So true .... and I think that has a LOT to do with it. But if so, they should have kept their Springfield 1903's , yes ????skidkid said:
.... so you don't have to ....
-
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
Why USMC using obsolete M-16 in Iraq?
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
.... so you don't have to ....
Much thanks for the correction and errata. I don't own either of these back in the states as I'm sure many of you do. So my use of them is limited to ocassional range time a few times a year.
Surprisingly, they were very worn looking.
Cheers,
G
Surprisingly, they were very worn looking.
Cheers,
G
not a prairie poodle shooter fan for people
Love the gun threads, guys (and gals,we can only hope...)
If given the choice, I think I'd either like to take the venerable M-14 or the new M-1 SOCOM into the field out there. 7.62N has more takedown power (enhanced by the Marine handloaded ammo program at Quantico) and the weapon's action is based on the Garand. And as one soldier put it, if someone argues that 2800fps seems slow: "well soldier, I haven't found anyone who can outrun it yet." Ammunition is readily available, and the extra weight would be worth the trade in increased lethality and reliability. A friend of mine, a Marine SGT got back from his tour in Iraq and said the -16 was rendered a paperweight during blowing sand conditions (he was a refueler, always on the move, so that'd be most of the time). His unit would have had to have used their Ka-Bars if hostiles had attacked them during a sandstorm. They would have gladly traded their rifles in for Kalashnikovs. His words.
Love the gun threads, guys (and gals,we can only hope...)
If given the choice, I think I'd either like to take the venerable M-14 or the new M-1 SOCOM into the field out there. 7.62N has more takedown power (enhanced by the Marine handloaded ammo program at Quantico) and the weapon's action is based on the Garand. And as one soldier put it, if someone argues that 2800fps seems slow: "well soldier, I haven't found anyone who can outrun it yet." Ammunition is readily available, and the extra weight would be worth the trade in increased lethality and reliability. A friend of mine, a Marine SGT got back from his tour in Iraq and said the -16 was rendered a paperweight during blowing sand conditions (he was a refueler, always on the move, so that'd be most of the time). His unit would have had to have used their Ka-Bars if hostiles had attacked them during a sandstorm. They would have gladly traded their rifles in for Kalashnikovs. His words.
Someone needs to take better care of their weapon. We had no problem with the M-16, the Baretta was another story. It is a simple equation when in combat: Everytime you get a break think 1-my gear (clean and service it) 2-my people (take care fo teh junior marines) 3-myself (get some chow sleep etc).
Every time you stop clean the weapon and no problems will be had.
Every time you stop clean the weapon and no problems will be had.
helldog said:
Stopping power is a myth. A 5.56mm round hit to the human torso is much more likely to result in massive trauma and eventually death then a 7.62mm. Ask anybody that actually does combat medicine (my dad is my source) a hole that goes straight through one side and out the other is much easier to fix then a round that goes in and takes a spiralling path inside the body. You bleed from more places making you die faster. The thing the 6.8mm does thats so good is provide a very high velocity rate with a moderately sized bullet allowing for a better combination of range and killing power. Lethality at range has always been the weakest point for the 5.56mm but when you think how many rounds can be expended accurately in an alotted time by your average soldier/reservist (Marines are far above this mark :icon_wink ) and then compare that number to the amount of rounds that could be accurately fired from a 7.62 platform. Now figure in that your the bad guy that has to poke his head up or run from point A to point B to engage said group of soldier/reservists. Whats gonna make you want to stay put more? A lot of accurately placed fire or a little accurately placed fire (also figure that 7.62 will require more reloads due to lower capacity). Your not gonna be sitting in your whole thinking "pfft.... there using those plastic toys that fire the panty waisted 5.56mm bb's!" your gonna be going "SH#T SH#T ....Thats a whole lot of SH#T there shooting at me!!!!"
Ryoukai
The Chief doesn't like cheeky humor...at all
While we're on the topic of firearms; to anybody who is more qualified to answer this (you guys), what's the skinny on the P90? That thing is wicked cool looking but, as with everything in life, looks rarely tell the whole story.
LOOK OUT FOR 1920's GANGSTERS!
LOOK OUT FOR 1920's GANGSTERS!
Ryoukai said:While we're on the topic of firearms; to anybody who is more qualified to answer this (you guys), what's the skinny on the P90? That thing is wicked cool looking but, as with everything in life, looks rarely tell the whole story.
LOOK OUT FOR 1920's GANGSTERS!
Its the newest thing in CQB. Fires 5.7x28mm rounds from a top loading magazine that holds something like 50-60 rounds. Basically they went with the idea of hitting a guy with a whole bunch of little holes.
Best part is FN is bringing over the PS90, a civilian model that fires the same ammunition but is at the moment only available in a 30 round magazine load.
Lawman said:
Precisely. It's a pistol round. It's a submachine gun. They went with the idea that maybe a dozen ice picks will work better than a few heavier bullets. The only people that say our military should carry them are Counter-Strike players. There is no use for it in our military. It DOES have good armor penetration capabilities, but no better than any rifle round can handle.
Ryoukai
The Chief doesn't like cheeky humor...at all
Oh, CS...hahahahahha. I can't remember if it was you who was asking about Splinter Cell in a thread from long ago, but the main character in that game carries one of those. How does this gun stack up against others in the same category? I assume its main rival would be things like the MP5, which seem to be very well established.Fly Navy said:
Its actually a great platform because it allows a bullet to be armor piercing but due to the ballistic characteristics it has a very low chance of overpenetration. Main problem is its the new kid on the block, and the ammunition is at a premium compaired to the already established weapons. Its capacity is much higher though, and its controlability is better under rapid fire due to the low recoil and bullpup design.
Fly Navy said:
Am I going into a house, or something like a warehouse/office building? Is it a one room breach or do we have to clear the entire unit? How many hostiles? How Many on my team? Am I the first guy through the door? Do we know what they are using? ect.......... lots of questions before you can just pick a gun in a CQB enviroment.
Tell you what always works though, a really good pistol. And a really good light. Plenty of Houses in West Dayton cleared with nothing more then those tools :icon_wink .
Lawman said:
Of course... I just don't see a need for the 5.7mm round... I don't have a problem with smaller bullets (I like 5.56mm and 9mm)... but I just don't buy into the theory behind that design. I'd love to shoot some steel with it though