Results 1 to 20 of 978

Thread: The Roles and Weapons with the Squad

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    67

    Default

    And to not to only complain, I´m going to post something positive:
    Last month I was lucky enough to fire couple hundred rounds from both .223 and .308 SCAR rifle, plus some grenades from grenade launcher, and I am very impressed. So far the best rifle I ever fired from.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BushrangerCZ View Post
    And to not to only complain, I´m going to post something positive:
    Last month I was lucky enough to fire couple hundred rounds from both .223 and .308 SCAR rifle, plus some grenades from grenade launcher, and I am very impressed. So far the best rifle I ever fired from.
    Which one... the .223 or the .308?

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    Which one... the .223 or the .308?
    I would choose 10 inches barrel in .223 and 13 or 16 inches barrel in .308. I really liked the shape, weight, cocking handle, safety selector, bolt catch, mag release, pistol grip, buttstock, behaviour during shooting, ambidextrousness (does this word exist?), reliability etc., basically whole weapon system was excellent, no matter what caliber. I also liked the FN guy.
    Last edited by BushrangerCZ; 02-10-2011 at 05:10 PM.

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcustis View Post
    P-Hustle, welcome aboard brother.
    Thank you jcustis, it's good to see a familiar face (err...name).

    On the issue of being overloaded, while we still carry too much gear in my opinion, we have come leaps and bounds from when I first started deploying as a young LCPL. My first tour, where we relieved 1/8 after they were chewed up in Fallujah, it was common to find a Marine with 12-15 magazines on his body, as well as grenades, flashbangs, camelback, and whatever else we could drape over ourselves. And that was just on our Interceptor vests, leaving out the daypack most of us carried for crew served ammo and more water. While this set up worked for the Marines who were slugging it out in the Jolan, we operated in a much larger AO and required speed and agility, neither of which we had. We were not hunters, but armored turtles.

    Today, plate carriers abound and I don't allow anyone in my platoon to carry more than 8 magazines on their second line kit (I myself stick to 6). While there is still a tendency to carry more than we need (side plates on anything but a raid/mounted operation sticks out), at least the men are analyzing their gear needs. Much of this weight cutting is done counter to requirements that come down from on high, but at least the common sense seems to exists at company level and below.

    That brings me to a point that Ken White made about the inability of lower level leaders to make decisions that in past wars were made by men of the same position. Whether it be dropping equipment for certain missions, or modifying the number of men on patrol, today's Officers and NCO's at the company level and below can rarely make these decisions. And when they do, it is almost always in direct violation of some requirement from higher. This has created an entire generation of leaders who have plenty of combat experience, yet very little in what you could call "outside the box" thinking. What is sad here is that "outside the box" these days would involve sending out a rifle squad, sans armor, for a few days to hunt around the hills. When I read about the actions of infantrymen in past wars, it seems as though this kind of activity would not require the approval of a brigade commander. But today, I know of few company commanders who would risk their careers by approving this kind of activity without asking permission.

    The result here is that almost all (almost being the operative word) conventional units, no matter what their supposed specialties, are relegated to very simplistic mounted and dismounted patrols. Anything else, and you'd better have "Special" before your unit name.

    I realize I am generalizing here, but when I read about Marine CAP platoons in Vietnam spending months running their own operations with not so much as a Sergeant or Staff Sergeant running the show, it's frustrating to watch Captains unable to have the same leeway. Remember, Herman Hanneken snuck into an enemy camp and assassinated Peralte, when he was still an enlisted man. While I don't advocate Corporals taking off alone and killing people, I think it's a good benchmark to show how much we have been stifled by bureaucracy and risk aversion.

  5. #5
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by P-Hustle View Post
    I realize I am generalizing here, but when I read about Marine CAP platoons in Vietnam spending months running their own operations with not so much as a Sergeant or Staff Sergeant running the show, it's frustrating to watch Captains unable to have the same leeway. Remember, Herman Hanneken snuck into an enemy camp and assassinated Peralte, when he was still an enlisted man. While I don't advocate Corporals taking off alone and killing people, I think it's a good benchmark to show how much we have been stifled by bureaucracy and risk aversion.
    And without that type of flexability of the lower enlisted the US military has lost a large part of its ability to fight. In the cold war days the inflexable command structure of the Soviet Army was the first thing we were trained to attack so as to paralize their ability to move. We were told if we had no orders and didn't know what to do find something to attack don't sit on our ass and wait for orders or wonder what to do.

    BTW I have no problem an enlisted man taking out some bad guy if it is the right thing to do and circumstances dictate it. Why wait for orders and pass up an oppurtunity?

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BushrangerCZ View Post
    ... no matter what caliber.
    You have an opinion on the calibre issue?

  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
    You have an opinion on the calibre issue?
    Yes, I do, but it would take probably longer discussion... (especially for what purpose it would serve).
    My army is now buying the CZ 805 rifles with interchangable barrel/caliber (.223 and 7,62x39), and SCAR ended second. Personally I would certainly prefer SCAR, and have my opinion on whole affair, but I can´t affect it.
    If you would like to talk about calibre issue into the depth, pls PM me. (I am no expert, but I am interested in shooting and have some ideas and experiences.)

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BushrangerCZ View Post
    Yes, I do, but it would take probably longer discussion... (especially for what purpose it would serve).
    My army is now buying the CZ 805 rifles with interchangable barrel/caliber (.223 and 7,62x39), and SCAR ended second. Personally I would certainly prefer SCAR, and have my opinion on whole affair, but I can´t affect it.
    If you would like to talk about calibre issue into the depth, pls PM me. (I am no expert, but I am interested in shooting and have some ideas and experiences.)
    No surprise there that the contract would go to a Czech company.

    On the calibre issue nothing worth taking to PM. The fact that it was deemed necessary to have the ability to switch calibres through a quick change barrel system indicates that the debate at national level has not been resolved and they want to keep their options open.

    I'm sure it will be of interest to all to hear what the official Czech opinion is on the issue and also yours personally if it differs.

  9. #9
    Council Member Firn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,297

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BushrangerCZ View Post
    My army is now buying the CZ 805 rifles with interchangable barrel/caliber (.223 and 7,62x39).)
    CZ makes certainly some fine firearms.

    Just curious. How is that CZ 805 stock? It seems to be quite interesting, being foldable, having an adjustable lenght of pull and an addable cheek piece.

    Seems that stocks like that are becoming more and more the norm, which is IMHO a good thing if the hold up.

  10. #10
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firn View Post
    CZ makes certainly some fine firearms.

    Just curious. How is that CZ 805 stock? It seems to be quite interesting, being foldable, having an adjustable lenght of pull and an addable cheek piece.

    Seems that stocks like that are becoming more and more the norm, which is IMHO a good thing if the hold up.
    Stock was one of the things that was pointed out during the recent field tests, for me it seemed too "competition" and not too "army". Imagine throwing buttstock full of holes and screws into the mud, you would clean it forever. I think the current one will be fine, it´s similar to SCAR stock, and I guess a bit lighter.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •