"It's Good Enough For The SAS"

I watched that Dispatches on how the MOD was wasting our money the other week. My overall impression was that it collected together some of the more obvious headlines, provided enough basic background to get your worked up, then conveniently moved onto the next topic before explaining any of the relevant detail. In other words, it was a documentary version of the many paper-media articles that inspired me to create this blog.

I could go into it all in detail with this post, but I shan't. In all honesty, I've forgotten most of it because it didn't tell me anything new or overly interesting. In fact, the only thing that stuck with me after the final credits was the scene in which the reporter visits an arms fair and speaks to the bloke from Colt about providing the British Army with M16 and M4 assault rifles instead of the SA80 that we actually use.

The SA80 has had a rough time of it. When it first came out, branded the "A1" variant, it had serious, well-docuemented issues. No-one disputes that it was a bit crap, as the magazine dropping off while firing is a pain the bum for any soldier, and difficult to gloss over. Unfortunately, since the press latched on to that particular defect in the early days, it's struggled to recover. In my experience, it's difficult to find a British soldier who doesn't rate the "A2" variant that incorporate all the necessary fixes. It now does its job and does it very well. The press, however, will keep telling you it's rubbish.

There are many sensible arguments for and against the use of the SA80, not because of how "good" or "bad" it is, but because of the role it plays and the things we need it for. I'll get into those arguments shortly, but I want to start with the one that Dispatches used, and which most people who don't really get the military but want to sound knowledgeable use: "The SAS use the M16 and the M4. If it's good enough for them, why aren't all British troops using it?"

First of all, the SAS don't use the Colt rifles. Not insofar as they have a "standard issue", anyway. It's common knowledge that they actually use the Canadian versions, the C7 and the C8. Granted, the rifles are barely distinguishable from the American ones, but that's still a factual error on the part of Dispatches.

Secondly, the SAS are special. The clue is in the name. They don't fight normal battles, the don't get into the same situations as a "line grunt" infantry soldier. Most of their scraps are up close and personal. If you believe books like Task Force Black it's all kicking in doors and pulling people out of bed. Chances are, if they're fighting people at range, something has gone wrong. Infantry, however, could well be expected to get stuck in at longer ranges. Funnily enough, the SA80 is significantly better at that job.

Moving away from the dubious Dispatches claims, the SA80 is often accused of being heavy, complicated, and expensive. Yes, it does way a fair bit in comparison to the M16 and is a lot more difficult to put together. The Americans, however, don't give their troops as much basic training as we do. They needed a simpler weapon that could be trained on quicker. As we essentially get to create "better" soldiers (physically fitter, as well as more skilled) with our additional training time, we can afford to give them a better weapon that requires more input.

The cost issue is the last thing I'll cover, and I'll use the official MOD line because, well, it makes perfect sense. The US buys many millions of its stock infantry rifles. They're simpler to put together as well. Our Forces are smaller, hence we need fewer rifles. Economies of scale suggest that a shitter product done on a bigger scale is quite obviously going to cost less per unit than a better product done on a smaller scale. Even if we sold our troops short by giving them a rifle that didn't fulfil the same criteria they needed for the job they do, we'd still pay more per unit than the Yanks. Why? Because we're small-time in comparison.

In summary, always be wary of people who immediately assume that the SAS kit is the best at everything. A special unit, with a very special role, uses very specialised kit. It doesn't immediately make it applicable to Joe Squaddie sat behind a sandbag in Helmand. Lazy, lazy journalism.