View Full Version : Delete
RetroRevolver77
04-05-17, 13:53
deleted
Grand58742
04-05-17, 14:03
Well, this article will put a serious spur under the saddle of the "7.62 RULES!" crowd.
Next thing you know the 1911 mafia will start clamoring for a reissue of JMB's classic.
I am kind of surprised we waited so long to put a DMR at the squad level in the .mil. It's something the Russians/Soviets were years ahead of us on.
WTF? Sorry, I just ain't seein' it happen.
If they're gonna do it make the barrel 18". Dropping to 16" robs the 7.62 of too much velocity.
Averageman
04-05-17, 14:11
From the above article;
Other factors to consider are the additional weight and recoil of a 7.62mm Battle Rifle. Let’s face it, the military transitioned from the M14 to the M16 for multiple reasons, and one of those was weight savings. Soldiers are also going to require additional training to take full advantage of the new capability. Increased engagement distances also mean Soldiers will require access to longer marksmanship ranges.
Additionally, word is that the Army desires a sub-MOA gun. If this is true, they are setting themselves up for failure because M80 Ball is not sub-MOA ammunition. Even the M110 is required to often 1.3 MOA accuracy. Something similar occurred in USSOCOM’s Precision Sniper Rifle program where the ammo was not spec’d to the same level of the rifle which fired it. If the Army tests any of these rifles, even if built to deliver sub-MOA precision, with an ammunition which delivers 2-3 MOA, they will get 2-3 MOA results. It’s the old story of the weakest link, and the capability will be considered a failure because all of the variables weren’t considered. You want an accurate rifle? Make sure you use accurate ammunition.
Then, there’s this whole ‘interim’ concept. Too many times I’ve seen capabilities that were sold initially as an interim and ended up never being replaced with the proposed final capability. There’s always a chance our Soldiers could get stuck with a 7.62 rifle if the planned caliber study doesn’t pan out or worse yet, DoD faces another budget challenged situation similar to the sequester. As we’ve learned, we go to war with the Army we have, not the one we wish we had.
My Take on this,
Throwing wheel barrow loads of money at this problem isn't going to make a sows ear in to a silk purse. Adding in to the already overwhelming logistical challenges a more accurate rifle in 7.62 Nato is likely to be fed a steady diet of M80 ball ammo taken from the links of the 240 gunner.
Want more firepower? Here, here's another 240.
Interim equipment is likely as not to be here to stay.
I don't think 7.62x54R is all that.
A 308 Semi Auto with a 1-6x scope should have long been in use since the 60s. AR10s, FALs, and G3s existed.
WTF? Sorry, I just ain't seein' it happen.
If they're gonna do it make the barrel 18". Dropping to 16" robs the 7.62 of too much velocity.
Not really. I thought that too until I was advised by an SME that any velocity loss is negligible. My personal ECC with a 16" and FGMM is quite a do-er.
If you need more speed, you meed a 300 win mag.
Not really. I thought that too until I was advised by an SME that any velocity loss is negligible. My personal ECC with a 16" and FGMM is quite a do-er.
If you need more speed, you meed a 300 win mag.
A 16" barrel with M80 Ball (or clones) will get you ~ 2500fps. IIRC an 18" tube should still achieve close to 2700fps, i.e. the ledge is steeper when going from 18 to 16 than it is from 20 to 18.
Well, this article will put a serious spur under the saddle of the "7.62 RULES!" crowd.
Next thing you know the 1911 mafia will start clamoring for a reissue of JMB's classic
You say that like it's a bad thing
A 16" barrel with M80 Ball (or clones) will get you ~ 2500fps. IIRC an 18" tube should still achieve close to 2700fps, i.e. the ledge is steeper when going from 18 to 16 than it is from 20 to 18.
If you are putting M80 ball in your precision semi auto and expecting laser accuracy then that just isn't happening. 200fps wouldn't be a deal breaker.
If they dead, they dead. I imagine 600 yds and in is where they are going with this
SomeOtherGuy
04-05-17, 14:41
I'm always reading here that veterans have made kills at 600+ yards with MK262. Why not issue 20" barreled rifles (like, ya know, an M16) and MK262 to get a 600 yard capability? You could even improve the cartridge a bit further with something like the Sierra tipped MK bullets (take your BC from .355 to .42) or Hornady's Superformance (claimed 2910fps with a 75gr, .395 BC bullet).
A 20" M16 is going to be lighter, and not much longer, than a 16" .308 battle rifle, and requires only the smallest changes to parts and repair channels. A unit might run out of the best ammo but the rifle would still work fine, effectively, with M855A1 or whatever else might dominate the supply channels. This approach would probably be cheaper and more effective than fielding a 16" .308 battle rifle, especially if the .308 is going to end up shooting M80 ball anyway.
Or you could do something like 6.5CM and get a huge gain in potential range (to 1200 yards, or more) while having less recoil and ammo weight than .308. Obviously creating supply chain and NATO commonality issues.
Averageman
04-05-17, 14:56
Or you could do something like 6.5CM and get a huge gain in potential range (to 1200 yards, or more) while having less recoil and ammo weight than .308. Obviously creating supply chain and NATO commonality issues.
This is the Military after all and there you go trying to apply some common sense.
Now you know how this is going to work out don't you?
If you are putting M80 ball in your precision semi auto and expecting laser accuracy then that just isn't happening. 200fps wouldn't be a deal breaker.
If they dead, they dead. I imagine 600 yds and in is where they are going with this
600 on in is probably a reasonable assumption.
I was mainly referring to the terminal ballistics side of the house with regard to velocity loss. And M80 is likely what they would issue anyway (not like this isn't all just pure speculation and mental masturbation as it ain't gonna happen).
Digital_Damage
04-05-17, 15:05
never going to happen... just more silly speculation for click bait.
600 on in is probably a reasonable assumption.
I was mainly referring to the terminal ballistics side of the house with regard to velocity loss. And M80 is likely what they would issue anyway (not like this isn't all just pure speculation and mental masturbation as it ain't gonna happen).
http://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/04/jim-schatz-a-path-to-overmatch-next-generation-individual-weapon-system/
Soldier Systems has a Jim Schatz Powerpoint talking about overmatch, polymer cased .264 ammo, etc. He focuses on 800-900m as the critical range where you can start to at least match 7.62x54R.
Going back to 7.62 would be a huge step in the WRONG direction. This subject has been covered at length by Dr. Roberts and a good summary can be found here:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008/Intl/Roberts.pdf
The 6.8mm SPC would be the most cost effective and realistic means to increase soldier lethality. It would create a common round for CQB out to SDM ranges, and extend terminal performance by at least 200 yards beyond what 5.56 or 7.62 can muster. This has been studied at length by the military and DOJ. Going with 7.62 would be a huge mistake.
RetroRevolver77
04-05-17, 15:49
deleted
SomeOtherGuy
04-05-17, 15:55
I got it- 18" barreled 7.62NATO piston fed bullpup with a 1-6x scope that uses SR25 mags and weighs under eight pounds.
Compact, free floating quick change barrel, ambidextrous, smart.
The future is here:
https://deserttech.com/product_overview.php?product_id=4&load=product_overview
7n6
Where is it exactly? I had the "opportunity" to put a $500 deposit on that rifle 26 months ago (2/16/15, still have the email exchange) and declined.
It looks like it will be an awesome rifle - someday. Manana. In the fullness of time. Etc. Sometime between when Remington un-messes-up the Magpul Masada and when the UBR 2.0 comes to market, maybe. When the F-35 is fully debugged and gains a reputation as the world's best multi-role aircraft. :)
But yeah, it looks pretty good. Just get the 6.5CM option for more range with less ammo weight...
All of this is silliness. Weve now been sentenced to another decade of nimrods squawking about the Army is going back to 7.62 cuz 5.56 sucks
When is big army going to use them brains they think theyve cultivated and stop throwing money away chasing this weasel around the mulberry bush. Less fancy gear, more/better training. My experiences nearly 20 years ago are pretty faded in relevance but I always felt waaay over equipped with a bunch of high zoot shit we barely trained with.
I got it- 18" barreled 7.62NATO piston fed bullpup with a 1-6x scope that uses SR25 mags and weighs under eight pounds.
Compact, free floating quick change barrel, ambidextrous, smart.
The future is here:
https://deserttech.com/product_overview.php?product_id=4&load=product_overview
7n6
No, the future is still taking pre-orders and has been doing so for well over a year...
RetroRevolver77
04-05-17, 16:06
deleted
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-05-17, 16:07
Or you could do something like 6.5CM and get a huge gain in potential range (to 1200 yards, or more) while having less recoil and ammo weight than .308. Obviously creating supply chain and NATO commonality issues.
New 6.5cm solid bullets will stay supersonic to 1800yards...
Since this is to "counter" the 7.62x54R....I just gots to know...
Aside from hardcore Vasilli Zaitsev Red Scorpion Alfa Group Spetsnaz Commandos who are just shooting all day like it was their J-O-B...
Whodafuq is getting solid 900m hits with either a Dragunov or a Mosin?
Serious question. Do these people actively practice with scopes, range estimation, and BCE or is it more a bunch of guys in the hills belt dumping PKMs in some makeshift fusillade?
Even in non-Russophobic states where people can buy factory Russian guns....7N1 match sniper 7.62x54R ammo is still kinda hard to come by.
If I wanted to, I could drive to an LGS and get some FGMM all day.
Seriously curious and looking for a straight answer.
Also a 308 bullpup is a lit of things but not my thing.
Reminds me of RPG thread. We have M3 300WM M240 etc
One would think the U.S. Army would look into developing a better 5.56mm cartridge for ammunition capability with multiple weapon systems.
They'll probably spend millions of dollars evaluating the various available 7.62 platforms, as well as an RFP for new designs, and then after all the money is spent, decide they're just going to stick with 5.56 :sarcastic:
But all jokes aside, it would be nice to see some 6.5mm variants in service on a wide scale in the future (both in bolt gun and semi-auto configurations). .260 or 6.5Creed etc is a much more effective round from a ballistics and accuracy standpoint at long range than 7.62 NATO, IMO.
If they want to use 7.62 NATO to fill a role in the meantime, I would think the quickest and most effective path would be to field larger numbers of M110s for general use since they are already in production, and in service with an OK reputation.
Please correct me if I am wrong. Because I often am.
But what is the point of all of this. Sounds like some think tank got together and looked back to the good ole days when wars were won with 18 year old go getter country boys who would wet the front sight and start taking out evil doers before they could even be seen.
Isn't the job of the infantry to fight in closer? I thought the long ranged killing was done with artillery, mortars, air strikes and drones.
sniperfrog
04-05-17, 17:24
A 16" barrel with M80 Ball (or clones) will get you ~ 2500fps. IIRC an 18" tube should still achieve close to 2700fps, i.e. the ledge is steeper when going from 18 to 16 than it is from 20 to 18.
The difference between an 18" and a 16" barrel is more like 60-80 fps.
They will start with a scar17.
Weighs too much
Logistics
Training... look at ar10
Capacity
Weighs too much
Too much lead per shot
Look at 6.5 creedmore:
Looks good, but logistics and supply, lack of knockdown powah, needs super-kill powah bullet.
Costs too much look at 5.56:
Better bullet?
Lead.
Issue m855a1.
$5 that's what happens.
Why do we still not issue intrasquad radios with Peltors/Sordins? Or even have free floating rails? Either would have an immediate impact on combat effectiveness with minimal bullshit attached.
If you stay and play outside of 600m, you're doing it wrong. Maneuver, let your gun teams get their war boner, or use your indirect fire capabilities.
I'm sure I'm looking at this wrong, though.
New 6.5cm solid bullets will stay supersonic to 1800yards...
Dr. Roberts has mentioned that multiple organizations have looked at 6.5cm and found it lacking in terms of reliability and terminal performance. Specifically, he noted a high(er) number of bolt failures when it was put through its paces.
Dr. Roberts has mentioned that multiple organizations have looked at 6.5cm and found it lacking in terms of reliability and terminal performance. Specifically, he noted a high(er) number of bolt failures when it was put through its paces.
Kind of like the 77gr Mk262, while accurate, has inconsistent terminal effects? IOW a "long range" cartridge that has a higher degree of hitting what it's aimed at but what it does once it gets there is questionable.
Why do we still not issue intrasquad radios with Peltors/Sordins? Or even have free floating rails? Either would have an immediate impact on combat effectiveness with minimal bullshit attached.
If you stay and play outside of 600m, you're doing it wrong. Maneuver, let your gun teams get their war boner, or use your indirect fire capabilities.
I'm sure I'm looking at this wrong, though.
I think much of this noise is coming from the A-Stan experience where it was not uncommon to receive direct fire from PK-types from 600-1000 meters and have little immediate answer. This was a particular pain in the ass when I was in Kunduz or points in RC-East where maneuver was difficult due to terrain. The fire was not particularly accurate, but throw enough lead and someone will get unlucky. We often didn't have an immediate/adequate crew served or indirect fire support answer.
Nobody has yet to tell me where these steely eyed, illiterate Mohammed freak Afghans are becoming Carlos Hathcock death dealers with old beat up Dragunovs, 4x scopes, and raunchy, corrosive, 40 year old ammo on a gun that even the Soviets admit is 2.5 MOA on a good day with good ammo.
I think much of this noise is coming from the A-Stan experience where it was not uncommon to receive direct fire from PK-types from 600-1000 meters and have little immediate answer. This was a particular pain in the ass when I was in Kunduz or points in RC-East where maneuver was difficult due to terrain. The fire was not particularly accurate, but throw enough lead and someone will get unlucky. We often didn't have an immediate/adequate crew served or indirect fire support answer.
Unfortunately, our experiences are much in the same. I had the fortune of always having a 60mm mortar team with my Platoon that were on their shit. The SDM role has merit for sure, same as I feel about weapons like the Mk48.
It's a balancing act between a legitimate lack of capability and a perceived one. One of the common trends I hear when talking to guys who didn't have the ability to return fire was some combination of lack of training, not taking the weapon systems because of weight/space limitations, or just legitimately not being able to even gain PID. The latter being more common than not, especially in the mountains like you've experienced.
But when I'm sitting around talking to other NCOs who tell me they left AT-4s and M14s back on their COP because they were tired of carrying them, we have to ask what will change without addressing our issues we have now?
I'd personally love to see some 40mm rounds that could reach 600m and still be fired from the M320, comms down to the Joe level for improved situational awareness, and if we're going to do a battle rifle for the SDM, we need to legitimately develop training doctrine and a support network for the position beyond "Here's your M14 and BII. Stack bodies, young padawan".
All 3 deployments, the M14 was issued out just before deploying and usually went to someone with a slightly higher than normal level of proficiency. Their M118LR was usually jacked from the Scouts, with many guys being forced to shoot M80. Some leaders going so far as making their guys load 4:1 ball:tracer in their mags.
We have issues with the way we employ SDMs as it is. I think we need to refocus our efforts on making our current capability more than a novelty and then we can re-evaluate our need for yet another battle rifle that will suffer the same fate as most EBRs.
I think much of this noise is coming from the A-Stan experience where it was not uncommon to receive direct fire from PK-types from 600-1000 meters and have little immediate answer. This was a particular pain in the ass when I was in Kunduz or points in RC-East where maneuver was difficult due to terrain. The fire was not particularly accurate, but throw enough lead and someone will get unlucky. We often didn't have an immediate/adequate crew served or indirect fire support answer.
Yeah, I see the point. It seems that, in lieu of indirect or a GPMG, a guy or two with a weapon that can accurately send a few back at those ranges would be more appropriate than equipping an entire infantry squad with 7.62's.
The military can be myopic. To be certain, the last 15 years it's been in the sandbox or sandbox-with-mountains. I get that. But this uber focus on 600+ meter engagements cannot affect the entire small-arms weapon system issued to U.S. troops. Give a soldier or two that capability, but not an entire grunt unit. The second something goes down in a tropical, jungled environment with contact distances of 50 meters or so (max) it's going to blow up in their faces so to speak.
Nobody has yet to tell me where these steely eyed, illiterate Mohammed freak Afghans are becoming Carlos Hathcock death dealers with old beat up Dragunovs, 4x scopes, and raunchy, corrosive, 40 year old ammo on a gun that even the Soviets admit is 2.5 MOA on a good day with good ammo.
I'm not sure that you have an accurate understanding of the insurgent capability circa 2009. I was more than once shot at with PK and RPK machine guns. They also had plenty of mortars, rockets, and RPGs.
Coal Dragger
04-05-17, 19:29
I'm not talking about that little company but something along the lines of that design.
Well if that design actually worked then we could talk, but evidently it doesn't yet work. Just more vaporware.
I'm not sure that you have an accurate understanding of the insurgent capability circa 2009. I was more than once shot at with PK and RPK machine guns. They also had plenty of mortars, rockets, and RPGs.
Oh no. I am tracking on PKM and RPK spamming. That's even been a bane of the Russians who fought there in the 80s.
It has been referenced in the sell for this "great need" of a .308 rifle is predicated on swapping tat for tat on hilltops with single shooters in some BS sniper (or DMR) battle.
Not a Joe, but I would think bombings, arty, and A10 strafes would tune up the high ground PKM wrecking crews far more than giving a guy a new small arm or demanding 'moar 7.62s zomg!'.
I personally think someone just wants to spend money to get a star and be all "I'm helping!" than actually be helpful.
Because I just dont see joes and Talibans having these epic .30 cal sniper duels like it seems like some of the source material of the deal is making it out to be.
JM2C
Amd yeah this is "Why don't we have RPGs too!?" spiel all over again.
Coal Dragger
04-05-17, 19:35
Dr. Roberts has mentioned that multiple organizations have looked at 6.5cm and found it lacking in terms of reliability and terminal performance. Specifically, he noted a high(er) number of bolt failures when it was put through its paces.
Terminal performance is a projectile design issue, and reliability is largely a weapon issue. Both of those can be solved if there is enough will and $$$. Now would the enhanced capability be worth that $$$? Who knows, realistically probably not.
I have a friend who's wife is a bit recoil shy and he bought her a Ruger Hawkeye in 6.5mm Creedmoor for hunting. That little 5'1" 105lb chick has flat out slayed the critters with it including a few elk. So pick the right projectile and the round should be more than capable of dispatching 200-250lb primates.
Yeah, I see the point. It seems that, in lieu of indirect or a GPMG, a guy or two with a weapon that can accurately send a few back at those ranges would be more appropriate than equipping an entire infantry squad with 7.62's.
The military can be myopic. To be certain, the last 15 years it's been in the sandbox or sandbox-with-mountains. I get that. But this uber focus on 600+ meter engagements cannot affect the entire small-arms weapon system issued to U.S. troops. Give a soldier or two that capability, but not an entire grunt unit. The second something goes down in a tropical, jungled environment with contact distances of 50 meters or so (max) it's going to blow up in their faces so to speak.
Bingo, see GTF's excellent post right above yours too. During my last trip to CENTCOM, the fielding of M14/EBR to SDM personnel was at a peak to deal with the 500-800 meter threat. Interestingly our snipers were using them almost exclusively because we had a hard time keeping the new M110's in theater.
While I agree that we need something more than what the 5.56 can offer, issuing a 16-20" 7.62 battle rifle would be a ridiculous "solution" that would create a massive CQB hole to fill. If I was Trump for a day, I'd move all the services to a 6.8SPC platform (new mags and barrels), adopt the 338LM as the standard sniper round, and bang the hell out of Melania.
SeriousStudent
04-05-17, 22:31
But not necessarily in that order.
Coal Dragger
04-05-17, 23:34
If I were Lord Cheeto, I'd hold off on buying a bunch of new small arms for current rounds. I'd like to see if the developments in polymer casings bear some useful end results that are stable, durable, powerful, and accurate. If the ammo meets those expectations, and we can save some weight on the casings, reducing ammo weight significantly then maybe some new ammo dimensions should be thought up that provide more power than current offerings.
Dumping $$$ into new small arms that utilize current military ammo technology, might seem a bit premature if a breakthrough is around the corner.
Just thinking out loud.
vicious_cb
04-05-17, 23:50
Bingo, see GTF's excellent post right above yours too. During my last trip to CENTCOM, the fielding of M14/EBR to SDM personnel was at a peak to deal with the 500-800 meter threat. Interestingly our snipers were using them almost exclusively because we had a hard time keeping the new M110's in theater.
While I agree that we need something more than what the 5.56 can offer, issuing a 16-20" 7.62 battle rifle would be a ridiculous "solution" that would create a massive CQB hole to fill. If I was Trump for a day, I'd move all the services to a 6.8SPC platform (new mags and barrels), adopt the 338LM as the standard sniper round, and bang the hell out of Melania.
6.8 has even worse external ballistics than 5.56...
wilson1911
04-06-17, 00:48
Why has no one mentioned the 6.5 grendel ? Its a solid 500 yard gun with light recoil.
If you want to reach out further than that, your going to need a 6.5 creed/47/260. All it would take is a little tweaking to get a bolt that is reliable for a semi auto.
There is no one do all cartridge out there. Having a mix of a few different types would be a better decision.
So a fire fight could go like this...at 500 yards.
guys with an AR 556 expend 1500 rounds kill 9 guys
guys with the 240 expend 900 rounds...hit 2 guys
the two guys with a 6.5 creed expend 14 shots...kill 11 guys.
You have suppression with the 240, flank the with 556 and have 2 guys dragging up the rear/flank with 6.5's....
Didn't savage just come out with a small frame ar in 6.5 ? Build one with better quality and problem solved.
We do not fight in the jungles much anymore, its desert/urban warfare.
So a fire fight could go like this...at 500 yardsguy with recon rifle shoots them with 556
Why has no one mentioned the 6.5 grendel ? Its a solid 500 yard gun with light recoil.
6.8 has even worse external ballistics than 5.56...
Yep. I'm not trying to change the fact that 600-800 meters will be crew-served weapon range for the foreseeable future. I'm just pointing out that a switch to a new platform that tries to optimize a minority of enemy encounters at the expense of the overwhelming majority (under 400 meters) is retarded - especially given the logistical and personnel issues involved in fielding a 30 cal battle rifle.
Moose-Knuckle
04-06-17, 05:05
Nobody has yet to tell me where these steely eyed, illiterate Mohammed freak Afghans are becoming Carlos Hathcock death dealers with old beat up Dragunovs, 4x scopes, and raunchy, corrosive, 40 year old ammo on a gun that even the Soviets admit is 2.5 MOA on a good day with good ammo.
Ever see American Sniper based upon the life of Chris Kyle?
Also recent documentaries of snipers on History Channle details multiple engagements with foreign trained enemy snipers armed with SVDs.
Digital_Damage
04-06-17, 07:36
this discussion happens every few years... I think we need to flog whoever creates a new thread about it from this point forward.
Digital_Damage
04-06-17, 07:37
Ever see American Sniper based upon the life of Chris Kyle?
Also recent documentaries of snipers on History Channle details multiple engagements with foreign trained enemy snipers armed with SVDs.
I just have to check, this is sarcasm right?
We do not fight in the jungles much anymore, its desert/urban warfare.
That is an incredibly short-sighted and narrow-minded view.
Grand58742
04-06-17, 07:48
My day would go like this if I was Trump for a day...
Wake up, bang Melania, have cup of coffee, get security brief, breakfast of anything with bacon, shower with Melania, conduct routine office "business", go shoot with Secret Service and SOCOM over working lunch, troll Glock lovers with pictures of the Sig 320 on Twitter, come back to WH and sign EO getting rid of the mamby-pamby eco friendly rules concerning lead in ammo, fire every General/Admiral who thought it was a good idea, sign another EO stating our nation will no longer abide by the Hague Convention in terms of small arms ammo development, another EO for the DoD to procure all service wide COTS replacements for current ball ammo, go to local gun shop to show support for American small business and to troll Diane Feinstein on Twitter by showing pictures of me holding evil weapons of war, dinner, fat shame Kim Jong-Un on Twitter, sign EO stating we are no longer going to nation build if we go to war and we will go in, kill the enemy, break their toys and come home to leave the survivors to pick up the pieces, bang Melania, send out random Tweet about winning, go to sleep with smile on face.
My day would go like this if I was Trump for a day...
Wake up, bang Melania, have cup of coffee, get security brief, breakfast of anything with bacon, shower with Melania, conduct routine office "business", go shoot with Secret Service and SOCOM over working lunch, troll Glock lovers with pictures of the Sig 320 on Twitter, come back to WH and sign EO getting rid of the mamby-pamby eco friendly rules concerning lead in ammo, fire every General/Admiral who thought it was a good idea, sign another EO stating our nation will no longer abide by the Hague Convention in terms of small arms ammo development, another EO for the DoD to procure all service wide COTS replacements for current ball ammo, go to local gun shop to show support for American small business and to troll Diane Feinstein on Twitter by showing pictures of me holding evil weapons of war, dinner, fat shame Kim Jong-Un on Twitter, sign EO stating we are no longer going to nation build if we go to war and we will go in, kill the enemy, break their toys and come home to leave the survivors to pick up the pieces, bang Melania, send out random Tweet about winning, go to sleep with smile on face.
And you sir get a star.
Digital_Damage
04-06-17, 08:01
That is an incredibly short-sighted and narrow-minded view.
but makes a point... If we did engage in a jungle moving forward we will not be using roaming squads anymore.
Technology has moved us past that point, and with no collateral to worry about it would just be a day to unleash rain.
Dist. Expert 26
04-06-17, 09:18
Why do we still not issue intrasquad radios with Peltors/Sordins? Or even have free floating rails? Either would have an immediate impact on combat effectiveness with minimal bullshit attached.
If you stay and play outside of 600m, you're doing it wrong. Maneuver, let your gun teams get their war boner, or use your indirect fire capabilities.
I'm sure I'm looking at this wrong, though.
I was saying this through my entire enlistment. Better comms and slightly better accuracy is easily attainable.
At least the USMC is starting to issue cans, and reportedly considering the M27 as a replacement for the M4 in grunt units. IMO that's a much better solution than a new "battle rifle".
I'm just pointing out that a switch to a new platform that tries to optimize a minority of enemy encounters at the expense of the overwhelming majority (under 400 meters) is retardedand dangerous. We cannot reduce our cqc capabilities in any way. Urban fighting/buildings/tunnels and other situations that reduce target identification capability
My day would go like this if I was Trump for a day...
Wake up, bang Melania, have cup of coffee, get security brief, breakfast of anything with bacon, shower with Melania, conduct routine office "business", go shoot with Secret Service and SOCOM over working lunch, troll Glock lovers with pictures of the Sig 320 on Twitter, come back to WH and sign EO getting rid of the mamby-pamby eco friendly rules concerning lead in ammo, fire every General/Admiral who thought it was a good idea, sign another EO stating our nation will no longer abide by the Hague Convention in terms of small arms ammo development, another EO for the DoD to procure all service wide COTS replacements for current ball ammo, go to local gun shop to show support for American small business and to troll Diane Feinstein on Twitter by showing pictures of me holding evil weapons of war, dinner, fat shame Kim Jong-Un on Twitter, sign EO stating we are no longer going to nation build if we go to war and we will go in, kill the enemy, break their toys and come home to leave the survivors to pick up the pieces, bang Melania, send out random Tweet about winning, go to sleep with smile on face.
Best post of the day. I doubt it will be surpassed.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Grand58742
04-06-17, 10:43
Why has no one mentioned the 6.5 grendel ? Its a solid 500 yard gun with light recoil.
I might ask the same thing. However, a couple of thoughts on this one.
Plus side: A lot of parts commonality with existing M16 FOW systems so take a possible deduction on maintenance costs, weapons handling/familiarization is obviously a wash, decent range and capacity weapon that reaches beyond the traditional "fight" yet should still be light enough for close in work, mature enough round that additional development shouldn't be needed.
Down side: Yet another caliber into the system, same size/shape mags as M16 FOW could cause confusion (trying to Soldier/Sailor/Airman/Marine proof this here), it really doesn't do anything "better" than a 7.62 except the weight savings and even that could be debated
I wouldn't be opposed to a fighting battle rifle in 7.62 like the Knights ACC or Larue PredatOBR, though cost would have to come down significantly per unit IMO. As well as adding a decent 1-6X or even up to 8X piece of reliable glass on top. And the rounds/training to be proficient with said rifle. But on a limited issue basis like one per squad or so. Not every rifle toting grunt has or needs the ability to reach out to 800M and pop someone, just like every grunt doesn't need a grenade launcher. Train that specific skill set to a selected number of individuals and keep them proficient by actually providing the range time needed.
Regardless of what weapon is being used, training and proficiency is the make or break point in all this.
wilson1911
04-06-17, 13:23
The 556 round is outdated by more than one modern design.
To be honest, I do not see why large frame AR's are so expensive anyway, but they have always been. Moving over to one would be way too expensive.
I have watched many vids of the fights over in the sandbox. What you see mostly is guys banging away on their triggers hoping to hit something. While some raghead is sending ak rounds back...with a lot bigger smack. It's plain to see they are outclassed in power. We are just lucky the AK is not super accurate and they are shit shots.
If you were to throw in a couple of guys with a grendel/small scope, it would change the dynamics of the fight. If the 556 round was so good, we would have already bagged and tagged 100's of thousands of them, instead they run away to fight another day.
If the 556 round was so good, we would have already bagged and tagged 100's of thousands of them, instead they run away to fight another day.
That's not at all how or why that happens. Most ambushes I've been in were initiated and the Taliban would break contact before we could even orient to the fight. We tend to take more than a handful off the earth when they decide to stay and play with us, though.
And the three douchebags I've shot all died with gusto, despite the clearly anemic 5.56 round I serviced them with. My ACOG reticle didn't even match the load I was shooting.
But I'll agree with your assessment of guys banging rounds out indiscriminately. That's 100% a training issue at the end of the day.
That is an incredibly short-sighted and narrow-minded view.
Myopic is a nice way of saying it, but yeah I agree. The U.S. military has to be able to fight ANYWHERE on this rock we call Earth.
but makes a point... If we did engage in a jungle moving forward we will not be using roaming squads anymore.
Technology has moved us past that point, and with no collateral to worry about it would just be a day to unleash rain.
With tech that may not function in triple canopy rainforest like it does in wide-open desert. Just sayin'.......
(hell, you might actually have to break out a map, compass, and protractor! Gasp!)
Outlander Systems
04-06-17, 13:58
Howdy,
Despite your successful OCONUS kills with 5.56; I'm going to have to disagree with you.
The round in question is sufficient for shooting poodles only.
HTH,
Mike
That's not at all how or why that happens. Most ambushes I've been in were initiated and the Taliban would break contact before we could even orient to the fight. We tend to take more than a handful off the earth when they decide to stay and play with us, though.
And the three douchebags I've shot all died with gusto, despite the clearly anemic 5.56 round I serviced them with. My ACOG reticle didn't even match the load I was shooting.
But I'll agree with your assessment of guys banging rounds out indiscriminately. That's 100% a training issue at the end of the day.
Howdy,
Despite your successful OCONUS kills with 5.56; I'm going to have to disagree with you.
The round in question is sufficient for shooting poodles only.
HTH,
Mike
C'mon man,
One handed shooting off of the skids of a Huey in flight don't count.
HTDH,
Jerms
Outlander Systems
04-06-17, 14:11
ROFL! :sarcastic:
C'mon man,
One handed shooting off of the skids of a Huey in flight don't count.
HTDH,
Jerms
I'm just a lowly tax payer but I would love to see dudes get better 5.56 ammo and more range time than some new gun they'll never learn and wont use.
7.62 is a thing, it isn't the only thing.
77gr OTM for everybody. Rob from Welfare and EBT and Nationalize Black Hills if you must.
ETA 6.8 is not the answer. Nor really is 6.5 CM despite my interest in it.
A regular AR can handle 70%+ of your problems. More RIS IIs or URXs and sensible optics.
I dont think loading dudes down in BS heavy rifles and 1911s like WWII is a step forward but thats just me.
Beretta 93Rs need to be general issue though :p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ1kfE4jpus&feature=youtu.be
I like this video. I feel it's relevant to this thread due to the distance of the threat and the misconceptions about our current capabilities.
Background: my Platoon took contact while patrolling a couple of villages known to have several local Taliban leaders living there. We were in a bounding overwatch to make up for the massively open terrain and the high likelihood of direct fire due to our poking a proverbial hornets nest. My Squad took the initial contact, and the Squad in this vid ran 500-600 meters to our position while my Squad + a gun team returned fire. This video was taken by one of their SAW gunners.
Few key points:
1) Conservation of fire. You'll notice we were "talking the guns" and the TLs did a great job controlling their boys.
2) Communication. I ran from the gun team to the TLs to coordinate fire and establish sectors.
3) Using appropriate weapons as intended There was no mad minute here...we gained PID, gained fire superiority, and formulated a plan in like 10 seconds. Contact was outside of 40mm range.
4) Cardio. Run more.
5) That M2010 tagged a dude in this fight. It was glorious.
Contact was between 400-450 meters out. No US casualties, we killed 7. All but two EKIA were with 5.56. M855 in the 249s, A1 in the M4s.
GTF425, that proves nothing.
Clearly M1 Garands were needed.
Failure2Stop
04-06-17, 14:45
Sigh. It's hard enough to teach skilled marksmen how to shoot 7.62 semi-autos, how it's possibly going to be the answer in wide application without one hell of a training and sustainment pipeline along with a very good support structure is eluding me.
Step 1:
Minor investment in 1-6x or 1-8x optics, Mk 262 Mod 1 type ammo to support, free-float the barrels, issue some bipods, and start a high volume/high standard training program with real oversight.
See if the gap closes enough by using what we actually currently have. If not, go to step 2. If so, skip to step 4.
Step 2:
Identify a cartridge that out-performs 7.62 and 5.56 at 500-800 meters in terminal effectiveness, wind drift, and drop, and allows not less than 25 rounds to fit inside a magazine the same length of the 30-round GI magazine. Recoil must be less than that of 7.62 when both are bare muzzle. Optimally, entire cartridge should be of equal or lower weight than 5.56.
Step 3:
Build a gun around that cartridge. Must be mission adaptable and easily supported logistically.
Step 4:
Bask in glory.
RetroRevolver77
04-06-17, 15:09
deleted
Idk about mk262 @ 850 yards. Guys have put erm down at that range but Id prefer the M2010 GTF referenced. There are long confirmed shots in 338 but 50 would have only made it easier
Why is the caliber such a challenge? It seems like a simple solution. With tax payer funding and a joint venture between quality bullet manufacturer and quality firearm designer/manufacturer it should be do-able.
To use the existing platform, I'd take the 22Nosler, neck it up to 6 or 6.5 mm, and shorten the case so a 108 or 120-130 grain bullet can be seated to the ogive at mag length. Have the bullet manufacturer design a bullet that isn't very jump sensitive and the firearm manufacturer figure out the optimal gas system length and port size. It would use a standard 5.56 bolt that lives at 50-54k psi, existing upper and lower receivers could be reused, and should push the bullet to a decent velocity. Free float the barrel, use a Lpv, and train the end user. Am I way off base?
Why is the caliber such a challenge? It seems like a simple solution. With tax payer funding and a joint venture between quality bullet manufacturer and quality firearm designer/manufacturer it should be do-able.
To use the existing platform, I'd take the 22Nosler, neck it up to 6 or 6.5 mm, and shorten the case so a 108 or 120-130 grain bullet can be seated to the ogive at mag length. Have the bullet manufacturer design a bullet that isn't very jump sensitive and the firearm manufacturer figure out the optimal gas system length and port size. It would use a standard 5.56 bolt that lives at 50-54k psi, existing upper and lower receivers could be reused, and should push the bullet to a decent velocity. Free float the barrel, use a Lpv, and train the end user. Am I way off base?
That would essentially be a 6x6.8 or 6.5x6.8 (6.8SPC necked down) with a rebated base to fit 5.56 bolts. Those two wildcat calibers seem to be moderately popular. You still need 6.8SPC specific Magpul magazines and enlarged mag well for optimal feeding.
Still doable? Machine a couple hundredth from the front or back of the mag well and reanodize?
Outlander Systems
04-06-17, 18:19
Howdy,
Didn't M4C member, SIMPLYDYNAMIC build a wall of corpses in Al Najaf, circa 2004, at distance, with a 5.56?
HTH
Mike
Coal Dragger
04-06-17, 18:37
No he used a Betetta 93R. Get it right dumb dumb.
Outlander Systems
04-06-17, 18:48
LOL.
Caliber Wars III: The United States Army
No he used a Betetta 93R. Get it right dumb dumb.
wilson1911
04-06-17, 19:11
You guys have it all wrong. Some politician with the help of an aide reading a book is going to decide on the next upgrade. Both will be hailed as saviors who modernized the army. They will have so much money it will take years to count.
Pay the middle man !!!
Digital_Damage
04-06-17, 23:10
Why is the caliber such a challenge? It seems like a simple solution. With tax payer funding and a joint venture between quality bullet manufacturer and quality firearm designer/manufacturer it should be do-able.
To use the existing platform, I'd take the 22Nosler, neck it up to 6 or 6.5 mm, and shorten the case so a 108 or 120-130 grain bullet can be seated to the ogive at mag length. Have the bullet manufacturer design a bullet that isn't very jump sensitive and the firearm manufacturer figure out the optimal gas system length and port size. It would use a standard 5.56 bolt that lives at 50-54k psi, existing upper and lower receivers could be reused, and should push the bullet to a decent velocity. Free float the barrel, use a Lpv, and train the end user. Am I way off base?
yes... yes you are when consider that is about 2.7 billion a year.
Digital_Damage
04-06-17, 23:12
With tech that may not function in triple canopy rainforest like it does in wide-open desert. Just sayin'.......
(hell, you might actually have to break out a map, compass, and protractor! Gasp!)
It is not an issue anymore.
Outlander Systems
04-07-17, 00:14
Howdy,
If 5.56 is anemic/underpowered/lacking in knockdown power, perhaps the United States Army should considering issuing the RPG-7 as a lethality multiplier for LR engagements.
HTH
Mike
I haven't been smoking crack or dropping 'cid but I was thinking....
Why don't we, like, make all our soldiers wear wool uniforms in drab doo-doo colors, give them all AKMs, start cranking out Dragunovs and RPG-7s, and start revisiting wave tactics?
We should also invent new ranks like Major-Colonel, Warrant Sergeant, and Corporal-Lieutenant.
Still with me?
Okay then we cram them all in these APCs, right? And the fuel tanks are in the rear doors but see we wont let them retreat.
Any Camo should be a ripoff of woodland or look like someone puked on a shirt.
Also we don't have enough wood on our soldiers's weapons.....for ruggedness.
That would be the only logical answer.
MountainRaven
04-07-17, 01:02
I haven't been smoking crack or dropping 'cid but I was thinking....
Why don't we, like, make all our soldiers wear wool uniforms in drab doo-doo colors, give them all AKMs, start cranking out Dragunovs and RPG-7s, and start revisiting wave tactics?
We should also invent new ranks like Major-Colonel, Warrant Sergeant, and Corporal-Lieutenant.
Still with me?
Okay then we cram them all in these APCs, right? And the fuel tanks are in the rear doors but see we wont let them retreat.
Any Camo should be a ripoff of woodland or look like someone puked on a shirt.
Also we don't have enough wood on our soldiers's weapons.....for ruggedness.
That would be the only logical answer.
SVDs and PKMs in 338 LM. General issue walnut and milled steel guns in 7.62x51 with automatic rifles in the same. RPG-7s with bunker busters as standard (scale the launcher and projectile to the appropriate size).
Just add power armor.
SVDs and PKMs in 338 LM. General issue walnut and milled steel guns in 7.62x51 with automatic rifles in the same. RPG-7s with bunker busters as standard (scale the launcher and projectile to the appropriate size).
Just add power armor.
Actually I was on crack and acid. Those would all be ridiculous.
Emulating the Red Army circa 1970 would be a huge step backwards and in a pothole.
(unless you are joining in on the "We need new gunz!" trolling. In which case I agree ;))
MountainRaven
04-07-17, 01:22
Actually I was on crack and acid. Those would all be ridiculous.
Emulating the Red Army circa 1970 would be a huge step backwards and in a pothole.
(unless you are joining in on the "We need new gunz!" trolling. In which case I agree ;))
'Murica.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/c24cvAJEEms/maxresdefault.jpg
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/2dOAcXy8-bI/hqdefault.jpg
By Washington's wooden teeth, we shall not fail this day!
Moose-Knuckle
04-07-17, 04:50
I just have to check, this is sarcasm right?
Nope.
My post was in response to Firefly's questions of US forces being engaged by enemy snipers armed with 7.62x54r rifles.
Outlander Systems
04-07-17, 06:10
Howdy,
For the Emperor, every heretic must burn.
HTH
Mike
'Murica.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/c24cvAJEEms/maxresdefault.jpg
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/2dOAcXy8-bI/hqdefault.jpg
By Washington's wooden teeth, we shall not fail this day!
Sigh. It's hard enough to teach skilled marksmen how to shoot 7.62 semi-autos, how it's possibly going to be the answer in wide application without one hell of a training and sustainment pipeline along with a very good support structure is eluding me.
Step 1:
Minor investment in 1-6x or 1-8x optics, Mk 262 Mod 1 type ammo to support, free-float the barrels, issue some bipods, and start a high volume/high standard training program with real oversight.
See if the gap closes enough by using what we actually currently have. If not, go to step 2. If so, skip to step 4.
Step 2:
Identify a cartridge that out-performs 7.62 and 5.56 at 500-800 meters in terminal effectiveness, wind drift, and drop, and allows not less than 25 rounds to fit inside a magazine the same length of the 30-round GI magazine. Recoil must be less than that of 7.62 when both are bare muzzle. Optimally, entire cartridge should be of equal or lower weight than 5.56.
Step 3:
Build a gun around that cartridge. Must be mission adaptable and easily supported logistically.
Step 4:
Bask in glory.
I've always had some interest in the 6x45. Replace the .224 bullet with a 6mm bullet in the 80 to 90gr range. From what I've read the accuracy is outstanding and we all know 6mm bullets do an awesome job on shit. I've considered building one to comply with Indiana's retarded Deer laws (6mm or .30 cal bullet diameter for rifles only).
Digital_Damage
04-07-17, 08:06
Nope.
My post was in response to Firefly's questions of US forces being engaged by enemy snipers armed with 7.62x54r rifles.
You do know 75% of that movie was fiction right? Even the book has taken liberty with the actual record.
No incidences on record of him ever taking out a "sniper".
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 08:14
http://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/04/jim-schatz-a-path-to-overmatch-next-generation-individual-weapon-system/
Soldier Systems has a Jim Schatz Powerpoint talking about overmatch, polymer cased .264 ammo, etc. He focuses on 800-900m as the critical range where you can start to at least match 7.62x54R.
I thought this was interesting and dead on when I went to look at some articles.
Read the very first comment.
http://drive.google.com/uc?export=view&id=0B3_szFRHlzPWcy12Z3FPUE5oQ0k
I did not think our guys had that many engagements out at that distance to warrant a change in caliber. They aren't going to change it to a better round, because of all the ASP's filled with basically 3 calibers of ammo (speaking of small arms.) So even if there is a better performing round, I just can't see that being implemented. I think this is a a lot of money being spent engineered by "thinkers" who have failed to incorporate the thoughts of the "doers". Happens all the time.
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 08:24
Howdy,
Didn't M4C member, SIMPLYDYNAMIC build a wall of corpses in Al Najaf, circa 2004, at distance, with a 5.56?
HTH
Mike
I just read through some of those posts, when he first joined. I felt like I was in a museum reading about the Great War. Interesting how back in the day, it wasn't nothing for those guys to post up comments and chat with you fellas.
I think this is a a lot of money being spent engineered by "thinkers" who have failed to incorporate the thoughts of the "doers". Happens all the time.
100% this.
I'd rather see the money go towards more training, including KD ranges (well, especially KD ranges) and paying the TDY to send AMU guys to units all across the Army and teach large groups of NCOs. Namely your TLs and SLs who will be most involved in the development and mentoring of young Soldiers.
We have guys who legitimately don't know how an ACOG reticle works, let alone any mil relation formulas to teach their Joe's filling the role of an SDM. I heard an "expert" (his EIB said so, anyway) teaching his Company's SDMs to zero at 25 and that each Mil Dot was corresponding to bullet drop every 100 yards.
We have bigger fish to fry.
Task the USAMU with modifying the AR-15 magazine to accommodate a cartridge pushing the heaviest projectile that will reliably feed through the magazine. Task them with cartridge development for shooting out to 800 meters. Have them test the magazine/cartridge combination and use it in competition.
Hopefully, something along the lines of the 90g HPBT would be feasible and suitable for issue to a Designated Marksman.
Heck, Turkey has a new 7.62mm battle rifle. I'm sure they'd be happy to share :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XV9RbE8IWI
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 08:43
I just have to check, this is sarcasm right?
I'm more concerned that this group pushing this change must have watched AS and thought it was a documentary?
Outlander Systems
04-07-17, 08:45
Old-school M4C was the best M4C.
I miss IraqNinja, Sinister, USMC03, rob_s, SIMPLYDYNAMIC, mark5pt56, Dano, Rana, Molon, Robb Jensen, JohnWayne_777, and DocGKR.
I just read through some of those posts, when he first joined. I felt like I was in a museum reading about the Great War. Interesting how back in the day, it wasn't nothing for those guys to post up comments and chat with you fellas.
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 08:51
Old-school M4C was the best M4C.
I miss IraqNinja, Sinister, USMC03, rob_s, SIMPLYDYNAMIC, mark5pt56, Dano, Rana, Molon, Robb Jensen, JohnWayne_777, and DocGKR.
Sinister still makes some posts, I had an exchange with him on the AR-10 thread...he's a really cool guy and helped me or with my questions.
I see posts from Molon too, but I'm not sure of the others. Things change, people's priorities change I guess. But I obviously missed the party. Feels like hooking up with one of those multi-level marketing companies after the ground floor guys have made all the money. ;)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-07-17, 09:14
Dr. Roberts has mentioned that multiple organizations have looked at 6.5cm and found it lacking in terms of reliability and terminal performance. Specifically, he noted a high(er) number of bolt failures when it was put through its paces.
Head scratcher until I figured you were talking about gas guns. 5.56 seems to have it's demons excised, 308ish ARs still have some voodo in them.
I just read through some of those posts, when he first joined. I felt like I was in a museum reading about the Great War. Interesting how back in the day, it wasn't nothing for those guys to post up comments and chat with you fellas.
And he did it with a Bushmaster with chrome lined barrel, with a RIS rail, a 2nd FP scope.
Task the USAMU with modifying the AR-15 magazine to accommodate a cartridge pushing the heaviest projectile that will reliably feed through the magazine. Task them with cartridge development for shooting out to 800 meters. Have them test the magazine/cartridge combination and use it in competition.
Hopefully, something along the lines of the 90g HPBT would be feasible and suitable for issue to a Designated Marksman.
Isn't that basically what the MK262 was? High-power shooters getting the most long-range performance out of a 5.56. If you are going to jerk around with a new cartridge, don't limit it to the 5.56 mag dimensions.
Maybe I missed it and it's above my pay grade, but I'd thought the SCAR 17 generally well regarded and would fit that need no? If not, surly the KAC rifle would. What am I missing?
Failure2Stop
04-07-17, 09:39
If the user can't shoot, doesn't have the optics to locate and identify the target, doesn't have a reticle that permits consistent aiming reference, and doesn't know the exact range to the target, it doesn't really matter if they're shooting .22LR or .338LM.
Waaaaaay too many carts in front of waaaaay too few horses.
FromMyColdDeadHand
04-07-17, 10:49
All I heard was, Knights to come out with ranging and self-correcting scope in a 22 sabot bullet in a 338 case for sniping. ;)
Outlander Systems
04-07-17, 10:55
Failure2Stop and GTF425 have dropped old-school style M4C knowledge bombs.
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 10:57
All I heard was, Knights to come out with ranging and self-correcting scope in a 22 sabot bullet in a 338 case for sniping. ;)
and it will say, "Gunner, load sabot!!" before every mag change.
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 11:24
Failure2Stop and GTF425 have dropped old-school style M4C knowledge bombs.
There are still some out here who haven't left us. :)
Sometimes when they get to posting I feel like this....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5aW08ivHU
Believe me, after a brief visit to some other M4/AR related sites, and even making some posts on TOS :stop: and another site, I am sooooooooo thankful for M4C. :neo:
Failure2Stop and GTF425 have dropped old-school style M4C knowledge bombs.
Yep. This.
Bittersweet, like 6 or 7 years ago there was more to read, more legit "Hey BTDT, this is what happened to me. Here is what you can do if XYZ" and folks listened.
Long AARs with maybe 10 posts but like oodles of views. RetreatHell's AAR of how he got shot remains one of the more powerful articles written. Pretty objective and positive minded.
Guys were encouraging people to save and buy right, buy once.
Now you got the Spikes/PSA/Anderson bunch and guys telling the BTDTs how wrong they are because of a James Yeager youtube video.
Had I known what I know now, I would have printed off a bunch of posts when DeFoor had his own spiel here. Esp. the recce thread.
Some info is dated, some is timeless.
I admit, GD is where I spend too much time as I have nothing else to say other than "yep". Beyond that I avoid pissing matches "Whaddya mean Spike's is no good?! I have 400 rounds through it and it is ready for teh zombiez!"
Some good folks still post here and will do anything to help you out and get you squared away. But then there is that "banned from TOS, Stengun, mouthbreather" quotient that gets guys to go "Gee....I could type up a well written dissertation on known knowns going unaddressed in modern riflery, but some fatass is going to come along and say 'Hurr we need moar M-14s like in 'Nam instead of that piece of shit M4'....screw that. Porn, rock videos, and video games would be a more satisfying use of my internet"
I miss the down rangy, "Oh Captain, My Captain" days of M4C. Where really it took me a while to register and even then my first post was on my ZM LR-300 which turned out not to be the future of carbines but I like mine.
A necropost had a post of mine praising M-14s and honestly, I probably wouldn't mess with another one ever given the current state of semi auto .308s.
I think this is the future of "gun culture" in general. A lot of, as Bowie famously sang, "Absolute Beginners". But instead of a nervous virginity, there is an almost caustic arrogance to defend their lame budget build or ignorance.
JMHO. Glad more people like guns now but then again, I dont like most people (or rather, their attitudes) these days
Still doable? Machine a couple hundredth from the front or back of the mag well and reanodize?
Nope, it isn't the length that's the issue. This requires a new lower and magazine that are significantly wider to allow for proper cartridge stacking inside the magazine.
Failure2Stop and GTF425 have dropped old-school style M4C knowledge bombs.
But I don't have a yellow username, though.
#ParatrooperLivesMatter #BigArmyAs****
But I don't have a yellow username, though.
#ParatrooperLivesMatter #BigArmyAs****
Maybe you should. Like for real.
#YellowForGTF425
#NoJusticeNoPeace
#McDonaldSzechuanSauce
If the user can't shoot, doesn't have the optics to locate and identify the target, doesn't have a reticle that permits consistent aiming reference, and doesn't know the exact range to the target, it doesn't really matter if they're shooting .22LR or .338LM.
Waaaaaay too many carts in front of waaaaay too few horses.
If we are talking about pistol marksmanship and tactics (a tertiary weapon system) or the average non-11 or 18 series MOS fobbit, I agree. However, is it your experience that Marine and Army infantryman are SIGNIFICANTLY lacking in marksmanship skills? Granted, I spent my time in the 18th AC where we liked to think that standards were higher, but most of the Army and Marine infantrymen that I've encountered could handle their rifles. This was especially true for guys from the 75th or MEU GCEs
I don't know man. I see myself falling more in line with Dr. Roberts on this one. We've got some pretty skilled Indians doing the vast majority of the shooting. Their bows (ARs) have withstood the test of time, and are accurate and versatile. With the current crop of ACOGs and Aimpoints, their reticles and optics are among the best on the battlefield. However, their arrows leave a lot to be desired in terms of lethality.
So, I'd be all for improvements to the caliber or choice of ammo. I'm just not seeing a compelling case that 7.62 is the better arrow. I do think that Dr. Roberts makes a compelling argument for 6.8SPC in the PowerPoint that I linked earlier. IF we were to improve the arrow, it seems to be the logical choice.
Dist. Expert 26
04-07-17, 13:19
If we are talking about pistol marksmanship and tactics (a tertiary weapon system) or the average non-11 or 18 series MOS fobbit, I agree. However, is it your experience that Marine and Army infantryman are SIGNIFICANTLY lacking in marksmanship skills? Granted, I spent my time in the 18th AC where we liked to think that standards were higher, but most of the Army and Marine infantrymen that I've encountered could handle their rifles. This was especially true for guys from the 75th or MEU GCEs
I was the primary shooting coach for my company and often helped design courses of fire when we actually got to go off script for training. I'd say well over half of Marines are severely lacking in basic marksmanship. Like they can't put both rounds in a hammered pair on target at 5 yards. Or even hit the target while slowly walking forward.
The issue, from my estimation, is simply lack of trigger time. Not counting when we were deployed we shot maybe 3 times a year. 2 of those were check in the box ranges with no real training value and the other might have been useful if the RSO's weren't complete retards. Which they usually were.
Manual of arms is another weak point. Some guys were very proficient with reloads, others couldn't change a magazine under stress to save their life.
Long story short, less time on PowerPoint, more time behind the gun. Realistic, useful courses of fire. When skill levels surpass equipment capabilities then worry about an upgrade.
I was the primary shooting coach for my company and often helped design courses of fire when we actually got to go off script for training. I'd say well over half of Marines are severely lacking in basic marksmanship. Like they can't put both rounds in a hammered pair on target at 5 yards. Or even hit the target while slowly walking forward.
The issue, from my estimation, is simply lack of trigger time. Not counting when we were deployed we shot maybe 3 times a year. 2 of those were check in the box ranges with no real training value and the other might have been useful if the RSO's weren't complete retards. Which they usually were.
Manual of arms is another weak point. Some guys were very proficient with reloads, others couldn't change a magazine under stress to save their life.
Long story short, less time on PowerPoint, more time behind the gun. Realistic, useful courses of fire. When skill levels surpass equipment capabilities then worry about an upgrade.
Disappointing if your company was a combat element. Not surprising if you were the band...
Dist. Expert 26
04-07-17, 13:39
Disappointing if your company was a combat element. Not surprising if you were the band...
This was a line company. For whatever reason our leadership never placed much emphasis on marksmanship until we were already deployed.
Had recently discussed this issue with my son who is an officer in an ABN unit. His BN has quite a bit of direct NCO experience in A'stan and Iraq combat, and a very large % of the NCO's and Company or higher officers have 75th experience. It's a subject of discussion for them, though in a different context.
My take away from the discussion is they are half amused and half annoyed that this whole issue comes up repeatedly.
Their view: It's not a weapons system issue. Nor even a doctrine issue, at least not for Light Infantry units. Not that the anecdotes do not have some truth at their heart, but that one of the following applies:
1) Support troops in convoy or similar without heavier weapons. IE: Put in a situation where they did not have enough beyond M4 capability. But that's really 2 & 3 below.
2) Bad tactics- Spreading platoons out further than company level resources can support or similar. Not allocating/using company level heavy weapons. Not using your 240's and 249's. Not enough BN level assets, etc.
3) Bad Habits/discipline- Not unmounting with 240's, not carrying SAW's. MRAP mindset. In outposts not having your 240's (and sometimes M2's) ready. And fireplans for 60mm/artillery
4) Bad training- It's harder to be proficient with 203's and similar. Not as many places to use them.
This is an Army, and specifically, light IN view. And my take away, not his words. But, it is very clear that there is no shortage of weapons capable of dealing with PK/RPK's. Just need to bring them, know how to use them and then use them. Half of a fire team has weapons capable of 300m+ already. Add company assets, and there should not be an issue.
It's not that concern for RPK's out at the limits of their carbine range does not occur. Just that the fix is not a rifle, instead, they need to properly use their 249's, 240's, 203's, 60mm, etc.
That is a training issue legitimately. Ask them what they want? More training facilities to do live fire including heavy/standoff weapons. More ammo/budget, etc.
Since they train extensively side by side with European allies using the 7.62x54R and RPG's in question in addition to being on the receiving end, it's something they are intimately familiar with. They don't want them. If there is need/desire for more than AT-4's, they can get Carl G's.
They don't want more weight, reduced ammo capacity, etc. Would not trade their SAW's with current optics for the soviet era counterparts.
It's not that they don't want more range, they'd take it. But not if it compromises other things. And optics already change the dynamics that many of the war stories which drive this type of thing derive from.
I'm a Grendel user/fan. I think it'd be a great fit, would extend the reach of carbines/LMG's. But will never happen due to logistics and many other factors. And it compromises ammo capacity, as would 6.8SPC (at least relative to 5.56).
The idea that this is somehow a gap, and that US infantry soldiers need some new miracle 7.62NATO in M4 format with longer range is a bit silly when the trend is shorter SOCOM barrels, etc. Now add female infantry soldiers. Gonna have them shooting 6.5lb 7.62 NATO rifles out to 600m?
Other than length, the AR-10 pretty much met the capability that keeps being raised. There is a reason it was not used widely in original form. Same for M-14.
Even DMR type capability with a longer range cartridge (Grendel or SPC) is not really workable as they just don't keep Joes long enough to maintain that level of trained capability. Not that it's a bad idea, just that the learning/training/apptitude curve is not realistic in current enlisted turnover/cycles. Mainstream IN is apparently very different than the special teams in that regard.
Again, my read from talking with my son, not his words. Myself, I'd wave my magic wand and give everyone 6.5 Grendel M4's and 249's, and 260 Rem 204's. (or a lighter crew served MG with 6.5G) And a zillion rounds of Hornady SST's, which has proven to be very accurate. With another zillion of steel cased ammo for training.
Or better yet, a larger mag well variant that bridges the gap between M4 & AR-10 and allows for about another 100-200 fps out of a 6.5mm 100-130g cartridge. Then have ammo commonality between the crew served and fire teams. But that's just me. :-)
I'd be shocked if this happens.
The Army's Training and Doctrine Command has a template called DOTMLPF to consider what it's going to cost, Doctrinally, Operationally, Training and Education, Materiel, Personnel, Facilities, and Policy-wise.
Soldiers (at least Infantry and Cavalrymen) can't routinely hit to 300 meters now with the stuff they have -- how are they going to train to 600-yards if there are no ranges and trainers?
This smacks of a Picatinny Arsenal body trying to justify their existence and future.
Not sure how many troops or units have been lost because we don't have overmatch at individual Soldier level. You can't call artillery in closer than 300 meters without it being Danger Close.
Reads like someone's off their meds.
Soldiers (at least Infantry and Cavalrymen) can't routinely hit to 300 meters now with the stuff they have -- how are they going to train to 600-yards if there are no ranges and trainers?
This smacks of a Picatinny Arsenal body trying to justify their existence and future.
Not sure how many troops or units have been lost because we don't have overmatch at individual Soldier level.
That was my son's and peer's read... though they train to and are effective out to 300m with optics with carbines. But probably have a higher optempo and training availability than many other line units. Likewise, their SAW's can definitely make someone have a bad day 300-600m, and make them duck out to 800m.
What they want: much more realistic live fire training at the platoon and company level. And more places to do it including the longer range weapons. (203, saw, 240B)
The other thing is the 7.62x54R is not magic. Many of the anecdotes apparently are from A'stan and they were using indirect fire techniques. Not that accurate, but works for suppressive fire. But we presumably have better tools available, do not feel indirect fusillades are worth the ammo expenditure.
Interesting that a prehistoric .30 caliber cartridge (7.62x54R) is such a driving factor in 2017.
Averageman
04-07-17, 16:26
Interesting that a prehistoric .30 caliber cartridge (7.62x54R) is such a driving factor in 2017.
It's not, those are literary road apples left to divert some folks away from reality.
Think of when the majority of that ammo was made? Is it match ammo? Is it even close to match ammo? What are the quality of the rifles and optics being used by OPFOR in a case like this?
Create a boogey man, come up with a half way logical solution to the problem you pulled out of thin air and then come up with a near goofy answer. You've just justified another ten years on the job.
There are too many logical answers out there at the Company level for this to be a real issue.
but makes a point... If we did engage in a jungle moving forward we will not be using roaming squads anymore.
Technology has moved us past that point, and with no collateral to worry about it would just be a day to unleash rain.
Huh? Infantry tactics are infantry tactics, hasn't changed a helluva lot over the years. You make it sound as though fighting in a jungle would be easier than fighting in the more open AO's like Afghanistan.
Terrain and jungle made Vietnam a squad and platoon leader's war.
RobertTheTexan
04-07-17, 19:51
Terrain and jungle made Vietnam a squad and platoon leader's war.
I don't really see a terrain ever eliminating that. Maybe in some cases some re-org, and/or some different assets sliced in, but I don't ever see infantry squad and platoon tactical ops being eliminated.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Grand58742
04-07-17, 19:59
It's not, those are literary road apples left to divert some folks away from reality.
Think of when the majority of that ammo was made? Is it match ammo? Is it even close to match ammo? What are the quality of the rifles and optics being used by OPFOR in a case like this?
Create a boogey man, come up with a half way logical solution to the problem you pulled out of thin air and then come up with a near goofy answer. You've just justified another ten years on the job.
There are too many logical answers out there at the Company level for this to be a real issue.
It's still interesting that a rifle cartridge that's over 125 years old is still in widespread general issue today.
Moose-Knuckle
04-08-17, 03:56
You do know 75% of that movie was fiction right? Even the book has taken liberty with the actual record.
No incidences on record of him ever taking out a "sniper".
You do know I only mentioned the movie, never quoted as gospel truth but also mentioned documentaries that have aired on the History Channel and Military Channel of interviews of US snipers from three branches of the military detailing engagements with foreign trained insurgent snipers.
Are you saying that US forces in the GWOT have never encountered enemy snipers?
I'll stay in my lane as I've never been in the military and asking the above as a genuine question.
If they're gonna do it make the barrel 18". Dropping to 16" robs the 7.62 of too much velocity.
Not true.
Terrain and jungle made Vietnam a squad and platoon leader's war.
That's kind of what I was thinking. You can get on line and move across an open area in Afghanistan and still maintain line-of-sight with your peeps. Try that in a jungle......that line would be considerably shorter (left to right) in order to maintain line-of-sight with personnel. And much slower going too. Usually it's single-file until contact is made and then spread out and do the fire-and-maneuver thing.
I haven't been to the sandbox but I did spend 3 years with an infantry unit in Panama 30 years ago. Granted, we didn't have the latest gizmos and gadgets (hell, we had M16A1's), but about the only thing I could see as helpful would be GPS, provided it got a signal through the triple canopy often present in the deepest jungles. Not sure how the latest FLIR devices would work on CAS aircraft, once again trying to see through triple canopy foliage to spot bad guys. IR would still work for the grunts on the ground, but only as far as the underbrush didn't block the view. If there is anything I'm wrong about please enlighten me as this is something I've thought about (not asking for OPSEC violations).
Digital_Damage
04-08-17, 09:17
Huh? Infantry tactics are infantry tactics, hasn't changed a helluva lot over the years. You make it sound as though fighting in a jungle would be easier than fighting in the more open AO's like Afghanistan.
They have changed significantly, lots of lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq. For one thing it showed our urban tactics were shit.
In most situations fighting in an unpopulated area with little to no collateral will now result in strike not requiring on the ground confirmation, Issues with dense canopy is no longer an issue. that is how far technology has progressed in the last 5 years.
Digital_Damage
04-08-17, 09:23
You do know I only mentioned the movie, never quoted as gospel truth but also mentioned documentaries that have aired on the History Channel and Military Channel of interviews of US snipers from three branches of the military detailing engagements with foreign trained insurgent snipers.
Are you saying that US forces in the GWOT have never encountered enemy snipers?
I'll stay in my lane as I've never been in the military and asking the above as a genuine question.
Abnormally rare on the modern battlefield and not encouraged to engage, if they do spot one they would call it in. There are far better ways to deal with one.
RobertTheTexan
04-08-17, 09:52
That's kind of what I was thinking. You can get on line and move across an open area in Afghanistan and still maintain line-of-sight with your peeps. Try that in a jungle......that line would be considerably shorter (left to right) in order to maintain line-of-sight with personnel. And much slower going too. Usually it's single-file until contact is made and then spread out and do the fire-and-maneuver thing.
I haven't been to the sandbox but I did spend 3 years with an infantry unit in Panama 30 years ago. Granted, we didn't have the latest gizmos and gadgets (hell, we had M16A1's), but about the only thing I could see as helpful would be GPS, provided it got a signal through the triple canopy often present in the deepest jungles. Not sure how the latest FLIR devices would work on CAS aircraft, once again trying to see through triple canopy foliage to spot bad guys. IR would still work for the grunts on the ground, but only as far as the underbrush didn't block the view. If there is anything I'm wrong about please enlighten me as this is something I've thought about (not asking for OPSEC violations).
We had missions in Honduras with other gov't agencies and ran FLIR. Pretty dense canopy but we had success in finding the things we were looking for. It's not a perfect environment for a few reasons, but it was a viable form of IMINT that provided us some actionable Intel.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maybe I need to ask this another way, what is they want the SCAR 17 and or KAC rifle cant achieve?
Averageman
04-08-17, 11:05
It's still interesting that a rifle cartridge that's over 125 years old is still in widespread general issue today.
Certainly, but I would be curious as to the 7.62x54R being used. It is likely decades old, has been bought and sold a dozen times, was likely never stored in good conditions and left the factory with So-So quality control levels.
Sure it has great potential, sure there are people out there shooting Mosin's with great optic hitting stuff at a half mile with handloads and much practise, but really? How many rifles, optics and shooters are out there with these capabilities and equipment?
Even more than that, where are these guys from?
Most likely a rural American with a lot of time and money available rather than some goat herder with a rusty mosin a shot out barrel and no optics.
The premise is wrong.
RetroRevolver77
04-08-17, 11:58
Maybe I need to ask this another way, what is they want the SCAR 17 and or KAC rifle cant achieve?
From what I've read the SCAR's were broken within weeks of field testing and the older KAC rifles had reliability issues.
From what I've read the SCAR's were broken within weeks of field testing and the older KAC rifles had reliability issues.
Then I'm well out of the loop on both guns. I had thought the SCAR was in use and beyond its quirks and such, been GTG. The KAC seeming loved by all. I know the KAC intended more as a precision rifle than a thugga thugga battle rifle.
From what I've read the SCAR's were broken within weeks of field testing and the older KAC rifles had reliability issues.
For what it's worth, I have an SF buddy deployed rocking a SCAR right now and a few of my Ranger buddies have them, too.
The Mk17 is pretty well liked by my friends issued them.
Some photos floating around of guys in Syria with the SCAR-H wearing multicam black with tan plate carriers.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
RetroRevolver77
04-08-17, 13:12
For what it's worth, I have an SF buddy deployed rocking a SCAR right now and a few of my Ranger buddies have them, too.
The Mk17 is pretty well liked by my friends issued them.
I read that it was SOCOM had SCAR 16s they were testing and basically destroyed them during standard field exercises to a point they were just dumping them. I've seen videos of a SCAR completely falling apart after an eight foot drop onto concrete and heard of people breaking them just by falling on them. I had a couple myself and didn't care for them. The 17 does fill a niche roll and in limited issue- I imagine it would be fine.
For what it's worth, I have an SF buddy deployed rocking a SCAR right now and a few of my Ranger buddies have them, too.
The Mk17 is pretty well liked by my friends issued them.
Other than occasional cracked stock and being hard on optics etc, seemed well liked from similar gents in the field I have communicated with.
I read that it was SOCOM had SCAR 16s they were testing and basically destroyed them during standard field exercises to a point they were just dumping them. I've seen videos of a SCAR completely falling apart after an eight foot drop onto concrete and heard of people breaking them just by falling on them. I had a couple myself and didn't care for them. The 17 does fill a niche roll and in limited issue- I imagine it would be fine.
16s are another matter no doubt and made little sense when AR so well vetted and I know little about them and any testing/field use. I have no experience with 17 myself but this is the first I'd heard of them not being viewed favorably overall with some "could be even better if changes to X" comments which makes sense for a design still maturing.
RetroRevolver77
04-08-17, 13:26
deleted
Well, if you want a thoroughly proven (over half a century), reliable, and reasonably accurate 7.62mm battle rifle I suppose you could dust off the old HK G3 drawings :D
Although I've been told that the SCAR is actually more durable/reliable than the G3, so I dunno.
The 16s was dumped because they kept breaking it from what I read. Basically the SCAR requires a polymer hinge block for the stock because it dampens the recoil on the rear machine screws holding the stock mounting trunnion in place. That hinge is where they break most often. The stock assembly is basically a toy- and no idea how they thought it was OK to issue a combat rifle with a plastic hinge assembly holding it together.
Does the 17 not comes with the same set up or is it beefier? Cracked/broken stocks on the 17 with real world use I have heard of, but that should be an easy fix I'd think and apparently not a deal breaker for most.
RetroRevolver77
04-08-17, 13:44
deleted
The SCAR 16 is kind of pointless but the SCAR H has a point if one needed a 308.
The SCAR 16 did absolutely everything the M4 did, so much so that it's like "Why not just use M4s?" Non-AR countries use a healthy supply of SCAR 16s.
My only beef with a SCAR that makes it hard for me to want to buy one is the short rails. But It is hella light and you can change the stock.
If I needed a 308 semi auto and had no SR-25, then yeah I'd use a SCAR.
Shoot any rifle enough and eventually a scope will break. Nothing new. I think the mass of the bolt group slamming to and fro is what was an issue. I think the FNH Fungineers came out with a list of optics that are sturdy enough for a SCAR.
No, popping a Leapers or Tasco on probably wouldn't be a hot idea.
According to one of Chris Bartocci's videos, the SCAR has some sort of peculiar issue with harmonics. So the scope takes more of a beating than with other designs.
Same exact stock from what I remember. You'd have to see one up close but basically- you can't change out the hinge to an aluminum one without risking damage to the rear trunnion screws. The factory polymer hinge assembly is required to dampen recoil vibration to the rear trunnion machine screws.
Again, no expert here, but it sounds like with some very minor mods, the 17 would fit the bill and save a lot of $, but throwing money in the toilet a favorite hobby of the big green et al.
The SCAR 16 is kind of pointless but the SCAR H has a point if one needed a 308.
The SCAR 16 did absolutely everything the M4 did, so much so that it's like "Why not just use M4s?" Non-AR countries use a healthy supply of SCAR 16s.
My only beef with a SCAR that makes it hard for me to want to buy one is the short rails. But It is hella light and you can change the stock.
If I needed a 308 semi auto and had no SR-25, then yeah I'd use a SCAR.
Shoot any rifle enough and eventually a scope will break. Nothing new. I think the mass of the bolt group slamming to and fro is what was an issue. I think the FNH Fungineers came out with a list of optics that are sturdy enough for a SCAR.
No, popping a Leapers or Tasco on probably wouldn't be a hot idea.
Me, it's (in my view) the wildly inflated price because it's a new ish toy. The KAC is easy to justify in my view, it's a beautiful rifle and refined to the max. The SCAR a production gun not fully vetted and mature (compared to ARs, etc) and fugly to boot. Value is relative of course, but to me, SCAR is poor value and I'm happy to wait till prices continue to drop until it makes sense.
The G3 is a pig though especially with optics and it's ergonomics are not well thought out but it works. The Germans did break out some old G3's during the Afghanistan conflict which was neat- kind of like how we brought out some M14's as well. That would probably be fun for a day and then no thanks- to damn heavy.
So a G3 is a pound heavier than a scar-h nekid. Within a few oz of an SR25 with similar barrel length. Lighter than the LMT MWS and HK 762 by about a lb.
Drop in rail does not chg that much. The Norwegian optic rail makes great sense. IE: much lighter than the claw mt, etc. Later plastic trigger packs lose about 5 ounces. You can put an M4 style stock on it at about the same weight. Shorten a barrel a hair and lose a couple ounces.
Not that I think it'd be a contender, just that it's not really the pig folks make it out to be.
I have thousands of rounds behind an HK91 in various cfgs, back when German surplus was cheap. Spent quite a bit of time deer hunting in the GA mtns with it when I was young and stupid. Shot my first deer with it, as did my brother. Banged a boilerplate flange at 200-300 yds repeatedly to the point it looked like a vw hubcap.
I now hunt with six and a half to 7 pound 308 bolt guns amongst other things. Okay to carry, but no fun to shoot. If it was something I had to shoot a lot, especially rapid fire, anything less than that 8 to 9 pound mark is going to be problematic. So think hard before you want a 6lb 762 by 51.
My read: ain't gonna happen. Even if the SCAR-H was wonderfully flawless and magically available to all. Joe would gain a pound of weight and suffer a 1/3 ammo base load reduction.
Yep, more better 5.56 loads and more range time.
That said, I love my HK91 but it is very much a product of its time.
Does the aluminum stock adapter and ACR stock from kinetic solve the stock hinge problem?
https://kineticdg.com/product/scarsasstockbrown/
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
RobertTheTexan
04-08-17, 15:16
For what it's worth, I have an SF buddy deployed rocking a SCAR right now and a few of my Ranger buddies have them, too.
The Mk17 is pretty well liked by my friends issued them.
GT
Does Army SOF not have the SR-25 issued? Is that pretty much a Navy issued weapon?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RetroRevolver77
04-08-17, 15:58
deleted
GT
Does Army SOF not have the SR-25 issued? Is that pretty much a Navy issued weapon?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SR-25s and M110s are in use within USASOC.
RobertTheTexan
04-08-17, 16:51
SR-25s and M110s are in use within USASOC.
Thanks, I knew we had the M110 in play, but wasn't sure on the SR- 25. Wonder if the variant they are using is working as designed and they are gtg as with the 17s?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They have changed significantly, lots of lessons learned in Afghanistan and Iraq. For one thing it showed our urban tactics were shit.
In most situations fighting in an unpopulated area with little to no collateral will now result in strike not requiring on the ground confirmation, Issues with dense canopy is no longer an issue. that is how far technology has progressed in the last 5 years.
Interesting, I was curious. Thanks.
We had missions in Honduras with other gov't agencies and ran FLIR. Pretty dense canopy but we had success in finding the things we were looking for. It's not a perfect environment for a few reasons, but it was a viable form of IMINT that provided us some actionable Intel.
Thanks for the input!
MountainRaven
04-09-17, 00:27
For what it's worth, I have an SF buddy deployed rocking a SCAR right now and a few of my Ranger buddies have them, too.
The Mk17 is pretty well liked by my friends issued them.
Everybody I've talked to who has actually used a Mk17 has been quite fond of it.
The only negative things I hear are from people, "who have a buddy who says."
From what I understand, the SCAR 17Ss (modified to be full auto) owned by Battlefield Vegas hold up about as well as their 16Ss. And their 16Ss are the only guns to outdo their AKs in terms of durability and reliability (in a machine gun rental range environment).
turnburglar
04-09-17, 00:36
I don't see the purpose of running out to get 7.62 semi autos. When I was deployed if the enemy was that far away we brought in M240's and M2 support. I was also lucky enough to be near a very active air field so CAS was always available.
Everybody I've talked to who has actually used a Mk17 has been quite fond of it.
The only negative things I hear are from people, "who have a buddy who says."
From what I understand, the SCAR 17Ss (modified to be full auto) owned by Battlefield Vegas hold up about as well as their 16Ss. And their 16Ss are the only guns to outdo their AKs in terms of durability and reliability (in a machine gun rental range environment).
This. My SCAR....I dont want to say "disdain", but hang up is that the rails are too short for my long arms. The stock is comfortable and folding is kinda unnecessary except storage or whatever.
A VFG makes it more palatable and FNH has said what optics can hang with it.
If they were 500 dollars cheaper, there would be no reason not to have one for a battle rifle.
They make aftermarket stuff to fix these niggles, but not cheap. Take off $500 dollars and I'd consider it a project.
I dont hate it but dont feel like investing like I did KAC wise in something that given more time and greater numbers will likely be less exotic/expensive.
Anybody longing for HK91s, M14s, and FALs in 2017 is buying into the old Soldier of Fortune hype. I like my HK91 and wouldnt mind having a beater PTR-91 at some point but not because they are relevant but because I have a literal crate of Aluminum mags.
If you want the whole Wild Geese factor, there are pics of dudes in Africa toting SCARs
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zdfEzSWPH40/Uj-XqUPA0xI/AAAAAAAAeQs/d-qH3WdkI-0/s1600/Kenya+Special+Forces+FN+SCAR+Special+Operations+Forces+Combat+Assault+Rifle+(SCAR)+(2).jpg
It's just guns people....not an indictment of your manhood or personal creeds.
Still...More ammo and more range time equal more gooder shooters tapping ass at 600+
RobertTheTexan
04-09-17, 01:51
I don't see the purpose of running out to get 7.62 semi autos. When I was deployed if the enemy was that far away we brought in M240's and M2 support. I was also lucky enough to be near a very active air field so CAS was always available.
I think that is the point of confusion or contention for several of us here. We have two (I'm presuming the SR-25 is gtg) very capable 7.62 NATO weapons in use by no less than USASOC, NSW , and who knows what other hard use units that don't have issues with the weapons. To me, that's all the "seal of approval" I need. No pun intended, I'm an Army guy anyway. Though it does make me wonder if there isn't a weapon already "built" or on the drawing board that meets these perceived needs, that is only waiting for the RFQ to get dropped on the street. Wouldn't be the first time a gov't contractoqski has had earmarked funds before the RFI or RFQ even hit the street. I saw this with my own two eyes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RetroRevolver77
04-09-17, 10:18
deleted
Lets stop pussy footing around and bring back the BAR. :sarcastic:
http://www.koreanwaronline.com/arms/KWjpg/1918a2.jpg
RetroRevolver77
04-09-17, 10:43
deleted
Here you go, the modern BAR and it comes with 30 round .30-06 magazines;
http://www.ohioordnanceworks.com/hcar
F-ing beast! I love it. 1500 yards + from 16 inch barrel (not that I could hit a damn thing at that distance) with AR like modularity and other goodness like the can. LAV shoots it at 9:50 and my T levels jumped 50 points. Outstanding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD31v5Rziag
RobertTheTexan
04-09-17, 11:09
Here you go, the modern BAR and it comes with 30 round .30-06 magazines;
http://www.ohioordnanceworks.com/hcar
Any company that has a Ma Deuce .50 barrel for sale on their website is o-flippin-k in my book. :drool:
That was a good one 7n6, thanks for that link.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think they're probably alone in NATO on this, but the Turks decided to pass on the 5.56mm as a general issue infantry round and stick with 7.62mm as their cartridge of choice in their new rifle. I read that it was a combination of being familiar with the round (in their G3's) and being unimpressed with the performance of 5.56mm.
My day would go like this if I was Trump for a day...
Wake up, bang Melania, have cup of coffee, get security brief, breakfast of anything with bacon, shower with Melania, conduct routine office "business", go shoot with Secret Service and SOCOM over working lunch, troll Glock lovers with pictures of the Sig 320 on Twitter, come back to WH and sign EO getting rid of the mamby-pamby eco friendly rules concerning lead in ammo, fire every General/Admiral who thought it was a good idea, sign another EO stating our nation will no longer abide by the Hague Convention in terms of small arms ammo development, another EO for the DoD to procure all service wide COTS replacements for current ball ammo, go to local gun shop to show support for American small business and to troll Diane Feinstein on Twitter by showing pictures of me holding evil weapons of war, dinner, fat shame Kim Jong-Un on Twitter, sign EO stating we are no longer going to nation build if we go to war and we will go in, kill the enemy, break their toys and come home to leave the survivors to pick up the pieces, bang Melania, send out random Tweet about winning, go to sleep with smile on face.
This sounds about right to me, especially the 'bang Melania' part.... Except I'd sign an EO-A-Day dismantling some of the dumbest parts of the NFA too, until Congress acts to allow SBRs, and suppressors too.
Heck, Turkey has a new 7.62mm battle rifle. I'm sure they'd be happy to share :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XV9RbE8IWI
It looks like a Turkey too.
If the user can't shoot, doesn't have the optics to locate and identify the target, doesn't have a reticle that permits consistent aiming reference, and doesn't know the exact range to the target, it doesn't really matter if they're shooting .22LR or .338LM.
Waaaaaay too many carts in front of waaaaay too few horses.
^^ I believe that truer words were never spoken. Just from my reading.
Does the 17 not comes with the same set up or is it beefier? Cracked/broken stocks on the 17 with real world use I have heard of, but that should be an easy fix I'd think and apparently not a deal breaker for most.
^ 16 and 17 stocks are the same. No, they don't have to be plastic to absorb recoil. Stock can be replace in 30 seconds, in reality they very seldom break. And over time FN has improved them. The 17 I bought almost 3 years ago has a better stock that the one I bought in 2010 (it doesn't rattle). I've got four SCARs two 17s and two 16s. They don't get beat up, but they get shot a lot. Excellent weapon. Because prices of 308 ARs have been rising, a SCAR 17 at $2700 looks like a pretty good deal these days. Just add ammo.
There was a lot of Internet BS about SCARs being crap (I thought that had stopped, but apparently not), the truth is they are accurate, extremely reliable, and easy to keep on target. The 17 only weights 8 pounds sans optic and ammo.
I'd still take a SCAR 17 over any 308 AR on the market. And they sell a lot of them.
I dunno. SCAR H is interesting. Will maybe get one before I die.
But an ECC with a MAMS really is transcendant.
I will say this, If I had a bunch of FGMM then SR-25.
If someone said all you get is rancid SA/Soviet ammo and shit that is not Match by any means, then a SCAR with either a vert grip or extended rails.
Legacy rifles would never be a consideration
JMO
I have three HK 91's. Owned probably half a dozen or more. They are good rifles, front heavy, somewhat awkward but they work well. I kept them over the SCAR just as I kept my FN FAL's and M1A.
No. That's the exact model that was on a SCAR 17 shown on the FN Forum that had the rear trunnion screws started shifting. It also still has a polymer hinge because of the ACR stock so it doesn't really address anything other than looks. FN stated somewhere that the actual mount needs to be polymer because it dampens the shock during recoil.
I've not read that, and I'd really like to see a link. But if you try to find pictures and actual first hand reports of broken stocks, there are very very few. Its funny how people latch on to things with no real first hand knowledge and it goes all over the Internet. I can see SF guys breaking a SCAR stock, but then I can see SF guys breaking just about anything.
Whatever, but if you think your G3 is just as good, and you think an M1A is a good firearm, then there is no way I could enlighten you. I think you've gone on this Jihad before and gotten schooled, but apparently you didn't learn anything.
For my part, I don't think it makes any sense for the military issue 7.62x51 NATO rifles and it makes less sense to develop a new cartridge. However, I've always liked the idea of the 6.8SPC from what I've read, not to help with longer range shooting, but to increase terminal ballistics at all the common battlefield ranges.
I dunno. SCAR H is interesting. Will maybe get one before I die.
But an ECC with a MAMS really is transcendant.
I will say this, If I had a bunch of FGMM then SR-25.
If someone said all you get is rancid SA/Soviet ammo and shit that is not Match by any means, then a SCAR with either a vert grip or extended rails.
Legacy rifles would never be a consideration
JMO
No that the SCAR is a precision rifle but it is an accurate Battle Rifle. I've posted this test before. I wanted to see what happens when you shoot 20 rounds through the "skinny" SCAR barrel. Does it string or loose a lot of accuracy.... Uh, no.
44936
Everybody tries to "M-16" shit-talk what folks are using and wistfully recollect the good ol' days when 'men were men' and carried a 'man's gun'.
This happened with Glocks. Still to this day.
#StopWithTheHateCrimes
#QuitHating
#CallTheCopsI'llJustThumpBassThatMuchLouder
No that the SCAR is a precision rifle but it is an accurate Battle Rifle. I've posted this test before. I wanted to see what happens when you shoot 20 rounds through the "skinny" SCAR barrel. Does it string or loose a lot of accuracy.... Uh, no.
44936
I agree with you. I'm just saying that if I absolutely knew my Ammo was made by some toothless Babushka high on Krokodil and Vodka who only worked for black bread and beets then it is Game On with the SCAR.
The SR-25 is definitely an AR evolution but I dont see myself putting raunchy ammo in it.
The SCAR lends itself to a raunchier diet if need be.
But for MY SR-25 it gets good ammo.
SR-25 isn't really a "battle rifle". It can be, I guess. M80 works in it. It isn't delicate, but it's a princess.
If I were to get Freudian: SR-25 is Madonna and SCAR is Whore for those familiar with the whole Madonna-Whore Complex.
F-ing beast! I love it. 1500 yards + from 16 inch barrel (not that I could hit a damn thing at that distance) with AR like modularity and other goodness like the can. LAV shoots it at 9:50 and my T levels jumped 50 points. Outstanding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD31v5Rziag
I just can't shake it.......that thing is a friggin' abortion! Especially for the $$$. Yeah, I know it might strike a chord with some folks but I'd need Viagra to be attracted to that.
Now the traditional M1918 they make? Ooh la la! :cool:
Know what else fires 30-06?
My Winchester 70.
That HCAR doesnt really speak to me.
If we had all our 2nd A rights/privileges restored; I'd be living dat 1918 life doe.
Not as fun semi only.
AP Black Tip rounds, don't Eff with me.
I remember this one movie called The Young Warriors. It was sorta like the Platoon of the 1970s kind of. This one crazy kid walked around with a BAR wearing his green field jacket and khaki pants murdering up Nazzies like it was his J-O-B. Like shot some in the back. It was bad ass. Cant find it on dvd nowhere.
pity.
I think that is the point of confusion or contention for several of us here. We have two (I'm presuming the SR-25 is gtg) very capable 7.62 NATO weapons in use by no less than USASOC, NSW , and who knows what other hard use units that don't have issues with the weapons.
Both those weapons would add 1 (SCARH) or 2 (sr25 carbine) lbs and a 1/3 reduction in base ammo load.
To somehow address a anecdotal problem that IN troops already have weapons to deal with... The IN serving guys I know have no desire for that trade-off. See earlier post about tactics and bad habits.
I am curious how SOCOM uses them vs 5.56 platforms. There must be a reason. SR25 is easy, we know why on that platform. But the SCARH is curious.
I'm guessing barrier penetration combined with no crew served MGs. Anyone know the mission profile where they'd want/carry scars?
I think they're probably alone in NATO on this, but the Turks decided to pass on the 5.56mm as a general issue infantry round and stick with 7.62mm as their cartridge of choice in their new rifle. I read that it was a combination of being familiar with the round (in their G3's) and being unimpressed with the performance of 5.56mm.
Others stuck with G3s and 7.62 NATO for a very long time. I saw one with a Norwegian type optic setup being carried in Italy recently. I would have expected some Beretta conglomeration, was surprised.
I just can't shake it.......that thing is a friggin' abortion! Especially for the $$$. Yeah, I know it might strike a chord with some folks but I'd need Viagra to be attracted to that.
Now the traditional M1918 they make? Ooh la la! :cool:
It's so ugly is beautiful kinda thing. JM Browing genius modernized. LAV makes it look like a soft shooter too considering what's comin' out that barrel.
Don't spend money on new gadgets, spend the money on ammunition and training with the current weapon systems available in the supply system. More running, more pushups, more math, countless hours of proper dry firing drills and more shooting at 600+ yards.
After the rank and file becomes born again hard and they can consistently outshoot their equipment, spend the money on weapons development. Until that day spend the money where it will do the most good.
Don't spend money on new gadgets, spend the money on ammunition and training with the current weapon systems available in the supply system. More running, more pushups, more math, countless hours of proper dry firing drills and more shooting at 600+ yards.
Hmm. The Marines did that very thing years ago and folks said it was archaic.
RetroRevolver77
04-09-17, 23:54
deleted
RobertTheTexan
04-10-17, 02:00
Both those weapons would add 1 (SCARH) or 2 (sr25 carbine) lbs and a 1/3 reduction in base ammo load.
To somehow address a anecdotal problem that IN troops already have weapons to deal with... The IN serving guys I know have no desire for that trade-off. See earlier post about tactics and bad habits.
I am curious how SOCOM uses them vs 5.56 platforms. There must be a reason. SR25 is easy, we know why on that platform. But the SCARH is curious.
I'm guessing barrier penetration combined with no crew served MGs. Anyone know the mission profile where they'd want/carry scars?
Others stuck with G3s and 7.62 NATO for a very long time. I saw one with a Norwegian type optic setup being carried in Italy recently. I would have expected some Beretta conglomeration, was surprised.
Oh I don't think any of this entire topic we are talking about, whatever it was we were talking about is legit. My deal is they are looking for a new weapon to fire a 7.62 round, when they already have 2 that do it pretty well. It just smells like another attempt to waste a huge chunk of money, or there are some politics involved here that's trying to rustle up a gov't contract for some company who has this non-existent problem solved. But since that's sounds rather conspiratorial and I only do conspiracies on 4 days weekends, I cannot elaborate on that. The whole thing doesn't make sense period.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wonder if someday we'll have the same discussions about phased plasma rifles.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Outlander Systems
04-10-17, 04:33
Fact.
We'll eventually have threads for the new caliber wars.
"KAC SR-100kw or SR-250kw, Which is Right For Me?"
I wonder if someday we'll have the same discussions about phased plasma rifles.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Averageman
04-10-17, 06:23
Oh I don't think any of this entire topic we are talking about, whatever it was we were talking about is legit. My deal is they are looking for a new weapon to fire a 7.62 round, when they already have 2 that do it pretty well. It just smells like another attempt to waste a huge chunk of money, or there are some politics involved here that's trying to rustle up a gov't contract for some company who has this non-existent problem solved. But since that's sounds rather conspiratorial and I only do conspiracies on 4 days weekends, I cannot elaborate on that. The whole thing doesn't make sense period.
I'm with you, the entire premise is a fail.
I've got a great idea, go get a six pack of beer and sit with five Infantry Squad Leaders and ask them "What would you do?"
You'll likely get some very creative and educated answers, few of them would include lets spend $20,000,000 researching a new weapon.
Grand58742
04-10-17, 07:47
This sounds about right to me, especially the 'bang Melania' part.... Except I'd sign an EO-A-Day dismantling some of the dumbest parts of the NFA too, until Congress acts to allow SBRs, and suppressors too.
I have to have something to do on the second day in office other than bang Melania.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.