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

Skip to comments.

Army, Marines rate weapon success
Stars and Stripes ^ | Sunday, July 13, 2003 | Mark Oliva

Posted on 07/13/2003 2:53:59 PM PDT by demlosers

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-111 next last

1 posted on 07/13/2003 2:53:59 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
Ping. I noticed your interested in these threads :)
2 posted on 07/13/2003 3:02:11 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

DANG FREEPERS KEPT ME FROM BECOMING THE WORLD'S GREEN KING!


Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-
It is in the breaking news sidebar!


3 posted on 07/13/2003 3:02:58 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Both soldiers and Marines also noted problems with the M-9 9 mm pistol. “There was general dissatisfaction with this weapon,” the Army report said. “First and foremost, soldiers do not feel it possesses sufficient stopping power.”

I hear some guy named Browning has designed a pistol which may be satisfactory.

4 posted on 07/13/2003 3:05:33 PM PDT by pa_dweller (This space left blank intentionally)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gabrielle Reilly
read later.
5 posted on 07/13/2003 3:06:35 PM PDT by Gabrielle Reilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
Bang!
6 posted on 07/13/2003 3:06:56 PM PDT by wysiwyg (What parts of "right of the people" and "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wysiwyg
I heard the same rumor about a Browing designed auto pistol in .45 caliber. Sounds like the army should give it a tryout. Parley
7 posted on 07/13/2003 3:11:25 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Just give them a colt .45
8 posted on 07/13/2003 3:11:38 PM PDT by Sofa King (-I am Sofa King- tired of liberal BS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
“The most significant negative comment was reference [to] the M-4’s range,” the Army report stated. “In the desert, there were times where soldiers needed to assault a building that may be 500+ meters distant across open terrain. They did not feel the M-4 provided effective fire at that range.”

No, Sh*t!

500+ meters is 7.62 country. Should have broken out the M14's in storage if there are any left.
9 posted on 07/13/2003 3:16:02 PM PDT by x1stcav ( HOOAHH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pa_dweller
I hear some guy named Browning has designed a pistol which may be satisfactory.

The Browning High Power is an excellent weapon! :-) I also hear that a guy named Glock has made some ultra reliable pistols that are favored by police in the U.S.

Maybe a 10mm would be better than a 9mm, if there were no problem with NATO standards.

Seriously, though, I think the real solution would be to do what the British did in their empire for decades, only do it with all of our troops, not just the officers.

Allow soldiers to buy their own personal sidearms, as long as it is of an approved caliber. The soldier will then have more confidence in their arm, and will be more likely to be proficient with it.

10 posted on 07/13/2003 3:17:31 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
Actually have used both the Hi power and the M1911A1, perfer the M1911A1, simple robust, and if you hit something with it it stays down.
11 posted on 07/13/2003 3:24:48 PM PDT by dts32041 ("The avalanche has started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: x1stcav
I've heard rumors that, rather than sell them thru the DCM, the plan is to scrap the M-14's, since they are too big to give to 3rd world "allies" and Americans can't be trusted with an "assault" rifle.
12 posted on 07/13/2003 3:38:00 PM PDT by jonascord (To Robert Service, with respect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dts32041
The 9mm is Euro-junk. Without making judgements, the "civilized" concept of wounding so that the Enemy ties up 4 other to take care of each casualty is a luxury the 3rd World does not indulge in. Kindness is a bullet thru the head. Hence the .45 ACP... Put 'em down, one shot, no worry about him getting up.
13 posted on 07/13/2003 3:44:54 PM PDT by jonascord (To Robert Service, with respect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
This brings to mind what General George S.Patton Jr. said about the M-1Garand Rifle!He called it:"The Finest Battle Implement Ever Devised"!!Now,I'm not saying that we should go back that far,but how about the M-14?It fires a .30cal.projectile(7.62/54).Or how about the FN/FAL which fires the same NATO cartridge as the M-14??As far as the Beretta 9mm.pistol,this is a DISGRACE!!!The 1911 Colt.45ACP pistol served this country's armed forces BRILLIANTLY for 75-years!!!!If you ask all of the pistol champions,they will almost always favor a 1911 variant.Combat-wise,it has no peer.The only improvement that could(and can)be easily undertaken is to re-engineer the grip so that it will accomodate a straddled,high-cap(15-round)magazine.You don't have to make a "killing shot"with a 1911.ANYWHERE will do just fine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
14 posted on 07/13/2003 3:47:21 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pa_dweller
You are quite RIGHT!It was adopted by the US Army Ordinance Dept. in 1911!!!!!!!!
15 posted on 07/13/2003 3:48:44 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
FNGs! You never lube a weapon in the desert! You spend a lot of time removing the least speck of oil! If the gun doesn't work without lube, ram it up the Ordinance Dept.'s rear end and get one that does, hence the pickup AK-47s...

Why does every war have to be fought by little boys, who get killed re-learning how to slaughter?

16 posted on 07/13/2003 3:50:15 PM PDT by jonascord (To Robert Service, with respect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
NATO"Standards"SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!
17 posted on 07/13/2003 3:50:27 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Here's a good link on 7.62mm vs 5.56mm rounds:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1986/MVT.htm

Can female soldiers qualify shooting the 7.62 round at 1000 yds (as was the old standard)?
18 posted on 07/13/2003 3:50:34 PM PDT by Gary Boldwater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
The M9 is a piece of sh!t- in my opinion. You may as well throw the f---ing thing at the enemy. You'd be better off with a reliable revolver than the M9.

The max effective range of the M16A2 is 550 meters. It's hard to distinguish a man target past this range. But getting accurate fire at the ranges between 300 and 500 meters is important. The M16A2 sight is set all the way up to 800 meters. I would've felt confident setting the iron sights on 500 meters and having a go at a target at that range. The thing is, obviously, those extra inches of barrel weigh something. You have to sort of take your pick in the end. What do you want? A weapon that is effective at long range or a weapon that is easier to carry and good for MOUT type combat? Personally, I like to be able to shoot at something from a long ways off and have a reasonable chance of hitting it.

19 posted on 07/13/2003 3:50:46 PM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sofa King
If you fire a .45ACP and then fire a 9mm,the difference is breathtaking!If you re-load both(as do I),the"recipes"are just as breatakingly different!!Standard load for the .45ACP is a 230-grain bullet and about 10grs of Unique(what I use).The 9mm Parabellum standard is a 115-grain bullet with about 6grs.of Unique.No Comparison!!!!!!
20 posted on 07/13/2003 3:55:08 PM PDT by bandleader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I also hear that a guy named Glock has made some ultra reliable pistols that are favored by police in the U.S.

Glock has some deficiencies as a military weapon that don't practically impede its use as a police weapon (which it was originally designed to be). There are definitely better military service pistols out there. But it is great for police or home use. I have a G27 for CCW in fact.

As a technical nit, Glock reliability is middle of the road for modern service pistols. There are a number of other popular platforms that have substantially better MRBF figures.

21 posted on 07/13/2003 3:56:48 PM PDT by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
I would point out that many of the comments reference the "feelings" of the soldiers with no regard to whether it has any bearing on reality and fact. The article has hints of urban legend all over the place in it, and I can state for a fact that most of what grunts think they know about weapons is pure voodoo and third-hand anecdotes of dubious origin. This isn't reason enough to question the effectiveness of a weapon.

There is very little substance to the article that references real specific shortcomings with the weapons that weren't intentionally designed into the platform -- no weapon system can do everything perfectly -- and trade-offs in capability are to be expected to get the maximum performance in the general case.

22 posted on 07/13/2003 4:03:37 PM PDT by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gary Boldwater
Can female soldiers qualify shooting the 7.62 round at 1000 yds (as was the old standard)?

What the hell does gender have to do with how well a person can shoot a wimpy-ass cartridge like the 7.62 NATO, or any cartridge for that matter? The only possible relevance is the weight of a rifle that you have to lug around all day.

If shooting ability for a given cartridge size was a measure of manhood, my 110-lb girlfriend must have a johnson that drags on the ground. Puhhlease. This is an imaginary issue.

23 posted on 07/13/2003 4:12:39 PM PDT by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
Personally, I like to be able to shoot at something from a long ways off and have a reasonable chance of hitting it.

Not me. I'll take a weapon that is light and fast any day. When it starts to get close and personal, I would rather avoid boat anchors at all cost. Go ahead and have a guy or two in your squad with some extended range capability (something that the M16 can be configured to do quite adequately actually, if built right), but you'll want most of your guys using systems that are optimized for killing in the 200 meters and under range.

24 posted on 07/13/2003 4:17:39 PM PDT by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
BFL8R



25 posted on 07/13/2003 4:18:18 PM PDT by Cacique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
There is very little substance to the article that references real specific shortcomings with the weapons that weren't intentionally designed into the platform -- no weapon system can do everything perfectly -- and trade-offs in capability are to be expected to get the maximum performance in the general case.

Excellent observation. This also applies to most of the posts. Though well intentioned, there is a lot of mythology out there, especially about the difference between the 9mm and the .45. The energy of both is practically identical, and the only studies worthy of the name shows "stopping power" to be nearly identical as well.

Stopping power is very hard to quantify, and with full metal jacketed military rounds, you are very likely to have to shoot a determined opponent several times, no matter what military pistol caliber you use.

26 posted on 07/13/2003 4:19:15 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Lack of range was and is a crucial problem in Afghanistan. The short barreled rifle simply does not have the range for the conditions our soldiers faced.
Some folks suggested adding a long barreled rifle in 7.62 to each squad to help with the problem. In other words going back 40 years to the M-14.

Buzz
27 posted on 07/13/2003 4:22:10 PM PDT by Buzzcook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
Well, we both have our opinions on this. Apparantly some of the guys on the ground see it both ways:
“The most significant negative comment was reference [to] the M-4’s range,” the Army report stated. “In the desert, there were times where soldiers needed to assault a building that may be 500+ meters distant across open terrain. They did not feel the M-4 provided effective fire at that range.”

28 posted on 07/13/2003 4:25:09 PM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bandleader
You're out of your mind for posting loads like that.

Children, do not attempt the previous loads. Do not try it at home. Do not try it anywhere.
29 posted on 07/13/2003 4:28:16 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: x1stcav
Yeah, the military needs a 7.62 rifle more than ever. I think they are scared it might hurt little shoulders.

30 posted on 07/13/2003 4:30:56 PM PDT by Gringo1 (I love ham.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
I haven't figure out what exactly they're complaining about in this article.

They mention the thirty year old controversy and put the blame on the M-16 rifle instead of the real reason which was the gunpowder. If they wanted controversy in the ancient times, why didn't they discuss the teething problems of the Garand??

Next, they didn't like the range of the M-16 but they picked up AK-47's to use???

Then they traded rifles for pistols but didn't like the fact they were unreliable??

They showed firing pin marks on the primers, neglecting to say that the non-existant problem started in 1936.

Gees, learn to clean a magazine, use a better lube and the rest of these "problems" can disappear.
31 posted on 07/13/2003 4:38:19 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prodigal Son
May I point out to everyone one important fact?

When it comes to standard military ammo, the 45acp beats the hell out of a 9mm any time. However, this is the problem.

The 9mm with standard 115 gr +p hollowpoint ammunition is quite a sufficient manstopper. I carry the Cor Bon version in my Glock 26.

As long as our troops are saddled with FMJ military ball ammunition, the M-9 will continue to be an insufficient manstopper.

Attack the ammo, not the gun.

Until then, get a new bullet, or go back to a proven manstopper, the 230 Gr ball 45 auto round.
32 posted on 07/13/2003 4:38:35 PM PDT by Armedanddangerous (The first rule in a gunfight is to have a gun...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Gary Boldwater
Don't know about 1000 yards, but my 5'1" daughter recently qualified at 500 yards. Good thing, too - she didn't shoot too well at 300 yards. Figures she'll either have to shoot 'em at 500, or wait until they close to 200 yards. In between they are safe.

Of course, it would be preferable it the Marines avoided sending her to the front lines - as she'll admit, 5'1" & 115 lbs has real drawbacks for combat.
33 posted on 07/13/2003 4:44:27 PM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bandleader
It's generally a bad idea to quote handloading recipes in a general forum like this without some serious warnings. Especially one that is seriously over the max quoted loads.

Your load for .45 auto is 67% over Alliant's max load and almost 50% over Lyman's max load.

I'm not saying you shouldn't use a load that works for you, but it looks like you are treading on the ragged edge and it may not be a safe load for someone else.

34 posted on 07/13/2003 4:48:26 PM PDT by MediaMole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
But soldiers and Marines alike railed against the poor performance of the M-9 ammunition magazines.

Regardless of your opinion of the 9mm (and I think it stinks as a military round, it isn't even adequate as a police round), magazines are considered "semi-expendable" in the military. Wanna bet there was no money in the budget for replacement mags during the klinton regime, just like there was no money for small arms ammo production?

35 posted on 07/13/2003 4:50:13 PM PDT by 300winmag (All that is gold does not glitter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Bring back the BAR-1918!!

:p

36 posted on 07/13/2003 4:56:37 PM PDT by Jonez712 (TOTAL RECALL!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonez712
O.K. then bring back the M1903.

:p

37 posted on 07/13/2003 5:01:22 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MediaMole
That was a very polite posting. I have to work on my tact but loads that are that hot are very bothersome to me. I have a pet load for a 45 Colt that goes to double digits with a 255 grain bullet and I won't post it at all. Especially since it's only used in a Ruger Blackhawk.

38 posted on 07/13/2003 5:02:35 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: demlosers; Jonez712
Did the 45-70 Trapdoor fans think a 30-40 Krag was a mouse gun?
39 posted on 07/13/2003 5:05:26 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: Prodigal Son
What about the SAW? It fires the same round (I believe) as the M-16, but is rated effective out to about 1000 yards.

I defer to those who have lugged the 22 pounder around.
41 posted on 07/13/2003 5:10:15 PM PDT by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: bandleader
How many grains of unique??????
whoa
42 posted on 07/13/2003 5:11:02 PM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Shooter 2.5
Interesting question, I wouldn't know. Isn't that a question for great grand papas?
43 posted on 07/13/2003 5:14:31 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: tortoise
If shooting ability for a given cartridge size was a measure of manhood, my 110-lb girlfriend must have a johnson that drags on the ground.

LOL! Now there's an image for us to consider...

44 posted on 07/13/2003 5:14:54 PM PDT by Future Snake Eater (Where's the money, Lebowski?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bandleader
You're shooting some wimpy loads .... my Rugers in 45Colt will throw a 360gr round at 1200 fps. Not too many guys are going to be getting up from that .. (like zero)
45 posted on 07/13/2003 5:25:44 PM PDT by Centurion2000 (We are crushing our enemies, seeing him driven before us and hearing the lamentations of the liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag
The reason the SAW is effective out to that rate is because it's spraying out a high volume of fire. Technically, the M16 is good out to that range if you can see what you're shooting at and can see where the rounds land. The maximum range of the M16 is over 3500 meters. Effective range is only 550 though. The 50 Cal has a max range of over 6 kilometers but the effective range is 1800 meters. That's over a mile. The thing with the 50 is, you can legitimately aim at things that far away and hope to hit it.

The barrel for the 50 is almost 4 feet long. This accounts for most of this accuracy. The thing with the M4 is- you're losing barrel length. That's what makes it less accurate than the M16A2 at range.

46 posted on 07/13/2003 5:26:18 PM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
I can hear it now. If that squirrel gun can't drop a horse at 1200 yards, what good is it?

Seriously, I think they were overjoyed to get rid of the single shots.

I had a Trapdoor that had knife blade marks on the inside of the receiver where the previous owner had to pry the copper cases out of the chamber. I didn't know what the marks were until I read about the Seventh Cavalry having the same problem.
47 posted on 07/13/2003 5:27:54 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Gringo1
Yeah, the military needs a 7.62 rifle more than ever.

If range and accuracy are the primary concern, they would be better off with a 6.5mm. Hell, they could just neck down 7.62 NATO. Flatter trajectory, way more effective range, and better penetration in the same size package.

7.62 is really the wrong answer to just about any problem the military has these days. Like the 9mm, the only reason it is around is due to legacy issues. There are reasons those cartridges have been dumped in various times and places. We don't need to move backwards, we need to move forward.

48 posted on 07/13/2003 5:33:15 PM PDT by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000
You're shooting some wimpy loads

You forgot your sarcasm tag.

Again, to the beginners on this thread, DO NOT TRY THE 9MM AND 45 AUTO LOADS THAT WERE LISTED. THEY ARE DANGEROUSLY OVERCHARGED.

49 posted on 07/13/2003 5:33:55 PM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
"Reliability complaints also found fault with the oil soldiers and Marines used to clean their weapons. In the dusty, sandstorm-plagued battlefields of Iraq, weapons became clogged with sand, trapped by the heavy oil, called CLP."

There are myriad excellent substitutes for oil as a lubricant on firearms and trust the mule-headed military brass to be the last in the world to be aware of it. Did they think Iraq was NOT going to be dusty?

One such is trade-named "dri-kote" which is does not attract dust and is an excellent colorless lubricant. One good application of it and dust and grit just bounce off of those tightly toleranced parts. However, if today's army is anything like my training outfit, a soldier would be court-martialed for using it.

I would expect that most of the weapons problems can be traced back to bureauocratic paralysis and lack of professionalism in the upper echelons of the military services.

50 posted on 07/13/2003 5:37:14 PM PDT by nightdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-111 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