Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills
US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills ^ | May 21, 2010 | AP

Posted on 05/22/2010 11:58:33 AM PDT by too_cool_for_skool

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last
When did the M4 replace the M16 as the standard battle rifle?
1 posted on 05/22/2010 11:58:33 AM PDT by too_cool_for_skool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Bring back the M14!


2 posted on 05/22/2010 12:00:50 PM PDT by Ken522
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Give them back the Browning Automatic Rifle, the M-14, and the M-60.


3 posted on 05/22/2010 12:00:56 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

This story seems to get dragged out once very six months


4 posted on 05/22/2010 12:03:03 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool
Bring back the M14 again. The Garand can fire more rounds per minute than the M14 and it is 30-06. Did they take away the 50BMG? I saw a video of a Hummer with a 50BMG mini gun that fired at the M2 rate and then over 3000 rounds per minute. It sure rocked the Hummer.
5 posted on 05/22/2010 12:03:06 PM PDT by mountainlion (concerned conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Just tell them to get the Israeli Galil. That thing takes a beating in the desert and keeps on shooting.


6 posted on 05/22/2010 12:04:10 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken522

No, rechamber the M-4 to fire the 6.5mm X 39mm round.


7 posted on 05/22/2010 12:06:41 PM PDT by Perdogg (Nancy Pelosi did more damage to America on 03/21 than Al Qaeda did on 09/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

For close in work nothing beats a Thompson.BAR with a cut down barrel aint bad either.


8 posted on 05/22/2010 12:07:51 PM PDT by HANG THE EXPENSE (Life is tough.It's tougher when you're stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

When targets presents themselves at very long ranges of fields of fire the M4s will be inadequate.


9 posted on 05/22/2010 12:08:06 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Absolutely, and it’s bunk. A 5.56mm round from an M4 will still perforate 1/8” plate steel at 500 meters. if it’ll go through steel plate at that distance, it’ll go through a combatant at that range (most of the combatants encountered in Iraq and Afghanistan do not wear body armor). Is it as potent at a 30-06 or 7.62x51? No, but it’s still carrying the energy and power of a 45 ACP “up close and personal” (like 7 yards). A single shot may not kill your target, but they are going to have a VERY bad day.

The issue isn’t the firepower packed by the soldiers, it’s the insane ROE that limits return fire. If you didn’t see the fire coming from a given individual - even if they have a weapon slung on their shoulder - you cannot return fire. Perfect ROE for the enemy to take a pot shot and go back to goat-herding, unopposed.

The new snipers will be charged with long-distance observation, predominantly, to keep an eye out - well out - for the very situation where a 600m away goat-herder takes a single pot-shot and re-shoulders his weapon before the round strikes or is heard. Having spotters dedicated to extreme range only - and equipped to return accurate fire at that range - is the only thing that has any chance of working with the current ROE.


10 posted on 05/22/2010 12:09:19 PM PDT by PugetSoundSoldier (Indignation over the Sting of Truth is the defense of the indefensible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

The M1 Garand did pretty well in the hills and mountains of Italy in WW2... And had a good power punch.. Ok I am biased.. I love my Garand.


11 posted on 05/22/2010 12:10:08 PM PDT by crazydad (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I’d be happy to let em try out my Socom .308...


12 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:47 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ken522

I used to think that then I got to shoot an FN SCAR in 7.62. It is awesome, isn’t that heavy, mounts optics that are a pain on the M-14, has a folding stock which is nice for getting in and out of vehicles. Way nicer than the M-14 in the Sage stock.


13 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:51 PM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

give them Napalm, and the delivery system for it

let them have BBQ’s


14 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:53 PM PDT by SF_Redux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: imahawk

I agree...


15 posted on 05/22/2010 12:11:55 PM PDT by crazydad (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SF_Redux

Flame Throwers and Zippo Tracks too.


16 posted on 05/22/2010 12:13:22 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I love the M-4. It’s so much better for someone like me with short little arms.


17 posted on 05/22/2010 12:13:58 PM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

Just like in Saving Ryans Privates. “DONT SHOOT EM,LET EM BURN”!


18 posted on 05/22/2010 12:14:43 PM PDT by crazydad (What)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool
Stories about weapons generate lots of responses on FR.

Maybe some of you gun experts can comment on this. I'm not any type of expert of this but from what I've have read is there is no perfect type of rifle for our soldiers. A rifle that's ideal for one environment is not necessarily best for all environments. That seems common sense.

The M14 was very heavy and not suited to many environments but seems ideal for Afghanistan. But if my memory serves me correctly, didn't Bill Clinton order large amounts of these weapons destroyed by executive order? It seems I read this somewhere. These weapons were safe and secure in armories on military bases. They were as safe as the gold in Ft. Know. Now we need them for Afghanistan and we don't have enough. Is this correct or am I prematurely senile?
19 posted on 05/22/2010 12:24:04 PM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

Is it cheaper to rework a receiver and replace a barrel than to purchase a new rifle chambered for another round? I don’t think the round you suggest has much greater range than does the 5.56.
Clinton order over fifty thousand of our M-14s destroyed while he was president even thought the NATO 7.62 was and still is an excellent round. My preference is the 30.06 cartridge if a new round is chosen to extend a rifleman’s reach.


20 posted on 05/22/2010 12:25:03 PM PDT by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ken522
Photobucket
21 posted on 05/22/2010 12:26:17 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ken522
Yeah, especially since we either gave them all away or that fat turd bill clinton ordered them destroyed.

The m14 was a based upon the Garand and George Patton said the Garand was the greatest battle rifle ever designed.

Troops in Vietnam complained, however, that the 308 round was heavier than the 5.56 and thus couldn't carry as many mags of 308 as they could mags of 5.56. Also, the 308 was more difficult to control in full auto especially when so many troops adopted the spray and pray technique.

22 posted on 05/22/2010 12:27:19 PM PDT by LouAvul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine
Just tell them to get the Israeli Galil

Never heard of it... but just checked it out. Looks good. It appears they're replacing it with the Tavor TAR-21.

23 posted on 05/22/2010 12:28:52 PM PDT by scripter ("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

WOW! it only took 44 years to admit that the Poodle Shooter is nothing more than a top of the line varmit plinker!

How many American lives have been lost since 1966 because of the foolish decision to abandon the .308 M-14 and go with the .223?

If you want to get your blood boiling read the history of the big money, insider influence, and cover ups of operational defects that lead to the adoption of the AR-15/M-16/M-4 Poodle Shooters.

As in everything else related to the Federal Government, if you want the truth just follow the money.


24 posted on 05/22/2010 12:29:22 PM PDT by Iron Munro ("You can't kill the beast while sucking at its teat" - - Claire Wolfe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter
I’d be happy to let em try out my Socom .308...

Yep, mine served me well with an EOTech sight attached.

That was before the boating accident...

25 posted on 05/22/2010 12:29:26 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: truthguy

Ft Know s/b Ft Knox. Lousy keyboard (and typist) and lousy spell check.


26 posted on 05/22/2010 12:32:33 PM PDT by truthguy (Good intentions are not enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit

I’ve seen the pictures of the FN SCAR - it must be a really nice rifle. I envy your good fortune at actually firing such a fine rifle!


27 posted on 05/22/2010 12:33:35 PM PDT by Ken522
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul

I have a Garand and a MIA national match in my defensive armament. Also a Ruger .223 Ranch Rifle and an SKS. I’m ready no matter what.


28 posted on 05/22/2010 12:34:19 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

We need something in .308.


29 posted on 05/22/2010 12:35:05 PM PDT by behzinlea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: behzinlea

Why not something in 7.62x39, the preferred caliber of our enemies? I’ve owned one. Mild recoil and utter reliability. 308 is considered mid sized but it still packs large caliber recoil. That’s one of the reasons we got rid of it.


30 posted on 05/22/2010 12:40:28 PM PDT by LouAvul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer
I've got a S&W M&P 15 PC in 5.56. The weapon next to my bed is a remington 870 tactical w/knoxx stock. In the next few months I'll be buying a M1A scout.

I had a 7.62x39 in a Ruger mini 30, but seriously, with that pencil thin barrel, after the first two shots the groups opened up enormously. I sold it.

31 posted on 05/22/2010 12:44:38 PM PDT by LouAvul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion
The Garand can fire more rounds per minute than the M14 and it is 30-06.

Perhaps the action is capable of more rounds per minute, but neither was issued as a full-auto, so that's not really an issue, is it? I'm real sure that I could shoot more rounds with the M-14 in one minute, because of the 20 round magazine vs. the 8 round clip. I think this advantage outweighs any other mechanical cycling advantage the Garand may have.

32 posted on 05/22/2010 12:47:09 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ken522
The M-14 is still the best battle rifle the US ever made.

It's should not be fired in full-auto however...unless to clear a room from a stiff hip-mount.

The USMC used to regularly mix weapons in their rifle teams....30 Carbine, .45 Thompson and the M1 Garand were a common mix.

I see no reason why we wouldn't go about 50-50 with the M4 and M14...it's the same round used to the two machine guns currently in service....308 and .223.

33 posted on 05/22/2010 12:48:17 PM PDT by Mariner (The first Presidential candidate to call for deportation, wins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Wahoo! Saw one with a regular rifle scope attached. Got to shoot it. WOW! A real “Christian” maker need in Afgan!


34 posted on 05/22/2010 12:51:53 PM PDT by TaMoDee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul
The weapon next to my bed is a remington 870 tactical w/knoxx stock. In the next few months I'll be buying a M1A scout.

Like minds...

I've an 870, M1A, and an AP4 .308 panther. : )

35 posted on 05/22/2010 12:57:09 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: crazydad

The italians had a updated version with a 20 round deatachable mag

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beretta_BM59


36 posted on 05/22/2010 12:59:44 PM PDT by Charlespg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul
I am an American and I am admittedly biased in favor of the .308. Properly trained, our soldiers and Marines are more than up to the task of handling the recoil of a .308.

We need to be able to push bullets with heft (e.g., 150 grain) long distances over open spaces in Afghanistan. A .308, a very accurate round, is up to the task.

37 posted on 05/22/2010 1:04:51 PM PDT by behzinlea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LouAvul

The rifles now referred to as “assault rifles” came to be in the latter years of WWll, when the Germans found that the full-house infantry round, the 8x57mm Mauser, was uncontrollable in a rifle-weight shoulder-fired weapon. The devised the MP-44 “Sturmgewhre”, a rifle featuring select fire and firing a less-powerful cartrige, the 8x33mm. Mikhail Kalasnikov applied the concept to his AK-47. The definition of “assault rifle by the military is a select-fire rifle of INTERMEDIATE POWER.
The M-14 was unmanagable in full-auto fire. The old BAR was capable of select fire but tipped the scales at 20 lbs.
I have seen AR-15s used in high power rifle competitions at 600 yards but it requires an 80gr. bullet with a different rate of twist in the barrel rifling. There is a difference between punching a hole in a piece of paper and making certain that SOB 600 yards out is down for the count. The M-4 is a cut-down M-16. In making it more compact for urban warfare, a good deal of velocity was sacrifices, further reducing the effectiveness of a marginally effective round.
It is difficult to build a rifle that will do all things for all people but in the end, ya gotta have enough gun


38 posted on 05/22/2010 1:05:25 PM PDT by JayVee (Joseph)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper
This story seems to get dragged out once very six months

I would say that you are correct.

But it does give everyone a chance to bash the M16 (and its more modern variants) and its "poodle-shooter" 5.56x39mm round, and to discuss what would be better (bring back the M14, go to a modern rifle which fires the .243 / 6.5mm round, etc.) so it is all good...

39 posted on 05/22/2010 1:07:54 PM PDT by Screaming_Gerbil (...he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one... Luke 22:36)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ken522

> Bring back the M14!
Exactly !!! In Vietnam I was issued an M14, 4 months later they took it away from my and substituted a crappy piece of junk called the M16. (Mine failed me in 2 different firefights). The M14 was a nice weapon. Accurate, long range and with lots of knock down power.


40 posted on 05/22/2010 1:14:56 PM PDT by BuffaloJack (Comrade O has to go; FIRE OBAMA NOW !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

Call in an air strike.


41 posted on 05/22/2010 1:17:52 PM PDT by edcoil (RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit
I used to think that then I got to shoot an FN SCAR in 7.62. It is awesome, isn’t that heavy, mounts optics that are a pain on the M-14, has a folding stock which is nice for getting in and out of vehicles. Way nicer than the M-14 in the Sage stock.



http://www.fnhusa.com/le/products/firearms/model.asp?fid=FNF045&gid=FNG007&mid=FNM0109



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_SCAR

My favorite too (if I were in charge of what rifle for the U.S. military to use).

Also works really well with optics attached.

42 posted on 05/22/2010 1:26:45 PM PDT by Screaming_Gerbil (...he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one... Luke 22:36)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack

I carried an M14 in basic, then we fired the M16 in the last week. The consensus was the M16 felt and handled like a toy. Any military weapon that needs an extra assist mechanism to chamber a round is seriously flawed.


43 posted on 05/22/2010 1:28:04 PM PDT by Spok (Free Range Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Ken522

I like the sound of a .30 caliber weapon. A frickin’ gussied up .22 is not a suitable battle weapon. In my un-soldier-trained opinion. Them boys need firepower.

Again, it was never my honor to serve so I only have theoretical knowledge of this, I’m just flapping my lips.


44 posted on 05/22/2010 1:32:11 PM PDT by West Texas Chuck (US out of the UN - UN out of the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool
I really don't understand the mentality of people who buy AR-15 variants. You'll be able to pick up 10 of those off the ground for every guy on the other side who starts with a single .308.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

45 posted on 05/22/2010 1:36:54 PM PDT by The Comedian (Evil can only succeed if good men don't point at it and laugh.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scripter

You can pour sand in the receiver of the Galil (an AK-47 variant) and it’ll still fire. The Israelis do carry M-16s but they weren’t really designed for that environment.


46 posted on 05/22/2010 1:57:15 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JayVee

My understanding is that since WWII, marksmanship was considered less important than firepower. Standard military doctrine for small-units revolves around suppressing the enemy with high firepower while a second team maneuvers in close for the kill. If further out, then you call in air strikes or artillery. But generally you try to avoid a marksmanship contest.

Of course, according to the NYTimes, Afghan (and Taliban) marksmanship is terrible:
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/02/the-weakness-of-taliban-marksmanship/


47 posted on 05/22/2010 2:05:20 PM PDT by too_cool_for_skool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Jack Hydrazine

Yeah but AK variants achieve their reliability by having really loosy-goosy tolerances - which wrecks their accuracy. I see AR variants routinely hitting 300+ yard targets at my local range - never seen it with an AK.


48 posted on 05/22/2010 2:07:31 PM PDT by too_cool_for_skool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

I trained on the M-14 and a few years later was given a course on an M-16 as I had my over the pond orders albeit never went. From my limited knowledge the M-14 was designed as a longer range weapon to defend fixed positions in Europe. The M-16 came along as a more rapid fire closer in weapon which allowed a soldier to carry more rounds. I own ARs in both 308 and 556 and would say the calibers of each fit their billing exactly. So, given our need for a longer range rifle with great knock down power at long range needed in Afghanistan, I would opt for the M-14 or any other 308 rifle deemed OK.

As a side note, there was a story this week that due to ROE in Afghanistan, soldiers in some areas patrol with empty firearms. Now, whether one has a 556 or 308, such rules are beyond the bounds of logic. The nitwit responsible for promulgating them should be fired.


49 posted on 05/22/2010 2:23:42 PM PDT by Mouton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: too_cool_for_skool

It’s a big improvement over the AK-47. It’s a 2 MOA rifle. There’s even a sniper variant of the Galil which is good for 1 MOA. Would that work for ya?

From Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMI_Galil

Sights

The L-shaped rear sight has two apertures preset for firing at 0–300 m and 300–500 m respectively (the rear sight can only be adjusted for elevation). The front post is fully adjustable for both windage and elevation zero and is enclosed in a protective hood. Low-light flip-up front blade and rear sight elements have three self-luminous tritium capsules (betalights) which are calibrated for 100 m when deployed. When the rear night sight is flipped up for use, the rear aperture sights must be placed in an offset position intermediate between the two apertures. Certain variants have a receiver-mounted dovetail adapter that is used to mount various optical sights.


50 posted on 05/22/2010 2:25:33 PM PDT by Jack Hydrazine (It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson