Just seen this
Interesting…
Is this.going to be the end of full bore shooting in the Corps then?
Or the replacement we should’ve had for the No8.
Bin off the L144 and go to L98 drills for both small and full bore.
Simplify the whole thing down to 1 Training Course.
1 Like
Sounds good to me.
Should have been the Anschutz Junior. Lots of cadets only want to achieve .22 shooting.
Probably would have been too if Anschutz hadn’t withdrawn early on in the competition as they couldn’t meet the fielding requirements.
Yup. Seen it, held it. Managed not to lick it.
The prototype was at DSEI in 2019. Mass recoil system, and designed to be S1 compliant. That much is in the public domain…
1 Like
Replacement of conversion kits. For the regulars simpler for training than adopting a dedicated .22 self loader like the Ruger. Just slightly different WHT to cover different internals.
Maybe less advantageous for cadet use, as we’d actually need more weapons than was the case with the .22 kit. As a replacement for the L144, though, it has legs. Same drills, nicer transition from the AR. As long as it works as advertised…
I thought that was the whole point of the DCCT
The issue with the conversion kits was that the weapon was still a Section 5 as the kit was easily removed (usually when it broke). The new weapon is being designed not to be a S5 and not possible to be modified to S5 so as it can alleviate some of the storage and transport issues.
Hopefullly it will also be more robust than the conversion kits.
I’m not aware of any discussions at the moment with any of the cadet forces to procure any but if anyone will then it will be the ACF first as they hate the L144.
ah right that makes sense, given how the RAFAC is its top fan 
Maybe there’s not enough DCCTs to go round?
Shush don’t tell…
Surely the cost of building a few extras has to be lower than purchasing and fielding a whole extra weapons system?
I struggle to think of a decent sized Training Camp that doesn’t have a DCCT. (Outside of the ones that are dedicated to AT).
I tried to get in touch within MOD for the originator of the spec - it was as if it written for a heavy duty “weapon of war” with safety catch, drop requirements, etc.
We could have had a top quality .22, great for trg & especially competitions.
Possibly, though from what H&K said the .22s would be recycled / upcycled from existing hardware. Maybe it fills a different niche. Hopefully we’ll be able to get some. And more DCCT time!
Maybe they’re thinking of AR centres with miniature ranges in?
I dare say 10 x .22 SA80 per centre would be cheaper than a DCCT range per centre.
Indeed but considering what the Army traditionally used Small Bore to achieve (working on Marksmanship at a fraction of the cost), I don’t see a place for a .22 service rifle in the modern age, certainly not at the cost.