Those are pretty much the conditions by which we’ve been operating them here for the past 2 decades at least.
Those are pretty much the conditions by which we’ve been operating them here for the past 2 decades at least.[/quote]
We don’t operate any in my county any more. It is a royal pain in the ■■■■.
And probably not the only ones - but at least now they won’t vanish into thin air at the end of Sep!! 
Well there’s a good few of them knocking around so its unlikely that they’ll all break in the short term is it?
Probably not, thank goodness. However, it will be the servicing/gauging/spare parts that might become an issue.
Any idea what the scaling for the replacement will be?
We are established for 221 (Army:121, RN: 40; RAF: 60) which resulted in 36 L98A2 (1:4 Army and 1:10 RAF, I seem to recall). We used to have 18 no. 8, no doubt a legacy; we have an 8-lane range. 8 were withdrawn a couple of years back for spares leaving me with 10 for an 8-lane range, which seems fair enough. Fewer than 8 of the replacement would be a pain as we would no longer be able to run all our lanes, which seems a bit daft, though I have come to expect daftness from Support Command…
Well, that will depend on the price per unit of the (unknown) replacement rifle with a proportion of the first year’s budget allocated to spares/repair support. The original tender was quoted for £6M, I would guess at only 15-20% of that for the first allocation. Yep, times are hard!!
As to what/when/how a scaling or allocation is agreed is anyone’s guess! Sounds like you have more serviceable rifles than some Wings! 
I still think that they should go one of 2 routes:
-
Bin the ridiculous requirement for a safety catch (the L81A2 cadet tgt rifle has one - it’s not used!) & the option of basic AND advanced sights. Go off the shelf for Anschutz or Walther, robust & high (known) quality products. Accept less rifles per unit on that basis. Spare support, etc, = simple.
-
Go the “full metal jacket” single shot .22 service rifle look-alike; that way there is a safety catch, magazine & cocking handle = as similar to the L98A2 as can be.
Re-inventing the wheel is a known MOD trait - & with SASC having their input, the “we’ve always done it that way” outlook will always take precedence…
This is being looked into as part of a requirement for biathlon teams, but is probably a while off yet.
Hmmm, are we talking the same type of design? Mine was more like THIS in order to be as close as possible a transition to the L98A2…
A typical biathlon rifle is more like this ONE. Straight pull bolt too - not sure about a safety catch, I think they fire the last shot in the sequence & leave the empty case in the chamber? That’ll be good for SASC!
Hmmm, are we talking the same type of design? Mine was more like THIS in order to be as close as possible a transition to the L98A2…
A typical biathlon rifle is more like this ONE. Straight pull bolt too - not sure about a safety catch, I think they fire the last shot in the sequence & leave the empty case in the chamber? That’ll be good for SASC! :P[/quote]
Yes, the idea is as per your first link but obviously as an L85. Well, I imagine being like an L98 would be more appropriate as I don’t see the need for automatic on a rifle like this. The procurement team was only “looking into” it earlier in the year so if it does happen it will be a couple of years before anything happens.
Presumably the problem with the L41A2 subcalibre adaptor for the ATC is the lack of ‘proper’ armouries on ATC units?
Not that we’ve actually used our A2 ones yet - we only have 4 (we had 8 L41A1) and I’m not current on the A2 variant (and it is different).
Basically, yes. The problem with the subcalibre adapter isn’t the adapter but the weapon it needs to be is fitted to 
You aren’t current? There isn’t a WHT for the damn thing!
Ah. But according to TG5 it’s a weapon category which needs to be listed separately on your F7257 for you to be able to exercise your RCO qualification with it, and my F7257 says L41A1 not A2.
Of course, according to the Army (SASC who make the rules) it’s merely an accessory to the L98A2 and as such doesn’t require any specific qualification. But then according to them, SA(SR)07 is valid for any weapon you have a WHT for, so you could do the range course on the no. 8 and then run an L98A2 range; but the RAF/SATT system doesn’t permit this…
A mess, entirely of HQAC’s making…
Do they know?
The saga for the replacement to the No 8 rifle never ceases to amaze me.
Had this been a commercial operation, the decision making processes, funding & eventual solution would have been completed years ago. Oh no, we have had a convoluted & over-complicated process (albeit driven by MOD rules) to try & find a half-way house answer. Personally, I think that the tender details did not reflect the true need. If the Cadet organisations want to continue with .22 tgt rifle shooting, go for a proper .22 tgt rifle. If they want to have an intermediate “service rifle” option, then as per my previous link (magazine fit, etc). If none of the above is suitable, go for the .177 air rifle.
Our parent station have advised that the Safety Case expires on 30 Sep 15, and the No.8 is not to be used after this date, they are therefore collecting all No.8’s so that they can then be returned to a central location.
This is also going to have repercussions for the L98, with having fired the No.8 a pre-requisite, we might as well all give up now :mad:
So for our 12 year old’s that join we now have;
[ul]
[li]No Gliding[/li]
[li]No Flying until 13.3[/li]
[li]No Shooting until 14[/li]
[li]No DofE until 14[/li]
[/ul]
Can someone remind me why we reduced the age of entry :ohmy:
They can have done shooting on air rifle beforehand. I could have sworn the whole requirement for prior shooting had been removed but apparently not. If the No8 does gate taken away then perhaps they’ll need to reconsider that stance.
Get your parent station to contact TG5 - the Safety Case has changed meaning that the information they have is out of date. Alternatively, PM me your BADER address and I can send you the information direct
Good News 
It has now been confirmed (through local CoC) that although not published as yet the safety case has been extended and as such we won’t be losing our weapons at the end of the month.
Last minute.com!! I bet that the station armouries were already planning which order to grab them in! lol