“Jungle Gun” Concept

[SteyrAUG]

I'd have to pick this one, plus a good supply of mozzie repellent.
Attachment 67170

So a XM-177 and a ham sandwich?

[Moonlight Again]

I'm more inclined to think it was the endless supply of quality tang that motivated them artistically.

If I'm going to die for a word, that word is tang.

[1986s4]

My stupid simple choice would be the "XM177" with a suppressor, light weight, simple red dot sight and fixed set of sight's with ghost ring size keep rifle light n short no extra stuff to snag on vines, ECT, ECT. Fixed iron sights for mud rain fogged up optics. caliber depending on what extra threats are abound aka bear, mountain lion, tigers. If one of them besides man up the caliber. Maybe (7.62×51 AR-10?) or 350 legend, 450 B.M., 7.62×39, ECT. Simple 2 point "jungle" sling. Keep gear light and tied on/ down, a thermal sight for rifle and or combination passive /thermal nvd. But overall K.I.S.S. Since this is just a what if mind exercise.

Stoner 63 maybe ?

[militarymoron]

So a XM-177 and a ham sandwich?

Whatever works. I'd get eaten alive by mosquitos in the tropics.

[Stickman]

https://primaryandsecondary.com/foru...ngle-gun.1426/

I think it would be interesting to get M4C posters’ thoughts on the concept of a “jungle gun”.

I’d give a little more of an explanation but it’s been pretty well fleshed out in the P&S thread and so, in reading that, I figure most folks here can come to a pretty general idea of the direction in which the discussion in this thread should go.

Basically… real-deal, no-shit, everything wants you dead up to and including the enemy, jungle. Guns, gear, loadouts, the why and the how, the thought process behind picking this or that… comms, electronics, mold, heat, moisture, everything breaks or rots, sickness, heat-casualties, lightweight, bare-essentials, etc.

Do you want a go at this thread using available equipment of the time? Or are we looking at this from a 1980-90s perspective where gear wasn't super electronic? Or the modern warfare of today?

I have known good persons who did a lot of Gods work up close and personal. I mean no time for sights, hand to hand, bayonet scarred no BS dirty deeds dealing MoFos, and I am convinced they were harder men with much less "training" than we see today. I've also known good men who in the later 70s and 80s were doing God work even dirtier in places like Africa and countries where Communism reared its ugly head.

Fing A I am a better man for knowing the above heros. They set hard standards, and quitting was never an option.


ETA- On a side note, anyone who think Christians In Action is a bunch of pussies who only walk around handing out money to insurgents or setting up fake businesses is so wrong they aren't worth correcting. However, this comment, and the comments above are regarding two different sets of people.

[WillieThom]

Basically, although this is more just a thought exercise—not like I’m about to dive into Jumanji and looking for a loadout—modern warfare of today would kind of be the direction I’d be interested in going. And even though the title does say ‘Jungle Gun’, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is limited to just that... It just seemed like a good title that was short enough to convey the subject, along with the post linking Primary & Secondary.

Chuck Pressburg (he is very active in the posted thread and regardless of what one’s personal thoughts may or may not be about him, his reumé is kind of impressive) is the one talking about how, at the time he posted, even current-day optics and electronics don’t fare well in ‘legit’ jungles, of which I know there aren’t any of those CONUS. And so with modern equipment and tech being what it is, are his thoughts and/or opinions still valid with regard to a bare-bones, lightweight, carry handle only AR platform being best for that type of up close jungle warfare, where everything gets tangled up with everything else, 15-meter or less engagements, electronics dying, optics fogging, the enemy and everything else trying to kill you, etc., and are the lessons and doctrine from 1960s and 1970s Vietnam still applicable to today’s jungle warfare training?

[RUTGERS95]

Basically, although this is more just a thought exercise—not like I’m about to dive into Jumanji and looking for a loadout—modern warfare of today would kind of be the direction I’d be interested in going. And even though the title does say ‘Jungle Gun’, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is limited to just that... It just seemed like a good title that was short enough to convey the subject, along with the post linking Primary & Secondary.

Chuck Pressburg (he is very active in the posted thread and regardless of what one’s personal thoughts may or may not be about him, his reumé is kind of impressive) is the one talking about how, at the time he posted, even current-day optics and electronics don’t fare well in ‘legit’ jungles, of which I know there aren’t any of those CONUS. And so with modern equipment and tech being what it is, are his thoughts and/or opinions still valid with regard to a bare-bones, lightweight, carry handle only AR platform being best for that type of up close jungle warfare, where everything gets tangled up with everything else, 15-meter or less engagements, electronics dying, optics fogging, the enemy and everything else trying to kill you, etc., and are the lessons and doctrine from 1960s and 1970s Vietnam still applicable to today’s jungle warfare training?

trijicon reflex sights work in the conditions that do effect other optics.

[Stickman]

15-meter or less engagements, electronics dying, optics fogging, the enemy and everything else trying to kill you, etc., and are the lessons and doctrine from 1960s and 1970s Vietnam still applicable to today’s jungle warfare training?

I think the lessons learned are massively important from then, just as they are now. However, I also think personally that any leadership that doesn't study ancient warfare is seriously lacking.

When you get into heavy brush and leaf, the AK, or at least its heavier bullet has a lot going for it. I don't mean to poo poo the 5.56 at all, but if we dumb everything down, heavier bullets penetrate better. The heavier bullet in an AR is what opened the door to the 300BLK, and I'll be more than happy to admit that I would rather be using 110 grain copper Barnes killing beast than 62 grain anything.

[RUTGERS95]

I think the lessons learned are massively important from then, just as they are now. However, I also think personally that any leadership that doesn't study ancient warfare is seriously lacking.

When you get into heavy brush and leaf, the AK, or at least its heavier bullet has a lot going for it. I don't mean to poo poo the 5.56 at all, but if we dumb everything down, heavier bullets penetrate better. The heavier bullet in an AR is what opened the door to the 300BLK, and I'll be more than happy to admit that I would rather be using 110 grain copper Barnes killing beast than 62 grain anything.

agree and why I said AK earlier in this thread. 5.56 has notable disadvantages in heavy bush.

[utahjeepr]

Short and manuverable. White light or NODS/illum (gets F'ing DARK under canopy). A whole lot of industrial strength DEET, and a bunch of Gold Bond. I gets the crotch rot in da jungle