Talk:FN FAL

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Firearms; If you would like to join us, please visit the project page where you can find a list of open tasks. If you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale

Contents

[edit] Australia/NZ stuff

Why the comment on the Australians being told to keep magazines because of shortages of funding? It's very standard practice here in NZ to keep empty magazines for three reasons: 1) to allow you to bomb up the mags again as soon as practical. 2) to deny enemy 'sign'. 3) to deny the enemy equipment. We get our asses kicked if we leave our gear lying around a battlefield, is it not the same elsewhere? TinyPirate 01:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

We need a photo! David.Monniaux 11:17, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

How were Australian tactics in Vietnam dictated by this weapon? That's unclear and needs justification. Rst

I agree with the above sentiments. New Zealand and Australian tactics tended to be off the main tracks. Also the experience of the Malayan Emergency helped their tactics. I'm not sure the FN FAL affected them.

Also used by New Zealand. Did NZ buy them from Australia? Rst

No New Zealand obtained them commercially from Armscor in South Africa. Whirling

About tinypirate comment. we may not use the fn fal but its common us practice to just leave the magizine on the ground once there finished. im nbot sure about the Special opeeration

Hello Used the FN to train with when I was in Royal Canadian Army Cadets. It's 13:57 on Tue Jan 24, 2006. My site is at http://www.michaelmanalolazo.webitsmart.co.uk Just Surfing. Thanks.

I am an ex-aussie digger from the 80's. During the period I was in the army it was drilled into us that we do not drop our mags. They were to be stowed in our mag pouches as we changed to a charged mag, or as soon as the tactical situation allowed. The reason given was that you could recharge them later...and if you didnt have them you couldnt charge them! I also edited a portion of the Australian post, someone had put something in there about not being allowed to use them on "fully automatic", not only was it prohibited..it was also something outside the normal range of the weapon, the sear on the Australian SLR was semi-auto only. There was a trick involving a small piece of "hoochie" cord, which would allow the rifle to fire in a "fully automatic" mode, but that is a trick best not elaborated on in this forum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.59.195.104 (talk) 18:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] not an assault rifle

changed "assault rifle" to "battle rifle" to correct error and clarify internal conflict

In that case, the infobox on the right needs to be changed, as it's listed as an assault rifle there, but it's described as a battle rifle in the main text. Geoff B 00:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The assault rifle page states that an assault rifle "is a type of automatic rifle generally defined as ... chambering intermediate-powered ammunition." This article clearly says that the FAL "utilize[s] a full-power rifle cartridge." An FAL is a battle rifle, not an assualt rifle.

You're correct, the FAL cannot be considered an assault rifle. I'll make it like the M14 article and put "Selective fire rifle" on the spec_type field. --Squalla 18:57, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] .280 British

I think the page needs discussion about Britains involvement with FN to create the FAL. It was originally meant to be a select fire rifle in a medium sized caliber much like the Stg. 44. The British aided FN in medium powered rifle cartridges and came up with .280 British but changed to 7.62x51 mm NATO (.308 Win.) with the standardization of NATO calibers and pressure from Americans. El Jorge 23:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australian AR was a L1A2, not a L2A1

In Australian service the Automatic Rifle (AR) version of the SLR was known as the L1A2, not the L2A1. For a reference see http://www.raeme.net/toc.php?cat=armoury&item=2

That contradicts the information from every other source on the matter. Doesn't mean its wrong, but I've never heard of that. Also, since the weapons were obviously quite seperate, it would not make sense that the Automatic Rifle (with its full-auto, heavy barrel, lack of handguards, bipod, and different rear sights) would be a variant of the rifle. Any other information confirming this is welcome. -- Thatguy96 15:18 May 30 2006
I suspect that this fellows use of L1A2 is due to a slip of the fingers or faulty memory. Collector Grade Publications' authoritative UK and Commonwealth FALs clearly uses the designation L2A1, and even quotes from Aussie manuals and reports. One such manual is Technical Brochure, Rifle Equipments 7.62mm L1A1, L2A1, L1A1-F1 published by SAF Lithgow, the manufacturer of the rifles. --D.E. Watters 21:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Out of curiousity what was the L1A1-F1? -- Thatguy96 18:22 May 30 2006
It was a special model made up for Papua-New Guinea Forces. The buttstock and flashhider were both shortened. --D.E. Watters 15:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fiction references

I have moved the list of references to films/tv/video games to a new pages and replaced the section with a link to it for the following reasons:

  • This is to keep it the article clean and uniform with other similar articles
  • Reduces overall length (already quite long) in keeping with size guidelines (see Wikipedia:Article size)
  • Help with inclusion into pages like List of firearms in video games and List of firearms in films

See Heckler & Koch MP5 / Heckler & Koch MP5 in popular culture or MAC-10 / MAC-10 in popular culture) for similar ...in popular culture pages) for similar efforts. Deon Steyn 12:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Queries & observations

'History' section
Para 2
"Unlike some other tactical rifles, reliable high-caps for the FN FAL are quite inexpensive".
What is a 'high-cap', reliable or not ?

There is no mention of the rifle's nickname "Right hand of the free world." Seems it should be in there somewhere, but I am not sure where.

'Israel' section
Para 1
a. "They (the FN FAL),were effective up to 730m".
Somebody has written on the edit page: "This sentence doesn't make much sense". I agree. Indeed, I would go as far as to say that 730m sounds: (a) too precise and (b) too ambitious.
If memory serves correctly, the British army taught the L1A1 SLR thus:
Maxium effective range, as an individual weapon - 300m; as one in a section (squad) - 600m.

b. "the Mauser K98 and the M1 carbine as sniper rifles". The M1 carbine as a sniper rifle, is this correct ?

'United States' section
Is the last paragraph in this section really necessary ? And who is Gary Jeter when he's at home?

RASAM 20:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

'Production and Use - Australia' Section 2.2

At least towards the end of its service life, the L1A1 was not fully automatic (comment saying "fully automatic use was discouraged"). Fire selector had a marking on the body of the rifle for fully automatic, however it could only be moved between "safe" and "single shot". The Kidd 03:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Answer to Question B

In regards to question B. Yes, the M1 Carbine family served a limited role as a designated marksman's weapon. Outfitted with the infrared M2 Sniperscope and flash hider, it was used in Korea and to some extent Vietnam. El Jorge 19:37, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment on Question A

Can agree with the ranges 300m/600m ranges as taught during my basic training (1989). Was still being issued with the L1A1 up to about 1991 or 1992. My accuracy was nowhere near out to those ranges (although I am sure the rounds got there, just not where intended!).

—The FN FAL was also used extensively by the Rhodesian Security Forces during the Terrorist War 1971 - 1980 and was shown to be far superior to the AK47 where aimed fire from ambush in savannah bush/veld conditions were required. Hitting power against hidden troops in concealed vegetation was excellent with the 7.62 ball ammo and the ability to operate under all weather conditions as well as above average accuracy made it a formidable weapon.Kills through 15 - 20 cm tree branches were often reported. The one disadvantage with the 20 round magazine was weight. Carrying an FN FAl with 100 rounds of ammo required far more effort than the equivalent for AK 47. The AK47 was better employed in a rapid fire situation, where blanket firepower rather than accuracy were required. Witness J. Mpofu Superintendent BSAP

[edit] New Zealand Army/Air Force

I've edited the section on the New Zealand army since it said that they used American M16s, which is not true, they use Aussie F88 Steyrs. The section seems to have been written by someone from the Royal New Zealand Air Force, who seems to have got the Steyr and M16 mixed up, or perhaps was recalling a period from when the M16 was in service.(before the Steyr replaced it)58.104.198.156 15:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wars

on the info box , it stated "cold war" only. the FAL has been used in MANY MANY wars , and even more if you consider conflicts. i can't think of many off the top of my head except for the Vietnam War (used by Australian & New Zealand army , SASR , NZSAS and the french foreign legion) . please help me out with this , i'm sorry but it's dammright disgusting that the M16 article gets more attention then this rifle that has had near more overall use around the world.

How about these:

Vietnam Rhodesia, Congo, well heck...about every war in Africa, Faulklands (Both sides used it!), Libya-Chad Isreali-Arab(6-days, Yom Kippur, Suez conflict), Kashmir, Sri-Lanka, Iran-Iraq, Desert Storm Rhodesian Bush War (Second Chimurenga)

G. Scott, 16 Oct 2006

I must add, the FN FAL was used in the war of Cyprus in 1974 by both sides. The greeks had greek assembled FN-FALs that had just arrived on the island (to replace the M1 Garand), and were used by many units. The turks, although having the G3 as their service rifle, they also had a number of G1 rifles (german made FN-FAL)--Xristar (talk) 10:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rhodesia?

I believe they were used by Rhodesia, including during the Rhodesian Bush War. Not having any more information than that, I haven't put that in the article. Does anyone have more info, or pictures to confirm this? rst 05:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

--i can confirm that the british SASR used L1A1s in Rhodesia

--I just added a brief section on the use of FAL rifles by Rhodesia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.174.82.215 (talk) 01:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Advertising

Think we can get rid of the advertising for DSArms? 24.28.19.63

We can, and did, apparently... However I don't know that this is the best move. Regardless of whether it may be considered "free advertising", DS Arms is in fact a current producer of the FN FAL rifle. Their product is claimed to be a completely new rifle, not a rebuild from de-militarized parts, and they have been doing it for many years now. Given this fact, they would indeed be one of only a few makers of the FAL still with rifles in production. Also of importance is the fact that DS Arms is one of only a few US makers that ever made the rifle. Based upon these facts, I would be in favor of including a statement in the USA FAL section which merely indicates that the FAL is still in production by DS Arms. FWIW, it turned me off too when I saw it in the article, but after thinking it over, I understand why it should be there.

Is there any evidence that indicates the DS Arms SA-58 FAL is not a completely new, US produced, production FN FAL rifle? and that they have been so for a decade or more? I also had a FAL made by Springfield Armory,for the life of me I can't remember the designation used by them,getting old,an excellent rifle with superb accuracy and function.Safn1949 02:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC) Ok,the one I had was the SAR-4800Safn1949 02:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC) G. Scott 23 Oct 2006

IIRC Springfield Armory SAR-48s were not new production FALs, but built from surplus recievers (Greek and something else IIRC). -- Thatguy96 03:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What The?...

There have got to be at least 10 million FAL's made as the FAL is the most used western made rifle. More are in circulation than even the M16, which I think there are about 9 Million in circulation. The info box states that at least 1 million have been made, this seems a bit low for me

[edit] Adding more images.

This article seems broing with mostly text, and very few images. thta's why i'm adding images (existing, already uploaded) to the erticles where I feel appropiate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TOMNORTHWALES (talk • contribs) 23:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] History of the FN FAL

I believe and have read that the original design/idea was thought up in 1940. The designer fled to the UK upon the German invasion of Belgium to avoid the Germans learning of this weapon. He then tried to talk the British into producing them. They declined as it was to hard to change all there factory's at the time and they where busy fighting the battle of Britain. After that I believe they made 2 or 3 prototypes although never mass produced them.

As for what happened next Im not sure. I read this in the book Military Small arms of the 20th century. Although that was a few years ago. Ill try to find time to re read it. Wonx2150 05:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Saive's rescued prototype was for the SAFN, not the FAL. D.E. Watters 06:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] designation?

The article's title is "FN FAL" and at some point it seamlessly changes to "L1A1" as a synonym. I'm assuming this is a military designation, but it would be nice to have a short text at the very beginning explaining this, as the (non-explanatory) references to "L1A1" are numerous. -- MiG 08:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you have instances? Because a quick look at the history and introductions and I don't even see L1A1 mentioned once, and in the Argentina section under users, which is the first section, it clearly says "British-made L1A1s." In fact, a quick use of the "find" function shows that only the mention of the L1 in the New Zealand portion of the article comes without a direct mention of it being a military designation or related to the British military desingation. -- Thatguy96 11:06, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
The term "L1A1" is used an amazing fourty times (CTRL-F) and it's not mentioned as a separate designation. As I said, a number that high warrants some sort of introductory text, for example saying that "the FN FAL is produced under licence in the UK, British made FN FAL rifles are known as L1A1." Does this sound about right? As I'm pressed for time these days I'll probably forget to check this page, feel free to add it to the article if it's correct! -- MiG 22:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I still want an example, because as I said, if you look at the actual text it is relatively self-explanatory. In fact, the first instance of the term in the article is "...or are British-made L1A1s." The second instance of the term in the article is "...improved version of the FAL rifle, designated the L1A1 rifle by Australia and Great Britain, and the C1 by Canada." I fail to see an issue. -- Thatguy96 23:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Not sure why you're battling this so forcefully. A line added to the introduction won't diminish the text, won't bother those in the know and will help those that read over this line ("... designated the L1A1 rifle ...") which is well hidden in the body text (second chapter, third paragraph). You don't reckon that no less than *fourty* instances of a specific designation deserve a proper introduction in the very first paragraph? -- MiG 20:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm "battling...so forcefully" because you suggested that it was impossible to discern from the article, and that of the 40 appearances "it seamlessly changes" (which is untrue) and that it is "non-explanatory" (which is also untrue). The reality is that the term's first instance in the article clearly states what I have already mentioned, and the second instance of it also mentions the connection. To say that the L1A1 designation appears without it being explained, as you have posited, is simply false. I see no problem in adding what you have suggested, but I see no reason. If you would like you are more than welcome to do so. I just want it clear for the record that the L1A1 designation is not as cryptic as one might infer from your responses. In fact, if you actually read the 40 instances (the majority of which are in the UK and Australia), none are out of context, and no entry using the term with the sole exception of the New Zealand entry does not explain the term in the first sentence in which it appears. -- Thatguy96 21:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I was under the impression that you were vehemently opposed to this fairly simple addition, which kept me wondering. I guess it comes down to either being familiar with weapons or not. I think the article will be improved for those not familiar with the FN FAL by adding this particular line. Done! -- MiG 09:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DSA-58OSW battle carbine

Shouldn't this article be merged with the US comertial FAl varients subsection. While I have seen photo's of it being tested in US Army hands as is it is not a notable varient.Then again given the amount of information in the article it could also be deleated. Paulwharton 03:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I would agree that that article should be merged with this one. The person who created that has been blitzing new articles of non-notable variants. -- Thatguy96 03:38, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 30-round LMG magazine (UK section)

I'm not very happy with this statement. The LMG magazine was unreliable with 30 rounds. When used by the infantry, they usually only filled it with 28 rounds as the weight of the rounds was too much for the leaf spring in the magazine (the LMG magazine being designed to work upside down). The 20-round magazine had a stronger coil spring. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TinyMark (talk • contribs) 17:25, August 22, 2007 (UTC). "The magazine from the 7.62 mm version of the L4 also fitted the L1A1 however the magazine spring was not sufficient to the task of providing enough upward pressure to feed rounds correctly." This quote is from the "Bren Gun" article! TinyMark 17:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm not entirely clear here as to what the problem is. Your first comment and the "quote" from the Bren Gun article basically say the same thing. -- Thatguy96 19:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually filling it with 28 rounds would still over-feed it. The thirty round magazine would be fit with anywhere from 25 to 27 rounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.128.253.170 (talk) 15:34, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article rewrite?

This entry needs some serious work. The users section consumes most of this page. We need a detailed technical run-down of the design. Koalorka (talk) 02:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Move production/use section to new article?

Seriously, it's gettin' a mighty long folks. Ominae (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think a better approach then a seperate article would to look at some other articles production sections of the same subject (AK47) rings a bell. RoyalOrleans 02:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I would vote for a compromise. Where the header of a table like the one in the AK-47 article links to a separate page where the more detailed information could be held. -- Thatguy96 (talk) 15:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)