View Full Version : Is The Battle Rifle As Obsolete As The SMG...?
I think it is the long accepted consensus that the SMG no longer has a primary military role. WWII was the last time they were fielded as a front line weapon and Vietnam was the last time the US employed them in significant numbers.
Assault rifles basically come in at similar weights and lengths with superior ballistics, especially at combat distances. As a result the SMG has been relegated to a very limited special application role, usually involving the need for suppression.
But has the larger caliber battle rifles similarly been dismissed? Like the SMG they still pop up from time to time, often in a DMR role or other similar special application, but nearly every modern military has largely retired them in favor of carbine length assault rifles.
Have 7.62 military rifles simply seen their day in the same manner as the 9mm SMG?
Aside from long range rigs they are done and rightfully so.
i'm not nearly enough of a warfare buff to be too insightful... but what if warfare should evolve back out to longer engagement distances? for the last 65 years, war has been up close and personal because we've been facing poorly trained irregular soldiers with shitty guns. but if we were to face off with a well trained military, i would expect our small unit close-with-and-engage MO wouldn't work anymore. engagement distances may very well open up- WAY up. with less rounds fired per soldier, with greater energy at longer distances needed, we might find an m14-esque gun with an acog the ideal front line weapon. or at least one of the main line guns.
variablebinary
04-14-11, 04:13
Just about every 1st world nation that has the means to change from a battle rifle to an assault rifle has done so.
Some people believe battle rifles are a solution for the Afghanistan problem, but the Norwegians didn't agree and replaced the AG-3 with the HK416. I doubt they would have done so if they regarded assault rifles failures
http://img469.imageshack.us/img469/9541/7jw8.jpg
http://k53.pbase.com/g4/76/574376/2/65267120.OX7TKnll.jpg
This is how they roll now.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2719/4464518450_11379cc73b_o.jpg
The_War_Wagon
04-14-11, 05:48
I think the SMG is "obsolete," only in the sense we no longer fight wars to WIN them - rather, we fight them to snipe at the enemy from football field distances or more, and our current personal weapon platforms reflect that.
WERE we fighting in the sandboxes, the WAY we fought across Italy and Germany in WWII (mechanized armor to open up the city - then house-to-house to either kill or capture EVERY enemy combatant), it's hard to beat a Thompson, once you kick in a door and need to "clear" the room, OLD school style. An HK MP-5 in .40 or 10mm would be IDEAL for such work today.
Assuming we WANTED to win the war, that is. :mad:
Belmont31R
04-14-11, 06:01
I think the SMG is "obsolete," only in the sense we no longer fight wars to WIN them - rather, we fight them to snipe at the enemy from football field distances or more, and our current personal weapon platforms reflect that.
WERE we fighting in the sandboxes, the WAY we fought across Italy and Germany in WWII (mechanized armor to open up the city - then house-to-house to either kill or capture EVERY enemy combatant), it's hard to beat a Thompson, once you kick in a door and need to "clear" the room, OLD school style. An HK MP-5 in .40 or 10mm would be IDEAL for such work today.
Assuming we WANTED to win the war, that is. :mad:
Not at all. The problem with pistol caliber carbines for today is that a soldier is expected to do CQB, step outside, and engage obscured enemies several hundred yards away. A pistol caliber round does very poorly at that which is why WW2 squads were a mix of long and short guns. They didn't have a rifle that does both things pretty well like the M4 of today.
I think SMG's have long since seen their day. There just really isn't a role for them anymore that is mainstream enough to keep their use alive.
As far as 7.62 battle rifles I think their use is on the rise and will continue to grow especially if we are still in Afghanistan for the next 3-6 years.
variablebinary
04-14-11, 06:55
I think the SMG is "obsolete," only in the sense we no longer fight wars to WIN them - rather, we fight them to snipe at the enemy from football field distances or more, and our current personal weapon platforms reflect that.
WERE we fighting in the sandboxes, the WAY we fought across Italy and Germany in WWII (mechanized armor to open up the city - then house-to-house to either kill or capture EVERY enemy combatant), it's hard to beat a Thompson, once you kick in a door and need to "clear" the room, OLD school style. An HK MP-5 in .40 or 10mm would be IDEAL for such work today.
Assuming we WANTED to win the war, that is. :mad:
Think for a moment how different WWII would have been if the Germans had the MP44 fielded in large numbers from the start of the war.
Logistically, they would have been in a much better position, which in itself is a force multiplier. Plus they would have had a weapon that was equally capable clearing rooms, street to street fighting in Stalingrad, and keeping GI heads down at intermediate ranges in France. That's the strength of the assault rifle.
Also, one of the big problems of the subgun is the ubiquitousness of the MP5, and HK's awful support. HK basically drove scores of agencies into the arms of the M4 where parts and support are plentiful.
SilentType
04-14-11, 08:09
Battle Rifle: A military service rifle that fires the 7.62x51mm round.
Question: Is the battle rifle obsolete?
Answer: No.
Reasoning: SOCOM has adopted the MK17 SCAR-H. The UK last year adopted the L129A1. The Australians have procured the HK417. All these have been 7.62x51mm rifles pressed into Military Service in the last few years primarily due to the increased distances of engagements in Afghanistan.
I believe the future will be military service rifles that are very caliber modular allowing entire units to quickly and easily modify their rifles to go 7.62 or 5.56 depending on their mission. Our military is very expeditionary these days and has to be ready to go from heavily urban environments to very rural ones.
SMG's went obsolete due to body armor. We are seeing body armor become more in use throughout the world including now in third world nations. At some point 5.56x45mm or 7.62x51mm may be obsolete and require a new caliber.
Have 7.62 military rifles simply seen their day in the same manner as the 9mm SMG?
HELL YES, BROTHER!
The "battle rifle" is gone, just like the full powered bolt rifle. Both will still be used for longer ranges as designated marksman and sniper rifles, but that's it.
The role of modern infantry is now to "break doors" and "find and hold". The find and hold is basically a support function for aircraft and longer range weapons. Precision guided bombs, artillery, and mortar rounds are a part of the digital revolution that will change ground warfare as long as they exist. If he is going to survive, the enemy must either get so close that our bombs will kill us too or just blast away inaccurately from a distance and bug out before the high powered stuff gets there.
Most rounds fired in combat miss. In WWII it took about 20,000 rounds to cause one enemy casualty. It is far more now. It is much better to miss with a much lighter weight round as, after all, you have to carry them. And if they are beyond 300 meters, it is unlikely that the average soldier will even see his opponent. Steely eyed marksmanship is a fantasy unless one is a highly trained sniper or possibly a designated marksman with an optical sight.
Steely eyed marksmanship is a fantasy unless one is a highly trained sniper or possibly a designated marksman with an optical sight.
Or one plays a lot of COD.....
abn45bravo
04-14-11, 11:59
I would say yes that battle rifle is dead but the 7.62x51 carbine is in. 7.62 will not die until we(the military) get a true intermediate cartridge.
i'm not nearly enough of a warfare buff to be too insightful... but what if warfare should evolve back out to longer engagement distances? for the last 65 years, war has been up close and personal because we've been facing poorly trained irregular soldiers with shitty guns. but if we were to face off with a well trained military, i would expect our small unit close-with-and-engage MO wouldn't work anymore. engagement distances may very well open up- WAY up. with less rounds fired per soldier, with greater energy at longer distances needed, we might find an m14-esque gun with an acog the ideal front line weapon. or at least one of the main line guns.
I always wonder this as well. But I think we would simply revert to a 20" AR15 rifle rather than back to the M14 or an AR10.
I always wonder this as well. But I think we would simply revert to a 20" AR15 rifle rather than back to the M14 or an AR10.
I agree. There's never been a decent AR10 that I've seen... and there's NO ONE making a good M14... I don't know that the M14 could be revived in any decent numbers.
That junk SA is kicking out would never be acceptable in a military Rifle.
But I think we would simply revert to a 20" AR15 rifle rather than back to the M14 or an AR10.
Isn't that what the Corps is doing?
I think it will stay around in a limited function, ie DMR, for long range engagements. If we end up switching to a bigger intermediate round then maybe it will go away.
I do find the 7.62 Nato to be a fantastic machine gun round and think it will stay in that role for a long long time.
Isn't that what the Corps is doing?
As far as I know the Corp never really issued the M4 on a large scale like the Army did.
I agree. There's never been a decent AR10 that I've seen... and there's NO ONE making a good M14... I don't know that the M14 could be revived in any decent numbers.
That junk SA is kicking out would never be acceptable in a military Rifle.
if a little effort went into it, i'm sure somebody could produce a reliable automatic intermediate range rifle firing an intermediate range cartridge. doesn't need to be AN m14, just something that does what the m14 was supposed to do, but in a modern configuration.. likewise doesn't necessarily need to be 7.62x51.. we're talking about something a bit out into the future, where necessity has birthed invention.
Isn't that what the Corps is doing?
I'm not sure.
I know they have had the M16A4 for awhile now. I'm not sure they every retired it in favor of the M4 or if they simply issue both as needed or if they are now moving back to it from the M4.
if a little effort went into it, i'm sure somebody could produce a reliable automatic intermediate range rifle firing an intermediate range cartridge. doesn't need to be AN m14, just something that does what the m14 was supposed to do, but in a modern configuration.. likewise doesn't necessarily need to be 7.62x51.. we're talking about something a bit out into the future, where necessity has birthed invention.
We could finally get that T48 FAL.
:D
Magic_Salad0892
04-14-11, 14:48
I agree. There's never been a decent AR10 that I've seen
What do you consider the KAC EMC to be? (Then again... SR-25 =/= AR-10)
and there's NO ONE making a good M14
Same reason that nobody makes a good TEC-9.
Then again, at least the M14 goes bang most of the time.
I agree. There's never been a decent AR10 that I've seen... and there's NO ONE making a good M14... I don't know that the M14 could be revived in any decent numbers.
That junk SA is kicking out would never be acceptable in a military Rifle.
The original Dutch production AR-10's that the Portuguese carried into their colonial wars in Africa; Mozambique and Angola, saw plenty of hard use and were very highly regarded. They just never really went anywhere after that besides some adoptions by countries that really don't matter (Sudan, Nicaragua, Burma). Most of that had to do with the folding of Artillerie Inrichtingen.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Africa/Portuguese%20Colonial%20Wars/docu00139ad.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Africa/Portuguese%20Colonial%20Wars/Angola1970-1.jpg
The weight of FN and HK just drove the AR-10 into obscurity until Knights Armament started up the SR-25 project again.
As far as M14's, the closest to a decent milspec one made today is produced by LRB, but it's an obsolescent design that's on it's last legs.
As others have stated, the day of the "battle rifle", as carried by every soldier or Marine, is gone. It will continue to live on in the newer generation of rifles like the SCAR-H, LMT, and KAC as a DMR type weapon.
Wow. Those are REAL, Vintage AR-10s.
Wow. Those are REAL, Vintage AR-10s.
Yeah man, and I absolutely do want. They really did work every bit as well as a FAL or G3.
I was able to get a tour of Reed Knight's museum at SHOT '09, and he had an entire wall of original AR-10's.
Vickers has several as well.
I've seriously thought about getting a post '86 dealer sample, but the parts are damn near unobtanium and that's an expensive machine gun to break.
Magic_Salad0892
04-14-11, 15:40
I take it they don't use .308 LMT, parts or similar?
I take it they don't use .308 LMT, parts or similar?
Only thing that would work is the magazine.
Yeah man, and I absolutely do want. They really did work every bit as well as a FAL or G3.
I was able to get a tour of Reed Knight's museum at SHOT '09, and he had an entire wall of original AR-10's.
Vickers has several as well.
I've seriously thought about getting a post '86 dealer sample, but the parts are damn near unobtanium and that's an expensive machine gun to break.
Actually Sudanese and Dutch AR10s pop up all the time as pre86 dealer samples at very affordable prices. I keep intending to buy one but cost of 7.62 and the fact that most local ranges are pistol caliber only has prevented me from doing so.
I was also at the Reed tour in 09, simply an amazing collection.
Moose-Knuckle
04-14-11, 18:21
MBR obsolete?
As and infantryman's primary weapon, I'd say yes.
As a DMR (accurized of course) I'd say Afghanistan has taught us that they are a necessity hence the recent adoption of multiple 7.62x51 NATO platforms in various allied nations and the un-mothballing of M14's in inventory.
Blast from the past.
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a144/AKS-74/giofthefuture1959-3.jpg
Fuzzy-Reticle
04-14-11, 19:18
I don't think the MBR is done just yet.
With the emergance of 7.62 rifles like the SCAR H and the others from LMT and Hk the MBR may still have some story to tell.
Given the proliferation of hard and soft body armor on the modern battlefield the MBR is still King.
Unless the US and NATO decide to switch to an intermediate caliber 6.8SPC or whatever I think the MBR in 7.62 fills the role nicely.
Wasn't the FAL supposed to be in one of these medium sized calibers originally until the US/NATO forced the change to 7.62x54? Had that not happened would we have ever had MBR heyday when FAL's and G3's and M14's went toe to toe with the AK47?
The Eastern Bloc and Germans got it right 50+ years ago IMHO but I still love 7.62 and I will own a SCAR-H before the year is over.
In my humble semi informed opinion, not all screw heads are Philips and not all bolts are 1/2. So why only have 1 screwdriver and 1 socket wrench.
Belmont31R
04-14-11, 20:17
I don't think the MBR is done just yet.
With the emergance of 7.62 rifles like the SCAR H and the others from LMT and Hk the MBR may still have some story to tell.
Given the proliferation of hard and soft body armor on the modern battlefield the MBR is still King.
Unless the US and NATO decide to switch to an intermediate caliber 6.8SPC or whatever I think the MBR in 7.62 fills the role nicely.
Wasn't the FAL supposed to be in one of these medium sized calibers originally until the US/NATO forced the change to 7.62x54? Had that not happened would we have ever had MBR heyday when FAL's and G3's and M14's went toe to toe with the AK47?
The Eastern Bloc and Germans got it right 50+ years ago IMHO but I still love 7.62 and I will own a SCAR-H before the year is over.
None of those guns you mentioned fill the main issue rifle today. They are specialized variants.
The 7.62x51 is done as a general issue gun in modern 1st world nations.
Belmont31R
04-14-11, 20:20
In my humble semi informed opinion, not all screw heads are Philips and not all bolts are 1/2. So why only have 1 screwdriver and 1 socket wrench.
The infantry squads of today have many more tools available to them than the infantry squads of 30 years ago, and especially ww2 as well as being much more efficient. In WW2 you could have Thompson's, BAR's, carbines, M1's, M1919's, M1903's, ect. Today you can outfit a squad with 2 calibers and 3 guns all of which are more effective weapons systems than WW2 era guns.
Wasn't the FAL supposed to be in one of these medium sized calibers originally until the US/NATO forced the change to 7.62x54? Had that not happened would we have ever had MBR heyday when FAL's and G3's and M14's went toe to toe with the AK47?
The FAL was originally chambered in the German 7.92x33mm Kurz, from the StG-44. It was then upped to the British .280, which was supposed to be the great compromise, a Belgian rifle with a British intermediate round adopted by all of NATO. That, of course, fell apart before an agreement was reached, and the US shoved the 7.62x51mm down NATO's throat. A round that ballistically mimicked the .30-06 M2 ball from WWII and Korea, in a shorter case.
As has been stated, yes, the MBR is dead as a general issue rifle to any first world or second world country. The only NATO member state that still issues them in significant numbers is Turkey, and they just bought a bunch of HK 416's.
I don't think the MBR is done just yet.
With the emergance of 7.62 rifles like the SCAR H and the others from LMT and Hk the MBR may still have some story to tell.
Given the proliferation of hard and soft body armor on the modern battlefield the MBR is still King.
Unless the US and NATO decide to switch to an intermediate caliber 6.8SPC or whatever I think the MBR in 7.62 fills the role nicely.
Wasn't the FAL supposed to be in one of these medium sized calibers originally until the US/NATO forced the change to 7.62x54? Had that not happened would we have ever had MBR heyday when FAL's and G3's and M14's went toe to toe with the AK47?
The Eastern Bloc and Germans got it right 50+ years ago IMHO but I still love 7.62 and I will own a SCAR-H before the year is over.
Yes, the original FAL was chambered for .280 British, as was their early versions of the L85A1, the EM-1 and EM-2.
NATO forced the adoption of 7.62x51 (7.62x54R is a Russian caliber).
ETA: Beat by Templar again.
I have a FAL set up as a T48 / Belgian type A, shorter and lighter than an M14. :D
Reliability of modern .308 AR's just isn't there at an affordable price (or often times it just ain't there period compared to the AR10's of old).
7.62x51 has its place in terms of a marksman's rifle. The brits are quite pleased with their LMT's.
The original Dutch production AR-10's that the Portuguese carried into their colonial wars in Africa; Mozambique and Angola, saw plenty of hard use and were very highly regarded. They just never really went anywhere after that besides some adoptions by countries that really don't matter (Sudan, Nicaragua, Burma). Most of that had to do with the folding of Artillerie Inrichtingen.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Africa/Portuguese%20Colonial%20Wars/docu00139ad.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/Africa/Portuguese%20Colonial%20Wars/Angola1970-1.jpg
The weight of FN and HK just drove the AR-10 into obscurity until Knights Armament started up the SR-25 project again.
As far as M14's, the closest to a decent milspec one made today is produced by LRB, but it's an obsolescent design that's on it's last legs.
As others have stated, the day of the "battle rifle", as carried by every soldier or Marine, is gone. It will continue to live on in the newer generation of rifles like the SCAR-H, LMT, and KAC as a DMR type weapon.
We had one of the Dutch made AR-10s as a range toy when I was in El Salvador in the 80s. It was very nice. Easy to control on full-auto, would shoot 1 moa, even with a wore out barrel. I wish I could find one of the semi-auto kit guns. Everyone I've seen has been around 3k.
Cheers
QuietShootr
04-15-11, 07:22
Actually Sudanese and Dutch AR10s pop up all the time as pre86 dealer samples at very affordable prices. I keep intending to buy one but cost of 7.62 and the fact that most local ranges are pistol caliber only has prevented me from doing so.
I was also at the Reed tour in 09, simply an amazing collection.
Me too. Do you guys remember the CRATE of Dutch AR10s he had on one of the stripper platforms in the AR room? With the original shipping papers from AI?
Jay Cunningham
04-15-11, 07:26
For the Army? No. For me? Yep.
Me too. Do you guys remember the CRATE of Dutch AR10s he had on one of the stripper platforms in the AR room? With the original shipping papers from AI?
Yep, off to the side where the Bushmaster 25mm cannon was. Only thing that would have been better would have been a pole with strippers on it......:D
Most of us come to a point where we might need another safe to store our stuff. Knight needed an entire wing added on to his museum.
I guess it's hard for me to understand, knowing how well the original Dutch AI manufactured AR-10's worked in very harsh conditions, why companies like Knight and LMT can't reproduce the same weapon and move the cocking handle down to where the M16 FOW is.
I guess it's hard for me to understand, knowing how well the original Dutch AI manufactured AR-10's worked in very harsh conditions, why companies like Knight and LMT can't reproduce the same weapon and move the cocking handle down to where the M16 FOW is.
I've long suspected that the difference is the result of the modern AR10 variants trying to maintain backward compatibility with AR15/M16 parts.
QuietShootr
04-15-11, 11:11
Yep, off to the side where the Bushmaster 25mm cannon was. Only thing that would have been better would have been a pole with strippers on it......:D
Most of us come to a point where we might need another safe to store our stuff. Knight needed an entire wing added on to his museum.
I guess it's hard for me to understand, knowing how well the original Dutch AI manufactured AR-10's worked in very harsh conditions, why companies like Knight and LMT can't reproduce the same weapon and move the cocking handle down to where the M16 FOW is.
I remembered thinking - you know, I would love to know the story of how that crate made it to Florida intact with all the original paperwork, packaging, and guns still untouched in the grease. If I remember correctly the original consignee was somewhere in Africa.
But when you have enough connections to get yourself a .gov built missile factory for a buck a year or whatever it is, I suppose having some fellows who can get things on aircraft without a lot of questions put a crate of Artillerie Inrichtengen AR10s onto a C130 headed north, then onto someone's books in the States so they could be legally transferred would be a piece of cake. Purely hypothetically speaking, of course.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.