What is going on? Can’t use .22s because no one has parts for it and I imagine armourers can’t fix them and then the much awaited replacement can’t be used because it has faults. Why did no one see these during the evaluation period and ensure they were sorted before issue. Or is that asking too much?
1 Like
That is disappointing.
I’d understand it if the rifles had been in service for 10 years, and these problems were starting to surface (except the trigger gauge - that should really have been part of the procurement plan) - but before they’ve even reached a squadron??? Unbelievable.
From what I understand the vertical sight adjustment means that you can’t adjust it down far enough.
Essentially always shooting far far far to high to hit the target.
They are modifying them so that this problem can be corrected!
1 Like
I hope they’re also fixing the sighting increments - what with the current configuration at something like 4,957 clicks to the inch…
Thanks for that! I’ve just spoken to a mate who is in that line of business. He reckons that someone has decreed that the L144 must have a trigger gauge capable of measuring a certain amount of Lbs (I’m sure he said around 35), whereas the MOD only hold ones that go up to about 25lbs, which is why the fielding has been paused.
I’m guessing that someone has tried to save a bit of cash by using tools that we already held, only to find out that we can’t manage after all (a bit like those Chinooks that sat around in a hangar at Boscombe Down for a number of years…)!
Yeah, that is bonkers, isn’t it!
It makes it very accurate though, assuming the cadets can shoot consistently (and not lose count whilst adjusting the sights!).
Just under 1 click per mm - giving it a very very accurate sight adjustment. 28 clicks to 25mm
Some L144 gossip…
Sights are “variable” due to different sized foresight blocks / risers… Good quality control.
No 30 lb weights for “safety catch ON” weight check - so, probable procurement, unknown timescale, don’t hold your breath!
Possible issues with sears wearing unduly (& quickly) = safety issues.
Firing pin - continued impact on side of the breech (NSPs) - if the pin becomes worn, this might be an issue if a damaged pin splits the edge of the case = safety issue??!!
EDIT - if this proceeds to a “no availability” of .22 rifles in order to qualify for L98, this may progress to “not required” - hopefully. Age limit for L98 may disappear too…
I just hope that something is done as unless you have access to Air Rifle (Private Purchase) there is an ever dwindling number of cadets able to shoot anything.
Good job our training system is “progressive” eh?
2 Likes
It really beggars belief.
I even went to the MOD department who published the original tendering specification, & was told that “the experts know what they are doing.” Clearly not.
The concept of a cadet tgt rifle should not have gone down the “militarised” route for this type of design. It would have been entirely different if a .22" compatible “service rifle” option had been the preferred choice.
It wasn’t, we have been sold a pup.
It would seem that local provision might have to be a solution - let’s go & buy some Anschutz Youth rifles - oh, they do far more than the L144, immensely better quality, no issues with servicing or spare parts, ability to add on lots of extras - this should have been a primary choice to replace the No 8. Accept lesser numbers, you get what you pay for. Ah, no safety catch for SASC to come up with inappropriate NSPs for a single shot rifle…
Today I received an email today saying that all LPW .22 shooting is to cease immediately. Hmmm.
Waiting for a “pending” decision from the Ivory Towers, I believe… 
1 Like
I’ve had no such email. What for this time? Wind in the wrong direction?
Just seen sight of an email saying we may be getting No8 rifles back.
I believe that it is linked to the “pending” decision / update from on high, so the relevant DDH has said stop… Hopefully it will be rescinded once those above provide the relevant “solution.”
I’ve been told that the DIN for the No8 is being extended until mid-2018. Which explains why we were told not to let the armouries take them back.
Ok for those that could…
All ours were removed and quarantined as nobody would service them!
We were told from on high not to return them even if they were out of date.
For various reasons we didn’t get that luxury
They were ordered to be handed in