How's the 25mm Chain Gun doing in Iraq?

[MikeyD]

I've seen reports in praise of pretty much every weapon system fielded by the U.S. from .50 cal Browning, up to the 120mm tank gun, down to ancient Korean war M15 rifles! But I've located very little on the effectiveness of Bradley's 25mm autocannon. I suspect this may be because the Pentagon press office doesn't exactly want to draw attention to Stryker not being able to field that weapon.

Has anyone heard any 25mm chain gun anecdotes? Is the gun actually used much or does Bradley largely stick to the coax 7.62 due to fear of collateral damage, or even fear of firing saboted rounds over the heads of Coalition troops?

The only weapon that I've been seeing not-particularly-great press on is the 40mm grenade launcher. Seem to be a lot of stories of jamming for that weapon, but i know there's a big difference between anecdotal and proper statistical evidence.

[ December 05, 2006, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[Los]

You can see plenty of footage of then 25mm chewing up the stone buildings in various cities there. It's good for that.

Los

[Homo ferricus]

actually, I've heard a lot of stuff about the M249 not being an adequate weapon from U.S. Soldiers and Marines.

[offtaskagain]

The 25mm has seen good use over here. If you dig around YouTube for Operation Al Fajr clips theres some of it action there. Still the vast majority of all fires by vehicles, M1 and M2 included, are coax or top mounted MGs. Anything that goes boom has very tight restrictions on its use. The MK 19 is definitely not the most liked weapon in the armory. It's not reliable, it produces duds, and it's heavy to manipulate in a turret. The ammo is a major bitch too. I don't think I've heard of anybody bothering to fire one in quite some time. In fact all the units I've been with usually just leave them in their armory. The M249 is a good enough weapon, but it's round has trouble with the brick and conrete structures that are prevelant in the cities. It's also avoided if possible on turret mounts because it's perceived as not being as effective against a vehicle as an M240. I personally am quite sure it will shred any civilian vehicle.

[ December 06, 2006, 06:06 AM: Message edited by: offtaskagain ]

[hellfish]

There was talk about the Bradley being updated with a 30/35/40mm gun like the Europeans have, but the higher ROF and the gobs of 25mm ammo the Bradley could cary was still preferred over the larger weapons.

[MikeyD]

Awhile ago I had started a "SAW piece of crap?" thread based on comments made by an ex-Marine nephew of mine about the weapon. I perceived the reappearance of old M15 7.62 rifles as a vote of no-confidence in the 5.56mm M249 too. I was then thoroughly stomped on for daring to impune the M249's reputation.

[YankeeDog]

A while back I read a good article, detailing why the Bradley and its 25mm was often valued in MOUT operation over the Abrams and the 120mm, for two basic reasons:

(1) Smaller vehicle and shorter barrel = easier to maneuver around sometimes narrow, and/or partially blocked streets. (Interesting to speculate about how the Bradley compares to the very wide turning radius Stryker, in this regard. . .)

(2) The 25mm autocannon offers a good compromise between penetrating power, and danger zone -- it is powerful enough to penetrate almost any structure, and, with high ROF, has a good supressive effect. But, unlike a big 120mm round, it can be targeted quite close to friendlies.

Anyway, that's what I remember of the article. I wish I had saved a link, but I didn't. . . maybe someone else remembers it and can call it up.

[Battlefront.com]

Mikey,

I think Offtaskagain was talking about the M249 in the context of heavy weapons, such as Ma Deuce and up. In that regard, he's correct for sure. The 5.56 round simply wasn't designed to punch through much. So if you are riding along in an Abrams and you need to add some air conditioning to a building, you're not going to use the M249

I've heard nothing good about the Mk19 in general, though it would appear that the RWS mount of the Stryker eliminates some of the problems. Certainly the Mk19 can do things out in the open that no other infantry weapon can. But being in an urban environment, I can easily see why it is left in the armory.

Steve

[MikeyD]

About Mk19 and Stryker, when initially deployed the Stryker brigade had fits over the weapon. No safe firing range for the weapon on their base in Mosel. A real bear to safely extract the round when it jams. I believe first Stryker Brigade's first casualty was a soldier who accidentally dropped a round onto a Stryker roof while loading the weapon back when they were still in Kuwait! The first time a Stryker was hit by an RPG the second vehicle had attempted to target the attackers but its Mk19 launcher jammed.

That's as much as I know on the topic.

[ December 06, 2006, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[Splinty]

Someone's confusing the M242 which the Bradley's 25mm, and the M249 which the Squad Automatic Weapon a 5.56 mm light machine gun.

[flamingknives]

FWIW, the British Military have acquired an automatic grenade launcher for use in Afghanistan. Differen't situations, different weapons (It's the Heckler and Koch Grenade Machine Gun) but it seems that such weapons haven't dropped right out of favour.

[offtaskagain]

I certainly wouldn't describe the MK 19 as useless. In a serious firefight it would have a chance to shine. Or a long distance engagement like Afghanistan tends to have. Another problem I forgot to mention is the arming distance of the grenades, and the fragmentation of course can be a problem if you fire it too close to yourself. The MK 47 that has been field to Army SF appears to address a great deal of the MK 19s shortcomings. It's smaller and lighter, operates on a closed bolt recoil operated design. and has one hell of an optical/NVG sight. If they replaced the MK 19 entirely with that, even minus the sighting system it would probably be much better regarded.

Another link

[MikeyD]

Wow. First time I've heard about the Mk 47.

Why-oh-why did the company name the thing "Striker" though? I would've much preferred a name like "Bridley", "Abrims", or 'Shirman"

[Aacooper]

I think "Stryker" is the name of a couple Medal of Honor winners. Personally, I always think of the Airplane movies, where Ted Striker was the washed out pilot.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

FWIW, the British Military have acquired an automatic grenade launcher for use in Afghanistan. Differen't situations, different weapons (It's the Heckler and Koch Grenade Machine Gun) but it seems that such weapons haven't dropped right out of favour.

The HK GMG

we got ahold of a couple right before I left the service and got to do some testing with it.

An amazing weapon with an incredible rate of fire

[Imperial Grunt]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

About Mk19 and Stryker, when initially deployed the Stryker brigade had fits over the weapon. No safe firing range for the weapon on their base in Mosel. A real bear to safely extract the round when it jams. I believe first Stryker Brigade's first casualty was a soldier who accidentally dropped a round onto a Stryker roof while loading the weapon back when they were still in Kuwait! The first time a Stryker was hit by an RPG the second vehicle had attempted to target the attackers but its Mk19 launcher jammed.

That's as much as I know on the topic.

Well a 40mm HEDP round has to spin before it arms. Not sure how many times, but it has to travel about 15m before it arms when fired (if I remember correctly). Simply dropping it will not cause it to go off, that would be very bad for troop welfare.

[Battlefront.com]

Simply dropping it will not cause it to go off, that would be very bad for troop welfare.

Oh, you mean like the sudden rise in 2LT casualties? "No we did NOT frag the LT. He was playing around with one of those 40mm rounds and he must have dropped it. You know those guys, they're all butterfingers. Why was he playing with one? I dunno... he was bored. Are we through with the questions yet? I gotta go talk with the Captain."

Steve

[SgtMuhammed]

I always liked the MK19 as a weapon but not as a weapon system. Way too fragile, even on a range we suffered multiple duds, missfires, and cookoffs. I can only imagine it in the big sandbox.

[Dogface]

Originally posted by Aacooper:

I think "Stryker" is the name of a couple Medal of Honor winners. Personally, I always think of the Airplane movies, where Ted Striker was the washed out pilot.

I think he was typing about the MK 47 (it's called the MK47 Striker ALGL by the manufacturer) not the vehicle.

However, you are right about the Stryker ICV.

[Abbott]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Wow. First time I've heard about the Mk 47.

Why-oh-why did the company name the thing "Striker" though? I would've much preferred a name like "Bridley", "Abrims", or 'Shirman"

Mike, check the link in my Sig. for Stryker naming Info.

[Battlefront.com]

You guys are silly. What MikeyD is saying is that some bozo named the Mk47 "Striker". The rest of what he said is just making fun of this bold and stupid marketing name. It's not like that thing won't get confusing.

"Sir, your Striker has been hit!". "Good God, EVERYBODY OUT!!!!" "No sir, not your Stryker, your STRIKER!!" "I know, we're getting out" (daaadaadaaat.... daaadaadaat) "Private, I'm going to kick your butt all the way back to the swamp you came from! My Stryker hasn't been hit, but now Smitty has been thanks to you!" "Sir, I tried to tell you, you're STRIKER has been hit!!" "I'm not falling for that one again, Jones. Don't bother me, I've got to hit those bastards back with my Striker.... oh, now I see what you mean. Argh!"

Steve

[ December 07, 2006, 11:07 AM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by rudel.dietrich:

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

FWIW, the British Military have acquired an automatic grenade launcher for use in Afghanistan. Differen't situations, different weapons (It's the Heckler and Koch Grenade Machine Gun) but it seems that such weapons haven't dropped right out of favour.

The HK GMG

we got ahold of a couple right before I left the service and got to do some testing with it.

An amazing weapon with an incredible rate of fire </font>

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by rudel.dietrich:

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

FWIW, the British Military have acquired an automatic grenade launcher for use in Afghanistan. Differen't situations, different weapons (It's the Heckler and Koch Grenade Machine Gun) but it seems that such weapons haven't dropped right out of favour.

The HK GMG

we got ahold of a couple right before I left the service and got to do some testing with it.

An amazing weapon with an incredible rate of fire </font>

[luderbamsen]

Hmm, the Brits are pretty good at naming military stuff.

They named their new 4.5in naval gun "Kryten"

Respectfully

luderbamsen

[flamingknives]