taking part in air rifle shooting. Again for air rifle there has been 1 opportunity in last year and a half only and it was a wht with 5 mins of shooting and this was only for 4 cadets.
Its frustrating not just for us we tell all these new cadets about shooting and things you can do but in reality its not happening. Im assuming its alot to do with not enough qualified staff etc or that ones that are qualified are putting out the training/courses accross the wing.
I was running an L98 long range at the weekend. Shooting is happening, just not in your locality.
It is difficult to do, lots of complex admin to do and courses to attend to make it happen.
Could always see if your Wing Shooting Officer needs any assistance 
Easier said than done but i don’t really know of what assistance i could be to him. As he never has said really what are the issues of why virtually no shooting happening etc.
Extra staff are generally always welcome on a range day
Ammo Orderly, just need to be able to count no special quals required
Do you have First Aid quals? Could be the medic.
If it’s a long range could be on sentry, not the most exciting job but vital to allowing the days to go ahead.
As @Jimothy suggested it’s worth reaching out to your Wing Shooting Officer asking for info on range days and offering your assistance
Very sad to see the schools / cadets here at Bisley for what will probably be the last time.
It would be nice to have some support from @Cab to see if an extension or other rescue plan can be looked at.
I really don’t think that those on high realise how vitally important it is for the cadet stream to remain - from little acorns, big oaks grow - a huge number of current tgt rifle shooters began their shooting experiences in cadets (.22 & .308). Turning off that route is going to be exceptionally detrimental for tgt rifle shooting in the UK.
Even if MOD / NRA come up with a workable plan for a bulk acquisition of some L81 rifles, the logistics / costs / range access (especially in the regions) will be problematic & expensive. Moreover, with overall support for tgt rifle activities being binned, then there will bee no opportunity to have any financial support to sqns for transport, allowances, accommodation, etc, etc.
As I’ve mentioned earlier, it’s all well & good proposing that sqns who will lose out on shooting will have air rifle packages uploaded to them (about £1k a go?). It looked to be some 300-350 sqns affected - huge chunk of money. The major logistical issue will be getting so many RCOs / SAAIs trained up - there’s no way the current SATT teams will be able to do this. Overall, another kiss of death factor for cadet shooting.
It’s almost as if there are some people at the top of the tree who hate cadet shooting. 
EDIT - i wonder if the debacle with armouries in the SW has skewed their statistics about usage - limited use = rifles not needed??,
This is why we’re pushing the SASC for the AR SAAI so as we can be more efficient in how this is done. What we need is support from as high as possible to make this happen.
As an ideal, we need to stop this stupid curtailment of the L81…
That’s a cost decision being made at MOD level though, not the RAFAC so not something we can really influence beyond parlimentary level discussions and even then I don’t think they would care as the focus is cost saving.
I appreciate it’s a loss but there are 2 things that should have happened and haven’t:
CCRS should have moved on quicker to drive other shooting.
People need to stop pretending we are here to breed olympian target shooters.
but if we aren’t…who is?
it is the same with the flying package the RAFAC used to offer.
we are not here to recruit the future RAF or commercial pilots, but my word the percentages of those who are former Cadets is significant and so without the experience (be it target shooting or flying) the end result suffers
disclaimer, i have no clue how many olympic shooters are former Cadets so perhaps my point is moot and yours is spot on?