|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 14,463
Campfire Outfitter
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 14,463 |
Our troops are not equipped correctly. I think this a main problem right here, the guy in charge. My opinion but it doesn't sound like he knows what he is talking about. Col. Douglas Tamilio, program manager for U.S. Army firearms at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, said the M4 has the advantage of more-rapid firepower.
�The 5.56 caliber is more lethal since it can put more rounds on target,� he told The Associated Press. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/25/military-reconsiders-armys-use-m-rifles-afghanistan/The U.S. military is re-evaluating the Army�s use of the M4 rifle in Afghanistan following concerns that the Taliban�s primitive AK-47�s are proving more effective. The M4 is an updated version of the M16, which was designed for close quarters combat in Vietnam. But while the weapon is better suited for the kind of urban warfare common in Iraq, some have questioned whether it is deadly and accurate for Afghanistan � where U.S. troops often find themselves in long-range combat. An Army study found that the 5.56mm bullets fired from the M4s don�t retain enough velocity past 1,000 feet to kill an enemy. In Afghanistan, forces are often up to 2,500 feet apart. �It just makes no sense,� said Maj. Gen. Robert Scales Jr., a Fox News military analyst. Scales said the M4 is �unsuitable� for Afghan terrain and �notoriously unreliable� in the first place. The Army Times reported on an Army weapons test three years ago that found the M4 performed worse than three other newer carbines when subjected to an �extreme dust test.� Problems with the M4 locking up were also cited in a study last year on a July 2008 firefight that left nine U.S. soldiers dead in eastern Afghanistan. The Taliban are meanwhile using heavier bullets that allow them to fire at U.S. and NATO troops from distances that are out of range of the M4. To counter these tactics, the U.S. military is designating nine soldiers in each infantry company to serve as sharpshooters, according to Maj. Thomas Ehrhart, who wrote the Army study. The sharpshooters are equipped with the new M110 sniper rifle, which fires a larger 7.62mm round and is accurate to at least 2,500 feet. As for what could ultimately replace the M4, the Army�s center for small-arms development is trying to find a solution. Col. Douglas Tamilio, program manager for U.S. Army firearms at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, said the M4 has the advantage of more-rapid firepower. �The 5.56 caliber is more lethal since it can put more rounds on target,� he told The Associated Press. But he acknowledged the weapon is much less effective at 2,000 feet out. A possible compromise would be an interim-caliber round combining the best characteristics of the 5.56 mm and 7.62 cartridges, Tamilio said. Scales said the U.S. military simply needs to engineer a better weapon � he said the M8, a weapon that was under development before being halted several years ago, could be revived and improved for Afghanistan. �We�re the world�s largest superpower. Why don�t we just make one,� Scales said. �This isn�t rocket science. We�re not putting a man on the moon here.�
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579 |
Yeah okay...
How 'bout we engineer a better overall battle plan instead.
Like blow the mutherphuckers straight to hell with lots of very large explosions that leave nothing standing, asap, and get out of there once and for all.....
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,722
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,722 |
At close quarter the M4 is great get over 200 and they are not. If I had my choice I'd take a 45 for close work and an M14 for everything else.
NRA Lifetime Member
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,249
Campfire Tracker
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,249 |
I like your idea best windswalker but just in case we don't go that route I nominate the 6.8 SPC. Especially in Barrett Rec7. 163bc
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,959
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 21,959 |
I think an M14 would be nice in such country. Why not let Springfield Armory build a slug of M1A1s for the Army and USMC in "The Stans"?
"For joy of knowing what may not be known we take the golden road to Samarkand." James Elroy Flecker
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 27,692
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 27,692 |
Yeah okay...
How 'bout we engineer a better overall battle plan instead.
Like blow the mutherphuckers straight to hell with lots of very large explosions that leave nothing standing, asap, and get out of there once and for all..... AMEN Brother! Peace thru Superior Firepower.
Member: Clan of the Turdlike People.
Courage is Fear that has said its Prayers
�If we ever forget that we are one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under.� Ronald Reagan.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579 |
I like your idea best windswalker but just in case we don't go that route I nominate the 6.8 SPC. Especially in Barrett Rec7. 163bc We [bleep] up how we fight wars when we started having to ask permission to shoot azzholes that are trying to shoot us. Search and destroy....war isn't a place for nice.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579 |
The Corps qualifies at 500 with the M4, no?
Show me as many AK toting ragheads that can do the same........
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,065
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 13,065 |
No doubt in my mind the the US military will adopt a weapon suited for that specific application....about 10 years after our troops are gone from Afgahnistan.
Mike
Always talk to the old guys , they know stuff.
Jerry Miculek
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,734
Campfire 'Bwana
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 42,734 |
The problem with dust has been discussed and has an easy solution, but it was declined...
Then also just going to a different cartridge will also address the problem of longer range punch....
6.5 Grendal, or a 6.5 BR...
and yeah, they should be making M14s again...chambered in a 260 or 7/08 equivalent...
"Minus the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the Country" Marion Barry, Mayor of Wash DC
“Owning guns is not a right. If it were a right, it would be in the Constitution.” ~Alexandria Ocasio Cortez
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130 |
The Corps qualifies at 500 with the M4, no?
Show me as many AK toting ragheads that can do the same........ No. Not M4s. M16A2s.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130 |
Our troops are not equipped correctly. I think this a main problem right here, the guy in charge. My opinion but I it doesn't sound like he knows what he is talking about. Col. Douglas Tamilio, program manager for U.S. Army firearms at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, said the M4 has the advantage of more-rapid firepower.
�The 5.56 caliber is more lethal since it can put more rounds on target,� he told The Associated Press. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/25/military-reconsiders-armys-use-m-rifles-afghanistan/The U.S. military is re-evaluating the Army�s use of the M4 rifle in Afghanistan following concerns that the Taliban�s primitive AK-47�s are proving more effective. The M4 is an updated version of the M16, which was designed for close quarters combat in Vietnam. But while the weapon is better suited for the kind of urban warfare common in Iraq, some have questioned whether it is deadly and accurate for Afghanistan � where U.S. troops often find themselves in long-range combat. An Army study found that the 5.56mm bullets fired from the M4s don�t retain enough velocity past 1,000 feet to kill an enemy. In Afghanistan, forces are often up to 2,500 feet apart. �It just makes no sense,� said Maj. Gen. Robert Scales Jr., a Fox News military analyst. Scales said the M4 is �unsuitable� for Afghan terrain and �notoriously unreliable� in the first place. The Army Times reported on an Army weapons test three years ago that found the M4 performed worse than three other newer carbines when subjected to an �extreme dust test.� Problems with the M4 locking up were also cited in a study last year on a July 2008 firefight that left nine U.S. soldiers dead in eastern Afghanistan. The Taliban are meanwhile using heavier bullets that allow them to fire at U.S. and NATO troops from distances that are out of range of the M4. To counter these tactics, the U.S. military is designating nine soldiers in each infantry company to serve as sharpshooters, according to Maj. Thomas Ehrhart, who wrote the Army study. The sharpshooters are equipped with the new M110 sniper rifle, which fires a larger 7.62mm round and is accurate to at least 2,500 feet. As for what could ultimately replace the M4, the Army�s center for small-arms development is trying to find a solution. Col. Douglas Tamilio, program manager for U.S. Army firearms at the Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, said the M4 has the advantage of more-rapid firepower. �The 5.56 caliber is more lethal since it can put more rounds on target,� he told The Associated Press. But he acknowledged the weapon is much less effective at 2,000 feet out. A possible compromise would be an interim-caliber round combining the best characteristics of the 5.56 mm and 7.62 cartridges, Tamilio said. Scales said the U.S. military simply needs to engineer a better weapon � he said the M8, a weapon that was under development before being halted several years ago, could be revived and improved for Afghanistan. �We�re the world�s largest superpower. Why don�t we just make one,� Scales said. �This isn�t rocket science. We�re not putting a man on the moon here.� Reissue the friggin' M16A2s, strip off all the "tacti-cool" bullschit, and let them start killing people.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579 |
The Corps qualifies at 500 with the M4, no?
Show me as many AK toting ragheads that can do the same........ No. Not M4s. M16A2s. Same round..... Don't matter anyway, until we can bring ourselves back to fighting like we did in WWII we will continue fighting Viet Nams, Iraqs, and Afghanistans......
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130 |
Same round, yes. Much different velocity. Therein lies a good bit of difference as to lethality downrange.
Agreed, on the fighting ROEs.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18,300
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 18,300 |
you cannot win a war unless you occupy territory or so someone says...
we burned entire cities to the ground in WWII, the cost of war became too much for the populace...now wars are run by political pussys, there is no hope.
I agree regards a 20 inch barreled gun with a 1-7 twist shooting a heavier bullet...we have lost our way, bullchitt reigns supreme.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 18,075
Campfire Ranger
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 18,075 |
God, Family, and Country. NRA Endowment Member
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579 |
Same round, yes. Much different velocity. Therein lies a good bit of difference as to lethality downrange.
Agreed, on the fighting ROEs. Our problem isn't the M4, the 5.56, 5.5 inches of barrel length, or 80 fps muzzle velocity. Unless the fight is fought on the 'net by rifle loonies........
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 61,130 |
No, there is an actual difference in downrange effectiveness.
However, agreed, that the biggest problem is the ROEs.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579
Campfire Outfitter
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 7,579 |
you cannot win a war unless you occupy territory or so someone says...
we burned entire cities to the ground in WWII, the cost of war became too much for the populace...now wars are run by political pussys, there is no hope.
We aren't exactly fighting the Third Reich, or the Japanese Empire... If we were conducting War like we did then, this would have been long over, by now. It isn't the troops fault.......
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,547
Campfire Sage
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 131,547 |
The Corps qualifies at 500 with the M4, no?
Show me as many AK toting ragheads that can do the same........ No individual raghead needs to do that. They can use massed fire at longer ranges than can US soldiers using M4s.
|
|
|
|
344 members (1lesfox, 163bc, 01Foreman400, 12344mag, 160user, 10Glocks, 30 invisible),
2,715
guests, and
944
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,281
Posts18,467,748
Members73,928
|
Most Online11,491 Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|