Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
R-32 is my bitch
Avatar
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Aug 2003
  • Posts 51004
  • Location USA WA, USA
Offline
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Aug 2003
  • Posts 51004
  • Location USA WA, USA
Offline
NRAMilitary
Posted: 7/24/2012 8:30:10 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 8:31:39 AM EST by KA3B]
http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/video/?bctid=1750028924001
About halfway through the video.

Army cuts M806 machine gun.
The Army's $160 million gun program is a casualty of the budget ax.
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2009
  • Posts 840
  • Location USA TN, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2009
  • Posts 840
  • Location USA TN, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 8:34:17 AM EST
Hey, gotta pay for GLBT Awareness month somehow, right?
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1744
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1744
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 8:53:51 AM EST
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?
Ever shoot a XM218 nekked?
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jul 2007
  • Posts 14419
  • Location USA NY, USA
Online
Bronze
  • Joined Jul 2007
  • Posts 14419
  • Location USA NY, USA
Online
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 8:56:22 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


Labor intensive. I love the M2 family of Machine guns with a deep and disturbing depth but its time that we stop trying to reinvent the fucking pistol and dump some cash into crew served stuff. Which gets used more?
Basic
  • Joined Feb 2009
  • Posts 6369
  • Location USA USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Feb 2009
  • Posts 6369
  • Location USA USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:00:14 AM EST
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1745
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1745
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:03:45 AM EST
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.
Basic
  • Joined May 2004
  • Posts 3030
  • Location USA MN, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined May 2004
  • Posts 3030
  • Location USA MN, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:04:48 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


The point remains.
Curmudgeon
Avatar
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15072
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15072
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
NRAMilitary
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:05:14 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


I LOVE the M2, but it is a bit dated. The M2 is heavy, and it takes a certain finesse to make it work well. I knew how to run one very well, but despite my constant teachings, many of my soldiers continued to have problems.

We can do better.

Basic
  • Joined Feb 2009
  • Posts 6370
  • Location USA USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Feb 2009
  • Posts 6370
  • Location USA USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:07:04 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


its still a complete piece of shit.
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1746
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1746
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:07:21 AM EST
Originally Posted By MNnaloxone:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


The point remains.


And what is your point?

What does an Army machine gun have to do with Marine Corps handguns?
Basic
  • Joined Mar 2011
  • Posts 797
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Mar 2011
  • Posts 797
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:08:19 AM EST
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.
Basic
  • Joined Mar 2002
  • Posts 24760
  • Location USA VA, USA
Online
Basic
  • Joined Mar 2002
  • Posts 24760
  • Location USA VA, USA
Online
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:09:09 AM EST
Hasn't this thing been in development for ages anyway?
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1747
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1747
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:10:08 AM EST
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


Overall weight with tripod and all the bits or just the receiver assembly?
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1748
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1748
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:10:41 AM EST
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


its still a complete piece of shit.


okay then.
Cyber-Luddite - 291 PT score
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined May 2007
  • Posts 9173
  • Location TCA TCA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined May 2007
  • Posts 9173
  • Location TCA TCA
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:12:27 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


Overall weight with tripod and all the bits or just the receiver assembly?


I think it's 40 pounds lighter with the entire setup.
"You're amazing at being apathetic."
Basic
  • Joined May 2004
  • Posts 3032
  • Location USA MN, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined May 2004
  • Posts 3032
  • Location USA MN, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:13:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By MNnaloxone:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


The point remains.


And what is your point?

What does an Army machine gun have to do with Marine Corps handguns?


If you can't see that, the CA water is too polluted. Whatever, mang.
Curmudgeon
Avatar
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15073
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15073
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
NRAMilitary
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:13:34 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


Overall weight with tripod and all the bits or just the receiver assembly?


Just receiver and barrel is 82 lb vs. 40 lb.
Not the illegal kind...
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2002
  • Posts 26913
  • Location USA AZ, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2002
  • Posts 26913
  • Location USA AZ, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:31:39 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


Well there have been advancements in things like materials (lighter) and designs (less labor intensive) that could make for a better gun, but nah that couldn't possibly be an improvement on a 100ish year old design right?
Please tell me what you had for breakfast.
Basic
  • Joined Nov 2001
  • Posts 996
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Nov 2001
  • Posts 996
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:32:06 AM EST
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


How was the reliability and durability though?

I don't know the answer, but if it's not as reliable (function wise) or durable (parts breakage wise) as the current gun, that might be a reason to kill the program.

So, anyone have any info on the reliability and durability of the (now cancelled) new system in T&E?

Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined May 2007
  • Posts 21848
  • Location USA MD, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined May 2007
  • Posts 21848
  • Location USA MD, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:37:57 AM EST
thats fucking stupid. something they actually NEEDED
Coyote with 40 people crammed into a minivan gets into a chase with DPS, Paco over estimates his driving abilities and *whmmo!* the Astrovan of Immigration becomes a Pinata of Pain, hurling broken bodies like so many tasty pieces of cheap candy...
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Dec 2005
  • Posts 2259
  • Location USA TN, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Dec 2005
  • Posts 2259
  • Location USA TN, USA
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:41:17 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 9:44:13 AM EST by Paulie771]
Originally Posted By Trebor:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


How was the reliability and durability though?

I don't know the answer, but if it's not as reliable (function wise) or durable (parts breakage wise) as the current gun, that might be a reason to kill the program.

So, anyone have any info on the reliability and durability of the (now cancelled) new system in T&E?



The M2 is an unreliable POS. Any weapon that can have it's parts installed incorrectly and the gun still go together, but not work, shouldn't be in use. Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.

At 80 lbs w/ out tripod, it damn well better be durable. It's too heavy to have a troop hump it up a mountain side in Afghanistan (you know, where medium/heavy MG fire is the work horse) when he's already humping 120+ pounds of gear.

As has been said, we can do better.
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" - Robert Novak
Basic
  • Joined Dec 2002
  • Posts 11687
  • Location USA TX, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Dec 2002
  • Posts 11687
  • Location USA TX, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:42:07 AM EST

Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


its still a complete piece of shit.


okay then.
they cracked frames and slides dureing the 20,000 round test, it's a piece of shit and I love 1911's

Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Apr 2005
  • Posts 18719
  • Location USA TX, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Apr 2005
  • Posts 18719
  • Location USA TX, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:42:44 AM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


about 40 lbs too heavy and difficult to change the barrel
5-4
Avatar
Platinum
  • Joined Apr 2007
  • Posts 19928
  • Location USA TX, USA
Offline
Platinum
  • Joined Apr 2007
  • Posts 19928
  • Location USA TX, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:46:26 AM EST
Looks like it has a higher rate of fire too.

You can't watch 3 war vids in a row featuring a M2 without watching some guy struggle to make it work.
If you would hIt, you must acquit. ~EvanWilliams
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2002
  • Posts 4532
  • Location USA RI, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2002
  • Posts 4532
  • Location USA RI, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:47:18 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 9:50:31 AM EST by Hamel]

Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


Overall weight with tripod and all the bits or just the receiver assembly?


Just receiver and barrel is 82 lb vs. 40 lb.

Would the weight savings really that much of an advantage? (other features of the MG aside) At 40 lbs plus ammo, and tripod probably still too heavy to bring out on a patrol so it probably woulda still been stuck as a vehicle mounted weapon or in defensive position and not moved around a lot. Wouldn't have been able to take advantage of the weight savings.

IIRC Gen Dynamics came out with a .338 NM machine gun earlier this year that had nearly the same range as the 50 BMG but was only slightly heavier than the lightened M240. Would that have been a better choice if you needed a lighter, long range MG?
Curmudgeon
Avatar
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15076
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15076
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
NRAMilitary
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 9:56:25 AM EST
Originally Posted By Hamel:

Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


Overall weight with tripod and all the bits or just the receiver assembly?


Just receiver and barrel is 82 lb vs. 40 lb.

Would the weight savings really that much of an advantage? (other features of the MG aside) At 40 lbs plus ammo, and tripod probably still too heavy to bring out on a patrol so it probably woulda still been stuck as a vehicle mounted weapon or in defensive position and not moved around a lot. Wouldn't have been able to take advantage of the weight savings.

IIRC Gen Dynamics came out .338 NM machine gun earlier this year that had nearly the same range as the 50 BMG but was only slightly heavier than the lightened M240.


We had a trunk have a partial rollover; the truck was barely balanced and about to tip into a canal. The M2 that was in the turret popped out of the pintle mount, fell on the gunner, and pinned him against the side armor. He was stuck as the weapon was too heavy for him to move. We had to risk more soldiers lives to go back onto the truck help get him out. We might not have had that problem if the weapon was lighter.
#119
Avatar
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 5629
  • Location USA FL, USA
Offline
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 5629
  • Location USA FL, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 10:05:00 AM EST
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.



What, you dont have a dime and a nickel in your pocket?
www.e6supply.com
Curmudgeon
Avatar
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15078
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
Lifetime Member
  • Joined Jun 2006
  • Posts 15078
  • Location USA OR, USA
Offline
NRAMilitary
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 10:06:24 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 10:06:43 AM EST by Renegade13B]
Originally Posted By echo6:
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.



What, you dont have a dime and a nickel in your pocket?


AAFES uses paper coins

Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2008
  • Posts 1098
  • Location USA MI, USA
Online
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2008
  • Posts 1098
  • Location USA MI, USA
Online
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 10:10:54 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 10:15:37 AM EST by jchewie1]
Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By echo6:
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.



What, you dont have a dime and a nickel in your pocket?


AAFES uses paper coins



ID tags are another improvised method.



< Would love to see and use a new 50 cal with fixed H&T, less 30+ pounds of weight, burst only, and disassembly and maintenance similar to the M240B. Design it with push through links on the belt, and left hand feed only.



Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Dec 2005
  • Posts 2260
  • Location USA TN, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Dec 2005
  • Posts 2260
  • Location USA TN, USA
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 10:16:11 AM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 10:17:53 AM EST by Paulie771]
Originally Posted By jchewie1:
Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By echo6:
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.



What, you dont have a dime and a nickel in your pocket?


AAFES uses paper coins



ID tags are another improvised method.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


My point being there shouldn't be any sort of HS&T at all in the field. Whether it's nickel and dime, dog tags, HS&T tool, whatever. It's archaic and unnecessary.

Especially when most troops can barely strip a M4 or a SAW. They're kids' puzzles compared to the M2's fucking Erector set.
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" - Robert Novak
Hey....I LIKE Fudd guns!!!!!
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2001
  • Posts 128
  • Location USA CO, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2001
  • Posts 128
  • Location USA CO, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 1:23:15 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 1:24:22 PM EST by DaveN]
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Originally Posted By jchewie1:
Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By echo6:
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.



What, you dont have a dime and a nickel in your pocket?


AAFES uses paper coins





ID tags are another improvised method.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


My point being there shouldn't be any sort of HS&T at all in the field. Whether it's nickel and dime, dog tags, HS&T tool, whatever. It's archaic and unnecessary.

Especially when most troops can barely strip a M4 or a SAW. They're kids' puzzles compared to the M2's fucking Erector set.


So...your reasoning is that instead of properly training your soldiers, you want to spend millions of dollars to replace something that actually works?

Member
Avatar
Gold
  • Joined Oct 2004
  • Posts 2094
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Gold
  • Joined Oct 2004
  • Posts 2094
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 1:37:58 PM EST
You guys are aware that they have an M2 with QD barrel, no HS&T gauge required, right?
A Boxer-Henry .45 caliber miracle
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Dec 2008
  • Posts 12558
  • Location USA IN, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Dec 2008
  • Posts 12558
  • Location USA IN, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:18:01 PM EST
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


That's small potatoes budget-wise. Blame the Army if you think the program was worth saving. My guess is that it was having problems.
Until they all come home....POW/MIA
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2004
  • Posts 35903
  • Location UZB UZB
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2004
  • Posts 35903
  • Location UZB UZB
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:20:10 PM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


Did you watch the vid?

The new gun would save 40# and cut recoil by 60%.
RIP Jessie Davila - You are the ultimate hero.

The accumulated filth of their sex/murder will foam up and the whores/politicians will look up and shout "Save us!" I'll look down and whisper, "No."
Basic
  • Joined Jan 2011
  • Posts 1455
  • Location USA USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Jan 2011
  • Posts 1455
  • Location USA USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:26:21 PM EST
Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


Overall weight with tripod and all the bits or just the receiver assembly?


Just receiver and barrel is 82 lb vs. 40 lb.


Wow, that sounds like quite the improvement.

Now that's something I, as a taxpayer, don't mind paying for - assuming it does everything just as well as the old M2. Just pull money away from the welfare rats.
65% more bullet
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2008
  • Posts 4860
  • Location USA IA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2008
  • Posts 4860
  • Location USA IA, USA
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:28:57 PM EST
Originally Posted By Strongbow:
Originally Posted By TacticalTaco:
The new .50 was 80 pounds lighter, and 60% less recoil. Thanks liberals.


That's small potatoes budget-wise. Blame the Army if you think the program was worth saving. My guess is that it was having problems.


If it was running like a raped ape then the money would have been found.
"George said "TAX? Fuck that, I THE FUCKING MAN!" Then took a bunch of shots of the whiskey he made himself and shot King George in the goddamned face." -RustedAce
Heavy Dipped In Cornbread
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Mar 2002
  • Posts 18906
  • Location USA KY, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Mar 2002
  • Posts 18906
  • Location USA KY, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:31:51 PM EST
Is this the gun that had such a slow rate of fire that it might as well have been a damn semi-automatic? If true, I won't shed too many tears. While I think the M2 needs to be replaced, I'm just not sure the XM806 was the answer. And it might be time to explore options other than the .50 for use in this role.
"Faced with the murderous cutthroats of the Taliban, we are not fighting under the rules of Geneva IV Article 4. We are fighting under the rules of Article .223/5.56mm."

Minion of Snow #215
Member
Avatar
Gold
  • Joined Nov 2001
  • Posts 5113
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Gold
  • Joined Nov 2001
  • Posts 5113
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
NRA
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:48:25 PM EST

Originally Posted By GTLandser:
You guys are aware that they have an M2 with QD barrel, no HS&T gauge required, right?

The video specifically mentions using the funding previously allocated for the M806 to upgrade M2's to the M2A1 standard which includes the quick-change barrel with fixed headspace and timing.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Basic
  • Joined Aug 2009
  • Posts 4411
  • Location USA FL, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Aug 2009
  • Posts 4411
  • Location USA FL, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 2:54:39 PM EST
The M2 is highly effective and an excellent platform. To reduce te weight by 40lbs and decrease recoil by 60% is a huge improvment on the current platform. I believe relibility was improved also and accuracy was to be better as well. Its a shame to see something like this get the axe. But being as the military will be investing in gay uniforms and new shit the boys dont reallly needs it just makes sense to cut the shit that may actually save lives and turn the tide of battle in our favor. God bless the UN
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1749
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1749
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:13:56 PM EST
Originally Posted By tyman:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


Did you watch the vid?

The new gun would save 40# and cut recoil by 60%.


Finally got around to watching it. Reducing weight would be great but recoil? It's not a shoulder fired weapon. The vehicle or tripod will absorb the recoil.
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1750
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 1750
  • Location USA CA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:16:34 PM EST
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Originally Posted By jchewie1:
Originally Posted By Renegade13B:
Originally Posted By echo6:
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
Any weapon that has to have it's own (ideally, not 1 per PLT/Co) HS&T tool next to it to make sure it will fire properly shouldn't be in use.



What, you dont have a dime and a nickel in your pocket?


AAFES uses paper coins



ID tags are another improvised method.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile


Especially when most troops can barely strip a M4 or a SAW.


If they can't strip their personal weapon, then that is a whole nuther issue.

Team Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2009
  • Posts 5305
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2009
  • Posts 5305
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:17:15 PM EST
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the FN M3 offer a lot better over the M2?
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2005
  • Posts 1359
  • Location NZL NZL
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2005
  • Posts 1359
  • Location NZL NZL
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:29:26 PM EST
Originally Posted By Gunnerpalace:
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the FN M3 offer a lot better over the M2?



I wondered this, Why spend the money to develop a new 50 Cal. Why not just buy a modern 50 Cal, like the CIS 50 for example ?

Seems the way to do it to me, A manufacturer designs and builds the gun, government buys it.
If the gun is a failure, no cost to government. if it is a success, then government pays the development cost through buying the guns themselves.
"no Jag driver is ever entirely trustworthy, but it is in a really nice likable way" - James May, TopGear
Basic
  • Joined Dec 2009
  • Posts 276
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Basic
  • Joined Dec 2009
  • Posts 276
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:34:51 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 4:35:14 PM EST by Sweet_Storm10]
Originally Posted By hondaciv:
Looks like it has a higher rate of fire too.

You can't watch 3 war vids in a row featuring a M2 without watching some guy struggle to make it work.


Rambo's calling you out bro!
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2008
  • Posts 1099
  • Location USA MI, USA
Online
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2008
  • Posts 1099
  • Location USA MI, USA
Online
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:38:34 PM EST
Originally Posted By Paulie771:
...

Especially when most troops can barely strip a M4 or a SAW. They're kids' puzzles compared to the M2's fucking Erector set.


See my edit.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2005
  • Posts 37321
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2005
  • Posts 37321
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:41:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By USMC6177:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
What's wrong with the current 50 cal?


Labor intensive. I love the M2 family of Machine guns with a deep and disturbing depth but its time that we stop trying to reinvent the fucking pistol and dump some cash into crew served stuff. Which gets used more?

It's really irritating how every procurement program now seems like it costs way more than it should. Crazy to think they built the SR-71 in 3 years, but they can't do an Amphibious Assault vehicle in less than 10 years.

Pathetic.

Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 5967
  • Location USA WV, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Nov 2000
  • Posts 5967
  • Location USA WV, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:41:36 PM EST
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
Originally Posted By E__WOK:
Originally Posted By Howie_Phelterbush:
so the army nixes a new generation of .50 and the marines buy a complete piece of shit of a hand gun that's actually and older design than the 50s the army is stuck with. we got some real brainiacs working in procurement and budget don't we?


The Colt 1911 is for MARSOC use, not general issue.


its still a complete piece of shit.


okay then.


Don't mind him, he probably likes girls guns... you know, the Glock. Tupperware that belongs in the kitchen with the women.
When the hammer drops, the BS stops!

Support the Heller Foundation! www.hellerfoundation.com
Luv C3!
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jan 2001
  • Posts 20478
  • Location USA WV, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Jan 2001
  • Posts 20478
  • Location USA WV, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:44:42 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 4:45:16 PM EST by Bubbles]
Originally Posted By Young-Kiwi:
I wondered this, Why spend the money to develop a new 50 Cal. Why not just buy a modern 50 Cal, like the CIS 50 for example ?

Seems the way to do it to me, A manufacturer designs and builds the gun, government buys it.
If the gun is a failure, no cost to government. if it is a success, then government pays the development cost through buying the guns themselves.

No gun manufacturer is going to throw $$$$$ into R&D without a decent ROI. If the government doesn't buy them guns, then there is no market and thus no ROI thanks to 922(o).
Heller II - Challenging DC's bans on semi-automatic rifles, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, and its onerous and expensive handgun registration process. http://www.HellerFoundation.com/
Team Member
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2009
  • Posts 5307
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Jun 2009
  • Posts 5307
  • Location USA MI, USA
Offline
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 4:57:01 PM EST
Originally Posted By Young-Kiwi:
Originally Posted By Gunnerpalace:
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the FN M3 offer a lot better over the M2?



I wondered this, Why spend the money to develop a new 50 Cal. Why not just buy a modern 50 Cal, like the CIS 50 for example ?

Seems the way to do it to me, A manufacturer designs and builds the gun, government buys it.
If the gun is a failure, no cost to government. if it is a success, then government pays the development cost through buying the guns themselves.


922o
I AM A GEAR IN THE WHEEL OF KLOK
Avatar
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2005
  • Posts 3815
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Bronze
  • Joined Oct 2005
  • Posts 3815
  • Location USA GA, USA
Offline
Military
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 5:04:08 PM EST
As a M2 gunner, I would have loved to cut the weight in half. I never had problem with the Deuce, cant think of one failure in the 4.5 years I was in. Making it a little less complicated would help though.
XBL: WARMACHINE W122
Basic
  • Joined May 2006
  • Posts 3124
  • Location USA CA, USA
Online
Basic
  • Joined May 2006
  • Posts 3124
  • Location USA CA, USA
Online
Link Posted: 7/24/2012 5:06:59 PM EST
[Last Edit: 7/24/2012 5:07:53 PM EST by RifleCal30m1n00b]
Originally Posted By Gunnerpalace:
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the FN M3 offer a lot better over the M2?


Um, the M3 is basically an M2...with a different trigger mechanism. GAU-21, according to the blurb on FN's website here.

ETA: Wiki Link about the M3 as well.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top