Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 6/16/2001 6:55:30 AM EDT
It seems like full auto would be needed when you were either firing at a big group of people, when you were surprised buy a group, or firing at unseen targets shooting at you. Besides that semiauto seems to be the best way to shoot a single or few targets with accuracy. Also, If you were in an isolated area wouldn't you try to conserve ammo? I think I heard a soldier can carry 280 .223 rounds. On full auto that would be gone real quick. Since I have never been in the military these are just thoughts. Am I correct?
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 7:04:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/16/2001 7:03:09 AM EDT by Death_By_AR15]
Originally Posted By GeoffM24: It seems like full auto would be needed when you were either firing at a big group of people, when you were surprised buy a group, or firing at unseen targets shooting at you. Besides that semiauto seems to be the best way to shoot a single or few targets with accuracy. Also, If you were in an isolated area wouldn't you try to conserve ammo? I think I heard a soldier can carry 280 .223 rounds. On full auto that would be gone real quick. Since I have never been in the military these are just thoughts. Am I correct?
View Quote
The Marines in my company that were in the GUlf War said that they usually carried about ten full mags, a sh*load of ammo for the machine guns and SAWs. Most of the infantrymans firepower comes from the automatic weapons (SAWs). Each fireteam is built around this weapon. This gun will be the one that is on "rock and roll." Keeping your M16 on full auto or burst doesnt make much sense, unless you need a LOT of rounds down range and you need them NOW. My father said that [i]their[/i] M16s did not have full auto capability in Vietnam.(?) During most engagements, Marines are trained to keep a sustained rate of fire (15-18 rounds per minute), unless the squad leader gives teams the order for "rapid" supression. So leave the blasting away to the automatic weapons. If youre carrying an M16 or a 203, fire accurately and you will kill a lot more of the enemy.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:07:35 AM EDT
Hmmm, I learned a thing or two from the old ar-15.com site. A bunch of ex military were there. You DO need full auto to get out of an ambush. In Vietnam, the Immediate Reaction Drill were executed using full auto. Face the enemy, if the enemy is directly in front of the the column, odd numbered men jumped to the left and even numbered men jumped to the right. If enemy engaged from the side, then turned toward the enemy in an array. First man emptied his mag full auto, followed by the second man, etc. The last man would also throw grenades / throw smokes. A six man team can get out of ambush in less than 10 seconds this way. In a more conventional unit, full auto would be used to provide base of fire while trying to outflank the enemy by charging. Of course there are far ambush and close ambush, the tactics are slightly different. But to get out of an ambush, you need to empty your rifle FAST to provide higher volume of fire and force the enemy to break off the engagement. That is why I am a firm believer that full powered battle rifles are, well, outdated.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:43:21 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:49:20 AM EDT
Originally quoted by Death_by_AR15
My father said that their M16s did not have full auto capability in Vietnam.(?)
View Quote
I would have to disagree with that. I never saw a semiauto only. Besides, the MILSPEC called for full auto on the original M16's. Maybe someone changed the selector or removed the full auto parts, but again, I never saw one.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:51:59 AM EDT
agree on the ambush reason- was told that if ambushed - to RUN INTO the ambush spraying full auto until through it. steve
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 9:11:43 AM EDT
Death_by_AR15's father might have been referring to the M14. I agree that every man should have full-auto option. I also think that everyman should have rifle grenades. But those in control like to control who has auto and who can fire grenades. I think the better answer is better training in fire discipline.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 9:37:43 AM EDT
I spent my tour in Vietnam both as a grunt and then medic with the MobileRiverineForce operating out of a couple of different firebases..all M16 back then were capable of full auto....flip selector all the way over...past semi Coming into a hot LZ everybody fired full auto...just to suppress enemy fire and get to cover..On patrols I kept mine on full auto....just learn to fire short bursts...the jungle in my AO was generally pretty thick with the exception of rice paddy areas...which were surrounded by jungle.."spray and pray" alot of time was the tactic when you couldnt see who you were firing at..from a supported postition at an enemy in the open..then aimed semi auto was prefereable..For a three day patrol we each carried minimum of 20 (20rd) mags...a lot of guys carried 500-600 rds of ammo plus a belt for the 60, frags, smoke,gas, claymores, trip flares,laws rockets, the grenadier carry HE, Smoke, Gas, The 60 Gunne had a 100 rd teaser belt in the weapon and carried up to1000 rds or more and the A gunner carried his personal stuff plus extra 500 rds in cans for the hog.The problem with the 16 is its inability to penetrate cover and why the 60 was essential for getting us out of ambushes ...The 60 is what made things happen...NO small unit operating in dense cover could afford to be without a full power battle cartridge..big mistake to rely only on 556 imo...just from my experience
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 9:50:26 AM EDT
The main goal in a sustained firefight is to gain fire superiority over the enemy. This is where a full-auto weapon like the 249 SAW and M-16(that should still be full-auto) comes in. Once this is accomplished, then you need to change to accurate fire with the M-16's while still laying a good base of fire with the 249's. The military seems to have forgotten that you should use proper training not mechanical changes to the weapon. Also full-auto is great for breaking contact with a larger/superior force. Hopefully as the military moves toward the M-4 they will use the M-4A1 that has the full-auto capability and properly train the men to use them. Semper Fi ASO544
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 9:53:30 AM EDT
9divdoc Afew of the guys that were in the MobileRiverineForce hang out over at this site, ever been there? [url]http://pub50.ezboard.com/bvietnammemoriesbulletinboard[/url] always looking for new members. Ron
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 10:16:09 AM EDT
Full auto is also preferred in an urban setting when fighting house to house. When you are clearing a room that you don't care about hitting friendlies full auto is an advantage. At close range the auto has advantages over semiauto. I would hate to have only semiauto. I know when we practiced ambushes we always iniated them with our M60s ,saws, and sometimes claymores. Then M16s would join the fun. Ambushes are usually up close so having M16s on auto is usually preferred. Put maximum firepower on target. Unless the enemy is real close I would generally agree semi-auto is the best for hitting your target and conserving ammunition. Hey 9divdoc, I was a M60 gunner and I would have hated to carry a 1000 rounds for the pig.That would suck. I was not in Vietnam, but thats alot of weight. I usually carried around 400-500 rounds. If I remember correctly, I think a hundred rounds weighs at least a few pounds. I don't think most people realize how much weight an infantryman carries sometimes. With the M60, ammuniton, and water a M60 gunner could be carrying 50lbs alone. No Slack!
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 12:40:51 PM EDT
since i want there i dont knwo but what alot of vietnam vets have told me the whole war boilded down alot of times to who can throw the most lead at the enemay at the quickest time
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 1:12:14 PM EDT
Matt: 100 rounds of 7.62x51 ball ammo weighs in at 10 lbs. Not including links, mags etc.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 1:25:25 PM EDT
MDS The 100 Rds assault pack used on both the M60 and M240G weighs 7 lbs, the includes the links, and cardboard and the cloth bag.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 2:21:25 PM EDT
My father said that [i]their[/i] M16s did not have full auto capability in Vietnam.(?)
View Quote
I used to have a HydraMatic M16A1 wich had a full auto selector switch position. I found the M16 in full auto mode was a little hard for a 135lb guy like me to control. We didn't have any M249's (SAW) but did have M60's. I am not 11B, but was in supply in an infantry unit. OSA
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 4:39:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/16/2001 4:39:10 PM EDT by Death_By_AR15]
Well, my old man was a pogue, never fired a shot in Vietnam (thank god or I might not be here), and barely knows the difference between a muzzle and a buttstock. He may have gotten his facts confused. Not sure... I still havent been sold on the whole "volume of fire is better" idea. I have read before that is IS the amount of surpression that wins a firefight, but I have a hard time believing that you are going to kill more of the enemy that way. (With an M16) Sure, spraying and praying might save your ass in an ambush, and may make the commies duck when you land in an LZ, but it's my OPINION (yes, no flames intended) that this does nothing more than intimidate/scare the enemy and might get their heads down. And maybe sometimes that is good enought to win the fight.... I have never been in combat, but in training situations when I have sensed an ambush - I go to "burst." When the front of our column gets hit and my squad is enveloping, I go to "semi." I prefer leaving the full auto firing to the SAW gunners. Again, a lot of the Nam guys say its "as many rounds down range as you can" that wins firefights, but remember, this is before the M249 era. Now 1 out of 4 grunts have an automatic weapon, so maybe back then it was more important for the average rifleman to fire faster??? I dont know, just a thought.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 4:54:31 PM EDT
Hey Ron thanks for the link...I joined the assoc. a few months ago...didnt know about the board...
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 5:17:17 PM EDT
Matt D...I remember our gunners (it might have been 800rds hey its been thirty+ some of them rougher than others lol) had a two bandelliers 1 arround each shoulder sometimes one more arround their waiste ...an ammo can bottom of the ruck on the shelf..the A gunner had two cans plus the spare barrel and mitten...this was for a three to four day op ...we had resupply problems sometimes..plus food (back then it was C rats in cans not dehydrated or freezedried)...I carried my load of ammo, c rats, water, frags, smokes,medical supplies including a couple bottles of plasma in glass, we were loaded down like elephants...I remember one of our gunners got wounded and we had no LZ so after I patched him up we got him up and walking..so I carried his 60 out for him...oh man..tell you that was a hump...just a few miles of canal crossings but wow..I have nothing but respect for our gunners..they saved us many times..the 60 at least in heavy cover will get you out of an ambush...The M60 makes things happen
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:12:51 PM EDT
Full auto is most useful for keeping heads down while breaking contact. It's not easy to hit a target full auto, especially if you are moving. I would not say full auto is preferred for urban combat (at least according to the MCWP/FM/etc I've seen :-)). Semi auto gives you the most control and allows for target discrimination. Especially if you are in an environment where you may have hostages/non-combatabts. Moving in building combat full auto can annoy the other teams when rounds come through walls, etc. Run into an ambush...hehehe...yea, whatever. -SARguy
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:29:44 PM EDT
Back in the 80's I was in the Army. Full auto for ambushes being or doing, and full auto for MOUT. Building clearing was throw a grenade wait for boom, get in room and spray whatever was still in there. Yes, we expressed doubts about that. Most US houses would probably come apart with grenade or 2. But alot of european homes are brick, stone etc. little more solid.
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:29:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LARRY G: Originally quoted by Death_by_AR15
My father said that their M16s did not have full auto capability in Vietnam.(?)
View Quote
I would have to disagree with that. I never saw a semiauto only. Besides, the MILSPEC called for full auto on the original M16's. Maybe someone changed the selector or removed the full auto parts, but again, I never saw one.
View Quote
Me neither Larry G! What you said.... [sniper] [b]The Sniper
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:47:30 PM EDT
Anyway.... Usually it was the newbies that tended to pray and spray - then if they lasted any time at all, they learned to conserve ammo. Recon teams were small and most of the time the idea was to avoid contact but sometimes.... well stuff happens. I can tell you that there were definately times when full auto saved your bacon. Recon traveled as light as possible so you HAD to know how to use your ammo supply if things went south in a hurry. I am a believer in the select fire concept - I do think that you should have all the choices available: semi-auto, tri-burst, & full auto. Just for those "special" times it would be nice to be able to flick your selector and rock and roll until all the bad guys go away. [uzi] .... but then there is always the case for the one well placed shot from a distance - now isn't there...? [:D] [sniper] [b]The Sniper
Link Posted: 6/16/2001 8:50:10 PM EDT
I'm no expert, but I think the main advantage of full auto is psychological. Nobody wants to stick their head up when they hear that sound. Which serves a real function in some cases. I was reading some old "American Rifleman" magazines from 1964 a few months back, and one article told how they were trying to see how the M14 compared to the BAR. I think they ran guys through some kind BAR course with M14's on auto, and naturally the results were really bad. But the part that I really remember ('cause it agreed with my pre-conceived notions) was that they ran them through again with M14's on semi-auto and beat the BAR scores every time.
Link Posted: 6/17/2001 4:04:46 AM EDT
SARguy That is the SOP for about ever force if they are ambushed. If an ambush is laid and triggered correctly the KZ doesn't allow you to break contact with ease. They are not going to start shooting until most of the force is in the kill zone anyway. So you have an option stay in a KZ the enemy has picked out, or charge through the ambush. Since most ambushed are linear on one, two or three sides, if you get to the enemy position you have broke up the concentrated fire. Most break contact drills you see are for patrols that bump into and make contact with an enemy force and decide that the force is too large for them to handle, not for deliberate ambushes.
Link Posted: 6/17/2001 5:27:21 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/17/2001 7:51:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By STLRN: SARguy That is the SOP for about ever force if they are ambushed. If an ambush is laid and triggered correctly the KZ doesn't allow you to break contact with ease. They are not going to start shooting until most of the force is in the kill zone anyway. So you have an option stay in a KZ the enemy has picked out, or charge through the ambush. Since most ambushed are linear on one, two or three sides, if you get to the enemy position you have broke up the concentrated fire. Most break contact drills you see are for patrols that bump into and make contact with an enemy force and decide that the force is too large for them to handle, not for deliberate ambushes.
View Quote
Hi STLRN - am very familiar with what you are referring to. Take care, -SARguy
Link Posted: 6/17/2001 8:07:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/17/2001 12:06:11 PM EDT
STLRN 7lbs! Man my back hurts just thinking about that again.Usually though on just regular patrols I would only carry a small belt on the gun (can't remember how many rounds I would just break it off till it hung about a foot and half ) Then I would carry two bandoliers which is 200 rounds. I never liked having the box hooked on the gun when I was moving. Leaving to go to the field was the worst. Usually at the PZ we were issued all of our ammunition. We usually spilt up our ammo for the hog with the assistant gunner ( I started out as that and thats no picnic either with the spare barrel, T&E, and bipod)and some riflemen we would give a hundred round each. Hey 9divdoc, no problem with the memory. No that my memory is coming back a little I think between the gunner and assitant gunner we would split 400-500 rounds and then the platoon would get some also, but the amount would always vary. Of course we had two M60 gunners per platoon. Hey 9divdoc you medics had to hump alot of weight to. I always felt sorry for them because they carried just as much, but they only had a 1911 to go bang with. The medics were a good group of guys. No Slack!
Link Posted: 6/17/2001 5:04:33 PM EDT
Seems like I read an article about the Rhodesian Army and they were running low on ammo because of an embargo or something. They rigged all the AW's so that the troops could not select full auto. There was no change in kill ratios, etc. And they saved ammo.
Top Top