The Ministry of Defence has reiterated that Project Grayburn, the British Army’s effort to replace the SA80A3 service rifle, remains in its concept phase, with early work focused on defining capability needs and engaging with industry.
In response to written parliamentary questions tabled by Ben Obese-Jecty MP (Conservative, Huntingdon), Minister for Defence Maria Eagle confirmed that the programme is still at the exploratory stage.
“Project GRAYBURN is currently in the concept phase with the aim of identifying and understanding the capability requirements,” she stated, adding that considerations include “performance, interoperability and complexity.”
While full details remain under wraps due to commercial sensitivities, the Minister noted that further updates will be outlined in the forthcoming Defence Investment Plan. The plan, expected in the autumn, will replace the current Defence Equipment Plan and expand on capability investments set out in the 2025 Strategic Defence Review.
The British Army currently fields the L85A3, the latest variant of the long-serving SA80 family, as its standard-issue rifle. First introduced in the 1980s, the SA80 underwent several overhauls to improve reliability, ergonomics and weight distribution, culminating in the current A3 version.
Despite these improvements, the Army has acknowledged the need to move towards a more modern platform. The projected out-of-service date for the L85A3 is currently 2030, and Project Grayburn has been established to identify and deliver its replacement.
As part of early concept work, the Ministry has confirmed that “various rifle calibres are being considered”, alongside design characteristics such as adaptability to optics and modular attachments. Eagle also noted that the Army is taking “measures to mitigate any risk of potential capability vulnerabilities” during the transition period.
The MOD has already held discussions with manufacturers and industry experts to evaluate how the Land Industrial Strategy and UK production capacity might influence the future weapon’s development. While the overall cost of the programme remains unknown, it will depend on the eventual scope and complexity of the selected design.
Project Grayburn aims to produce a next-generation individual weapon tailored to the evolving demands of modern conflict, combining reliability, lethality and interoperability with allies.
Good to see the govt and MoD reacting at pace to the evolving threats to this country and our way of life.
Probably don’t want the protracted shit show that was the SA 80
Also replacing the A3 and the A2 is, all things considered, a very low priority.
I remember the good old days of the British army in the 80’s and 90’s with a service rifle that barely worked and a main battle tank where half the fleet were missing engines.
Not like any of this namby pamby nonsense now a days with global testing regimes and the like 😀
I believe I pointed out that the KS-1 acquisition was very quick (especially if you start counting from when the public became aware of it), and that Grayburn was not going to bring a weapon system into service any time soon. I’d be surprised if all the L85A3s (or even A2’s, as PG rifles are going to cascade A3’s to rear echelon units) are out of service by 20300.
HK416 or SCAR seem like solid choices
my 2 cents
Czech Bren 3s are apparently well-liked in Ukraine, and a different platform to the AR which doesn’t cost the earth.
We won’t get it. We probably should get something off the shelf but I think the MOD will copy the USA army and get the 6.8mmx51 calibre XM7 and XM250 weapons.
Would prefer it if we didn’t but the increased range, accuracy and stopping power over 7.62 and 5.56 is appealing to give troops a combat advantage, especially Vs lightly armoured troops wearing modern composite armoured vests that likely can’t be penetrated reliably by 5.56 or 7.62
Interesting thread about this matter on BFBS you tube from royal armouries. In essence it will go down to a 6.8 creedmoor or the Grendal round. The US military have switched to their new service rifle XM7 6.8mmx51 and squad automatic weapons XM250 so I’d imagine the UK will go for the same calibre. Or as an alternative back to 7.62 but with newer versions with a lighter weight round which would mean magazine size grows to deliver the same number of rounds the SA80 can.
I think we’ll just copy the USA but make all the ammo within the UK but likely and hopefully keep the SA80 A3 as a reserve battlefield rifle in case we rapidly need to arm 100,000 volunteers. That would make a lot of sense.
Jeez don’t overthink it, just buy a lightweight AR-15 derivative and move on to other things.
Ukraine has throughly disproven the idea that we need a longer range cartridge with better penetration.
Speaking of Ukraine, Why not ask our Ukrainian allies what their favourite is, and buy some of those?
Czech Brens have apparently been rather popular, and are a nice alternative to AR15s that aren’t all gold-plated and bespoke.
Because Ukraine is operating under different constraints than we are, and the MoD will have it’s own priorities which will not necessarily align with what any given individual in Ukraine has to say.
As Dern says, yep, under different constraints
Ukrainians need anything and everything!
The Ukrainians used rifles such as the Ukrainian Malyuk 5.45mm bullpup rifle early in the war.
Eventually, the western rifles took over
And they now receive so many types and makes of rifles from the state and fundraisers, it would take way too long to deal with!
You wouldn’t get an accurate enough answer 🤔🤣
Oh, and they all have their personal favourites with rifle modifications etc. and ammunition
Same with the sniper rifles, highlighting that the 375 caliber is the best cartridge of choice.
The British Army will faff about as normal and drag their feet over details, and ask for a GUCCI requirement
I think it will be an off-the-shelf European model
The problem with that statement is that the world is awash with Ar-15 derivatives. Project Hunter (the project that ended up with the procurement of the KS-1/L403 for the Rangers and Marines) was literally just a line of up AR-15 variants. But even here, I think if you said it has to be an AR-15 derivative and therefore ruled out the FN SCAR and the CZ Bren 3 there’d be at least some push back.
As it stands I suspect the MoD is still in the business of deciding what the criteria it wants to judge applicants by, we are a ways off from hearing what exactly the requirements for a bid are.
Not my field but if we want interoperability (and soon?) should we not just buy something that is already out there and used by our allies?
Designing bespoke solutions and finishing up with something that is UK-only kit has hardly a stellar record.
This is a field where interoperability is kind of a moot point. Your average British soldier is highly unlikely to need to use a Estonian, Polish or German weapon. The only huge benefit of interoperability is with ammunition, and we all use 5.56 and 7.62 already. However as we don’t make our own rifles anymore, we are probably going to buy something off the shelf simply because that’s what the option will be.
This is a nitpick. But why is the MOD calling it Project Grayburn, and not Greyburn?
Likely named after someone🤔🤷♂️
Pretty sure that Project and Operation names have been randomly generated since at least the 1980’s.
Whatever rifle is eventually selected, we need to manufacture it here even if under licence.
Whether it makes sense to select a new caliber, I’m not sure. Most NATO forces, including the USMC continue to use 5.56 mm., so interoperability would suggest sticking with the NATO standard makes most sense.,