Weapons review from Iraq veteran

[M1A1TC]

> Jordan spent 7 months at Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi. Aka: Fort Apache.

> He saw and did a lot and the following is what he told me about weapons,

> equipment, tactics and other miscellaneous info which may be of interest

> to you. Nothing is by any means classified. No politics here, just a

> Marine with a birds eye views opinions:

>

> 1) The M-16 rifle : Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the

> talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says

> you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4

> carbine version is more popular because its lighter and shorter, but it

> has jamming problems also. They like the ability to mount the various

> optical gunsights and weapons lights on the picattiny rails, but the

> weapon itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the

> 5.56mm (.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure

> common over there and even torso hits cant be reliably counted on to put

> the enemy down. Fun fact: Random autopsies on dead insurgents shows a

> high level of opiate use.

>

> 2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light machine

> gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of ****. Chronic

> jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly. (that fun

> in the middle of a firefight).

>

> 3) The M9 Beretta 9mm: Mixed bag. Good gun, performs well in desert

> environment; but they all hate the 9mm cartridge. The use of handguns

> for self-defense is actually fairly common. Same old story on the 9mm:

> Bad guys hit multiple times and still in the fight.

>

> 4) Mossberg 12ga. Military shotgun: Works well, used frequently for

> clearing houses to good effect.

>

> 5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun,

> developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!).

> Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts em down

> Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are

> being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 762 round

> chews up the structure over there.

>

> 6) The M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun: Thumbs way, way up. Ma deuce is

> still worth her considerable weight in gold. The ultimate fight stopper,

> puts their dicks in the dirt every time. The most coveted weapon

> in-theater.

>

> 7) The 45 pistol: Thumbs up. Still the best pistol round out there.

> Everybody authorized to carry a sidearm is trying to get their hands on

> one. With few exceptions, can reliably be expected to put em down with a

> torso hit. The special ops guys (who are doing most of the pistol work)

> use the HK military model and supposedly love it. The old government

> model 45s are being re-issued en masse.

>

> 8) The M-14: Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a

> modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight

> Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the

> sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.

>

> 9) The Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle: Thumbs way up. Spectacular range

> and accuracy and hits like a freight train. Used frequently to take out

> vehicle suicide bombers ( we actually stop a lot of them) and barricaded

> enemy. Definitely here to stay.

>

> 10) The M24 sniper rifle: Thumbs up. Mostly in 308 but some in 300 win

> mag. Heavily modified Remington 700s. Great performance. Snipers have

> been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it that a marine sniper on

> his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcocks

> record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.

>

> 11) The new body armor: Thumbs up. Relatively light at approx. 6 lbs.

> and can reliably be expected to soak up small shrapnel and even will

> stop an AK-47 round. The bad news: Hot as **** to wear, almost

> unbearable in the summer heat (which averages over 120 degrees). Also,

> the enemy now goes for head shots whenever possible. All the bull****

> about the old body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IEDs was a

> non-starter. The IED explosions are enormous and body armor doesn't make

> any difference at all in most cases.

>

> 12) Night Vision and Infrared Equipment: Thumbs way up. Spectacular

> performance. Our guys see in the dark and own the night, period. Very

> little enemy action after evening prayers. More and more enemy being

> whacked at night during movement by our hunter-killer teams. Weve all

> seen the videos.

>

> 13) Lights: Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights

> are Surefires, and the troops love em. Invaluable for night urban

> operations. Jordan carried a $34 Surefire G2 on a neck lanyard and loved

> it.

>

> I cant help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and

> ordnance are 50 or more years old!!!!!!!!! With all our technology, its

> the WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants!!!! The infantry

> fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.

>

> Bad guy weapons:

>

> 1) Mostly AK47s . The entire country is an arsenal. Works better in the

> desert than the M16 and the .308 Russian round kills reliably. PKM belt

> fed light machine guns are also common and effective. Luckily, the enemy

> mostly shoots like ****. Undisciplined spray and pray type fire.

> However, they are seeing more and more precision weapons, especially

> sniper rifles. (Iran, again) Fun fact: Captured enemy have apparently

> marveled at the marksmanship of our guys and how hard they fight. They

> are apparently told in Jihad school that the Americans rely solely on

> technology, and can be easily beaten in close quarters combat for their

> lack of toughness. Lets just say they know better now.

>

> 2) The RPG: Probably the infantry weapon most feared by our guys.

> Simple, reliable and as common as dog****. The enemy responded to our

> up-armored humvees by aiming at the windshields, often at point blank

> range. Still killing a lot of our guys.

>

> 3) The IED: The biggest killer of all. Can be anything from old Soviet

> anti-armor mines to jury rigged artillery shells. A lot found in Jordans

> area were in abandoned cars. The enemy would take 2 or 3 155mm artillery

> shells and wire them together. Most were detonated by cell phone, and

> the explosions are enormous. You're not safe in any vehicle, even an M1

> tank. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing our guys do over there.

> Lately, they are much more sophisticated shape charges (Iranian)

> specifically designed to penetrate armor. Fact: Most of the ready made

> IEDs are supplied by Iran, who is also providing terrorists (Hezbollah

> types) to train the insurgents in their use and tactics. Thats why the

> attacks have been so deadly lately. Their concealment methods are

> ingenious, the latest being shape charges in Styrofoam containers spray

> painted to look like the cinderblocks that litter all Iraqi roads. We

> find about 40% before they detonate, and the bomb disposal guys are

> unsung heroes of this war

>

> 4) Mortars and rockets: Very prevalent. The soviet era 122mm rockets

> (with an 18km range) are becoming more prevalent. One of Jordans NCOs

> lost a leg to one. These weapons cause a lot of damage inside the wire.

> Jordans base was hit almost daily his entire time there by mortar and

> rocket fire, often at night to disrupt sleep patterns and cause fatigue

> (It did). More of a psychological weapon than anything else. The enemy

> mortar teams would jump out of vehicles, fire a few rounds, and then

> haul ass in a matter of seconds.

>

> 5) Bad guy technology: Simple yet effective. Most communication is by

> cell and satellite phones, and also by email on laptops. They use

> handheld GPS units for navigation and Google earth for overhead views of

> our positions. Their weapons are good, if not fancy, and prevalent.

> Their explosives and bomb technology is TOP OF THE LINE. Night vision is

> rare. They are very careless with their equipment and the captured GPS

> units and laptops are treasure troves of Intel when captured.

>

> Who are the bad guys?:

>

> Most of the carnage is caused by the Zarqawi Al Qaeda group. They

> operate mostly in Anbar province (Fallujah and Ramadi). These are mostly

> foreigners, non-Iraqi Sunni Arab Jihadists from all over the Muslim

> world (and Europe). Most enter Iraq through Syria (with, of course, the

> knowledge and complicity of the Syrian govt.) , and then travel down the

> at line which is the trail of towns along the Euphrates River that weve

> been hitting hard for the last few months. Some are virtually untrained

> young Jihadists that often end up as suicide bombers or in sacrifice

> squads. Most, however, are hard core terrorists from all the usual

> suspects (Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas etc.) These are the guys running

> around murdering civilians en masse and cutting heads off. The Chechens

> (many of whom are Caucasian), are supposedly the most ruthless and the

> best fighters. (they have been fighting the Russians for years). In the

> Baghdad area and south, most of the insurgents are Iranian inspired (and

> led) Iraqi Shiites. The Iranian Shiia have been very adept at

> infiltrating the Iraqi local govt., the police forces and the Army. The

> have had a massive spy and agitator network there since the Iran-Iraq

> war in the early 80s. Most of the Saddam loyalists were killed, captured

> or gave up long ago.

>

> Bad Guy Tactics:

>

> When they are engaged on an infantry level they get their asses kicked

> every time. Brave, but stupid. Suicidal Banzai-type charges were very

> common earlier in the war and still occur. They will literally sacrifice

> 8-10 man teams in suicide squads by sending them screaming and firing

> Aks and RPGs directly at our bases just to probe the defenses. They get

> mowed down like grass every time. ( see the M2 and M240 above). Jordans

> base was hit like this often. When engaged, they have a tendency to flee

> to the same building, probably for what they think will be a glorious

> last stand. Instead, we call in air and thats the end of that more often

> than not. These hole-ups are referred to as Alpha Whiskey Romeos (Allahs

> Waiting Room). We have the laser guided ground-air thing down to a

> science. The fast movers, mostly Marine F-18s, are taking an ever

> increasing toll on the enemy. When caught out in the open, the

> helicopter gunships and AC-130 Spectre gunships cut them to ribbons with

> cannon and rocket fire, especially at night. Interestingly, artillery is

> hardly used at all. Fun fact: The enemy death toll is supposedly between

> 45-50 thousand. That is why were seeing less and less infantry attacks

> and more IED, suicide bomber ****. The new strategy is simple: attrition.

>

> The insurgent tactic most frustrating is their use of civilian

> non-combatants as cover. They know we do all we can to avoid civilian

> casualties and therefore schools, hospitals and (especially) Mosques are

> locations where they meet, stage for attacks, cache weapons and ammo and

> flee to when engaged. They have absolutely no regard whatsoever for

> civilian casualties. They will terrorize locals and murder without

> hesitation anyone believed to be sympathetic to the Americans or the new

> Iraqi govt. Kidnapping of family members (especially children) is common

> to influence people they are trying to influence but cant reach, such as

> local govt. officials, clerics, tribal leaders, etc.).

>

> The first thing our guys are told is don't get captured. They know that

> if captured they will be tortured and beheaded on the internet. Zarqawi

> openly offers bounties for anyone who brings him a live American

> serviceman. This motivates the criminal element who otherwise don't give

> a **** about the war. A lot of the beheading victims were actually

> kidnapped by common criminals and sold to Zarqawi. As such, for our

> guys, every fight is to the death. Surrender is not an option.

>

> The Iraqis are a mixed bag. Some fight well, others aren't worth a ****.

> Most do okay with American support. Finding leaders is hard, but they

> are getting better. It is widely viewed that Zarqawis use of suicide

> bombers, en masse, against the civilian population was a serious

> tactical mistake. Many Iraqis were galvanized and the caliber of

> recruits in the Army and the police forces went up, along with their

> motivation. It also led to an exponential increase in good intel because

> the Iraqis are sick of the insurgent attacks against civilians. The

> Kurds are solidly pro-American and fearless fighters.

>

> According to Jordan, morale among our guys is very high. They not only

> believe they are winning, but that they are winning decisively. They are

> stunned and dismayed by what they see in the American press, whom they

> almost universally view as against them. The embedded reporters are

> despised and distrusted. They are inflicting casualties at a rate of

> 20-1 and then see **** like Are we losing in Iraq on TV and the print

> media. For the most part, they are satisfied with their equipment, food

> and leadership. Bottom line though, and they all say this, there are not

> enough guys there to drive the final stake through the heart of the

> insurgency, primarily because there aren't enough troops in-theater to

> shut down the borders with Iran and Syria. The Iranians and the Syrians

> just cant stand the thought of Iraq being an American ally (with, of

> course, permanent US bases there).

>

> Anyway guys, thats it, hope you found it interesting, I sure did.

[flamingknives]

Oh dear, not this one again.

The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light machine gun

And there was me thinking that it was an M249 and belt-fed.

5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun,

> developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!)[snips]

Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are

> being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry

Someone had better tell FN that, since they think differently

6lb body armour? That would be nice.

There's some useful stuff in there, but you have to question it, considering the errors in the critical sections.

Then there's the calibre junkie bit.

[M1A1TC]

This came from the marine's father, so mistakes are possible(as far as the proper nomenclature)

[Yardstick]

Yeah...that's all BS. This has been floating around the internet for awile now. I think it is some clowns attempt to bring back 7.62 NATO and the .45. I say, kill the clowns, they are evil.

Since when does IBA w/SAPIs weigh in at 6 lbs? And what kind of fool would belive that we are 'dismounting' the coax from M1's and M2's to use in and infantry role. Anybody here have any idea of how much of a pain in the ass that would be? The M14 reissued in bulk? Right, if 2 per company is bulk, I'm Iraqi. The only 1911 I've seen it the past year belonged to a LN, so I'm sure we are not reissuing those. What a tool. The SAW a peice of ****? My SAW gunner would kick you in the teeth for saying something like that.

BTW, my M16A4 rocks. If you clean it, it will work. [/rant]

[Bigduke6]

I wonder where the proof is the Iranians are suppying the insurgency with weapons and have deeply penetrated the Iraqi government with spies.

If there is one thing you would think Saddam Hussein would have done if he could, it would be to weed everything even looking Iranian out of Iraq. They were at war for a decade, after all.

Just because roadside bombs have Iranian origin, that doesn't prove Iranian government complicity. Hizbullah could be selling its surplus to the Iraqi resistance, now that the Syrians are supposedly gone, for instance.

A nastier scenario would have the Israelis supplying Iranian-origin munitions to the Iraqi resistance, so as the get the Americans mad at the Iranians. Oh sorry, the Israelis would never be that sneaky and cynical.

Chechens are only Caucasians, there is no other kind. Chechnya is in the Caucauses mountains, that's where Chechens are from.

I personally seriously question the idea of a Chechen ever travelling to Iraq to fight Americans, considering he can stay at home and fight the traditional enemy, the Russians.

Interesting stuff on the weapons, though. The M2 clearly is up there with the AK in the world history all star automatic weapons list.

[Nidan1]

Lets face it...what US troops are facing in Iraq is a mixed bag. Mostly untrained, but still quite capable of inflicting lethal harm.

Disinfranchised teenagers who are sucked into the jihad thing, criminals who are looking to make a quick buck, foreigners who want to kill Americans, former Baathist regime members who do not want to give up their power. Tribal factions who consider the Americans to be a threat to their ability to dominate other Iraqis.

Then there are the hard core terrorist types, wherever they are from, Al Qeda, the Taliban, Hezbollah or any other number of Islamic terror groups.

Did you ever see "Escape to New York" with Kurt Russel? That is how I envision what is going on in Iraq.

[juan_gigante]

"Escape From L.A." was better. C'mon, how do you beat death basketball? Not to mention evil Che Guevara, the surfing chase scene, and the world code?

I've seen this weapons thing linked to a couple of different places, and wherever I see it there are large qualms with its accuracy. I'm pretty sure a lot of it is BS. Personally, though, the idea of bringing back 7.62 and .45 is one that should be considered, in my opinion. It's too bad that it is being championed by idiots like this.

I've read far, far too many AARs that mention OpFor not going down to multiple 5.56mm hits to think that it is really a good calibur for close-range insurgency combat. And maybe it's just bias left over from Vietnam-era problems, but I still don't trust the M16 (even the A4) to be totally reliable. Clearly, Angryson, it has worked well for you, and that is a good thing. But when I compare the M16A4, which is reliable as long as it is clean to something like the G36K, which is reliable no matter what, I feel like we could be doing better.

[Battlefront.com]

I've seen that "letter" in many different places. If I see something like that I assume it is fake, even if most of the stuff in it is rooted in reality. But in this case much of it is pure BS. When I saw the SAW comment I laughed my ass off. Either this letter is faked or this guy is just about the only one in the world that doesn't like it. There isn't a report I've read, from any soldier or weapons expert, that has said anything (significantly) negative about the M249 (or its other forms).

Angryson... damned funny response

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Found this link debunking the "letter":

http://www.socnetcentral.com/vb/showthread.php?t=54209

And to qualify my earlier agreemnt that the M249 is a fine weapon... the USMC has more constrained budgets and they tend to make do with older stuff far more than the Army does. Also in times of prolonged peace stuff tends to sit around a lot longer than it should (my dad in 1960 was issued mostly WWII and Korean War stuff, and he was "elite" Airborne!). I remember a pretty big flap years ago about USMC M240s basically falling apart in the field because they were so old and worn out. Same complaints about their Humvees and 2.5 and 5 ton trucks. Guard units are similar to Marines in that respect. Worn out hand-me-downs and all that.

Steve

[Nerd King]

My take, from being in Iraq and using all of these weapons multiple times:

M16/M4: Great system... if you CLEAN IT!!! The desert will F*** up any weapon system in a hurry if you don't maintain it.

M14: One bad-ass piece of equipment. My favorite rifle.

9mm Rounds: POS. Personally watched an insurgent take 4 center of mass hits before he went down. No thanks. Go 40/45.

5.56: Nice rounds, good ballistics etc, but our FMJs just lack the punch. You need a head/heart/spinal hit to take someone out immediately, and when you are room clearing, incapacitation a few minutes later is not acceptable. There are 5.56 rounds that exist that are exceptionally and quickly lethal, but I believe (Don't quote me), that our military isn't allowed to use them.

M240/M2 .50 cal: The Gods of machineguns. Those things...... rock!

M249 SAW: Ok.... but just ok...

As previosuly said, much in the letter was incorrect, very incorrect.

I still have fond memories of putting our ghillie suits and posting two man OPs by the highway overpasses where the punks liked to dig IEDs. They would NEVER see it coming, talk about fish in a barrel.

[Guest Mike]

Being old and past it I was wonderign what all these weapons were, and lo and behold I find that the "M240" is nothing more than the "Gympy" I used 25 years ago - the FN MAG GPMG - but of course the Yanks had to give it another name!!

One of my jobs was asa gun commander using this in the SF (sustained fire, not Special Forces!!)role - tripods and sighting posts and defensive fires all that!

Actually what was so wrong with the M60 anyway? we always used to think it was pretty much directly comparable with the MAG.

And the "SAW" is just the Minimi - I never used them but they're not much mroe than a MAG in 5.56mm!!

good to see the US has realised that there are talented small-arms designers outside the contiguous 48 states!!

What's been happening with that 6.5mm infantry weapon that was supposedly used in prototype form in Afghanistan by some SF (that's Special Froces this time, not sustained fire) types?

[akd]

Ack, not this again. Well then, this has to be brought out everytime this chain letter surfaces:

http://www.bob-oracle.com/SWATreport.htm

Anyways, the SF guys are supposedly evaluating the 6.5mm Grendel and 6.8mm Remington SPC rounds. Both offer significant advantages over 5.56mm, but are still larger rounds, so less bullets and more recoil. 6.8mm SPC would require fewer changes to current weapons systems, but the SPC is also apparently beating the crap out of M4s. Seeing as more effective 5.56mm rounds are out there now, the future of either in the U.S. military seems doubtful.

Grendel on left, Remington SPC on right:

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by akd:

Ack, not this again.

No - this STILL.

it's an ongoing discussion, and thanks for the link.

I note with some concern tho that there's a list of things that are needed to ensure good lethality with the 5.56mm round - "basic marksmanship" is an interesting one - I wouldn't have thought that's a ptoblem, but the need to operate in pairs certainly seems lik a serious limitation!!

[ December 04, 2005, 06:24 PM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organist ]

[John Kettler]

M1A1Tankcommander,

Had never seen that item before, but some of what it says rings true. Despite a lot of work done to it, the M-16 family, being closely toleranced, remains sensitive to dust and dirt. For a fairly well known example, see what happened to Jessica Lynch. As far as M-16 lethality goes, it would not surprise me to find that the switch to the higher twist barrel and what used to be called the SS109 cartridge firing a steel cored bullet designed to defeat body armor would improve to a great degree the stability of what once was a lightweight marginally stable varmint round. The M-16 used to inflict terrible wounds because of two major factors: one, the round was easily upset and tumbled after impact; two, at less than about 100m, impact stresses were so great the bullet would frequently break at the cannelure after penetrating. The above is based on VC reports, U.S. ballistic testing on animal carcasses, and reports of Panamanian doctors who treated Just Cause patients with one wound of entrance and multiple internal wound cavity tracks. Read many of the last while doing Primary Research for

Oscar winning documentary "The Panama Deception."

I suspect that the new setup is performing more like an AK-47, drilling a clean hole right through the victim.

Lack of 9mm stopping power doesn't surprise me, and for years now, there's been a trend in SpecOps

and many of the alphabet soup agencies toward .40 cal or greater. Interestingly, though, in the CMAK Companion, we find a fairly senior U.S. commander chosing to carry a Luger instead of a M1911 after conducting his own firing trials against a helmet.

Barrett performance is no surprise. Elsewhere, I reported that the Marines were using them in the 80s in Lebanon to take out snipers by firing through the walls. As for the Ma Deuce, it gives up some accuracy (unless tripod mounted, sandbagged, fitted with a telescopic sight and fired single shot a la Hathcock), but has volume of fire and the same penetrating power.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Guest Mike]

John here's an article from Janes Defence Weekly that discusses many of the issues you mention.

[lucero1148]

Re. Iran there purpose for getting invlved is all about getting a chance to hit at the US by using the insurgents. The fact that they are destabilizing the country also benefits them inthe long run as obviously it offers Iran the chance to turn Iraq into a Shia allied state at least and at best into a theocracy. They have the luxury of being able to t\plan for the long term while we have to deal with a wavering US public opinion on how long we shoud be there.

Hezbollah is for all practical matters an arm of the Iranian theocracy. They don't do anything without the gov't/ ulama's approving it.

[SgtMuhammed]

I used to envy the Germans because of the G3 but even they are switching to smaller rounds. So are the Russians. The thinking is that you can carry more rounds. Personally I would like to fire one really good round as opposed to three ok rounds. Still, hit location is much more important than the size of the round.

There is actually a quick fix to this problem, bring back the older M16A1 rounds. The new rounds were designed to punch through Soviet body armor and have a penetrator in the tip and a hotter charge so they are more stable. The old round would begin to tumble as soon as it hit anything but air, the new round will punch right through a soft body.

Kind of off thread but did anyone see the Mythbusters test of firing into water. The high velocity rounds, starting with the M1 and going all the way up to the Barrett .50, failed to penetrate 2 feet of water while an old Springfield Model 61 and a 9mm Barretta penetrated at least 5 to 9 feet. Interesting.

[Moronic Max]

Kind of off thread but did anyone see the Mythbusters test of firing into water. The high velocity rounds, starting with the M1 and going all the way up to the Barrett .50, failed to penetrate 2 feet of water while an old Springfield Model 61 and a 9mm Barretta penetrated at least 5 to 9 feet. Interesting.

For those of use who are utterly clueless about firearms, what was responsible for those results?

[shlitzzlipzz@hotmail.com]

I saw footage of M4s and M249s firing at a cinder block wall. It was being chewed down. At close ranges the 5.56mm would stop the largest man wearing most armor. Especially since the M4 uses a 3 round burst.

[juan_gigante]

Well, the problem at close ranges is that the bullet comes out so fast and punches a very small hole right through the enemy. So there's a hole straight through the guy and all his armor, but he's so drugged up that he doesn't notice for a few seconds, and gets out a few seconds of full-auto with AK before he legit dies. And and longer ranges, the bullet has lost much of its velocity, the big thing it has going for it. So it takes four holes in him before he goes down permanent-like.

[juan_gigante]

Also, despite how great the M4 is, remember that the G36K is lighter, more durable, and far, far more reliable (yes, even in a dusty desert). I can understand the Army not wanting to shell out to replace all of its M16-series rifles with G36Ks, but they are superior weapons. Far superior.

Edit:

Originally written in the SWAT report:

Soldiers voiced a need for an integrated sight. Although the accessories enabled soldiers to acquire and engage targets more effectively, weapon real estate was at a premium. Soldiers were limited to mounting a day or night sight and were required to boresight and/or zero the sights individually each time they were mounted. Soldiers strongly suggested a combinatorial day/night sight with an integrated laser aiming device and capable for close and long range engagements.

G36K (standard model) also has two integrated sights - a 1.5X for CQB, and a 3.5X for ranged combat. Plus, they have a standard night vision scope you can hook on there.

[ December 04, 2005, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: juan_gigante ]

[juan_gigante]

The JDW article was quite interesting. It also got me thinking about the HK G11. A project back in the late '80s, the G11 fired 4.3mm ammo, but it was caseless, so its ROF was something absurdly high like 2000 rounds per minute. The ROF was so fast that in a 3 round burst, the third round would be out of the barrel before it could recoil from the first. So though it was firing tiny rounds, there was basically no spread in the 3 round burst, increasing lethality overall. Too bad it was really, really expensive and got cancelled.

Jesus, I'm just like the HK cheerleader today. Did I mention how the 21E and 23E are better than the M240 and M249?

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

I used to envy the Germans because of the G3 but even they are switching to smaller rounds. So are the Russians.

Well the Russians stopped development of their 5.45mm round 15+ years ago, and the germans are only moving to the standard NATO 5.56mm - no great biggie.

The Chinese are starting to use a 5.8mm round apparently, so I expect to see their new weapon a lot more in the 3rd world in the next couple of decades!

[ December 05, 2005, 12:32 AM: Message edited by: Stalin's Organist ]

[Kurtz]

I posted this in another thread discussing rifle ammo, might as well post it here as well.

juan_gigante: IIRC the 3-round burst on the G11 was to increase hit probablity, not lethality. It was designed to have some dispersion of the rounds. A "shotgun approach", so to speak.

----

Amatuers talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.

The logistical advantages of 5.56 vs 7.62 are huge. Logistics win wars, individual rounds of rifle ammo doesn't.

IIRC the reduced size and weight of the ammo was one of the major selling points of the Heckler & Koch G11 with caseless ammo.

We should remember that the 5.56 round was decided upon based on experiences from WW2 (and Korea?), major conflicts. Not the conflicts of today.

In the context of a major conflict, 5.56 is a good round. The soldier can carry plenty of them, it's probably less likely to kill than the 7.62, but wounding the enemy is "better" in a full-scale war. Shorter range wasn't a real problem since the infantry squad couldn't engage the enemy outside the range of its anti-armour weapons (LAW). This because the enemy rode in armoured vehicles.

The times have changed, today it might be desirable to have a round that will kill the enemy instantly, and the range of the new anti-armor weapons are much, much longer (Javelin).

But switch to 7.62 and you'll be able to carry only half as much (?) ammo for the same weight, or leave something else behind.

5.56 is an excellent round for World War III, but is it as bad today as the critics say? Or is it just nostalgia speaking?

The reluctance of some nations to adopt 5.56 might be economic as well. Without World War III looming on the horizon, there's no perceived need to upgrade something as mundane as the rifle, especially when performance can be enhanced with new sights etc. I think Norway intended to replace their G3's with G11's, but that never happened.

-

Edited to add that the logistical concerns might not be that important for SF type units.

[ December 05, 2005, 12:56 AM: Message edited by: Kurtz ]

[FAI]

Originally posted by juan_gigante:

Also, despite how great the M4 is, remember that the G36K is lighter, more durable, and far, far more reliable (yes, even in a dusty desert). I can understand the Army not wanting to shell out to replace all of its M16-series rifles with G36Ks, but they are superior weapons. Far superior.

Edit:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally written in the SWAT report:

Soldiers voiced a need for an integrated sight. Although the accessories enabled soldiers to acquire and engage targets more effectively, weapon real estate was at a premium. Soldiers were limited to mounting a day or night sight and were required to boresight and/or zero the sights individually each time they were mounted. Soldiers strongly suggested a combinatorial day/night sight with an integrated laser aiming device and capable for close and long range engagements.

G36K (standard model) also has two integrated sights - a 1.5X for CQB, and a 3.5X for ranged combat. Plus, they have a standard night vision scope you can hook on there. </font>