It was that plan that alerted me to the problem Nothing like top quality internal communication
The DIN still exists and 30th Sept is the end date at the moment - an updated DIN needs issuing - talking does not override a DIN
There are significant issues that need to be taken into account by parent units & No 8 users, such as serviceable gauges or gauge calibration via commercial sources.
The policy letter should be sent to all parent unit armouries & users in order for them to be aware of the various considerations.
The OSD has not been changed, but there shouldn’t be a recall notice. The safety case will be extended so the life of the No 8 will be on a “waste out” basis.
Well, September 2015 has passed. Has anybody seen official communications about the future of the No8?
a new DIN has been issued. Still waiting for a copy of the actual doc, but jist of it from the email trail that came with it’s notification is No8 remains in service until Sep2016. Your WHQ was advised on Tues evening.
Waiting for news of the timescale/number of rifles for the No 8 replacement…
For those that have an historic interest in repairs for the No 8.
There is a course running at the end of this month centrally to convert members of the SATTs and CTT onto the new rifle. So it appears that some at least have been procured, and there is a manual for them.
Yeah, heard that at the weekend also that there is no manual to issue yet…
It seems they are doing the courses and the manuals will follow
The email seems to imply that there is a drafted manual, which the training teams will be using to deliver this course, and after their feedback/revisions, it can be put on wider release.
It also implies that the introduction of the replacement rifle will be going ahead, but I haven’t seen a formal message announcing the replacement…
Also, it’s not that long in “officaldom” time to 30 Sep 2016 - the OSD date for the No 8. Any idea if the OSD will be extended in order to cover any “gapping” with the new rifle??
The first batch of the new rifles has been ordered, so I would say it is probably going ahead.
All well & good - but how many, when will they be available to be issued (to which units) - & what is the master plan to cover the OSD for the No 8…??
700 at the moment but that might just be for ACF and CCF(Army) - it wasn’t that specific. Fielding plan TBC.
Is there any detail available about the sighting system? Can we expect decent sights as standard (with windage at least) or will they be as basic as the singer sights? Can I boresight the rifle and adjust for individual firers from that datum? Can we vary the diameter of the rearsight aperture?
The only thing I have seen was on the posted news article which said “The FVT’s sights are a simple aperture backsight with windage and elevation adjustment, combined with a 22mm tunnel foresight. Close-up photos of these sights can be seen here. This allows for conventional ring elements, as used by civilian target shooters, to be used by cadets.” I haven’t seen the rifle or the sights in person so I can’t say if any of the above is accurate.
A thought - does that mean that the “tin hat” tgts format will change in that the sight elements should be circular aperture? Or, will the rifle come with different width/height blade elements?
i have heard from a fellow CFAV parented by RAF Brize Norton that the No8 will be no more by Sept 2016…
they also said the ACF are already using the Savage rifle…
should we expect the PAM in the coming weeks if the ACF already have it [Savage/No9] in use??
We should probably expect to see a WHT full of nonsense.
I haven’t seen any information on it yet so I doubt it has actually been issued anywhere. Then again when the CZ200 was first issued I was given all the information on a poorly photocopied bit of paper so you never know!
Since I raised the point of a “WHT full of nonsense”, can anybody suggest a reason why, with the “unload” on the No8 rifle, we close the bolt and operate the trigger before re-opening the bolt?
If looking and checking in the breech is sufficient for a NSP, why are these additional actions part of an unload and what risks would there be if the unload was simply look and check, then fold the rearsight?