Reports of US weapons failing
In Afghanistan. Interesting to me that the press is wondering if our troops have the best that money can buy.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 11th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Ummm, just want were the NCOs doing that they could not ensure that weapons are functional?
Problems after 12 mags? 28×12=336 rounds in a couple of minutes. Yeah you might have a problem, but I’ve seen AKs burst into flame under 10 mags.
What do they want a Hk50/G36? An ACR if Remington every gets off it’s fat backside? A SCAR?
The M249 won’t work in the crap? Well, gee, we’ve known that since the early ’80s. Maybe we can have the SS-77 now that the eeevil white people in Azania are out of power?
October 11th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
M240G Baby, 6-8rnd burst, change the barrel after 100rnds. Can the M4 for open warfare, get back to the M14. No Ma Duce in the fight?
October 11th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Never been a fan of the Black rifle.
The only complaint I ever heard about the old piston jobs such as the G36, FAL etc. was they where too heavy.
I understand the lighter round allows the carry of more ammo theory but lets face it the 5.56 round isn’t worth a damn especially in areas where the bad guy’s wear heavy clothing.
Switch back to 7.62 or 30-06 and get back to marksmanship and let’s put more dicks in the dirt.
October 11th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
This sounds like a media put-up job. All the sudden, when Obama is faced with a REAL decision on Afghanistan, they come up with this Vietnam era style ‘GI’s weapons failing’ thing.
I noticed the SAW machinegun overheated and the M4 burned through more 5.56 than I even have (and 12 mags? What was he shooting at that burned up 12 mags in juat a few minutes? Must have been alot of bodies out there, right?
October 11th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
From what I’ve read, it seems some fire discipline would go a long way toward curing the “problem”.
October 11th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
It’s starting to look like we don’t have enough boots on the ground and are trying to make up for the lack with volume of fire.
October 11th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
“From what I’ve read, it seems some fire discipline would go a long way toward curing the ‘problem’.”
What he said.
October 11th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
I recall reading about M4 cook-offs and overheating-related failures since 2003.
What about crew-served weapons over and above MGs?
Doesn’t Uncle Sugar still buy 60mm mortars? 40mm GLs?
Claymores? Are we being limited by ROE?
October 12th, 2009 at 8:38 am
Same ol’ Sh*t, the ReMF’s are setting up small outposts in areas that “haven’t had any enemy action recently” so they are undersized & underarmed.
M4’s have always had a problem with sand & always will. An M-14 would be so much better & you don’t have to worry about the tango you just shot getting back up or to keep running.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:34 am
The problem is the M4 is a ‘light battle’ rifle, not a ‘heavy’ one. So if you find yourself being overrun by enemies, don’t bother firing your weapon and just run away. Or throw rocks at them or better still, kill a taliban take his Ak and use it against them!
October 12th, 2009 at 10:58 am
As unproven as the M14 is, I’m amazed that folks are chiming in and saying it’s the solution.
Designated marksmen are not going through 300 rounds in a single engagement with the M14 simply because they aren’t carrying 300 rounds of 7.62 NATO.
The fact is that 18 7.62 NATO 20 round mags are needed to make up the round count of 12 5.56 NATO 30 round mags, and those 18 mags weigh a good bit more than the 5.56 Mags.
How many rounds does the M14 go through in combat before choking? Do we even know? Or do they just run out of ammo first? The weight of ammo is a HUGE difference between the M16 and M14. We keep hearing about the heavy weight folks our troops are humping up and down the mountains in Afghanistan, adding half or doubling the weight of ammo wouldn’t be doing them any favors, neither would cutting their ammo loads to equal the weight.
I’ve never had to hump a combat load up a mountain, but folks really should think about the added ammo weight before suggesting we jump on the M14 band wagon.
In my humble opinion, they need to go back to the M16 for Afghanistan. An even shorter carbine (the M4) doesn’t seem optimal for wide open terrain.
October 13th, 2009 at 7:08 pm
The 7.62x51mm rd is far superior to the 5.56x45mm rd. just listen to the comments coming from the guys in service now.