Not much to tell. Hurricane relief... frustrated residents. Shots fired. Found out on post flight on two separate incidents.
-
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
Not much to tell. Hurricane relief... frustrated residents. Shots fired. Found out on post flight on two separate incidents.
Anything divided by said denominator = dead, if captured.
I’m surprised to see so much negativity about this. Obviously evasion is the way to go and I doubt anyone will shoot their way out of capture. I’d still rather have an M-4 derivative than an M-9
I suspect it’s part of the seat pan survival kit? No idea.
But this is an interesting study in culture clash between Naval Aviation / TacAir and USAF.
Brings to mind how the AF views back seat/WSO’s and equipping those cockpits with flight controls and mindset of battle damage redundancy vs our guys not having flight controls in the back seat of a Hornet/Rhino/Growler.
The seat pan, or rather the box of goodies under the seat pan, is usually on a lanyard that is several feet long and attached to your parachute harness. So if they figure out how to stuff an M-4 into the pan (!?), or more likely give it its own lanyard, then it would be easy to retrieve.
Maybe there is some assembly required, like Nordberg's carry piece...
The seat pan attaches to your butt. Well, it sits under your butt and is attached to the fittings on your harness.
I also think all of this negativity is dumb. If I'm going to go out I'm going to try to take out as many bad dudes as I can and not just shoot myself in the head. If I'm evading, I'd rather have something other than a pistol just in case my evading isn't going so well.
I also think all of this negativity is dumb. If I'm going to go out I'm going to try to take out as many bad dudes as I can and not just shoot myself in the head. If I'm evading, I'd rather have something other than a pistol just in case my evading isn't going so well.
I think the negativity has nothing to do with having a decent tool at your disposal, should the low-percentage need arise. But instead the negativity is along the same lines where someone like yourself advocates pushing money in the direction a widget with a much higher-percentage of use instead of a "nice to have, when or if we ever need it."
A thought: The majority of GOs at Corona level in the USAF are command rated pilots. i.e. Most of their top decision makers have gone to work in an ejection seat before.
Unless you are also implying the naval aviation community’s decision makers aren’t also mostly coming from a TACAIR background, I’m not sure how relevant that is.
How so? Which conflicts in the last 30 years have had USAF TACAIR and not USN TACAIR? Desert Storm? Nope. Northern/Southern Watch? Nope. Bosnia, Allied Force? Nope. OEF? Nope. OIF? Nope. OIR? Nope.
Where are you getting this idea?
I like the idea. How else do we shoot the monkey that they told us to watch and then eat during API ground survival? I mean, those fuckers are wiley.
Putting a modified M-4 in the seatpan would cost almost nothing in the grand scheme of things. And the things I argue for are those things that are combat related, like SERE. The things I argue against are those things that aren’t needed in combat and only make it easier to go on cross countries, like civilian ILS.