User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/8/2013 5:34:13 PM EDT
[#1]
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I can't recall ever shooting the SAW with tracers. Given that most are under the AR LIN and not the LMG LIN, I don't see much use for tracers at all. Now, the M240 does have some nice tracer action. There is ALWAYS room for tracers. Ever been on the receiving end? Scary as all fuck. My up mag was 100% tracer for precisely that reason. I was a SAW gunner when dismounted, my contact belt was a 100 round nut sack of straight belted tracer. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2013 5:44:43 PM EDT
[#2]
Originally Posted By NUcadet07:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
There is ALWAYS room for tracers. Ever been on the receiving end? Scary as all fuck. My up mag was 100% tracer for precisely that reason. I was a SAW gunner when dismounted, my contact belt was a 100 round nut sack of straight belted tracer. That's interesting... do you think that's because of the "irregular" nature of your opposition? Would a well-trained adversary be less scared and more "shoot the fuck outta that guy with the MG, he's right there at the other end of those tracers"? Not really opining on this, as it's so far out of my lane I'm in the tall grass, but it intrigues me nonetheless. I can definitely see "shock and awe" working better in LIC/COIN better than against regular military forces. They probably haven't done a durka-durka version of the "Tracers... Just Bullets, not the Finger of Allah" training film yet. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2013 5:49:31 PM EDT
[#3]
Originally Posted By Sylvan: Smaller rounds are going to have an earlier tracer burnout. also, with MGs, energy matters. we already have the SAW. instead of going tweener, go big. 338 Norma magnum. 25% weight increase, 75% range increase. Ok you answered the question I was about to ask. If smaller won't do it we would have to go bigger. And I don't know if it matters (don't remember tracer burnout range for 5.56) but I believe the 6mm SAW load would trace out to 1000m. And 6mm seems to have good sectional density for penetration, if I'm understanding your reference to energy.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2013 5:50:42 PM EDT
[#4]
Originally Posted By DeltaElite777:
Originally Posted By NUcadet07:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
There is ALWAYS room for tracers. Ever been on the receiving end? Scary as all fuck. My up mag was 100% tracer for precisely that reason. I was a SAW gunner when dismounted, my contact belt was a 100 round nut sack of straight belted tracer. That's interesting... do you think that's because of the "irregular" nature of your opposition? Would a well-trained adversary be less scared and more "shoot the fuck outta that guy with the MG, he's right there at the other end of those tracers"? Not really opining on this, as it's so far out of my lane I'm in the tall grass, but it intrigues me nonetheless. I can definitely see "shock and awe" working better in LIC/COIN better than against regular military forces. They probably haven't done a durka-durka version of the "Tracers... Just Bullets, not the Finger of Allah" training film yet. Honestly, it's a fair question. It had its risks, but with the enemy I faced, to me it was worth the trade off. My goal was just as much to make the enemy break contact as much as it was to kill him. I'd prefer to kill him, but that wasn't always an option to be honest. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2013 7:14:01 PM EDT
[#5]
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Smaller rounds are going to have an earlier tracer burnout. also, with MGs, energy matters. we already have the SAW. instead of going tweener, go big. 338 Norma magnum. 25% weight increase, 75% range increase. The Multi-Role MG would be at the Squad Level, and the LRMG (.338) would be higher, like Platoon and vehicle-mount. As far as 7.62 NATO goes for retained energy at distance, the 130gr 6.5mm will out-gas it between 500 & 600yds with more retained energy, and will stay supersonic longer, with less wind drift for the gunner, and that's with the 6.5mm starting 200fps slower at the muzzle. Regarding tracers: A 130gr 6.5mm is a lot longer than a 147gr M80 projectile, and the M62 NATO tracer with the 142gr projectile is structured as such: 
If you look at the Swedish 6.5mm Tracer, there appears to be the same or a little more volume of tracer pyrotechnic compound, but it is stacked deeper. I suspect this would yield as long as or longer tracer burn with the 6.5mm, and you would have closer trajectory performance than we currently have with the 147gr FMJBT versus long 142gr M62 Tracer with the 7.62 NATO. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/8/2013 7:43:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Sylvan]
[#6]
Originally Posted By LRRPF52:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Smaller rounds are going to have an earlier tracer burnout. also, with MGs, energy matters. we already have the SAW. instead of going tweener, go big. 338 Norma magnum. 25% weight increase, 75% range increase. The Multi-Role MG would be at the Squad Level, and the LRMG (.338) would be higher, like Platoon and vehicle-mount. As far as 7.62 NATO goes for retained energy at distance, the 130gr 6.5mm will out-gas it between 500 & 600yds with more retained energy, and will stay supersonic longer, with less wind drift for the gunner, and that's with the 6.5mm starting 200fps slower at the muzzle. Regarding tracers: A 130gr 6.5mm is a lot longer than a 147gr M80 projectile, and the M62 NATO tracer with the 142gr projectile is structured as such: http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv360/wolfganggross/cutaways7/cutaways7040.jpg If you look at the Swedish 6.5mm Tracer, there appears to be the same or a little more volume of tracer pyrotechnic compound, but it is stacked deeper. I suspect this would yield as long as or longer tracer burn with the 6.5mm, and you would have closer trajectory performance than we currently have with the 147gr FMJBT versus long 142gr M62 Tracer with the 7.62 NATO. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r6/JohnP-C/65mmPracticeTracerUK.jpg eh. Not feeling it. maybe the low light of the 5.56 was because of the sectional density. longer, thinner is longer and dimmer maybe? that would make sense. We have people humping 50 cals, I won't argue in favor of current NATO 7.62. for volume of fire at the squad level, SAW gets it done. But this gets me going. 
ETA At 1,000 meters, the LWMMG is capable of defeating Level III body armor and incapacitating soft skinned vehicles by delivering over 1,900 foot pounds of energy to the target – more than four times the terminal effect of the 7.62mm NATO cartridge. Weighing less than 24 pounds and featuring a fully collapsible stock, the LWMMG offers superior mobility and portability in both mounted and dismounted operations. Specifications: Caliber: .338 Weight: 24 pounds Length: 49 inches Rate of fire: 500 rounds per minute Ammunition: .338 Norma Magnum Projectile: 300gr Sierra HPBT, FMJ, AP Muzzle Velocity: 2,650 feet per second Barrel Length: 24 inches Max Effective Range: 1,860 yards (1,700 meters) Maximum range: 6,170 yards (5,642 meters) Mount: M192 tripod, or various vehicle mounts" http://www.defensereview.com/general-dynamics-armament-technical-products-gdatp-338-nm-lwmmg-338-norma-magnum-lightweight-medium-machine-gun-for-overmatch-capability-potential-game-changer-for-mobile-infantry/ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 12:48:55 AM EDT
[#7]
Yes, I've been following the GD .338 "Lightweight" Machine Gun for a while. That would be nice, especially for places like Afghanistan, but you would need a Wermacht Gun Squad to support it.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 11:07:18 AM EDT
[#8]
It would take a three man gun team.
You aren't assaulting a prepared position with 3 gun SBFs talking the guns for 20 minutes. Same weight on the gun (lighter, actually) with double the ammunition weight. its doable. easily so. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 1:31:19 PM EDT
[#9]
Originally Posted By LRRPF52: Yes, I've been following the GD .338 "Lightweight" Machine Gun for a while. That would be nice, especially for places like Afghanistan, but you would need a Wermacht Gun Squad to support it.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNB7khjOSXcHow would that be any different that current use with a 240? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 1:33:00 PM EDT
[#10]
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
Originally Posted By LRRPF52:
Yes, I've been following the GD .338 "Lightweight" Machine Gun for a while. That would be nice, especially for places like Afghanistan, but you would need a Wermacht Gun Squad to support it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNB7khjOSXcHow would that be any different that current use with a 240? The inherent testicular growth that comes from being near one is a 12 pound weight penalty. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 1:34:50 PM EDT
[#11]
Originally Posted By Sylvan: Originally Posted By Madcap72: Originally Posted By LRRPF52: Yes, I've been following the GD .338 "Lightweight" Machine Gun for a while. That would be nice, especially for places like Afghanistan, but you would need a Wermacht Gun Squad to support it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNB7khjOSXcHow would that be any different that current use with a 240? The inherent testicular growth that comes from being near one is a 12 pound weight penalty. Ahh, makes sense. Do they make pintal mounts for huge balls so you can bounce and gun like on the medical marijuana episode of south park? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 2:06:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Vik]
[#12]
Have run an MG-42 alot and carried it "in the field" (reenacting) that bitch is freaking heavy as hell! The whole squad is an AB for a 42. The squad was supposed to move near the objective, give all their ammo to the gun team, guns engage and riflemen attack. I can tell you that gun runs through ammo like a raped-ape! It is fairly controlable and fun as hell to shoot.
I have shot a ton of 8mm live with and without a tripod. Without a tripod it hammers the gunner. With a tripod that gun is awesome. It can put rounds on a man size target out to 2000 meters with the sights zeroed correctly. The BAR is fun as hell to shoot, but the 20round box sucks and reloading isn't the fastest. ZB26 the cezch version of the Bren is just as fun in 8mm, but with a even smaller 20rd mag. The Bren is a wonderful weapon. Accurate, fun to shoot and reloads are fairly fast. 30Round mag does suck. PKM is wonderful. Fun to shoot, good round and controlable. RPD sucks the balls. Heavy, not very easy to control, terrible trigger slap, and a damn ton of recoil for the round its shooting. M60 is fun fairly accurate and a joy to shoot. MG34 is very accurate and controlable. Can fire single shot for rangeing or fully auto. ZB37 is useless without the tripod, and heavy as hell with no easy way to carry it. |
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 5:01:24 PM EDT
[#13]
Originally Posted By LRRPF52:
How about the Israeli NEGEV NG7 LMG (Light Machine Gun) 7.62mm? Fairly light weight at 7.5 kg and from the videos I've seen fairly low felt recoil.
16.7 lbs empty is more than I want, but about as low as you can go with a 7.62 NATO belt-fed, and definitely preferable over 27.6 lbs for the M240. You still have to hump linked 7.62 NATO, which is a very limiting factor. There was a Botswanese Special Forces Captain in my Squad in Patrolling Phase of the Q-Course who really loved the Negev. The South African SS-77 and Negev share a lot of similarities. No.
I am already at range parity with the PKM. I don't want to EVER be outranged by my enemies' weapons. This is key right here. The PKM is the weapon system that we need to be thinking about matching or exceeding with regards to: * External ballistics capability * Terminal Ballistics capability * Weapon weight/profile/maneuverability/recoil (16.5 lbs/7.5kg) * Reliability PKM's are very light for a 7.62x54R belt-fed, and therefore are relatively easy to carry and employ. They use a canister mounted to the gun to feed from, and are rarely employed with an AG like we would in the US, but are most effective when a trained Sharpshooter (DM) with optics accompanies them, in addition to an RPG gunner and maybe a Team Leader. The Chechens used this 4-man team structure with murderous results against the Russians in the 1st & 2nd Chechen Wars, and there are a lot of Chechens floating around the CENTCOM AOR to pass on their experience, in addition to all the Pashtun Muj who were trained in Pakistan during the Soviet-Afghan War of 1979-1989, and have passed on those lessons to their sons and nephews. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110420050725/deadliestfiction/images/4/4f/PKM_machine_gun.jpg So the question is, can we match or over-match the 7.62x54R PKM in the 4 categories listed above? The answer is that we can over-match it in all of the categories. Here's how: * 6.5mm 130gr FMJBT with higher BC will fly as flat from a slower mv, and suffer from less wind deflection...OVERMATCH * 6.5mm 130gr FMJBT sectional density beats any 7.62 ball projectile yielding increased penetration and a longer projectile for soft tissue yaw characteristics...OVERMATCH * A small-cased 6.5mm based on the 7.62 Russian Short (6.5 Grendel) uses a much lighter, smaller receiver design, and generates less than 50% of the recoil of 7.62x54R...OVERMATCH * Using proven long-term reliability belt-fed designs, the reliability of the PKM can be matched for MTBF, and exceeded by using constant-recoil...OVERMATCH Additionally, the small case capacity 6.5mm with .444 case head diameter does not suffer from over-bore throat-torching issues, and therefore yields a very long barrel life, which is critical for machine guns and long-term logistics considerations of an army. Employing a constant-recoil mechanism for the operating system would make such a weapon behave like this: Ultimax 100 LMG Didn't know the PKM got so much love. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 5:19:47 PM EDT
[#14]
Pecheneg might be worth of consideration if the 600 round non-stop figure without barrel damage is true.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2013 5:26:53 PM EDT
[#15]
Originally Posted By TheFreepster:
In afghanistan we ran our squads as two big teams instead of three small ones due to lack of mine detectors and thor systems. On long patrols that expected significant contact we attached a 2 man 240 team to each of the squad's two elements to allow for bounding overwatch in the hills. They always carried the tripod and a vector and we ran about a million gun drills on those teams so they could be set up in a few seconds and have rounds on target in the first burst (through use of the vector). I am a little worried that since our foes in Afghaistan and Iraq were so poorly trained and disciplined if we were developing some bad or lazy habits but it looks like here that isn't the case with all units. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2013 2:04:03 AM EDT
[#16]
Originally Posted By SS109:
Originally Posted By TheFreepster:
In afghanistan we ran our squads as two big teams instead of three small ones due to lack of mine detectors and thor systems. On long patrols that expected significant contact we attached a 2 man 240 team to each of the squad's two elements to allow for bounding overwatch in the hills. They always carried the tripod and a vector and we ran about a million gun drills on those teams so they could be set up in a few seconds and have rounds on target in the first burst (through use of the vector). I am a little worried that since our foes in Afghaistan and Iraq were so poorly trained and disciplined if we were developing some bad or lazy habits but it looks like here that isn't the case with all units. Our foes are not exactly poorly-trained if you're talking about the ones who have been doing this for decades, and come from other countries with a lot of training from foreign intelligence services so they can yield a lot of results with minimal efforts. The training packages we started running for Mujaheddin in Pakistan in the 1980's was better than any of the training we'll ever conduct for Infantry units in our own Armed Forces, because they wanted significant results with small surrogate forces who regularly crossed the border through the mountains to attack the Soviets. 
Their use of motorcycles, spotters, belt-fed machine guns, snipers, and IED's is almost exactly what they did against the Soviets. You should see the IED program we developed for the Mujaheddin in the mid-80's. The Russians felt the change big-time when the new regime in Langley took over Central Asian Bureau, and sourced experienced SF veterans to put together the training program. They took the Afghans from a loosely-armed peasant militia with Enfields, to a well-organized UW light infantry organization with cross-training in demo, raids, ambushes, MANPADS, intel networks, sabotage, subversion, commo, and anti-armor, equipped with freq-hopping radios, AKM's from Egypt and China, Stingers, 20mm Oerlikons, recoilless rifles, and all kinds of explosives. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2013 2:37:45 AM EDT
[#17]
That's why I hate it when GD'ers always hear the word insurgent and equate it with unskilled dirt farmer.
In 03 in Iraq we fought some better than average forces. Fortunately we annihilated them, but they showed pretty decent command and control, and target priority. For instance, driving through the middle of the huge firefight of Al Nasaryia, my humvee took MAYBE 2-3 rounds. We counted over 200 on the BC's Amtrac right in front of my truck. In fact, I was the second humvee in the Bn at that point (one 3 tracks or so in front of mine was the 81's ammo truck), everything else in front was armor. The difference between the armored bullet resistance track and my soft skin humvee that can hardly stop a x51 round? Antennas. I had one, the command track had 4-5. They poured and poured fire into that track the whole length of that road, when they could have easily swiss cheesed my truck. While they probably should have just shot me up, that tells me that the whole length of that road, as we passed along, shooters specifically targeted the command track in hopes of taking it out. Just one instance of our enemies being a little more high speed than many gave them credit for. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2013 10:29:51 AM EDT
[#18]
where i was at the taliban could plant IEDs and that was it.
they fucking sucked in a firefight. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2013 10:45:21 AM EDT
[#19]
They generally missed a ton where I was but so did we...long range fight with lots of cover and concealment. They would do very smart things like engage multiple bases at once to limit the concentration of our artillery. Once time they engaged 3 bases from many positions initiated by an IED on an RCP Husky in the valley. I thought that was very smart. They didn't even wound anybody though 
Often times they would engage us from 2-4+ positions. It made finding them hell as sound echoed every which way and they were smart enough to remove tracers from their PKM ammo (or they didn't have them) 9/10 times. They would manually hop frequencies in the middle fights, speak in code on the radio, etc. They even had a repeater in our AO so that we wouldn't hit anything with artillery from direction finding triangulations. I'm sure there was plenty of AK hip firing but some of them were smart enough to use Lee Enfields and PKMs for long range stuff, they held onto AKs with buttstocks removed for PDWs. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2013 11:12:56 AM EDT
[#20]
Originally Posted By Infantry26:
, they held onto AKs with buttstocks removed because they are fucking idiots. PDWs are for vehicle operaters who can't keep a full sized weapon. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 3:31:13 PM EDT
[#21]
I knew I wasn't seeing things:
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 3:45:10 PM EDT
[#22]
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
That's why I hate it when GD'ers always hear the word insurgent and equate it with unskilled dirt farmer. In 03 in Iraq we fought some better than average forces. Fortunately we annihilated them, but they showed pretty decent command and control, and target priority. For instance, driving through the middle of the huge firefight of Al Nasaryia, my humvee took MAYBE 2-3 rounds. We counted over 200 on the BC's Amtrac right in front of my truck. In fact, I was the second humvee in the Bn at that point (one 3 tracks or so in front of mine was the 81's ammo truck), everything else in front was armor. The difference between the armored bullet resistance track and my soft skin humvee that can hardly stop a x51 round? Antennas. I had one, the command track had 4-5. They poured and poured fire into that track the whole length of that road, when they could have easily swiss cheesed my truck. While they probably should have just shot me up, that tells me that the whole length of that road, as we passed along, shooters specifically targeted the command track in hopes of taking it out. Just one instance of our enemies being a little more high speed than many gave them credit for. Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figgure out "the big one with all the antennas" is the nail in the board sticking out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 3:46:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TAP]
[#23]
For instance, driving through the middle of the huge firefight of Al Nasaryia, my humvee took MAYBE 2-3 rounds.
We counted over 200 on the BC's Amtrac right in front of my truck. ...snip... Do you think the amtrac's size (over 3 times the profile square footage) compared to the hmmwv also accounted for any of that, and not just the antennae? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 3:54:13 PM EDT
[#24]
Originally Posted By TAP:
For instance, driving through the middle of the huge firefight of Al Nasaryia, my humvee took MAYBE 2-3 rounds.
We counted over 200 on the BC's Amtrac right in front of my truck. ...snip... Do you think the amtrac's size (over 3 times the profile square footage) compared to the hmmwv also accounted for any of that, and not just the antennae? There was a story I read.....I think the book was "Tank Sergeant" 
They were running convoy escort for an Engineer unit that was heading up to do road improvement. They hit an ambush, and the VC detonated a 105mm shell IED, and blew the dog crap out of a road grader. Never mind the ammo, feul, C&C vehicles, etc. They chose the road grader. Later, after they had repulsed the ambush, the VC captives said they did it becaue "It looked different, so it must have been important" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 4:01:43 PM EDT
[#25]
Originally Posted By TDCJBoss: Originally Posted By Madcap72: snip Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figgure out "the big one with all the antennas" is the nail in the board sticking out. At night with poor Illum, with two Bn's of Marines shooting at you? I mean, there was a bunch of tracks just like it in the lead. The Iraqi's stuck it out through all that .50 and Mk-19 fire, and fire from 2nd Marines, and still took shots... Pretty impressive fortitude. I give them WAY more credit than the majority of people. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 4:03:57 PM EDT
[#26]
Originally Posted By CharlieR:
Great post. My contribution: . The German put their best guy, schutze #1, on the gun. Many landser had bolt action kar98ks, and their mission in life was to help carry ammo for the machine gun, which did the heavy work. Most historians have said the German system worked better. It generated more firepower. Of note, the ‘gun group’ in the German rifle squads did not necessarily have the tripod. The art of machinegunnery was an LMG to support squad maneuver, and only two of the 14 guns in a rifle company in the Wehrmacht routinely used the tripod. They would rather carry the ammo. This is the German Army. Some units, such as German airborne (fallschirmjager) would have two LMGs per squad. Ferocious firepower. Of course, they were on the defense. So basing tactics around MGs may have made more sense. The honest to god truth which no one likes to talk about is the fact that the Germans put select men who were able AND WILLING to aim at another human being and pull the trigger behind their best firepower asset. The guys with the K98's could make all the noise and smoke they wanted as long as they kept the MG secure and fed. Not enough to be a good marksman, you had to be a killer too. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 4:09:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: LRRPF52]
[#27]
They were running convoy escort for an Engineer unit that was heading up
to do road improvement. They hit an ambush, and the VC detonated a 105mm shell IED, and blew the dog crap out of a road grader. Never mind the ammo, feul, C&C vehicles, etc. They chose the road grader. Later, after they had repulsed the ambush, the VC captives said they did it becaue "It looked different, so it must have been important" In the Asian system, a lot of autonomy is granted to subordinates to make decisions based on the situation, if they are following Sun Tzu's Art of War. It provides more flexibility and appropriate action for the real-time intel available to a unit. In the few instances of US military history where this has been allowed, or the situation dictated it, the effects were demonstrably greater than the abortions planned by generals in the rear. Look at LGOPs during D-Day invasion, Marine Raiders, SOG, LRRP's/SF/Force Recon/Squeals in SEA... When you let just a few small units with a strong warrior ethos act relatively autonomously, it's scary what they can do. Give them general left and right limits, and tell them to jack someone up however they need to do it, and prepare to watch results happen. Conversely, take a stringent Chain of Command with rigid operational guidelines, distractions based on matrices and thought processes generated in a garrison-based environment, and morale will be low, movement slow, objectives unclear, results disastrous or unproductive at best. Sun Tzu discusses this in detail in The Art of War. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 7:17:55 PM EDT
[#28]
Originally Posted By LRRPF52:
They were running convoy escort for an Engineer unit that was heading up
to do road improvement. They hit an ambush, and the VC detonated a 105mm shell IED, and blew the dog crap out of a road grader. Never mind the ammo, feul, C&C vehicles, etc. They chose the road grader. Later, after they had repulsed the ambush, the VC captives said they did it becaue "It looked different, so it must have been important" In the Asian system, a lot of autonomy is granted to subordinates to make decisions based on the situation, if they are following Sun Tzu's Art of War. It provides more flexibility and appropriate action for the real-time intel available to a unit. In the few instances of US military history where this has been allowed, or the situation dictated it, the effects were demonstrably greater than the abortions planned by generals in the rear. Look at LGOPs during D-Day invasion, Marine Raiders, SOG, LRRP's/SF/Force Recon/Squeals in SEA... When you let just a few small units with a strong warrior ethos act relatively autonomously, it's scary what they can do. Give them general left and right limits, and tell them to jack someone up however they need to do it, and prepare to watch results happen. Conversely, take a stringent Chain of Command with rigid operational guidelines, distractions based on matrices and thought processes generated in a garrison-based environment, and morale will be low, movement slow, objectives unclear, results disastrous or unproductive at best. Sun Tzu discusses this in detail in The Art of War. My point being, it was probably the lowest value target in the convoy, and it was struck for no other reason than it was the nail standing out on the board. It doesn't take Sun Tzu to figgure that out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/15/2013 7:20:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
Originally Posted By TDCJBoss:
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
snip Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figgure out "the big one with all the antennas" is the nail in the board sticking out. At night with poor Illum, with two Bn's of Marines shooting at you? I mean, there was a bunch of tracks just like it in the lead. The Iraqi's stuck it out through all that .50 and Mk-19 fire, and fire from 2nd Marines, and still took shots... Pretty impressive fortitude. I give them WAY more credit than the majority of people. I would say my point makes MORE sense under the circumstances. Shoot at the biggest, most important looking thing. Was it with the lead group of tracks or by itself amongst other, smaller, dissimilar vehicles? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2013 9:52:52 PM EDT
[#30]
Bump
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2013 10:58:35 PM EDT
[#31]
Originally Posted By TDCJBoss: Originally Posted By Madcap72: Originally Posted By TDCJBoss: Originally Posted By Madcap72: snip Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figgure out "the big one with all the antennas" is the nail in the board sticking out. At night with poor Illum, with two Bn's of Marines shooting at you? I mean, there was a bunch of tracks just like it in the lead. The Iraqi's stuck it out through all that .50 and Mk-19 fire, and fire from 2nd Marines, and still took shots... Pretty impressive fortitude. I give them WAY more credit than the majority of people. I would say my point makes MORE sense under the circumstances. Shoot at the biggest, most important looking thing. Was it with the lead group of tracks or by itself amongst other, smaller, dissimilar vehicles? It was behind dozens of similar looking vehicles. It wasn't the biggest, it was the same size, and it didn't stand out THAT much, in fact it would have been tough for a lot of people to tell it apart from the other tracks, given lack of NVG's and volume of incoming fire. In fact, the very first dissimilar vehicle was mine... the one that avoided getting hit. LOL you're sure trying hard not to give them credit. |
|
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 1:43:21 PM EDT
[#32]
First post Tag and Bump for awesomeness and good reading.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 3:28:53 PM EDT
[#33]
Here's a good writeup on the Swedish M36 machine gun, including the mount that was used for indirect fire.
The new .338 Norma Magnum machine gun seems to be a revival of the medium caliber machine guns of yesteryear. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 3:54:32 PM EDT
[#34]
Originally Posted By swede1986:
Here's a good writeup on the Swedish M36 machine gun, including the mount that was used for indirect fire. The new .338 Norma Magnum machine gun seems to be a revival of the medium caliber machine guns of yesteryear. Very cool. the only thing new is the history you don't know. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 3:57:21 PM EDT
[#35]
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By swede1986:
Here's a good writeup on the Swedish M36 machine gun, including the mount that was used for indirect fire. The new .338 Norma Magnum machine gun seems to be a revival of the medium caliber machine guns of yesteryear. Very cool. the only thing new is the history you don't know. An air-cooled version of the M36, chambered for 7.62x51, is still used in the CV90. Those things are indestructable. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 4:07:47 PM EDT
[#36]
Originally Posted By swede1986:
Originally Posted By Sylvan:
Originally Posted By swede1986:
Here's a good writeup on the Swedish M36 machine gun, including the mount that was used for indirect fire. The new .338 Norma Magnum machine gun seems to be a revival of the medium caliber machine guns of yesteryear. Very cool. the only thing new is the history you don't know. An air-cooled version of the M36, chambered for 7.62x51, is still used in the CV90. Those things are indestructable. Interesting. Thanks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 4:09:13 PM EDT
[#37]
Originally Posted By Vik:
RPD sucks the balls. Heavy, not very easy to control, terrible trigger slap, and a damn ton of recoil for the round its shooting. . Da fuq? Was this some semi auto variant? I've owned two postie RPDs. The RPD is extremely easy to use and control. No trigger slap at all. I also had a MG42, it is not heavier then the 240B. My experience with the 240 and 249 come from 8 years in the army as both a Cav Scout and serving in a light infantry Bn |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 9:25:37 PM EDT
[#38]
Originally Posted By swede1986:
Here's a good writeup on the Swedish M36 machine gun, including the mount that was used for indirect fire. The new .338 Norma Magnum machine gun seems to be a revival of the medium caliber machine guns of yesteryear. 
The Swedes are known for making some of the best weaponry in history, and that dates back to a particular Viking sword that is comparable to modern carbon steel alloys. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 9:27:05 PM EDT
[#39]
Originally Posted By Tim_McBride:
Originally Posted By Vik:
RPD sucks the balls. Heavy, not very easy to control, terrible trigger slap, and a damn ton of recoil for the round its shooting. . Da fuq? Was this some semi auto variant? I've owned two postie RPDs. The RPD is extremely easy to use and control. No trigger slap at all. I also had a MG42, it is not heavier then the 240B. My experience with the 240 and 249 come from 8 years in the army as both a Cav Scout and serving in a light infantry Bn I was thinking this same thing about the RPD. The design is well-loved by SF/SOG/Rhodesian SAS types of the 1960's-1980's, especially in cut-down form. |
|
|
|
SGP
|
Posted: 5/31/2013 11:34:13 PM EDT
[#40]
Dutch Soldiers from 12 infanterie Bataljon 11, Luchtmobiele Brigade during an Air Assault during Exercise Indian Prepare – Attacking and eleminating an Armed Group holding a Water Purification Plant in Grou – 22nd May 2013
Photos: kpl1 Hillinga |
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 6/1/2013 1:53:22 AM EDT
[#41]
Too much of the belt hanging off the feed tray will put excessive pressure on the feed pawls. I advise against such a practice. That was the purpose behind the 100rd 7.62 soft packs.
I carried the M249 on 3 continents with mother green over a span of 4yrs. Is it too late for a rant about the M27 IAR? I have no clue what the USMC high command was thinking. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2013 3:57:37 AM EDT
[#42]
What in the glorious hell is the rocket launcher in that first pic? Getting a moto boner over here. Although I would hate to carry a loaded launcher, especially the SMAW with a rocket. That's like carrying a 240 on your back and buddy rushing. Originally Posted By 0311-1903: Too much of the belt hanging off the feed tray will put excessive pressure on the feed pawls. I advise against such a practice. That was the purpose behind the 100rd 7.62 soft packs. I carried the M249 on 3 continents with mother green over a span of 4yrs. Is it too late for a rant about the M27 IAR? I have no clue what the USMC high command was thinking. We deployed to Afghanistan about a year and half ago with some of the first IARs and I've been issued an IAR for the MEU I'm on. They are NOT a replacement for the SAW no matter what anyone has said. Our battalion Gunner (CW3) has told us, that it supplements the fire team and the SAW. We still have SAWs and they will still be issued, but with less numbers. The IAR is to provide accurate fires, some full auto suppression and be lighter, more accurate, more reliable, and maneuverable than the SAW. In my experience, the IARs have performed past expectations. While I attribute some of this to them being freshly delivered to us, they have impressed me with their qualities. During our workup for the Afghan pump, we had an IAR gunner pinging a LaRue target at 600m so much it got boring. The IAR is very accurate. I'd say they're more accurate than a brand new M16 or M4. The trigger is much lighter and cleaner without the 3 round burst bullshit. With an IAR, a Marine can be 1 man in the stack if you're doing MOUT, something not recommended with the SAW because of it being an open-bolt, and the RMR that tops the SDO(TA-11) makes close up shooting a snap. It's not without it's cons, though. It's heavier for one. Noticeably, much more than an M4. Kinda feels the same as an M16 with an M203. Since the one I've been issued is brand new, the controls haven't been worn in yet and they're stiff. The magwell is kinda stupid and I hate it. A brand new magazine barely fits in it and has to be torn out. Older mags with the finish worn down insert and eject freely. The bolt release is stupid stiff when trying to send the bolt home. Older PMAGs don't fit obviously, Magpul makes a new generation for it but we left for the MEU only a few weeks ago and PMAGs were nowhere to be seen. Wasn't happy about leaving my pmags back home  Overall, I really like it. The Marine Corps is headed back into the peacetime focus of mobile, amphibious units with a lot of flexibility. And the kicker? I'm not even an 0311. I'm a weapons guy, 0351. I get to hump my IAR and my SMAW. Lt. tells me and I do lol. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/1/2013 4:03:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: BakerMike]
[#43]
Originally Posted By TheGunslinger:
What in the glorious hell is the rocket launcher in that first pic? A Panzerfaust 3, I think. |
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 6/5/2013 5:21:26 AM EDT
[#44]
Bumping a great thread; may it never die
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 6/5/2013 5:35:43 AM EDT
[#45]
Great post OP, thanks.
Something I don't know much about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/8/2013 5:29:32 PM EDT
[#46]
fkn Awesome.
funny most Fudds at gun ranges will tell you how ineffective a machinegun is..... Originally Posted By TheGunslinger:
I don't have much to add other than that my machine gunners have always been the best in my battalion. In Afghanistan, my buddy got two confirmed kills on some assholes that thought it would be fun to spray us with a pkm and then jump on a their little moped and try and get away. Range, laser confirmed, 932 meters. With one burst. The Marine Corps is keeping the art of machinegunnery alive and well. <a href="http://s630.photobucket.com/user/TheHiddenMan/media/DSCF0224_zps7781eee8.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i630.photobucket.com/albums/uu24/TheHiddenMan/DSCF0224_zps7781eee8.jpg</a> Pic is not the aforementioned time but another, on a routine security patrol near the patrol base. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/9/2013 3:17:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: LRRPF52]
[#47]
Earlier this summer, I took my 16" Grendel AR15 out to 1200yds. It actually surprised me, because I was able to get 4 rounds on-target as fast as I could pull the JP Single-Stage trigger after quickly indexing the reticle. It made me want a lightweight, constant-recoil Grendel LMG even more. My 16" pushing 123gr A-MAX is 80% of the energy of a 168gr SMK target bullet at 850yds, but I'm starting 200fps slower. The 168gr SMK has a better BC than the 147gr M80 7.62 NATO as well.
|
|
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 7/11/2013 11:23:09 PM EDT
[#48]
Bump for an awesome thread. Thanks to all who shared their insight, especially the veterans.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/12/2013 12:05:49 AM EDT
[#49]
Awesome thread. Still going through it but one thing the OP mentioned that I started wondering about was the use of machine guns in modern warfare, the number of soldiers to operate a machine gun, mobility, etc.
So, without trying to throw a monkey wrench on the topic here's a question. Would using the same number of snipers cause similar "damage" to the enemy? Meaning, one sniper makes everyone take cover, the sniper can better select high value targets, the sniper is a lot more difficult to detect and neutralize, etc. Therefore, would replacing the MGs with sniper be more effective in more scenarios nowadays where we do not see hordes of enemies charging like crazy? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/15/2013 3:44:09 PM EDT
[#50]
Originally Posted By Rossi:
Awesome thread. Still going through it but one thing the OP mentioned that I started wondering about was the use of machine guns in modern warfare, the number of soldiers to operate a machine gun, mobility, etc. So, without trying to throw a monkey wrench on the topic here's a question. Would using the same number of snipers cause similar "damage" to the enemy? Meaning, one sniper makes everyone take cover, the sniper can better select high value targets, the sniper is a lot more difficult to detect and neutralize, etc. Therefore, would replacing the MGs with sniper be more effective in more scenarios nowadays where we do not see hordes of enemies charging like crazy? 
That's an interesting question, because it touches on the fact that snipers and machine gunners engage targets in the same range spectrum. The first response you are likely to hear from those of us who have employed machine guns in a military capacity is the distinction of suppressive fire versus precision fires. There is a psychological component to incoming fire, especially from a machinegun. When the projectiles are passing by you or impacting material around you, you know that your position is dialed-in, and you are limited in your options, namely the ability to get into position and return effective fire, or maneuver from your pinned-down position. Interestingly enough, in training, snipers and machine gunners would often end-up task-organized within the same element, namely the Support-By-Fire element. A good SBF position has the best overwatch of an objective or infiltration/exfiltraton route with expansive observation and fields of fire, and minimal dead space. Snipers and machine gunners can work well together in that regard, since the debilitating effects of machine gun fire keep people fixed, while snipers can place effective 1st-round hits on targets of opportunity. There have been instances where snipers have been able to reduce an entire infantry company who had chosen to use an open piece of terrain to expedite their movement into South Vietnam, although they were also using indirect fires to assist with keeping the enemy unit fixed. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
