Sheesh - what a bunch of Germanophiles ;-)

[Abbott]

"The development of the XM8 Lightweight Assault Rifle was initiated by US Army in the 2002, when contract was issued to the Alliant Techsystems Co of USA to study possibilities of development of kinetic energy part of the XM29 weapon into separate lightweight assault rifle, which could, in the case of success, replace the aging M16A2 rifles and M4 carbines in US military service. XM8 is being developed by the Heckler-Koch USA, a subsidiary of famous German Heckler-Koch Company. According to the present plans, the XM8 should enter full production in 2005."

Caliber: 5.56x45 mm NATO

Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt

Overall length: 838 mm in basic configuration, butt extended

Barrel length: 318 mm in basic configuration; also 229 mm in Compact and 508 mm in Sharpshooter and SAW versions

Weight: 2.659 kg empty in basic configuration

Rate of fire: ~ 750 rounds per minute

Magazine capacity: 30 rounds (STANAG) or 100-rounds double drum in Automatic Rifle/SAW role

[ June 24, 2005, 09:46 AM: Message edited by: Abbott ]

[Earl Grey]

We´re not really on topic anymore, are we?

[Bigduke6]

Abbott,

No, I'm not intoxicated, I'm just offering a point of view pretty different from yours. You don't like it, put together a logical argument to contradict it.

Also you might like to answer those hypothetical questions about switching weaponry around in Iraq. I think they illustrate pretty clearly that your basic assertion - the Kalashnikov is a sucky weapon not respected by all professional soldiers - rests on pretty soft ground.

Millions of professional soldiers think the Kalashnikov is a fine weapon. The apparent fact that you haven't met them, doesn't mean those don't exist, or that their opinion has no value.

With friendly respect, and nothing personal, of course.

Nidan1,

Better hot air than bullets my friend, any day of the year.

Frankly, I thought you had trumped every one with your leg wound. That definately beats my stories of Chechens and Red Army vets.

But that's the beauty of the forum. The Messiah himself could drop in and lay out the specs for a working warp drive, and all us grogs would do is tell him it wouldn't work, where's the historical documentation, and dude, this is the wrong thread.

[Nidan1]

Bigduke6,

Happy Birthday!!!!

I wish I was 45 again

Anyone who contributes thoughtfully to a thread here has value. Lord knows we have had our share of those who could never get along with anyone on this Forum.

[ June 24, 2005, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: Nidan1 ]

[LongLeftFlank]

Originally posted by bruceb:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

(\_/)

(O.o)

(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.

I hear and I obey.

(has as much to do with the original topic as anything else in this thread... btw - I always take the russkies and avoid the kraut-heads whenever possible...)

cheers,

bruceb </font>

[LongLeftFlank]

And in keeping with the vaguely anime / Hello Kitty appearance of the original smiley...

---------

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">

(\_/) ((

(-.-)>_FED=====

(>_<) ^ _/ \_(---) This is Bunny's Pact Fellow Signatory, Nambu. Copy Nambu into your signature to help him on his way to East Asia Co-Prosperity for six months (twelve at most).

</pre>

[LongLeftFlank]

Ah heck, there goes my productivity for the day....

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">

|\_/|

( O o )

|###|

o o

X

o o This is Bunny's sidecap and lapel emblem "Totie". Copy "Totie" into your signature and/or E-Bay listing to help the European courts on their way to sedition charges against you. </pre>

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Bigduke6:

Abbott,

No, I'm not intoxicated,

Now the AK model soup ladle would require no polish, it could be buried then dug up or run over by a Tiger tank picked up and still serve stew! The M 16 variant ladle would require many hours of polishing every day before it could hit a can of soup. Then it would most likely snag on the rim of the can. That is why all US troops in Vietnam were issued with a P38. I wonder, which ladle the poor sod, was caring for when that tank rolled into view?

Awg, wrong thread! However it somehow seems to fit in this one in an odd sort of way.

[roqf77]

abbot you seem to be up on your stuff. my brother actualy wants to know something if you can tell me.

He has been told/ read that the us army are experimenting with what amounts to a 6.8m sa-80 a-3 is this true? or do you have any info? sorry if its off topic but i dont thnk it realy matters anymore

[Vixen]

Hehe...Bunny has some new pals.

[Bigduke6]

Originally posted by Abbott:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bigduke6:

Abbott,

No, I'm not intoxicated,

Now the AK model soup ladle would require no polish, it could be buried then dug up or run over by a Tiger tank picked up and still serve stew! The M 16 variant ladle would require many hours of polishing every day before it could hit a can of soup. Then it would most likely snag on the rim of the can. That is why all US troops in Vietnam were issued with a P38. I wonder, which ladle the poor sod, was caring for when that tank rolled into view?

Awg, wrong thread! However it somehow seems to fit in this one in an odd sort of way. </font>

[flamingknives]

Abbott:

http://procnet.pica.army.mil/FBO/RFP/W15QKN-05-R-0449/W15QKN-05-R-0449.htm

[Omni-Max]

Hello everyone, I'm new and this is my first post.

[Note: I've never been in any armed conflict of any kind, if that sort of information matters to you.]

Assuming Abbot is correct, why are all the DoD documents talking about urban combat? All the modern and released documents about warfare from the United States laments about urban combat. MOUT training? Why does Combat Mission place a lot of emphasis on squad firepower?

So if our militaries are expecting a close range urban fight, doesn't it follow logically that they would not require match grade accuracy in these instances?

[Tagwyn]

Earl: If and buts were candy and nuts .... The Red Army kicked the Whermacht's ass and took names. Tigers and Panthers, made with slave labor, were prone to frequent breakdowns and were never made in sufficient numbers to really make a difference against allied armor. But buy Hearts of Iron 2 and I'll play Allies, you play Axis and we both start in 1936? Tag

[Earl Grey]

@Tagwyn: Then i ask myself why the almighty allied armies needed that long to defeat an enemy not really equipped well enough to fight that kind of a war... sorry, no personal criticism, but I just wonder.

[Dandelion]

Originally posted by Tagwyn:

Earl: If and buts were candy and nuts .... The Red Army kicked the Whermacht's ass and took names. Tigers and Panthers, made with slave labor, were prone to frequent breakdowns and were never made in sufficient numbers to really make a difference against allied armor.

I stand silenced in awe, tormented by the unaccustomed torture of thought provoked by your brilliant analysis.

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Omni-Max:

Hello everyone, I'm new and this is my first post.

[Note: I've never been in any armed conflict of any kind, if that sort of information matters to you.]

Assuming Abbot is correct, why are all the DoD documents talking about urban combat? All the modern and released documents about warfare from the United States laments about urban combat. MOUT training? Why does Combat Mission place a lot of emphasis on squad firepower?

So if our militaries are expecting a close range urban fight, doesn't it follow logically that they would not require match grade accuracy in these instances?

First off welcome to the Forum.

Second, I never said a word about “match grade accuracy” you are posting the "Big Duke stretch". Where all that Bullsh*t came from was the argument changing directions several times.

I said: Any one of us would have and could have used an AK 47 if we had found them to be more efficient. We did not. It is a very simple statement that’s only concern is with staying alive.

If an AK 47 was a superior personal weapon and would have made our job more efficient we would have used them. We did not because there were several superior weapons available including the M16. I chuckle at Big Duke’s claim of “they constantly jammed” based on his desire for them to do so or on what he has read or hearsay. Everyone I worked with found them to be a very good weapon and almost everyone used them. Everyone also had a choice of which weapon to use. I also liked the G3. I never witnessed a malfunction causing much of a difficulty let alone it costing someone his life, that is for conscripts, movies and Big Duke’s hypothetical scenarios. When a jam occurred it was cleared the same as any other distraction. If a soldier could not quickly clear a jam or instantly become effective with another personal weapon he was not with us. Everything including weapon malfunctions was routinely dealt with along with all else that came with a dangerous environment.

I have not based my comments on books read or what people have said but from several years of using weapons to bring violence to the enemy. I also never noticed anyone from the DoD nearby when I was getting shot at.

[ July 04, 2005, 07:42 AM: Message edited by: Abbott ]

[Abbott]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Abbott:

http://procnet.pica.army.mil/FBO/RFP/W15QKN-05-R-0449/W15QKN-05-R-0449.htm

Thank you.

[Abbott]

Originally posted by roqf77:

He has been told/ read that the us army are experimenting with what amounts to a 6.8m sa-80 a-3 is this true? or do you have any info? sorry if its off topic but i dont thnk it realy matters anymore

I am not familiar with the SA-80 other then it appears to be a compact rifle.

[von Churov]

Originally posted by Glider:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Abbott:

...

Hitting anything with an AK-47 out past 100-150 meters is very dicey...

Just wanted to say that this is a considerable underestimate... I saw a bunch of signals unit soldiers, i.e. soldiers with a very basic infantry training, score regular (30-40%) hits on man-sized targets at 200 and 250 metres.

I also saw hundreds of 40years+ general staff officers who probably touch an AK-47 once every few years score even better results, all this using AK-47s that, while regularly maintained, have been used by generations of recruits. </font>

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Abbott:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by roqf77:

He has been told/ read that the us army are experimenting with what amounts to a 6.8m sa-80 a-3 is this true? or do you have any info? sorry if its off topic but i dont thnk it realy matters anymore

I am not familiar with the SA-80 other then it appears to be a compact rifle. </font>

[flamingknives]

Ooo, nearly forgot:

Something John Salt said a while ago.

Q:"What is the purpose of a military small arm?"

A:"Cleaning and range practice"

Cleaning a weapon as a form of maintaining discipline?

[llama]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Ooo, nearly forgot:

Something John Salt said a while ago.

Q:"What is the purpose of a military small arm?"

A:"Cleaning and range practice"

On the subject of that and the SA80 I was at the National Army Museum last week and in an exhibit case there was a stripped SA80. Lots of small, fiddly-pieces just right for attracting and retaining dirt and gunk. I hope that the field strip required to keep the thing clean and working was not what was being shown.

The old SLR was a beautiful weapon: very easy to keep operational, a dead easy IA in the rare case of a jam, deadly accurate out to 600 yards with iron sights, a 20 round magazine and plenty of stopping power. I never did understand why they got rid of them.

[Tagwyn]

Dandelion: Thank you very much for your sarcastic drivel.

Earl: The Whermact refused to quit because of their fanatical devotion to their lunatic fuhrer!! They were great soldiers, well trained and well equipped. Tactical leadership was superior and morale was strong. Strategic leadership was poor and their racial superiority prejudices did not allow them to discover that the Allies were reading their message traffic like they were the intended recipients. They made so many mistakes. Yes, they could have won but not with Nazi leadership. However, if no Nazi leadership (or lack thereof,) they probably would not have undertaken the war at all. Tag

[Bigduke6]

Abbott,

I thought we had agreed to leave one another alone. Do us both a favor, leave me out of your discussions with third parties.

I served three years in a regular U.S. Army infantry battalion equipped with M-16A1, and the M16A2. I have plenty of experience with both those weapons.

My experience with Kalashnikov came primarly after I left the service, during work in the FSU.

I have said it before and I'll say it again, if it was me in the firefight and I had to choose, I would probably choose an M-16 series rifle as I am more familiar with it. (Assuming it was zeroed. If not, then give me the the Kalashnikov). I have fired probably thousands of rounds, and certainly hundreds, of rounds through M-16A1.

That mother jams, I have seen it. A2 is better, but as I have pointed out before, a three-round burst reduces your overall volume of fire, and volume of fire is what wins firefights - assuming the firers are of roughly equal motivation and training.

The jamming problems you are dismissing lasted nearly 20 years. It is arguable they never were fixed - after all you can't fire the A2 on automatic, which naturally reduces jams. (At the expense of volume of fire.)

I have seen the Kalashnikov abused beyond almost belief, and function normally. On automatic. In peacetime operations and in wars. Because I was there watching.

You are out of line calling my opinions "hearsay".