hlg6016
A/C Wings Here
And he managed not to get written up for lost rounds, Win!
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
NEWS USAF Fighter And Bomber Crews Get Modified M4 Rifles That Fit Under Ejection Seats
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
Flown around with an M4 in my cockpit, 6 magazines, M9, and never even crossed my mind... Also, AR style rifles are relatively well
proliferated through out SE Asia. Probably not an exactly out of the normal experience for PR personnel in the AOR. I’d rather have an M4 any day of the week and twice on Sunday than an M9 for a multitude of reasons.
Those blood type patches are as useful as the shit magnet patches. Any prehospital care will only carry blood that can be used on everyone. Any hospital that has a selection of blood will do a test before using a specific type. Doctor's don't base their treatment off of a patch that someone wears.
The name and serial number is equally as useless. Since Korea, we have not had an unidentified soldier.
The name and serial number is equally as useless. Since Korea, we have not had an unidentified soldier.
But it looks super tacticool! You can’t wear your Grunt-Style shirt while drinking your Black Rifle Coffee without having an awesome patch on your desert colored ball cap with Velcro on the front...
8/10, almost there . . . you forgot to mention wearing 5.11 Tactical pants.
GroundPounder
Well-Known Member
Follow SPINS like you're supposed to and that isn't a problem.
Any procurement is open to cost benefit analysis, let alone absolute value, ie more batteries vs carbine. But the reasons for the universal dismissal of this program concerns me a bit.
If aircrew were captured by the most common enemy we face, it won't be anything like the Hanoi Hilton. It will be torture to the death, beheading or burned alive. I for one would lik every chance to live long enough to be rescued. More over, if capture means death I'd like to kill as many of my enemy up to capture as I can. The ultimate outcome for me will not be any worse than had I not wasted a few.
I disagree that survival and evasion is always paramount. Just because you find yourself on the deck without your primary means of combat does not mean you are a noncombatant. If enemy is between me and rescue, or an evasion route, I'd like to eliminate them rather than surrender to them.
You could debate dozens of scenarios and find reason not to fight. But having a more capable weapon only gives you more options. If you want to surrender to ISIS and leave a M4 behind, go ahead. Id rather not throw spare batteries at them. I'd like to evaluate the situation and then kill some of the fuckers before they behead me.
If aircrew were captured by the most common enemy we face, it won't be anything like the Hanoi Hilton. It will be torture to the death, beheading or burned alive. I for one would lik every chance to live long enough to be rescued. More over, if capture means death I'd like to kill as many of my enemy up to capture as I can. The ultimate outcome for me will not be any worse than had I not wasted a few.
I disagree that survival and evasion is always paramount. Just because you find yourself on the deck without your primary means of combat does not mean you are a noncombatant. If enemy is between me and rescue, or an evasion route, I'd like to eliminate them rather than surrender to them.
You could debate dozens of scenarios and find reason not to fight. But having a more capable weapon only gives you more options. If you want to surrender to ISIS and leave a M4 behind, go ahead. Id rather not throw spare batteries at them. I'd like to evaluate the situation and then kill some of the fuckers before they behead me.
I haven't seen anyone universally dismiss it. It's been more of a, "why is this all of a sudden a requirement 17 years into the conflict?" I'm all for having this tool in the toolbox. Your argument for why this might be more necessary in this current conflict is on point, but by that same token, how many aircrew are we losing on the ground? Or even getting shot down to begin with?
Flip it the other way and you could argue the bigger picture of we won't always be fighting these relatively simple forces, and I agree, but is that same need to fight your way out to escape beheading still true with a peer adversary? Maybe. I hope we don't have to find out.
But again, I'm back to the "why now and why this?" question. But asking that question doesn't mean it isn't great that we have these available for the downed airman to utilize.
Flip it the other way and you could argue the bigger picture of we won't always be fighting these relatively simple forces, and I agree, but is that same need to fight your way out to escape beheading still true with a peer adversary? Maybe. I hope we don't have to find out.
But again, I'm back to the "why now and why this?" question. But asking that question doesn't mean it isn't great that we have these available for the downed airman to utilize.
You mean you’re not supposed to run to the SAR helo with your pistol drawn?
Exactly - why now? What was the epiphany that caused the AF to fund 7-8 figures for this program and stand up an armory modifying 100 rifles per week - not to mention the engineering mods to the seat/seat pak and unit level SOP for qualification, training and administration of said weapons and ammo. Is it a result of gearing up to face a nation state adversary?
That's your take?
Not explicitly- but I get we are pivoting macro strategy wise away from what’s been the norm for the last 17 years. Kind of like we pivoted away from Northern Euro/Fulga Gap and GI-UK North Atlantic to SWA/desert everything in 90’s
So maybe there is some lessons learned doc somewhere that speaks to the requirement. “If only we had...”