Weapons & Tactics in Iraq: A Grunt's perspective ...

[A4sForever]

Weapons & Tactics & Iraq: A Grunt's perspective ???

The following was forwarded to me from a Marine friend --- he got it from someone else. I don't know if this is "widely disseminated" on the web ... and I cannot vouch for it's authenticity --- but I agree with most/all of the conclusions. It's the first time I've seen it and I'm copying it here FYI ... didn't put it in the "Marine" sections of AWs as I thought many non-USMC might want to look at it as well as Marines. I will copy/paste the info about the bad guys's weapons and tactics at a later date, time permitting, if there is any interest. Overall, I think it is a good read. Nothing is by any means classified. No politics here, just a Marine with a bird's eye view's 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 it's 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's 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 7.62 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 .45's 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 700's. 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 Hathcock's 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 bullsh!t
about the "old" body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IED's 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. We've all seen the videos.

13) Lights: Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights are Surefire's, 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, it's the WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants!!!! The infantry fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.

 

[AllAmerican75]

I've read this before. Looks like us civilians are going to have to start shipping some M14s and M1 Garands to the battle front. I always did love the 30-ought-6.

 

[Gatordev]

And here Fly and I were talking about the good old M1911. If I ever have to go IA, I think I'll take mine. I just wonder how easy it is to get ammo for it.

 

[squeeze]

That same article has been posted all over the web... and it's been debunked as total BS on every site it's been posted on (BS in the regard that it's some guy's "son" and BS in regard to all the "facts" it contains). Nothing but some "omg small bullets suck" redneck bullsh-t. Sorry A4s.

Want a real afteraction on small arms? Go here:
http://www.bob-oracle.com/SWATreport.htm

 

[Fly Navy]

Yep, like Squeeze, I've seen the same "report". It's totally bunk. It is widely regarded that it is unauthentic and a farse. While there are certain statements in there that could be considered true, the facts just aren't there in a lot of statements.

It's the classic big vs small bullets, and someone decided to fictionalize it in a "war report".

 

[gaijin6423]

squeeze, that link is great.

 

[esday1]

Yeah, I was wondering about that first one when it mentioned the drum-fed M243 SAW.

That second link is great, though.

 

[A4sForever]

That same article has been posted all over the web... and it's been debunked as total BS ......Sorry A4s.

Want a real afteraction on small arms? Go here:
http://www.bob-oracle.com/SWATreport.htm

I'm soooooooooooooooo .... ashamed . The guy I got it from is the "real deal" and has spent a lot of time on the ground in Iraq. Maybe he's got an agenda ... I know I certainly do . I haven't spent any time in Iraq (obviously) , thus my "authenticity" disclaimer. Thanks for the other link, squeeze.

 

[Banjo33]

Yeah, I was wondering about that first one when it mentioned the drum-fed M243 SAW.

The M249 SAW is drum-fed....or magazine-fed, or belt-fed...

 

[Banjo33]

Ok, my bust. I think I just realized the difference between "drum-fed" and "box-fed", after thinking about it. With a drum you've got spring tension feeding the rounds, but with a box you've got a belt of ammo.

 

[ChuckMK23]

The REAL DEAL After Action Report OIF

A4s - I have a copy of an UNCLASSIFIED version of real deal after-action report to senior officers on weapons/equipment and tactics. It was provided to me by a retired army MSGT and Ranger who conducted the interviews with a group of warrior minded senior staff NCO's.

This is the real deal. It is also UNCLASSIFIED.

Feel free to PM me to mail you the full document - (it's a PDF). I will post the first few paragraphs that hit on how they obtained the AAR (actual interviews with in-theatre units) and small arms pluses/minuses (interesting)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

Operation Iraqi Freedom AAR

Small Arms and Individual Equipment Lessons from Operation Iraqi Freedom Source is USAJFKSWCS, Army Special Operations Battle Lab. Note the lessons on M9 ineffectiveness (again), M4 round's lack of range (again), and XM-107/M-82A (Barrett .50 cal semi-auto) effectiveness (again). Lessons noted have certainly not been turned into lessons acted upon in the cases of the M9 and the 62-gr. 5.56 NATO round.

Introduction:

The following is a gathering of lessons learned on items of equipment either within the PEO Soldier domain or closely related to current or planned PEO programs. I gathered these lessons while serving as the PEO Soldier Liaison to the ASA (ALT)-SWA Operations Cell. I accompanied a team from the Science and Technology community conducting a similar mission for GEN Kern, Commander, AMC, and MG Doesburg, Commander, RDECOM, consisting of Mr. Bill Andrews, MAJ Rob Johnston and SFC Sam Newland. The lessons were gathered from 5 through 10 May 2003 from soldiers serving in the Baghdad sector during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Comments came from Brigade Commanders down to riflemen.

The following units were interviewed:

* HHC/1-187 IN, 101st ABN (5 MAY)
* 2d BCT, 82d ABN (6-7 and 10 MAY)
* 3-325 PIR (7 MAY)
* 2-325 PIR (7 MAY)
* 3-7 CAV (8 MAY)
* FSB (8 MAY)
* 1st BCT, 3 ID (9 MAY)
* 3-69 AR (9 MAY

We informed brigade headquarters and requested permission to conduct interviews at the company level. The brigade issued a FRAGO to subordinate units and arranged link up times. Once we arrived in company areas of operations we would gather available soldiers, typically 7 to 10, and conduct interviews for approximately 90 minutes. An effort was made to capture observations from soldiers with a wide variety of MOS's and experiences. We questioned airborne, air assault and mechanized infantrymen, armored soldiers from both armored Battalions and cavalry squadrons, and clerks, mechanics, and medical personnel in the support battalion. The timing was very fortuitous. In almost all cases, we were the first external visitors to the unit. Soldiers were fresh off combat operations and were just beginning the stability and support phase of the operation.

They were very interested in relating their experiences and thoughts on how equipment could be improved. They recognized that the equipment provided significant combat overmatch against the combatants they encountered enroute to and in Baghdad. However, all soldiers know There is always room for improvement. In this spirit, this document will capture their feelings on what worked well and what can be improved as well as their ideas on how the deficiencies can be corrected.

Covering every item of equipment in the PEO Soldier inventory is a daunting task. I do not claim to be a subject matter expert on each item. I have recorded the soldier's comments as accurately as possible. It may be that a subject matter expert could have addressed their concerns on the spot or thought of additional questions that would get closer to the heart of the issue. I was unable to do so and the respective PM's are encouraged to conduct the follow-up work required to address these observations if necessary.

1. Weapons Capabilities

9-mm Beretta:

• There was general dissatisfaction with this weapon. First and foremost, soldiers do not feel it possesses sufficient stopping power. They desire a modification to allow for more accurate firing during limited visibility - tritium on the sight posts was a specific recommendation.

• The 9-mm. magazines performed very poorly. Soldiers were stretching the spring in order to provide sufficient force to feed rounds into the chamber. Soldiers were not satisfied with the guidance from higher to not stretch the spring and only load 10 rounds in the 15-round magazine.

• The issued 9-mm. holster is not used. Most soldiers/units purchased thigh holsters because of comfort, access and availability. If the 9-mm. Is your personal weapon, you don't want to have to always wear your LBV in order to have your weapon with you. The leather shoulder holsters did not hold up well in this environment. The thigh holsters came from a number of different commercial sources such as Blackhawk.








M-4 carbine:

• Soldiers were very satisfied with this weapon. It performed well in a demanding environment especially given the rail system and accompanying sensors and optics. As one Brigade Commander said, "The M-4 with PEQ and PAC provided overmatch over our threat equipped with AK-47s and RPGs." The general consensus is that every rifleman wants the M-4 vice the M-16A2.

• The most significant negative comment was reference the M-4's range. In the desert, there were times were soldiers needed to assault a building that may be 500+ meters distant across open terrain. They did not feel the M-4 provided effective fire at that range. The 82d Airborne soldiers wished they had deployed with M-14's at the squad level as the 101st did.

• There is also a significant safety issue that bears further investigation. Apparently when the M4 selector is in the "Safe" position and the bolt is allowed to ride forward, the firing pin still makes contact with the bullet primer. A CSM in the 101st related a story of a soldier who had an accidental discharge while his weapon was in the safe position - the CSM personally witnessed this incident. Numerous soldiers showed us bullets in their magazines that had small dents in the primer. There may be a "Safety of Use" message out on this issue but it is not well known at the battalion-and-below level.

• The flip-up sight on the M-4 allowed the soldier to engage targets out to 600 meters. However, the plastic grommet that formed the small aperture was prone to falling out. Soldiers "super-glued" the aperture to the sight.


M-203 grenade launcher:

• Again, very positive comments on this weapon. Many soldiers felt this was the weapon of choice for combat. Unfortunately, we are not able to realize the benefits of this capability in training. Soldiers did feel, however, that the safety is too unreliable to carry a round in the chamber. Some mentioned the need for a buckshot-type round.


M-249 SAW:

• Overall positive comments on this weapon. It provided the requisite firepower at the squad level as intended. The short barrel and forward pistol grip allowed for very effective use of the SAW in urban terrain. Soldiers requested a better stowage position for the bipod legs.

• The legs interfered with the attachment of the forward pistol grip. If a pistol grip was attached and the legs were down, the legs made movement in the restrictive urban terrain difficult. Additionally, the soft ammo pouches are great improvements over the plastic ammo canister. However, the 100-round pouch performed much better than the 200-round pouch. There is a design flaw that allows the ammo to get tangled in the 200-round pouch.

M-240B:

• Soldiers have great confidence in this weapon. Again, the vast majority of comments were positive. Most negative comments were relative to the AG's load. Soldiers recommended fabricating the tripod out of a lighter material.

• The AG bag is not integrated into the remainder of the MOLLE and, therefore, is not easily carried. Additionally, the nylon bag melts when it comes in contact with a hot barrel. Other suggestions included adding collapsible bipod legs like the SAW, wiring down the heat shields and an ammunition carrying system to carry 300-400 linked rounds.

Shotgun:

• This was a very useful addition to the MTOE. The shotguns were used mainly as ballistic breachers. Therefore, soldiers felt the length could be greatly shortened. They removed the stock and local purchased pistol grips and would have preferred a "sawed-off" configuration

XM-107:

• The Barrett 50 cal Sniper Rifle may have been the most useful piece of equipment for the urban fight - especially for our light fighters. The XM-107 was used to engage both vehicular and personnel targets out to 1400 meters. Soldiers not only appreciated the range and accuracy but also the target effect. Leaders and scouts viewed the effect of the .50 cal round as a combat multiplier due to the psychological impact on other combatants that viewed the destruction of the target.

• "My spotter positively identified a target at 1400 meters carrying an RPG on a water tower. I engaged the target. The top half of the torso fell forward out of the tower and the lower portion remained in the tower." 325th PIR Sniper.

• There were other personal anecdotes of one round destroying two targets and another of the target "disintegrating." The most pervasive negative comment was that snipers felt the Leopold sight was inadequate for the weapon - that it was not ballistically matched.

• The sight was zeroed for 500, 1000 and 1500 meters, soldiers did not feel confident in their ability to engage targets at the "between" distances (e.g. 1300 m). Snipers felt there were better sights available for this weapon such as the Swarovski.

• Sniper team spotters felt the tripod for the Leopold Spotter Scope could be better designed. COL Bray, Commander, 2d BCT, 82d Airborne Division supported an Operational Needs Statement for a Sniper Sight that would allow the sniper to identify targets as combatants or non-combatants out to 2000 m.

M-2:

• The M-2 .50 cal still receives great praise. It performed exceptionally well in this harsh environment. Soldiers did mention that the vehicular mount had too much play for accurate fire and that the large ammo box made it difficult to effectively manipulate the weapon.

Close Combat Optic:

• Soldiers appreciate this equipment also. Many commented that the new design/battery was a vast improvement over the previous CCO. Negative comments were on the honeycomb attachment which was difficult to clean and its ability to hold a zero.


• A suggested design change was to fix the CCO about its axis within the half-moon spacer. Currently the CCO can rotate within the mount. This does not effect the accuracy of the sight but, if the CCO is not oriented properly when the soldier zeroes, his left-right and up-down adjustments will be on a cant. A simple tongue and groove design modification would fix the CCO from rotating.


• Bore sighting the weapon's sensors and optics has been fully accepted. We heard anecdotal evidence of soldiers hitting 40/40 day and 32/40 at night with optics in training. Soldiers are purchasing Bullet Bore sights from AccuSite. The borelight fits in the chamber of the weapon. This eliminates the steps required to boresight the borelight to the weapon.





ACOG:

• Many soldiers expressed a preference for the ACOG over the CCO because of its magnification and no need for batteries.

 

[Fly Navy]

• The 9-mm. magazines performed very poorly. Soldiers were stretching the spring in order to provide sufficient force to feed rounds into the chamber. Soldiers were not satisfied with the guidance from higher to not stretch the spring and only load 10 rounds in the 15-round magazine.

I believe this was attributed to overused magazine springs. Metal fatigue sets in after a while and they just won't work right. Not a new concept.

• The most significant negative comment was reference the M-4's range. In the desert, there were times were soldiers needed to assault a building that may be 500+ meters distant across open terrain. They did not feel the M-4 provided effective fire at that range. The 82d Airborne soldiers wished they had deployed with M-14's at the squad level as the 101st did.

A function of multiple problems. For one, the M855 62gr ammo was NEVER designed to be shot out of a 14.5" barrel. This GREATLY reduces the characteristics of the 5.56mm round that worked wonderfully in the M193 55gr version of Vietnam era. The Army, in its wisdom, decided to get rid of the M193 because soldiers would confuse it for use in the M249, which it won't work correctly in. The bullet won't stabilize due to differing barrel twists. The results? Excellent ammo turns sub-par in short barrels... and they wonder why. It's SCIENCE. It's not a mystery. Optimum velocity of the 5.56mm ammo is 2700fps or more. With the heavier 62gr bullet, the range associated with this velocity drops off dramatically in the short barrel rifles. This problem is not normally associated with the full 20" M-16. The Marine Corps are smart for keeping it.

• There is also a significant safety issue that bears further investigation. Apparently when the M4 selector is in the "Safe" position and the bolt is allowed to ride forward, the firing pin still makes contact with the bullet primer. A CSM in the 101st related a story of a soldier who had an accidental discharge while his weapon was in the safe position - the CSM personally witnessed this incident. Numerous soldiers showed us bullets in their magazines that had small dents in the primer. There may be a "Safety of Use" message out on this issue but it is not well known at the battalion-and-below level.

Well it fvcking should be general knowledge, know your damn weapon system. The M-16 started as the AR-15 and was designed in the 50s. This has been a trait of this series of rifles ever since it was born. It's called dimpling, and accidental discharges can happen with bad soft primers. BOTH my AR-15s do this, it's entirely normal (dimple, not accidental discharge).

 

[Screamtruth]

I've read this before. Looks like us civilians are going to have to start shipping some M14s and M1 Garands to the battle front. I always did love the 30-ought-6.

The M14 would have been welcomed in my day. I love that rifle.


BTW, in the article, he said M24 for the sniper rifle? 4 years ago we had the M40 A1, and now I thought they were using the M40 A3.

And for the SAW, you know how it goes,
......peanut butter, peanut butter, peanut butter...JAM. That was our little joke.

 

[gaijin6423]

Ah, the SAW... What a POS. I like the concept, but the M249 is not the best piece of gear to carry it out. What is? I doubt that I'm quallified to answer that one. Even at MCT, CAX, and TBS, the thing's failings were pretty apparent, though. It jams like crazy; It rusts like nothing else; The ammo boxes are crap; It jams repeatedly and in odd ways; Pieces randomly break/fall off; The sling sucks, period; Did I mention that it jams? Quite frankly, I'm amazed at how Marines and Soldiers have been so effective with it weighing them down. The rate of fire would be awesome, provided the damn thing worked on even a slightly more reliable basis. There has to be something better out there.

 

[Lawman]

I believe this was attributed to overused magazine springs. Metal fatigue sets in after a while and they just won't work right. Not a new concept.

Yeah me and my girlfriends brother (82nd Airborne) in law were talking about this over turkey leftovers. We both kinda agreed that the trouble with the M9 has a lot more to do with the care of the weapon its recieved. Things like loading full mags in training.... theres no reason to ever do that, you dont need to shoot off 15 rounds at a range, and it would be much more beneficial to shoot a few rounds and teach them to reload. At the Academy none of us fired more then 6 rounds out of a mag the only exception was when we did the Hogans Alley shoot. Buy a bunch of superior quality mags and institute rules to combat unnecessary wear and fatigue and I'd bet good money the M9would be a great performer. No its not the best handgun out there by any measure but you cant blame the weapon alone for not standing up to negligence.



Oh and Fly, the new 77gr Mk262 is supposed to perform brilliantly in the M16/4 platform. Maybe the Army training command could teach its gruns the differnce between a 2 and an 8 so they could stop using an poor performing round