This story was posted over at Free Republic and was pulled for some of it's content. Sensitive information has been edited out and I present it here, with credit to it's author, for discussion of his friend's son's   observations of frontline weapons and tactics.

Tactical observations from a grunt in Iraq

Posted on 11/10/2005 9:47:49 AM PST by RVN Airplane Driver

Got this from a former Marine first sergeant - thought you might be interested in his son's assessment of weapons and enemy tactics in Iraq (the boy is home from his first tour, going back in early 2006, and early re-enlisted for another 4 years.)

Hello to all my fellow gunners, military buffs, veterans and interested guys. A couple of weekends ago I got to spend time with my son Jordan, who was on his first leave since returning from Iraq. He is well (a little thin), and already bored. He will be returning to Iraq for a second tour in early '06 and has already re-enlisted early for 4 more years. He loves the Marine Corps and is actually looking forward to returning to Iraq.

Jordan spent 7 months at {edit} in Ramadi. {edit}. He saw and did a lot and the following is what he told me about weapons, equipment, tactics and other miscellaneous info which may be of interest to you. Nothing is by any means classified. No politics here, just a Marine with a bird's eye view's opinions:

1) The M-16 rifle : Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4 carbine version is more popular because it's lighter and shorter, but it has jamming problems also. They like the ability to mount the various optical gunsights and weapons lights on the picattiny rails, but the weapon itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the 5.56mm (.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure common over there and even torso hits cant be reliably counted on to put the enemy down. Fun fact: Random autopsies on dead insurgents shows a high level of opiate use.

2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light machine gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of shit. Chronic jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly. (that's fun in the middle of a firefight).

3) The M9 Beretta 9mm: Mixed bag. Good gun, performs well in desert environment; but they all hate the 9mm cartridge. The use of handguns for self-defense is actually fairly common. Same old story on the 9mm: Bad guys hit multiple times and still in the fight.

4) Mossberg 12ga. Military shotgun: Works well, used frequently for clearing houses to good effect.

5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun, developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!). Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts 'em down. Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7.62 round chews up the structure over there.

6) The M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun: Thumbs way, way up. "Ma deuce" is still worth her considerable weight in gold. The ultimate fight stopper, puts their dicks in the dirt every time. The most coveted weapon in-theater.

7) The .45 pistol: Thumbs up. Still the best pistol round out there. Everybody authorized to carry a sidearm is trying to get their hands on one. With few exceptions, can reliably be expected to put 'em down with a torso hit. The special ops guys (who are doing most of the pistol work) use the HK military model and supposedly love it. The old government model .45's are being re-issued en masse.

8) The M-14: Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.

9) The Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle: Thumbs way up. Spectacular range and accuracy and hits like a freight train. Used frequently to take out vehicle suicide bombers ( we actually stop a lot of them) and barricaded enemy. Definitely here to stay.

10) The M24 sniper rifle: Thumbs up. Mostly in .308 but some in 300 win mag. Heavily modified Remington 700's. Great performance. Snipers have been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it that a marine sniper on his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcock's record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.

11) The new body armor: Thumbs up. Relatively light at approx. 6 lbs. and can reliably be expected to soak up small shrapnel and even will stop an AK-47 round. The bad news: Hot as shit to wear, almost unbearable in the summer heat (which averages over 120 degrees). Also, the enemy now goes for head shots whenever possible. All the bullshit about the "old" body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IED's was a non-starter. The IED explosions are enormous and body armor doesn't make any difference at all in most cases.

12) Night Vision and Infrared Equipment: Thumbs way up. Spectacular performance. Our guys see in the dark and own the night, period. Very little enemy action after evening prayers. More and more enemy being whacked at night during movement by our hunter-killer teams. We've all seen the videos.

13) Lights: Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights are Surefire's, and the troops love 'em. Invaluable for night urban operations. Jordan carried a $34 Surefire G2 on a neck lanyard and loved it.

I cant help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and ordnance are 50 or more years old!!!!!!!!! With all our technology, it's the WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants!!!! The infantry fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.

Bad guy weapons:

1) Mostly AK47's The entire country is an arsenal. Works better in the desert than the M16 and the .308 Russian round kills reliably. PKM belt fed light machine guns are also common and effective. Luckily, the enemy mostly shoots like shit. Undisciplined "spray and pray" type fire. However, they are seeing more and more precision weapons, especially sniper rifles. (Iran, again) Fun fact: Captured enemy have apparently marveled at the marksmanship of our guys and how hard they fight. They are apparently told in Jihad school that the Americans rely solely on technology, and can be easily beaten in close quarters combat for their lack of toughness. Let's just say they know better now.

2) The RPG: Probably the infantry weapon most feared by our guys. Simple, reliable and as common as dogshit. The enemy responded to our up-armored humvees by aiming at the windshields, often at point blank range. Still killing a lot of our guys.

3) The IED: The biggest killer of all. Can be anything from old Soviet anti-armor mines to jury rigged artillery shells. A lot found in Jordan's area were in abandoned cars. The enemy would take 2 or 3 155mm artillery shells and wire them together. Most were detonated by cell phone, and the explosions are enormous. You're not safe in any vehicle, even an M1 tank. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing our guys do over there. Lately, they are much more sophisticated "shape charges" (Iranian) specifically designed to penetrate armor. Fact: Most of the ready made IED's are supplied by Iran, who is also providing terrorists (Hezbollah types) to train the insurgents in their use and tactics. That's why the attacks have been so deadly lately. Their concealment methods are ingenious, the latest being shape charges in Styrofoam containers spray painted to look like the cinderblocks that litter all Iraqi roads. We find about 40% before they detonate, and the bomb disposal guys are unsung heroes of this war.

4) Mortars and rockets: Very prevalent. The soviet era 122mm rockets (with an 18km range) are becoming more prevalent. One of Jordan's NCO's lost a leg to one. These weapons cause a lot of damage "inside the wire". Jordan's base was hit almost daily his entire time there by mortar and rocket fire, often at night to disrupt sleep patterns and cause fatigue (It did). More of a psychological weapon than anything else. The enemy mortar teams would jump out of vehicles, fire a few rounds, and then haul ass in a matter of seconds.

5) Bad guy technology: Simple yet effective. Most communication is by cell and satellite phones, and also by email on laptops. They use handheld GPS units for navigation and "Google earth" for overhead views of our positions. Their weapons are good, if not fancy, and prevalent. Their explosives and bomb technology is TOP OF THE LINE. Night vision is rare. They are very careless with their equipment and the captured GPS units and laptops are treasure troves of Intel when captured.

Who are the bad guys?:

{edit}

Bad Guy Tactics:


When they are engaged on an infantry level they get their asses kicked every time. Brave, but stupid. Suicidal Banzai-type charges were very common earlier in the war and still occur. They will literally sacrifice 8-10 man teams in suicide squads by sending them screaming and firing Ak's and RPG's directly at our bases just to probe the defenses. They get mowed down like grass every time. ( see the M2 and M240 above). Jordan's base was hit like this often. When engaged, they have a tendency to flee to the same building, probably for what they think will be a glorious last stand. Instead, we call in air and that's the end of that more often than not. These hole-ups are referred to as Alpha Whiskey Romeo's (Allah's Waiting Room). We have the laser guided ground-air thing down to a science. The fast mover's, mostly Marine F-18's, are taking an ever increasing toll on the enemy. When caught out in the open, the helicopter gunships and AC-130 Spectre gunships cut them to ribbons with cannon and rocket fire, especially at night.
{edit}

How many times is this going to get posted today?

This is now count #4 on this site alone...

where are the dupe police?

Quoted: How many times is this going to get posted today? This is now count #4 on this site alone...

Who cares, that is what the mods are for.  Why are people so obsessed with crying dupe?

Interesting read.

Quoted: where are the dupe police?

First time I've seen it.

Quoted: Quoted: where are the dupe police? nullbits.foxxz.net/albums/Mjohn3006/dupepolice.jpg

Regardless of the dupe, I'm still happy to see that the effective caliber size is going up. I've heard similiar stories first hand that you may be able to supress with the lighter rounds but it's the .45 and 7.62 that's really rocking the house.

/me strokes his 1911's and M1A's.

Quoted: First time I've seen it.

+1

Interesting read.

The M16 and M9 situations are something I heard this weekend from ARFcom member likebuddah at an ARFcom shoot. Makes me think there is a problem for sure.

WIZZO

Quoted: First time I've seen it.

+1

Interesting read.

If you clean your M16 it will work,Im sure all the small arms mentioned would fail if not maintained at some point.I remember a story about M1 garands failing in north african sand when not maintained in WW2..the mighty M1.I do agree the M249 is crap once it gets rebuilt at the depot to many times and is plain worn out.Would benefit from a redesign using less parts.

The 9mm will never work succesfully in combat when we continue to use FMJ ammo.  It's not a big suprise that the .45 is doing better.  There's more lead being thrown out.  It's still a shitty bullet in FMJ, but it's better than 9mm FMJ.  I bet if thier M9's were loaded with Ranger 127gr. +P+ there would be more positive reports on the combat effectivness of the 9mm.

Just my $.02 cents.hug.gif

AGNTSA

Quoted: Regardless of the dupe, I'm still happy to see that the effective caliber size is going up. I've heard similiar stories first hand that you may be able to supress with the lighter rounds but it's the .45 and 7.62 that's really rocking the house. /me strokes his 1911's and M1A's.

The problem is not so much that it's a dupe, but that most of the stuff in it is complete BS.

Check out the thread in G.D. - someone pretty much dissects the entire post.  Whoever wrote is is clearly not particularly well informed about what weapons are in use, what is currently being issued, etc.  

First time I've seen it and it was verry intresting.  Thank you.

Quoted: First time I've seen it.

+1

Now were at dupe # 4.   Search function is your friend.

Quoted: This story was posted over at Free Republic and was pulled for some of it's content. Sensitive information has been edited out and I present it here, with credit to it's author, for discussion of his friend's son's   observations of frontline weapons and tactics. Tactical observations from a grunt in Iraq Posted on 11/10/2005 9:47:49 AM PST by RVN Airplane Driver Got this from a former Marine first sergeant - thought you might be interested in his son's assessment of weapons and enemy tactics in Iraq (the boy is home from his first tour, going back in early 2006, and early re-enlisted for another 4 years.) Hello to all my fellow gunners, military buffs, veterans and interested guys. A couple of weekends ago I got to spend time with my son Jordan, who was on his first leave since returning from Iraq. He is well (a little thin), and already bored. He will be returning to Iraq for a second tour in early '06 and has already re-enlisted early for 4 more years. He loves the Marine Corps and is actually looking forward to returning to Iraq. Jordan spent 7 months at {edit} in Ramadi. {edit}. He saw and did a lot and the following is what he told me about weapons, equipment, tactics and other miscellaneous info which may be of interest to you. Nothing is by any means classified. No politics here, just a Marine with a bird's eye view's opinions:

Ok, i'll play.

1) The M-16 rifle : Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4 carbine version is more popular because it's lighter and shorter, but it has jamming problems also. They like the ability to mount the various optical gunsights and weapons lights on the picattiny rails, but the weapon itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the 5.56mm (.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure common over there and even torso hits cant be reliably counted on to put the enemy down. Fun fact: Random autopsies on dead insurgents shows a high level of opiate use.

Yeah, i'm hearing this a lot, so i'll buy it. However most of the issues with 5.56 stopping power have more to do with the crappy design of M855 ammo and not 5.56 itself. Give them Mk262 ammo and I think they'd get far better results.

2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light machine gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of shit. Chronic jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly. (that's fun in the middle of a firefight).

That's M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, not 243 or assault, and it's normally belt fed, not drum, I would think a Marine would know that .

3) The M9 Beretta 9mm: Mixed bag. Good gun, performs well in desert environment; but they all hate the 9mm cartridge. The use of handguns for self-defense is actually fairly common. Same old story on the 9mm: Bad guys hit multiple times and still in the fight.

Actually, from most of the reports I've heard, the M9 has had a lot of jamming/breaking issues. Mostly due to slide design, the explosed barrel allows sand to get in there really well, and what's left of the slide is too thin, breaking in half now and then. As for 9mm stopping power, that's a 'duh' moment when you load it with FMJ.

4) Mossberg 12ga. Military shotgun: Works well, used frequently for clearing houses to good effect.

Time to issue 4 or so of these per squad in urban ops.

5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun, developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!). Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts 'em down. Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7.62 round chews up the structure over there.

Sounds about right, main complaint for the 240 has been weight and the lack of a good ammo box  for the belts like that on the SAW.

6) The M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun: Thumbs way, way up. "Ma deuce" is still worth her considerable weight in gold. The ultimate fight stopper, puts their dicks in the dirt every time. The most coveted weapon in-theater.

Everyone who comes back from there rants about the great and mighty Maw Duce, doesn't surpise me a bit .

7) The .45 pistol: Thumbs up. Still the best pistol round out there. Everybody authorized to carry a sidearm is trying to get their hands on one. With few exceptions, can reliably be expected to put 'em down with a torso hit. The special ops guys (who are doing most of the pistol work) use the HK military model and supposedly love it. The old government model .45's are being re-issued en masse.

Also fits what I've heard.

8) The M-14: Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.

Fits, main cimplaint for the M14 has been sand getting in the action from the top, weight, and the amount of service it needs [like a sports car, it demands time in the shop]. But other than that it seems to be loved by the troops.

9) The Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle: Thumbs way up. Spectacular range and accuracy and hits like a freight train. Used frequently to take out vehicle suicide bombers ( we actually stop a lot of them) and barricaded enemy. Definitely here to stay.

Also fits.

10) The M24 sniper rifle: Thumbs up. Mostly in .308 but some in 300 win mag. Heavily modified Remington 700's. Great performance. Snipers have been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it that a marine sniper on his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcock's record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.

Haven't heard of any in .300 Win Mag... News to me... Might be worth looking into.

I have heard of spec-ops rifles in .300, but those aren't really M24s.

As for over 100 kills... doesn't count, Carlos Hathcock was killing VC/NVA, who were pretty smart critters, the boys in Iraq will have to kill a dozen of these dumbasses to equal a VC kill.

11) The new body armor: Thumbs up. Relatively light at approx. 6 lbs. and can reliably be expected to soak up small shrapnel and even will stop an AK-47 round. The bad news: Hot as shit to wear, almost unbearable in the summer heat (which averages over 120 degrees). Also, the enemy now goes for head shots whenever possible. All the bullshit about the "old" body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IED's was a non-starter. The IED explosions are enormous and body armor doesn't make any difference at all in most cases.

All fits.

12) Night Vision and Infrared Equipment: Thumbs way up. Spectacular performance. Our guys see in the dark and own the night, period. Very little enemy action after evening prayers. More and more enemy being whacked at night during movement by our hunter-killer teams. We've all seen the videos.

All fits... Great, now everyone on ARF is gonna buy NVGs and drive the price up .

13) Lights: Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights are Surefire's, and the troops love 'em. Invaluable for night urban operations. Jordan carried a $34 Surefire G2 on a neck lanyard and loved it.

I'll stick with maglights, easier to find parts for them. I only use surefires for weapon mounted lights.

I cant help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and ordnance are 50 or more years old!!!!!!!!! With all our technology, it's the WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants!!!! The infantry fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.

Most of the 'WW2' and such era weapons we're still using are the perfections of those wars, for each one is a dozen outdated weapons that have been replaced. Ala the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, etc etc. I look at it like evolution, weak weapons die out, strong ones survive, the fact we're still using a few weapons that have WW2 designs doesn't suprise me, they where the best damned inventions of that war.

Bad guy weapons: 1) Mostly AK47's The entire country is an arsenal. Works better in the desert than the M16 and the .308 Russian round kills reliably.

It's not .308, more like .315 or something, not the same caliber as our weapons.

PKM belt fed light machine guns are also common and effective.

True.

Luckily, the enemy mostly shoots like shit. Undisciplined "spray and pray" type fire. However, they are seeing more and more precision weapons, especially sniper rifles. (Iran, again) Fun fact: Captured enemy have apparently marveled at the marksmanship of our guys and how hard they fight. They are apparently told in Jihad school that the Americans rely solely on technology, and can be easily beaten in close quarters combat for their lack of toughness. Let's just say they know better now.

Fits, muwahahhahahha! "Sucks to be you, Jihadis!".

2) The RPG: Probably the infantry weapon most feared by our guys. Simple, reliable and as common as dogshit. The enemy responded to our up-armored humvees by aiming at the windshields, often at point blank range. Still killing a lot of our guys.

The RPG had become one of the most effect personal weapons of the era.

3) The IED: The biggest killer of all. Can be anything from old Soviet anti-armor mines to jury rigged artillery shells. A lot found in Jordan's area were in abandoned cars. The enemy would take 2 or 3 155mm artillery shells and wire them together. Most were detonated by cell phone, and the explosions are enormous. You're not safe in any vehicle, even an M1 tank. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing our guys do over there. Lately, they are much more sophisticated "shape charges" (Iranian) specifically designed to penetrate armor. Fact: Most of the ready made IED's are supplied by Iran, who is also providing terrorists (Hezbollah types) to train the insurgents in their use and tactics. That's why the attacks have been so deadly lately. Their concealment methods are ingenious, the latest being shape charges in Styrofoam containers spray painted to look like the cinderblocks that litter all Iraqi roads. We find about 40% before they detonate, and the bomb disposal guys are unsung heroes of this war.

All fits.

4) Mortars and rockets: Very prevalent. The soviet era 122mm rockets (with an 18km range) are becoming more prevalent. One of Jordan's NCO's lost a leg to one. These weapons cause a lot of damage "inside the wire". Jordan's base was hit almost daily his entire time there by mortar and rocket fire, often at night to disrupt sleep patterns and cause fatigue (It did). More of a psychological weapon than anything else. The enemy mortar teams would jump out of vehicles, fire a few rounds, and then haul ass in a matter of seconds.

Yup.

5) Bad guy technology: Simple yet effective. Most communication is by cell and satellite phones, and also by email on laptops. They use handheld GPS units for navigation and "Google earth" for overhead views of our positions. Their weapons are good, if not fancy, and prevalent. Their explosives and bomb technology is TOP OF THE LINE. Night vision is rare. They are very careless with their equipment and the captured GPS units and laptops are treasure troves of Intel when captured.

Sorry, the Google Earth thing is totally wrong. The images of Iraq in Google Earth are 32 meter resolution. You can't see shit with that. Also they are all months or years old. They must be getting their sat images elsewhere, probably Russia or China, via Iran.

Who are the bad guys?: {edit}

Now damn, that's the part I really wanted to see.

Bad Guy Tactics: When they are engaged on an infantry level they get their asses kicked every time. Brave, but stupid. Suicidal Banzai-type charges were very common earlier in the war and still occur. They will literally sacrifice 8-10 man teams in suicide squads by sending them screaming and firing Ak's and RPG's directly at our bases just to probe the defenses. They get mowed down like grass every time. ( see the M2 and M240 above). Jordan's base was hit like this often. When engaged, they have a tendency to flee to the same building, probably for what they think will be a glorious last stand. Instead, we call in air and that's the end of that more often than not. These hole-ups are referred to as Alpha Whiskey Romeo's (Allah's Waiting Room). We have the laser guided ground-air thing down to a science. The fast mover's, mostly Marine F-18's, are taking an ever increasing toll on the enemy. When caught out in the open, the helicopter gunships and AC-130 Spectre gunships cut them to ribbons with cannon and rocket fire, especially at night.

All makes sense, sucks to them. I liked the T-shirt "Do we really need Smart Bombs to kill these Dumb Bastards?"

{edit}

.

Not only is it a dupe.... the premise changes... now it's a 1st Sgt's kid?

jeesh!  This needs to be on SNOPES.

No Expert

Quoted: Quoted: First time I've seen it. +1 Interesting read.

+2

I never seen this before

This story is so full of shit. I can guarantee you it did not come from a single source.  I can further postulate that a lot of this stuff is old crusty gun guy folklore.

You'll notice the patten - they have NOTHING good to say about modern weapons.

Also it is highly unlikely that a single Marine would have extensive combat experience with every weapon one could think of.  A good amount of this is anecdotal.  In essence, this tells nothing more useful than a chain email.

Quoted: This story is so full of shit. I can guarantee you it did not come from a single source.  I can further postulate that a lot of this stuff is old crusty gun guy folklore.

Not necessarily. I doubt it came from a soldier in Iraq, but you cannot assume that as fact.

You'll notice the patten - they have NOTHING good to say about modern weapons.

Liked the M240, which is more modern than the M16, liked the AK-47, also a modern weapon. You just don't like that it didn't say you're toy was the best on the block. Boohoohoo.

Also it is highly unlikely that a single Marine would have extensive combat experience with every weapon one could think of.

Don't know too much about Marines, do you?

You'll also notice that he didn't say he had used them all, he's reporting what he's seen, most of the weapons mentioned are all in a single squad. Every one of them would be in a Platoon. What's the problem?

A good amount of this is anecdotal.  In essence, this tells nothing more useful than a chain email.

Mostly because the good stuff was filtered out.

You want to analyze it? Go ahead, but don’t refuse to listen to it just because it doesn’t praise your pet weapon, that’s called denial. It’s the same thing that LBJ did, and that cost us a lot of lives.

Nothing new in terms of info.  Replace the SAW with the Negev or multiple others.  A lightweight 240 would be the shit.  M9 being remedied.  M16 being remedied, not quickly enough, at the least buy piston uppers short term.  Shotguns, more the merrier.

Quoted: Nothing new in terms of info.  Replace the SAW with the Negev or multiple others.

HK has some nice weapons, Negev will never be a US military weapon, it was designed by Israelis, and dear god, we can't kill Muslims with a Joooooooooish gun, now can we? . I hate politics.

Same god damned problem we had with buying Israeli M855 to fill the ammo shortage, everyone in congress freaked out and yelled at the army for trying to use Jewish bullets on Arabs.

Gee, I dunno, maybe if you shoot a Jihadi with Israeli bullets soaked in Pig lard, they get angry at you as they die, can't have that, now can we?

A lightweight 240 would be the shit.

We're already working on it.

M9 being remedied.

Replaced, the M9 just needs to be swapped out for something else. HK makes some nice handguns, so does Smith and Wesson and Springfield.

M16 being remedied,

Gas piston kits short term, replaced with SCAR like weapon long term.

Shotguns, more the merrier.

Booyeah, nothing better at room clearing.

M14 and M24 are Army guns. The Corps doesn't deploy the M14 as a DMR since they haven't  any. AFAIK the M14s are drawn from storage at Anniston. The M24 SWS is definitely an Army weapon. The Corps uses the M40A3. Both are based on a M700 action but the M40 uses a fixed magazine while the M24 uses a box magazine. The also have different stocks and glass.

Hmmmmmm......

Quoted: M14 and M24 are Army guns. The Corps doesn't deploy the M14 as a DMR since they haven't  any. AFAIK the M14s are drawn from storage at Anniston. The M24 SWS is definitely an Army weapon. The Corps uses the M40A3. Both are based on a M700 action but the M40 uses a fixed magazine while the M24 uses a box magazine. The also have different stocks and glass. Hmmmmmm......

Actually 4th MEB (AT) got all the DMRs that were never fielded to the rest of the Marine Corps.

I know 2 Marines who served in Iraq during the time the Marines ran through Fallugha (sp).  Both dudes were issued M-16 A4 (they both had scopes) and they said their M-16s were reliable.  Sure they cleaned them often, but that is what your supposed to do in combat when you get a chance.  If I was over there and was issued an AK (hypothetically) I'd clean it ever chance I got.

Were these Army M14s transferred over or USMC stock that had escaped the cutting torch?

Simon

They were USMC weapons.  Back in 98 the Marine Corps was kicking around the DMR concept and had PWS build a couple hundred (generous number) DMRs.  They never were issued and just sat in Albany until Gen O'Dell wanted DMRs for the elements of 4th MEB that went to Afghanistan in late 01 early 02.    The weapons were fielded, but never lived up to the requirements and lead to 4th MEB initially trying SR25s back in late 03.  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun, developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!). Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts 'em down. Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7.62 round chews up the structure over there. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sounds about right, main complaint for the 240 has been weight and the lack of a good ammo box for the belts like that on the SAW.

There are several excellent ammo bags made for the 240 and other .308 belt fed weapons, and I've heard mention of BN commanders using unit funds to buy them.  The SAW box sucks ass, it breaks and falls off; similar bags are preferred.


Also it's no secret that 5.56 has some odd characteristics when it comes to stuff like cinder block; even some Army literature points out that 5.56 penetration on some building materials suffers at close ranges.

Would a 6.8 or 6.5 or heavier 5.56 do better?  Probably.  But we can't switch everyone over right now anyways, and for the time being the 5.56 seems to be killing plenty of bad guys just fine.

This guy's hard on for the bad guy's commo is pretty silly, I think; of course they use cell phones.  But our commo is still better, we have UAV's satellites, and we have locals giving us info.

Quoted: A lightweight 240 would be the shit. We're already working on it. M9 being remedied.

How is the M9 being remedied?  Heavier slides which causes locking block failure sooner (note sarcasm)?  Someone at Berretta must have sore knees.   I'm biased because I've seen too many M9's with major breakages.

Lighter M240?  Nevermind working on it.  Already made and fielded.  See FN website.  

I think it's funny, the people that hate the SAW are probably the same ones that loved the M60 (which I hate dearly from experience).  I had 1% the number of problems with a SAW than our 60's had.  Maybe not, but I like discussing the two.

The M240 newer than the M16?   It's only new to the U.S.  It's been around since the late 60's too.

Murdock:  I enjoyed your post btw.  LOL your Boohoohoo comment.  I don't think the M16 (family) is the best thing going, I just think the same people that have never liked it, and 5.56 for that matter, are using this scenario to justify their argument.  

I have heard conflicting info from people coming back...

M9 sucks but the 9mm itself does fine.  Opposite of what was in the thread.

M249 no problems.  M240 universally hated because of the loose belts and fact it weighs a ton.

No problems with M16s jamming.





I think the whole post is pure make believe and if not who cares its just one persons view of the situation.  Opinions and views are like assholes...

People sure don't know their histroy behind the machine guns.  The MAG58 is basically a belt feed (MG42) BAR.  The MAG was designed in the late 50s and adopted by Britian in 1961.  The FN MAG58 was chosen to replace the M219 machine gun as the coax guns begining in 1975 and adopted in 1977 as the M240.  The M60 was adopted in 1957 (which uses the bolt/gas system from the German WWII FG42 and feed system also from the MG42).  It was replaced by the M240 in ground role being in the 90s.  Machine Guns weigh allot for a reason.  If you want a duarble gun it will have some weight to it.  Build it too light and it will have a shorter life span.  

Happiness is a belt fed gun.........


As for the .300s, there's some over here.


CD

.

Quoted: The MAG58 is basically a belt feed (MG42) BAR.

This threw me off.  You are only referring to the belt fed portion of the MG42 correct?  You're not impling the Mag58 was a child of the MG42 right?


The MG42 has a completely different operating system.  Roller Locking, similar to the G3 etc.
The Mag58 is gas piston, derived from the M1918 BAR.  Came from Browning, not the Germans.
They took the BAR design, flipped it upside down and converted if for belt feed.

Anyway.  
Did your .300WM come in an aluminum hard case with cleaning rod, patch jag, bore guide, sling and bipod and some paperwork (inventory sheet)?  Looks like one of mine.

Quoted: M14 and M24 are Army guns. The Corps doesn't deploy the M14 as a DMR since they haven't  any.

Sorry, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

See here
here
and here

I would pass off the rest of your post as BS right here due to that huge error, but you did get the part about the M24 being an Army weapon correct. Doesn't mean a Marine wouldn't have seen them in use, the Army and Marines are on the same side, if you'll recall.

Quoted: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun, developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!). Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts 'em down. Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7.62 round chews up the structure over there. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sounds about right, main complaint for the 240 has been weight and the lack of a good ammo box for the belts like that on the SAW. There are several excellent ammo bags made for the 240 and other .308 belt fed weapons, and I've heard mention of BN commanders using unit funds to buy them.  The SAW box sucks ass, it breaks and falls off; similar bags are preferred.

True, I was more referring to the fact that, at the start of the war, some units didn't have any bag or box for the 240 at all, and had to effectively drag a separate ammo box of belted 7.62 along side the 240... Talk about suckage. .

That has mostly been corrected.

Also it's no secret that 5.56 has some odd characteristics when it comes to stuff like cinder block; even some Army literature points out that 5.56 penetration on some building materials suffers at close ranges.

Yup.

Would a 6.8 or 6.5 or heavier 5.56 do better?  Probably.  But we can't switch everyone over right now anyways, and for the time being the 5.56 seems to be killing plenty of bad guys just fine.

True, but switching units over to Mk262 wouldn't be that hard, no mods to the weapons are needed. A simple re-zero would be all you'd have to do, and if the SHTF, at short range you could change back to M855 and wouldn't notice much of a change in POI from Mk262... I  think we should be giving the units seeing more combat Mk262 ammo for now, and solve the whole 5.56 shortfall issue after the war is over. Besides more range and stopping power is never a bad thing.

This guy's hard on for the bad guy's commo is pretty silly, I think; of course they use cell phones.  But our commo is still better, we have UAV's satellites, and we have locals giving us info.

Yeah, cell phones aren't tac radios... Who wants to bet the SigInt guys are having a field day listening to Ackmed and Jalil send orders to each other over the Iraqi cellphone system?

But hey, no one ever accused the Jihadis of being smart .

Quoted: Quoted: A lightweight 240 would be the shit. We're already working on it. M9 being remedied. How is the M9 being remedied?  Heavier slides which causes locking block failure sooner (note sarcasm)?  Someone at Berretta must have sore knees.   I'm biased because I've seen too many M9's with major breakages.

That's why I said in my reply we need to just totally replace the M9.

Lighter M240?  Nevermind working on it.  Already made and fielded.  See FN website.

True, guess I overlooked that .

I think it's funny, the people that hate the SAW are probably the same ones that loved the M60 (which I hate dearly from experience).  I had 1% the number of problems with a SAW than our 60's had.  Maybe not, but I like discussing the two.

The M60 was a good weapon, just one heavy assed mofo. Some versions also needed near constant attention from the armeror. The later models pretty much solved this, but by that time we were already swapping to the 240... Oh well.

The M240 newer than the M16?   It's only new to the U.S.  It's been around since the late 60's too.

The AR-10 was actually in the prototype stage before the FN MAG, so the design on the FN-MAG/M240 is actually newer... At least from my point of view.

Murdock:  I enjoyed your post btw.  LOL your Boohoohoo comment.  I don't think the M16 (family) is the best thing going, I just think the same people that have never liked it, and 5.56 for that matter, are using this scenario to justify their argument.

I would agree, I like the M-16/AR-15 design. I just think that in the 40 odd years since we started using them, newer, better designs have come about. However that doesn't make the M16 a bad weapon, it just means there's room for improvment.

5.56 has some weaknesses, but I think most of the problems we've had are due more to the poor design of M855 ammunition than 5.56 itself. SS109/M855 was designed by Belgium to fight the Soviets in the hands of Americans... I think that explains the problem right there.

Quoted: Quoted: M14 and M24 are Army guns. The Corps doesn't deploy the M14 as a DMR since they haven't  any. Sorry, you don't know what the hell you're talking about. See here here and here I would pass off the rest of your post as BS right here due to that huge error, but you did get the part about the M24 being an Army weapon correct. Doesn't mean a Marine wouldn't have seen them in use, the Army and Marines are on the same side, if you'll recall.

It might also be useful to point out that the biggest difference between the M24 and the M40 is that the M24 uses Rem700 long action (hence 300 WinMag) while the M40 is of the short action variety.

So, is it for Counterstrike in the Dust and Dust2 maps or is it supposed to be for real?

ETA: I'm surprised it doesn't refer to the M4 as the "Maverick"

Quoted: Quoted: True, but switching units over to Mk262 wouldn't be that hard Where is the money going to come from?  Mk262 costs about SEVEN TIMES what M855 costs (government pricing) per round.  Then we'd have to wait while someone spooled up to produce it at 400+ times the rate of current production.  Sierra would have to undergo a HUGE expansion just to produce enough 77gr MatchKings, and Black Hills or someone else would similarly need a massive expansion. -Troy

I never said it would be cheap, and I never said it would be used to replace M855 in the short term, I simply said that it should be issued to units that are seeing the most combat. At most that would be about 1% of all units.

Quoted: Quoted: True, but switching units over to Mk262 wouldn't be that hard Where is the money going to come from?  Mk262 costs about SEVEN TIMES what M855 costs (government pricing) per round.  Then we'd have to wait while someone spooled up to produce it at 400+ times the rate of current production.  Sierra would have to undergo a HUGE expansion just to produce enough 77gr MatchKings, and Black Hills or someone else would similarly need a massive expansion. -Troy

I think I'd rather have 7 mags of 855 than one mag of Mk262.

When I was over there, my whole company had M9 pistols.  We had no problem with the pistols themselves, and we had no problem with the 9mm round.  The problem we had was with the magazines.  All the magazines we were issued was absoulute junk!  The magazines would jam after only one or two rounds.  Some of us ordered magazines from back home and the pistols ran flawlessly after that.

I'm open to the possibility that 5.56 might not be enough these days. We're not shooting Mr. Tran wearing black jammies in a rice paddy any more. There's more shooting at cars and the ubiquitous cinder block houses.  Someone oughta give OP a few thousand bucks and have him test 5.56, 6.8, and 7.62 against some junker cars and various urban building materials.

Quoted: You want to analyze it? Go ahead, but don’t refuse to listen to it just because it doesn’t praise your pet weapon, that’s called denial. It’s the same thing that LBJ did, and that cost us a lot of lives.

Whatever, dude.  It's not denial, it's borderline fiction.

There was actually a really good Army AAR that detailed a signficant number of real complaints regarding a number of weapons that came out last year, IIRC.  It was none-too-flattering to the M4, in particular - but it was very well written.  It pointed to ACTUAL PROBLEMS with ACTUAL RECOMMENDATIONS.  It wasn't just anonymous griping and bitching.  This is a rehashing of the same old shit everyone says.  Combining with the breadth of the weapons reviewed with the shallowness of the report leads me to believe that this is the work of somebody with too much time on the Interweb.  That somebody may be in the military, however, so there is that.

I find it highly amusing that some supposed anonymous Marine copied and pasted all over the Internet is considered a good source for the pros and cons of current weapons in the field.  As I said, it's hero worship/appeal to authority lending creedence to some pretty generic things.

".308 Russian"
"M243 squad assault weapon"

I could go to a gun show and hear this roundup.  Not particularly useful or informative.

Quoted: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quoted: True, but switching units over to Mk262 wouldn't be that hard -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Where is the money going to come from? Mk262 costs about SEVEN TIMES what M855 costs (government pricing) per round. Then we'd have to wait while someone spooled up to produce it at 400+ times the rate of current production. Sierra would have to undergo a HUGE expansion just to produce enough 77gr MatchKings, and Black Hills or someone else would similarly need a massive expansion. -Troy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I never said it would be cheap, and I never said it would be used to replace M855 in the short term, I simply said that it should be issued to units that are seeing the most combat. At most that would be about 1% of all units.

 

It isn't just the cost, it's the fact that you have to build another entire plant/production lines to make the new ammo in quantity -- that means not just making a building, but getting the equipment to make the rounds.  The people who make that stuff need stuff to make that tooling, which is probably made by yet other people who need stuff, and everyone needs to get their shit together to do that.  You also have to gear up for all sorts of other things like quality control, etc.  You *can* *not* do this overnight.  Ammunition does not grow on trees.

I think we should be giving the units seeing more combat Mk262 ammo for now, and solve the whole 5.56 shortfall issue after the war is over.

So, basically, since we can't get enough 5.56 right now, we should instead divert effort into tooling up and making a new and much more expensive and difficult to produce round.  Yeah.  Nice.

Quoted: Quoted: This story is so full of shit. I can guarantee you it did not come from a single source.  I can further postulate that a lot of this stuff is old crusty gun guy folklore. Not necessarily. I doubt it came from a soldier in Iraq, but you cannot assume that as fact. You'll notice the patten - they have NOTHING good to say about modern weapons. Liked the M240, which is more modern than the M16, liked the AK-47, also a modern weapon. You just don't like that it didn't say you're toy was the best on the block. Boohoohoo. Also it is highly unlikely that a single Marine would have extensive combat experience with every weapon one could think of. Don't know too much about Marines, do you? You'll also notice that he didn't say he had used them all, he's reporting what he's seen, most of the weapons mentioned are all in a single squad. Every one of them would be in a Platoon. What's the problem? A good amount of this is anecdotal.  In essence, this tells nothing more useful than a chain email. Mostly because the good stuff was filtered out. You want to analyze it? Go ahead, but don’t refuse to listen to it just because it doesn’t praise your pet weapon, that’s called denial. It’s the same thing that LBJ did, and that cost us a lot of lives.

the ak47 is not modern at all 60 year old design using a 1943 bullit.

I don't know about all the techincal stuff. But I wouldn't be labeling these bad guys as "BRAVE".                  

Our service men are BRAVE.
Not the dip shits that plant bombs that kill innocent children/women.

M16A2/ M4- I've been in the Army for a while now and I'm about to leave on my 3rd tour to Iraq. Personally the M-16 is a bad ass weapon. I love it and i never been in a firefight where it jammed on me. I don't know maybe I just cleaned my weapon more. Taking care of your magazines and making sure it doesn't get smashed, stepped on, or bent also helps. I've seen weapons jam or double feed because of damaged magazines.

M249- Before the war i was never a fan of the SAW. I prefered  the 240B or M2 .50 cal beacuse of the larger rounds. How ever Iraq changed my mind. In Iraq we aint fighting against tanks or armored vehicles. These people drive civilian cars and trucks. With an M249 you can dismount from a vehicle with twice the rounds than a 240B (battle load for the Saw is 600 rds and the 240B is 300 rds), since its a light weapon you could swing it around like a little crack whore, and the SAW is also capable of tearing up a civilian car with no problem. Oh and I have never been in a fire fight where the SAW has jammed up on us.

M2- One bad ass weapon that i love with all my heart. Saved a lot of lives and also ended a lot of lives.

AT4- 3 thumbs up. Shot 2 in Iraq. Way better than the enemy's RPG.

MK19- (fully auto grenade launcher)Its a good gun how ever like the ma deuce its a high maintenance gun. I've seen it jam up numerous times because of lack of cleaning.