They need to get rid of that stupid shit. It's waaaay too high pressure.
Printable View
Oh yeah, that was completely lost on me :rolleyes:
Except for a few particular circumstances, FA is a waste of ammo unless fired from a belt-fed platform. My opinion. Sure, it's cool and all, but it has limited appliction for the most part except for reducing accuracy and throwing bullets to the wind.
I see the point Sinister made about the FA trigger assembly having a better, more consistent trigger pull. I disagree with the angle of the article that somehow FA capacity will make the soldiers that much more lethal on the battlefield.
What would be smart, while not the cheapest option, would be Block II M4A1's. Maybe with the FSB cut out RIS II's. Block II M4A1's with Geissele SSA/SSF triggers and Mk262 ammo as standard issue and we would spend alot less than trying to adopt something completely new.
The point is supposed to be "Bang-smack-dead," not crack-crack/"Neener-neener," whether it's by an inch or a mile.Quote:
1 bullet snapping past a guys head is infinately more effective than 10 rounds whizzing by 3-4 meters above their heads.
A fancy-dancy full-menu carbine is wasted on 95+% of the force, although it might give a bunch of folks in the acquisition field a warm fuzzy like they're doing something for the Soldier. Frankly I think they'd be better off putting someone like Pat Macnamara or Brian Searcy in charge of training the leg Infantry force to use what they have in-hand, today.
The guns and optics we have are pretty damn good and generally affordable to field to a good number -- unfortunately the individual and his first and second-line supervisors have no idea how to perform to the advertised (in our doctrinal manuals!) hardware capability. The American mentality of short-cutting to get immediate superior results without working for them stands out here.
Geisselle makes an OEM only two stage that is 90% of the SSA at 50% of the price. We'd do well to put that in weapons issued to non combat arms troops. In particular it's been my experience that weak shooters benefit more from a better trigger than strong shooters.
Sinister is of course right about training. The Army can't afford to have top notch trainers everywhere but the book might as well be written by good trainers. Then you have to change a culture that cheats on quals.
I don't see a problem. This is still a training and NCO issue.
When I first got in, we had M16A1s and we didn't fire on FA except for very specific situations.
If we had, NCOs would have put a boot in our ass. I imagine that the same will be true today with the M4A1.
The trigger IS better, as well. I hated the burst pack trigger pull.
As to the comments, that's why they should have stayed with the old "Sir/Ma'am, I must respectfully direct you to our PAO for any comments on the new weapons system".
Im just waiting for another wanat to happen where they fire more and aim less then blame the weapon systems. Especially now with the M4A1 and its auto mode.The quotes in the article are what made me think of this, the whole we need to practice using these guns on auto......
Sure.Quote:
The point is supposed to be "Bang-smack-dead," not crack-crack/"Neener-neener," whether it's by an inch or a mile.
I wasn't trying to say that misses are good. Hits are better than misses. But in terms of the effects of our fires, aside from wounding or killing, this means making the enemy react and mess up his OODA loop. A close miss is better than shooting way over. Volume does not negate proximity requirements. Again, hits are better than misses, not advocating a different approach but guaranteeing "bang-smack-dead" every time is not realistic.
And I do not disagree on the training issues at all. Both field craft and marksmanship/combat shooting needs to be stressed a lot more, and any insufficiencies in these areas are more limiting than hardware.
"Chapman says that, “Down range, in combat situations, you are not going to want to just ‘squeeze trigger, squeeze trigger, squeeze trigger’ in order to return fire on an enemy that will have an automatic weapon firing back at you. There is no point in an enemy being more capable of firing at us when we have the number one power in the world and the capability to fire back.”
"more capable of firing at us... " :blink:
I can just see these solidiers going amber on ammo 5 minutes into a fight... 5-10 minute fight, great, but...
this