Adapting Equipment to the Reality of the Battlefield

[Steve Blair]

Counterstrike? Is that a flick or something?

First person shooter. You'd be amazed how many people get their ideas about how weapons work from computer games. This of course ain't how they really work.

Rob: The 5.56 versus 7.62 debate has been around for ages. Usually it's been spun as rate of fire and weight of ammo as opposed to penetration ability. 7.62 has greater penetration power, but you can carry more 5.56 and weapons that use it tend to have a higher rate of fire (at least until the 3-round burst feature came into use). I suspect the debate will always be with us.

[Monte Cristo]

If you wanna debate console games, you should wait for 120 mm to get online.

I'm afraid that my experince with bullpups is limited to live-fire range exercises.

[Steve Blair]

No debate on console games. Just pointing out that perception does not always equal reality when it comes to equipment and the situation in the field. 120mm makes very valid points in his post about the capabilities of weapon systems, and as someone who's using the gear today, Rob's points should be considered carefully as well. Using a weapon in range exercises isn't the same thing as using it when you're under fire in a dirty environment.

This whole thing brings to mind one lesson that every army seems to have to relearn with EVERY conflict: that of combat load for infantry personnel. Back around 1870 or so a group of German medical students determined that the most an infantryman could be expected to carry without degrading his endurance and performance was around 40 pounds. But every conflict we've been in since that time this lesson always surfaces as something new. Sort of like "you need more water when operating in a desert or jungle environment." Who knew?

[Monte Cristo]

Using a weapon in range exercises isn't the same thing as using it when you're under fire in a dirty environment.

So, in your opinion, training on range is pretty much useless...And what exactly is a "dirty" environment?

[Steve Blair]

Now who's trying circular logic?

I did not say range training is useless. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. What I said is that it is NOT the same thing as using a weapon in a combat environment when someone's shooting back at you, you're under stress, carrying a full combat load, tired, and scared. And combat zones tend to be dirty. Your weapon may have been dropped, rained on, or otherwise rendered less than pristine. It won't behave the same as it does on the range.

[Monte Cristo]

I wish we could continue this fascinating conversation, but unfortunately I have to leave, and I probably won't be anywhere near a computer with an Internet connection for a while. I wish you guys all the best. Keep it up and keep it civil!

[Rob Thornton]

Best comment I've seen yet is 120's. What ever you have - train with it! A piece of advice that every small unit trainer should live.

Steve, your right about the argument - when it comes down to it the 5.56 is a fine caliber for what its designed for.

M.C. as far as emotions go, everybody goes to work here with a different feel on any given day, sometimes you go a certain route at a certain time becasuse somebody says you have to go that way for one reason or another. Sometimes you are the bug and sometimes your the windshield - being the bug is no fun. What is fun is showing the bad guy one thing, but giving him something else.

I'm pretty sure the usefulness of this thread is exhausted.

Regards, Rob