|
|
 |
Reply
| |
From the Military Channel in reverse order from 10 to #1. M-14 MP 43 1903 Springfield Steyr Aug Mauser 98K Fn Fal M-1 Garand Lee Enfield SMLE M-16 AK-47 T-Dog |
|
Reply
| |
Hobbs I like the Stoner system, but heard stories of it stripping itself down, while firing. Also I think if you want an SF MG, it's got to be 7.62. I think mag fed .223 is for section use only. |
|
Reply
| |
SAME - SAME, TC. A GUN THAT EVEN THE POOR PEOPLE OF THE WORLD CAN OWN. |
|
Reply
| |
Flash I don't think the troops should be limited to one caliber over another. The really good thing about the M16 is that it can easily be set up to shoot a variety of calibers. By literally removing 2 pins you can put on a new upper and have a different rifle. Their are 3 different cartridges that I think the US military should keep in stock 5.56x45, 6.8spc and 6.5 grendal, all of which use similar length of cartridge. The 5.56 for urban type fighting such as Bagdad. The 6.5 grendal which was designed for distance shooting, hunting. For the hills of Afganistan. The 6.8 for general fighting where different areas can occur. I know this sounds like a logistical nightmare but it wouldb't be if done properly. |
|
Reply
| |
Pete Ref 20 Except Canada and California. |
|
Reply
| |
Hobbs no You must have misread me. I am saying you must have a more powerful calibre than .223/5.54/5.56 for platoon work. The LMG certainly in SF role coversion must be 7.62, as you did with the M60. The Soviets also use the short 7.62 RPK for section LMG but then full size 7.62 is used as below (Google crib) And then as you with the BMG they have the 12.7 DShk and 14.4 Goryunovs. |
|
Reply
| |
Everything in 5,56 was one of those stupid ideas the defense department came up with to ease logistics. The problem is you get your choice of belted ammo or boxes of magazines. I do think for urban environments the 5.56 is just fine. Using it as an end all be all for everywhere is stupid. |
|
Reply
| |
A LOT TO DO WITH IT HOBBS WOULD BE WEIGHT. HOW MANY RDS AMMO DOES THE AVERAGE MAN CARRY OF 5.56?? |
|
Reply
| |
I believe their basic load out is 180-390 rounds. In 30 round mags. Cool pics. |
|
Reply
| |
We carry what we're given. NI load was 60 rds, 3 mags, fitted into the top pocket of our Flak jacket. Full ammo pouches is 200 rds. Rule of thumb, 220 rds .223 = 120 7.62 including mags. Boxed Belt of 200 x 7.62 = 17lb. 50 rds .5 BMG same. |
|
Reply
| |
Hobbs. Urban use. your #24. We found we could outshoot the IRA (.223 and AKM) as the 7.62 would smash a wall down with only a few shots. The part of Belfast we operated in was an old mill area, with loads of red brick wall separating house backs and alleys. We saw a demo shoot by the Small Arms School Corps. they fired 2 rounds of .223 into a jerrican of water. neat hole front, neat hole rear, water spouted out. They then fired 1 round of 7.62 into another jerrican. There was a cloud of misty vapour, and a long vertical tear. No more water came out all evaporated. I know which I'd rather have been hit by. this was 1972, at the height of the stories of tumbling .223 ammo. |
|
Reply
| |
Flash What I'm thinking about is an attempt to limit the horror's of war, in respect to the hearts and minds aspect of our current operations in Iraq. 7.62 will turn cover into concealment rather quickly if properly used. BUT it serves our cause no good to take out Abdul and family with overpenetrating ammo. 7.62 is a good round probably the best for all around military applications. But in the Urban environment any attempt to limit casualties is a good effort. As to the other rounds mentioned I brought them up due to the fact that they were designed for use with the M16/AR15 platform. |
|
Reply
| |
Hobbs Interested to see 6.5mm there. same as .25. Japs and Italians used it in WW2 in the mannlicher carcano (Lee Harvey Oswald) and Arisaka. Both changed to 7.7mm (.303), neither could complete the conversion by war;'s end, so both were supplying 4 types of ammn at platoon level. 7.7 and 6.5 mm, rimmed and rimless. So, what have they done to juice 6.5mm up? Never heard of 6.8. |
|
Reply
| |
Flash 6.5 Grendal and 6.8 Special Purpose Cartridge, were developed to add firepower to the M16. 6.5 Grendal was developed for long range shooting. I believe it is 45mm long just like the 5.56 is. It uses a hotter powder. Thats all I know of it othere than the fact that It seems to do the job. 6.8 SPC was developed by a couple of US Army Special Forces armorers to replace the 5.56, it is 43mm long and is basically a 115-120 grain .270 bullet on a necked down .30 winchester case which is what they used for their initial brass. It uses a hot powder and is a more capable round. All I know is what I have read about them as I have'nt shot either. |
|
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
First
Return to Militaria Board