Only problem I have with all the neat weapons designed
for use by vehicle crews or those not normally engaged in direct ground combat is what do those folks do if circumstances change and they are suddenly engaged in direct ground combat... :eek:
That said, that one makes more sense than do the ones with the weird little cartridges. :cool:
Another hand grenade story
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Schmedlap
... Also was with a group of Soldiers, smoking cigarettes in our patrol base, surrounded by cement walls at least 10 feet high, and an RPG round landed right in the middle of us - don't even know what direction it came from - it just smacked into the ground in front of us all. Dud.
... But not a dud.
Early 2003 we were called in for "explosion in a residential area". At the scene a 60-plus year-old lady answers the door.
She explains, "This morning some Russians were here asking to rent our basement and I knew they wanted to set up some kind of bordell in our neighborhood, but I refused. Later this evening while watching TV I heard my window break and a loud bang."
The Russians had come back and thrown an F-1 hand grenade into the living room where the old women sat watching TV. Less than 75 centimeters from her on the couch, the WWII-era F-1 went high order. The walls covered in fragments and the TV destroyed. Oddly enough, other than some hearing problems the old bird had not a single scratch. The only possible scenario was the grenade's fuze cavity was pointed in her direction, or, as the link suggests, poor casting quality :D
M4 Fails at Battle of Wanat
I read somewhere on the net that in a U.S. Army investigative report of the Battle of Wanat that a couple of guys said their M4s malfunctioned. I believe one said he burned through 12 mags in about 1/2 hour before his weapon would nolonger load. They also said a M249 malfunctioned. I am familiar with M16 and its variants. Personally I find it to be easy to shoot, accurate, and light(er). I have never fired 12 mags through one in 1/2 hour so I do not know if his malfunction was one to be expected or one more example of why the rifle should be replaced. I read it's good, I read it's bad. I read the troops are happy with it. I read they are not happy with it. WTF!
Personally, I think all M16 and M4 uppers should be replaced with the 416. Also, bring back the the fully auto capability - it's all about training. The USMC is lookin at the IAR which I think is a good idea, but why do it if everyone has the capability to go full auto. If the weapon needs a heavy barrel then so be it. Add a HK417 to each squad - DM.
I've read similar complaints about the 249 and surveys conducted by the U.S. Army and Marine Corps. I understand why the M240 is not at the squad level due to its weight, but what about the MG4? Or is this weapon basically a 249? I know they look alike.
I have gone off subject, but I think a Marine platoon with two rifle squads each with a MG4, 11 fully auto HK416s and a HK417, and a third squad with 2 M240s, 416s and a SMAW would give our guys more maneuverability, fire power and most importantly realiable weapons.
Ah, yes -- but Joe today doesn't have much
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stan
The report also concluded:
94 percent satisfaction with accuracy
92% with range and
93% with rate of fire.
experience with any other weapons and he knows the M4 is lighter than the M16... :D
The M16 is okay, the M4 a little less so but the Army has too much money invested to undertake a big change for small gain.