Looking at all the postings and pix on this site has me wondering.  In most armed conflicts in the past, the grunt that was in harms way usually did what he could to make his rifle as light and responsive as possible to give him every battlefield advantage (better handling, less chance of hanging up on branches, etc.  My brother used to hump a BAR and said the first thing to go was the bipod..my other buddy threw his Thompson stock out the Helicopter door the fist day he got it.  I could go on and on.  

Anyway, now I see pix of AR's with rails on the front which have flashlights, lasers, and who the hell knows what else on them.  On TV I see rifles with Video cameras and all kinds of weird shit on them listed as "battle rifles of the future".  Hmmm

Is this because the nature of the battle has changed..??  I was wondering if it was because in the past, the grunt started at a various point and made his way through hostile territory on foot.  Now, they can get transportation right to the battle site, especially in urban areas such as Israel where they can almost take a bus to downtown.

The more pix like this I see, the more I wonder if some of it is posed, or some idea from a REMF, or am I failing to understand something.  I suppose anything that would enhance your chances on the battlefield would be of value, but it may compromise your effectiveness as Uncle Sam's finest.

What's your thoughts on this..??  

Part of what you see on this site is some individuals' ideas of Close Quarter Battle (CQB)rifles. These in no way represent what the military would carry into combat. I tend to think some of the items are window dressing and wouldn't be on the rifle after a short period of time.

My pop was with a combat engineer unit in Korea during the Korean war.  He saw a variety of nastiness that he still mostly won't talk about.  He said his "favorite" weapon was the grease gun.  His second was a sharpened entrenching tool and his third was the army 1911.

Why?  Up close they killed and were also compact.  When in a vehicle as Combat engineers often were the grease gun was easy to get at.  In a trench the shovel beat a knife any day up close.

He hated the vaunted Garand as "it often jammed in the cold."  He also said the sound it made when it was empty was a VERY BAD THING on a dark night.

He said the M1 carbine oculd get you killed as it failed to stop an attacker quickly enough.

The Thompson was too long.

The .45 auto and grease gun were (to him) the queens of close quarter combat.  He disliked relying on a pistol instead of the grease gun (whose simplicity was a plus to him).

In either a trench or a vehicle the shorter weapon throwing more lead was the better weapon.  Up close the stock iron sighted M4 would seem to be the ticket for today.

Rail systems do not add much, if any, weight to an M4.  With one installed an M4 becomes more versatile and basically has the same weight.  

The key here is material.  Any accessories made of aluminum and synthetics will add minimal weight to a weapon.  In previous eras, the majority of arms were made of steel and had wood furniture.  An M16 or M4 keeps it's steel content to the barest minimum and has no wood furniture.  This in itself saves a great deal of weight.  M16's are far lighter compared to the BAR, Garand, M1 carbine, and Thompson subguns.  Accessories for the M16 family of riflesand carbines also have to be made of the lightest materials possible.

A vertical foregrip can aid in maneuverability in close quarters.  A flashlight is invaluable in the dark for target ID.  A reflex sight makes target acquisition in close quarters much, much faster.  A laser is a must on a rifle if using a gasmask, an IR laser if using night vision.

Are all these absolutely necessary, maybe, maybe not.  The thing is, most infantry and support personnel won't attach or carry these itmes.  Most units use stock M16's, with at the most a small scope.  

The pictures that we see the most of these days are of special operations and special warfare operators who specialize in close quarters engatgements.  Most of them feel it is necessary to have these items because it gives you a slight advantage in combat.  Any advantage is better than none.  99% of the time they will mount some of these accessories.  Sometimes they will not.  They can choose if they need these itmes and the extra weight or not.

Most times these guys won't really have to hump it that far or that fast.  Even if they do, they are not (at least they shouldn't be) humping it with a 50 lb. pack on their backs.  Go fast guys travel light.  So most of them figure one or two pounds on the weapon is not that big of a deal because they aren't carrying extra weight on their backs.  

An ideal loadout for an operator is very light.  A weapon, a sidearm, a knife, extra mags, water, communications gear, spare batteries for equipment, maybe a backup sidearm and knife and light, and an MRE if he feels it absolutely necessary to carry one.  There shouldn't be that much more than that.    

A medic/corpsman will carry a large/medium first aid pack.  The unit might carry explosives if it is a demolitions mission.  Restraints would be carried if they plan on taking prisoners.  It really wouldn't be that heavy a loadout compared to your average infantry unit.  

"not that heavy compared to an infantry unit"

Thats funny!

The below I would consider average, its possible to trim a bit, and add considerably when looking for big game.

A regular, not loaded for bear, M4 standard loadout of 13mags 203 with 10-18 eggs, plus optics/laser, A SAW guy with 11/1200 rds, 60 gunner with 600min, Comms guy with the big radios, each guy has also has a secondary weapon with 2-3 mags, individual comms, med kit, E&E kit, water, extra batts, signals kit,

Some guys will have: demo for targets of oppurtunity, minimal prisonor handling gear, additional presents which deter pusuit.

Depending on area standoff weapons may be required.

Not even considering  body armor, or the weight of food/water/warmies for extended duration.

I humped with the M16 in Nam.  I just had a sling that I put from the front sight to the buttstock and carried it at the "ready" posistion.  I really don't remember it being too heavy.  But I remember all the rest of the shit I had to carry was a bitch.

We didn't have, at that time, any accessories available for our rifles.  But I might have used them if they had been available.

But...I don't think I would have wanted a weapons mounted light. I wouldn't want to give my posistion away.

Scopes: With a fully automatic weapon they taught me the "Instintive Point and Shoot" method. (Better know as "Spray'n'Pray") Most of the time in Nam we couldn't actually see the enemy in the jungle.  So we just sprayed the area.  There was nothing to aim at with any fancy sight.  In the rice paddies it was a different story.

Now in the middle east it's totally different.  Good fields of view.  I would want a good red dot scope that didn't need battries.  If I was going into a house or cave to clear I would want a weapons mounted light.

Remember, it depends upon the mission on what you would have and need.

Rambosky

I do believe the battlefield on the near future will be covered with spent batteries !

Really?


10th Mountain Division.

[img]http://www4.aixgaming.com/opend/albums/10th_Mountain_Division/d_mtn03.jpg[/img]

82d Airborne Division.

[img]http://www4.aixgaming.com/opend/albums/82nd_Airborne_Division/e_8207.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www4.aixgaming.com/opend/albums/82nd_Airborne_Division/82nd_more9.jpg[/img]

101st Airborne Division.

[img]http://www4.aixgaming.com/opend/albums/101st_Airborne_Division/10101_G.jpg[/img]

[img]http://www4.aixgaming.com/opend/albums/101st_Airborne_Division/a_10104.jpg[/img]

No Special Ops here!  Line infantry with rails, lights, lasers, grips, etc.!!!  

Point is:  All the weapons pictured look EXACTLY like a bunch of your preban AR's here on AR15.com.


Chris

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Those photos are revealing.

I would want it light and short, but I think a weapon mounted light would be a good idea for indoor ops.  I would not want to give up my Aimpoint M2, but I don't think I need a rail of any kind.

ISSUED THOMPSONS AND HELICOPTERS IN ONE SAME FIGHT? weird.

HUNTER.

[BLUE]CHECK THE BROWNING AND THE F.A.L FORUMS[/BLUE]

Yeah Hunter.  My buddy was a pilot.  They took pretty much anything they wanted with them.  A few guys liked the Swede 9mm, like the S&W mod 76.  Lots of guys carried .357's sent from home too.   Personal choice I guess.  I'm sure you know if you were there.

My buddy with the TSMG did 3 tours.  One night their base got over run.  He picked up his S&W model 10 and rolled over to see a guy raising his weapon at him. Dave's thumb pushed the release forward and popped the cylinder.  Luckily, the guy behind Dave managed to save Dave's bacon.  He never owned a S&W after that.   He just left this world last year...a great guy...hated to see him go.

I wish every one who came looking for me would use a flash light. Would be there last.
If I see you first in 3 seconds your dead.

              [nono]

When I  let my dad shoot my accessorised M4gery he was impressed at how light it was compared to what he termed as "the club"(m14) he carried in Korea and that it is much lighter and more comfortable.

Although not to impressed with all the bells and wistles except got a kick out of the laser.

Visable light is used indoors and night vision out doors.  The Aimpoints are far superior to iron sights 99% of the time and you need an IR laser and illuminator to fight using the NV.  Anything past this is useless weight.  Removing the previously mentioned items means you will be more likely to die if you try to fight without them when you need them and they weigh very little.  Only an idiot would go into battel with a plain jane M4.  

What do you do when you have to clear a dark cave?

How do you aim during a night fight at an enemy you see with your NODs?

Why would you use iron sights if an Aimpoint means better hit % and faster shooting?

I think you are failing to understand how these tools are used and you have no explanation for how to fight without them.  You gonna hold a flashlight in one hand and the M4 in the other during room/cave cleaning?  Or just wal around blind?  You gonna call in arty or the bad guys closing in at night over the hill since you cant aim or shoot with the NODs on and no laser?

It's called gear queering from what i have heard. I don't put any of that shit on my gun. Just a bunch of decorations as far as I am concerned. I will admit that I would be highly tempted to mount a generation 3 nightvison/thermal scope on my AR if i could afford it.

Ever stop to think that maybe, just [i]maybe[/i], there are individuals that [b]know [u]HOW[/u][/b] to use a weapon mounted light?

If you were up against someone who knew how to [b]use[/b] that light, I think there's a real good chance the end result isn't going to be what you think.


Chris

You go up against a guy with a 9-volt SureFire and you be blind in less than a second.  You're awfully optimistic.

Another picture of accessories being used on the M4 [url]http://communities.prodigy.net/sportsrec/gz-rooney2.html[/url]

Redbone,

That's a classic... thanks man...!

I like the keys and the compass the best... that's how I'd want to be hooked-up if the SHTF.

Thanks again for the laugh...!

STP

You tell me the first time you think you hear some thing and turn that light on your going to be able to still come after some one in the dark ! You must be dreaming. Takes 20 minute's to get your night eyes. You better have your vest on !!
              [wave]

2003 and we're still debating if flashlights make sense....

Hopefully the worlds elite police and military units will learn and stop using them. You'd think with the death toll from those damn things, Surefire would be out of business.

You guys are brilliant.  We should make you in charge of all our police and troops.  No wait in fact you can go into pitch black Al Queda caves with no lights and go clear em just to show the troops how to "Use the force Luke" to see while blind and make good hits on the enemy you cant see.  

Anyone who thinks flashlights are a bad idea is either totally inexperienced at night shooting or has an IQ under 100.

Oh wait I forgot to add most of the nay sayers are too poor to afford all the goodies so they make themselves feel better by saying they are just dead weight on the rifle.  

If I could only put one thing on a defensive carbine it would be a flashlight so I could ID my target to make sure its either frindly or hostile and holding a weapon before I shoot.  Anything less than 100% ID and you risk prison time if you shoot first.  If you elect to wait for them to shoot first you may not live to get your shot off.

Why are there two seperate catagories for competative shooters with or without optics?  Because the optics users have such an advantage thats why.  I can see a trunk gun not having an optic because it might fog up coming out of an airconditioned car to a hot muggy night but other than that the optic is superior 99% of the time.

[rant mode]NONE OF THE NAY SAYERS WILL TELL YOU HOW TO CLEAR A PITCH BLACK CAVE OR BUILDING WITH NO ELECTRICITY.  THEY JUST SAY FLASHLIGHTS ARE NOT THE ANSWER AND GIVE NO EXPLANATION ON WHAT IS BETTER.  IF YOU HAVE NO SOLUTION JUST KEEP YOUR TRAPS SHUT.[/rant mode]

100% agreement DevL...I was being sarcastic.