I repectfully beg to differ. Winning bids seem to be more oriented towards the political flavour of the month. I somewhat doubt that RO were lowest bid with the SA80.

It all comes down to the following - Platoon commanders. They are primarily responsible for getting their unit up for battle, they will be primarily responsible for tactics, they control the situation. The particular unit's involved. Some units are better than others, every man is different and has different experience level, etc. The terrain it is being fought on. If it is close to the water, the SEALs have an advantage. If it is inside of a city, the British SAS has an advantage. Luck. If the SAS can spring an ambush on the SEALs first, then they have an advantage. If the SEALs can spring an ambush on he SAS first, then they have an advantage. Intelligence. If the SEALs have better intel on the SAS location, etc...then they have an advantage. If the SAS has better intel on the SEALs, then they have an advantage. Numbers. Since both the number of SEAL and SAS operators are classified, then we would have to guess here. But the SEALs have been rumored to have about 1,200 operators, while the SAS has about 150 operators. Advantage - SEALs. Another thing alot of you seem to forget is that CT does not equal being excellent at Land Warfare. CT = Kicking in Doors. Land Warfare = Fighting in a large land area. Also, we should be comparing DELTA vs the SAS...ST6 vs SBS...SEALs vs. Komsubin, etc...not "NAVY SEAL VS BRITISH SAS". Also, I prefer "SEALs >and< SAS vs. Terrorist scum bags" FWIW, SEALs have an very good record against other SpecOps forces in exercises...the SAS does as well. Memo, I can promise you that CAG did not say that the SAS was superior to them. Also, we have no idea who won the exercise...and DELTA and the SAS ARE VERY EQUAL...THEY ARE BASICALLY THE SAME UNIT.

Good point, well presented. However, it wasn't a case of money well spent. It wasn't long before the L85A1 (SA80) had to be upgraded (by H&K) to the A2. There were a few changes, new ing handle, firing pin etc (they should have concentrated on the bolt carrier assembly in my opinion) and these changes still cost over £90 million! and more to the point, British SF don't use the SA80 to my knowledge.

horsesoldier my comment regarding on delta force saying that the s.a.s is more elite is actually the truth but i do also know that maybe an s.a.s member return that favour.i have a close friend who served with the s.a.s and they do military warfare games with delat force,green beret on numerous occasions and the s.a.s always comes on top the reason he said for that is because the extra training and focus on individuality that gets them pass the line most of the time.as he put it the diffrence between the s.a.s and the rest is they do alot of individual training.like that commander from the navy seal said i cant remember his name "there is the s.a.s and then there is the rest"

>>horsesoldier my comment regarding on delta force saying that the s.a.s is more elite is actually the truth but i do also know that maybe an s.a.s member return that favour.i have a close friend who served with the s.a.s and they do military warfare games with delat force,green beret on numerous occasions and the s.a.s always comes on top the reason he said for that is because the extra training and focus on individuality that gets them pass the line most of the time.as he put it the diffrence between the s.a.s and the rest is they do alot of individual training.like that commander from the navy seal said i cant remember his name "there is the s.a.s and then there is the rest"<< It mayb be true, but like you said, I am sure that the SAS has returned the favor...I think it is more of a humility thing than anything else. Delta and the SAS are equal. They do almost the exact same training, they do alot of exercises, and they do alot of exercises together...so if the SAS wins an exercise between the two, I can promise you that it is more inline with them having an advantage (see my list) and it probably has nothing to do with "Who is better trained" and everything to do with who has certain advantages (I will almost bet on the platoon with the best platoon commander, that can make all the difference in the world).

>>Delta and the SAS are equal. They do almost the exact same training, they do alot of exercises, and they do alot of exercises together...so if the SAS wins an exercise between the two, I can promise you that it is more inline with them having an advantage<< Who does competitive head to head training exercises anyway? It's a waste of time, resources, $$$ etc, since no one has a specific mission of "be able to out arm wrestle the SAS/Delta/SEAL Team 6" etc. The SAS are very good by reputation, but Bravo Two-Zero demonstrates they can screw up operations as well as anyone else when push comes to shove. I'm not completely sold on the premise that they are 10 feet tall and shoot lightning bolts out of their eyes, nor that they are head and shoulders above anyone else.

one thing about the SAS is that for such a small unit they have such a broad range of capacity. need hostages rescued, long range recon, long term surveillance, precision strike, insurgents organized or suppressed, bodyguards, coups arranged/squashed in virtually any terrain found in the world and they will do the job at least competently. i really cannot think of any other unit that can make that claim much less with so few bodies available to it.

>>one thing about the SAS is that for such a small unit they have such a broad range of capacity. need hostages rescued, long range recon, long term surveillance, precision strike, insurgents organized or suppressed, bodyguards, coups arranged/squashed in virtually any terrain found in the world and they will do the job at least competently. i really cannot think of any other unit that can make that claim much less with so few bodies available to it.<< Delta does the exact same thing (exactly the same, seriously...with the same amount of manpower). The thing that I have found out after reading several books is that the platoon commander trains his men in SOF (does alot of it), so a platoon commander is as important as anything in my opinion. Pre-deployment training also prepares every SpecOps group for the most likely scenario they will face, so they all have fairly similar capabilities (maybe certain groups aren't equal, but they are all close). The fact is, that 'regular soldiers' (they aren't any 'regular soldiers' in the US/UK arsenal anymore) can do almost the same thing that the SpecOps groups can when it comes to clearing rooms, etc (they all are taught similar tactics, but reaction time is somewhat slower because they don't train as often as the SOF guys do)...especially when you are talking about the dirtbags they are facing in Afghanistan and Iraq. You have to laugh when you see a topic called "NAVY SEALS VS BRITISH SAS"...it is equal to "BATMAN VS SUPERMAN" in terms of silliness

As many have pointed out already, comparing such secretive and elite SF units is a pointless excersize as we simply dont know enough about them and even if we did there are simply too many variables to consider. But all of that aside, if we ARE doing a comparison wouldnt a comparison between the SEALs and the SBS be far more appropriate? (as both units specialize in naval operations first and foremost)

>>But all of that aside, if we ARE doing a comparison wouldnt a comparison between the SEALs and the SBS be far more appropriate? (as both units specialize in naval operations first and foremost)<< No, Devgru (ST6) and the SBS would be the best comparison...as they are similar in size and capability.