Allah's Waiting Room..........in Ole Fashioned Marine Speak

dantastic4 said:
Gents, I don't mean offense...but if you go to Jim Rawles' survivalblog.net, you will find this original letter prefaced with the following comments from the moderator:

Lessons from the Big Sand Box: Firearms, Gear, and Tactics in Iraq (SAs: Supporting our Troop, Survival Guns, Small Unit Tactics, Iraq, Body Armor, Sniping)

We received this letter, ostensibly from a former Marine Corps First Sergeant, supposedly his second-hand assessment of weapons and enemy tactics in Iraq. This letter has subsequently been largely discredited, so I'm only leaving it up for a couple of days as a teaching tool. I've added a few notes. Special thanks to to another First Sergeant (1SG White) and to "Doug Carlton" for helping me with those notes.
Click to expand...

I posted this a week ago as I found it interesting and it came from a retired major friend of mine. Within 10 minutes I was told it was BS so I pulled the post. I felt a bit dejected as it was my first started thread :grumpy:
 
dantastic4 said:
The fourth big lie:

"Well, I read it on the Internet so it must be true!" :rolleyes:

Dan
Click to expand...

see post above, like newspapers, never believe it just 'cause it's in print. believe people like sylvrfalcn who have been there.
 
Sylvrfalcn said:
<snip> "two to the chest, one to the head", 'cause with the nine-mil that's about what it takes.:grumpy:

Sarge
Click to expand...
The one I heard was
Anon said:
Two in the belly and
One in the head
Knocks them down and
Leaves them dead.
Click to expand...
 
The 5.56 round seems not to be the favourite of any military in action. Since the German troops are in Afghanistan and on the Balkans (although they see a lot less fighting than the US-military) some seem to like to return to the 7.62 round they had during the days of the HK G3. The G36 as a system is accepted very well - but the caliber seems to have not much power. (I am far from being an expert but only can tell what I hear from friends in the army).
Lately I have heard some would like the HK 417 in 7.62x52 to be "the" German army gun - but I guess they just (from the early 90s on) substituted the G3 with the G36 and will not change gun and caliber anytime soon.

this is the (relatively new) HK 417
11523-HK417_12.jpg

- I know munk is not too fond of HK but I never shot an M16 or something - as HK is the supplier of the German armed forces this is about all I can contribute...

Andreas
 
OH heck, or 'hk'; how could I not like HK? I like them. I just think they've attainted cult status and many organizations seekings arms could find better value elswhere.

Now if John Browning were alive, wherever he worked I'd pay for the cult status. But not for HK, not for anyone living today.

My weapons philosophy is summed up by the fact that Mossberg won the pump shotgun contract over Remington to our military a couple decades ago. I don't know what the military is using today, but everyone knows the 870 is the go-to pump; how did Mossberg win?

Because it took a licken and kept on ticken every time. And cost less.


munk
 
Whenever an article like this floats around on the internet, reader beware: it's usually the opinions of one person and we know how opinions are. Certain "facts" may be inaccurate due to forgotten memories, exaggeration, or downright fabrications.

That being said, I have a few things to add:

1. I like the 60 - when I'm not the one carrying it. They can be put together incorrectly in several different ways and there are a few tricks to them, but I would not call them bad. Barrel swaps are very easy on the E3 and only pretty easy on the D. (Change that to a very easy if you have a hot glove laying around.)

2. I still think the Beretta is a pretty good pistol as pistols go. Don't blame the weapon for the caliber. I have been unimpressed with any of the M11's that I've shot.
 
Hey Dave, does the barrel on the latest version of the M-60 have a handle or are we still supplying gloves?
 
The problem with the Beretta is the exposed barrel clanking around. They made it work, but that is the engineering weak point to my mind. It will never ever be as accurate as many other semi auto's because of it, if nothing else.



munk
 
When I was a few months from leaving the Army in 2003, I interviewed for a position as a firearms training and range safety officer at a large resort in Colorado with an extremely nice indoor "fun house" with 360' shooting potential.

Besides meeting the owner of the resort, I also fired about 400 rounds in a day and a half. While I was much quicker and more accurate than I'd expected to be, I also hadn't fired a handgun in two years...after all the M4 shooting, it took me a while to remember to lock out my right wrist, so I numerous malfunctions in the first day, while using a Glock 17.

When I transitioned to a Beretta 92, I was firing at a similar rate to my fires with the Glock, but due to the more rigid Beretta frame, had no malfunctions. That was a relief! :)

It finally came back to me, and I had no malfs in my last few mags through the '17.

That 417 looks almost just like an M4.
 
You're right, Andreas. "What everyone knows" ain't exactly a scientific basis.

I'll agree, and I'm no especial fan of the M16 family.
 
There's a great Leonard Cohen song, I think called, 'everybody knows" ...

The other day on the History channel I watched a British weapons 'expert' talking about German small arms. IT was not Tales of the Gun but some other production. Anyway, they got around to comparing the Storm Gevar (sic-hows that for bad spelling?) the 'assault weapon' with the intermediate cartridge. You know the one. Anyway, the expert said it was useful and accurate up to 600 meters. In a pig's eye. He compared it to the BAR, which he said was disliked by 'everyone' as being too heavy and prone to jamming HE made no mention of the fact that the BAR with it's 06 round was superior in every way to the shorter German cartridge. I'd never heard of BAR's being unreliable. Just the opposite. If anyone can enlighten me please do. The BAR's served in two World War's up to Vietnam or so and were highly regarded...'everyone knows!!!"



munk
 
I gotta say, the data on that hk 417 is promising. And since it can be provided as an upper receiver replacement instead of a new gun, it could be affordable enough for serious consideration. After the failure of the xm8 program, this seems very practical. Pantau, is this available in 7.62 nato like you said? The article didn't mention that, only a 5.56 nato version.

Seems like this kit would be more accurate, but more importantly, more reliable than the m4a1. I've always been a fan of HK (not entirely a cult thing :) ) because of their quality. They tend to cost a lot, but the fact is that they make really good stuff. Special ops use a lot of their stuff for a reason, and at that level, it's not as much of a political thing.

The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a piston-driven m4. Cool.

Chris
 
the BAR with it's 06 round was superior in every way to the shorter German cartridge.
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree. You can carry more of a lighter cartridge, meaning more potential targets addressed. A less powerful cartridge allows more controllability with a lighter platform.

One's not better, just better for a specific task.

John, has wanted a BAR-D for years
 
Army instructors told us that the current G36 was actually pretty accurate up to about 800m. But I bet you would be very lucky if you consistently manage to hit stuff past 400m. That's about what I know from my limited exerience. Numbers dont always tell you what works in reality.

Keno
 
I am gonna try to incorporate my 18" Sirupati to my gear when I go over, but not sure if it is going to work. I need to get all my new equipment first.

Also, HK already has a competitor for our new standard issue assault rifle. The XM-8. It is based off the HK G-36, and I think it is everything we need in a an assault rifle. Changes to the gas system, receiver, magazine, dissassembly, and the accessorie: grenade launcher, foregrip... everything about the weapon sounds great. Last I heard they are holding off on it because the SAW version (to replace the M249) uses 100 round magazines instead of belts. Personally, I think this is dumb... a belt fed machine gun is not necessary at squad level when it is only one man operating the weapon. Magazines are easier for one man to handle than boxes of belts. At the platoon level, with a machine gun crew, yeah, the M240B is fine and belt fed. But we only started using belt fed at the squad level with the introduction of the M249, before that, they would use the M16A1 which was still full auto. I want the new M-8.

One last thing, there is nothing really wrong with the 5.56 round, it just needs a little improvement. Check out these new rounds being used... but only by private security, not military approved yet. http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/
 
namaarie said:
I gotta say, the data on that hk 417 is promising. And since it can be provided as an upper receiver replacement instead of a new gun, it could be affordable enough for serious consideration. After the failure of the xm8 program, this seems very practical. Pantau, is this available in 7.62 nato like you said? The article didn't mention that, only a 5.56 nato version.
Click to expand...

Just found an American forum - it seems that the 417 is the 416 but in 762x51mm instead of the smaller 5.56
http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=11238&page=0&fpart=all&vc=1

the people there seem to be much more experts than me. (In Germany these will not be for sale because it is a "Kriegswaffe" (Weapon of war). Only semi-automatic ones would be allowed but will not be offered by HK.

Andreas
 
Spectre, I was primarily referring to the power of the 06 round vs the shorter weaker German 'assault' round. The 06 is superior. As I'd quoted an 'expert' on TV saying the German round was accurate to 600 meters, which I find rather unlikely.

As for amount of ammo, and uses within 200 yards, intermediary cartridges have certain superiorities over heavier cartridges. Full auto being one of them and the amount of ammo carried. But that's apples to oranges, really.

munk
 
The Army did a study that found that 99% of all combat ocurred at ranges less than 300 yards. They also concluded that soldiers armed with bolt action rifles killed about as many of the enemy as the soldiers armed with automatics.
One aimed round kills one enemy. You can shoot him twice, but he's still only one kill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top