This guy ?Originally Posted by Drang
This guy ?
From the reading I'm doing, it looks like the "Ratnik" modernization program is well underway (atleast with the IBA) with all special forces and naval troops equipped, and is already being issued to general infantry.....on track to 70%+ issue to all troops (including reserves) by 2020.
Last edited by TGS; 05-28-2017 at 08:37 PM.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
I remember in the early 90's (think iron sights and 20" bbls) the Army taught that the M-16A2 had a max effective range of 500 yards while the Marines taught 800. As most member of this site understand it's the nut behind the rifle that matters most. Hell, I remember qualifying on a paper target that was maybe 50 yards away but had different size silhouettes that represent a torso at 100, 200, etc. Until our combatants are trained at an appropriate level of performance I believe we are chasing our tail looking for a better caliber or better rifle. All those tax dollars for new whatevers would be much better utilized on ammo and range time.
Sadly the DoD upper management doesn't think like that. They want a cool new toy they can claim makes us better so they can get promoted. Look at history. They like to fix training problems with technology. Grunt's wasting ammo with full auto in Vietnam? Give them a 3rd burst. People firing a handgun when startled? Give them a DA/SA gun. (That last one infects LE as well as the .mil)
I expect this problem to only get worse too as so few members of Congress have ever served. They have no personal experience to draw from and take the flag rank crowd as experts.
This guy ?
Among others
Recovering Gun Store Commando. My Blog: The Clue Meter
“It doesn’t matter what the problem is, the solution is always for us to give the government more money and power, while we eat less meat.”
Glenn Reynolds
El Cid you are talking about point and area targets, given probability of hits to target at those ranges with ammo and weapon combination. The numbers aren't just arbitrarily pulled out of a hat.
Yes marksmanship is extremely important but is not the complete solution. Personally I think the M4, M16 family of weapons are the best there is for general issue, minus ammo. Yes targets can be hit at 600 yards but it is a lot harder to do with a 5.56 gun in combat conditions than with something like a 7.62, and that's not accounting for the rounds terminal effects either at those ranges. I'm not advocating 7.62 just an example.
You can't fix training issues with technology. No argument, and a soldiers greatest weapon is his mind and body but technology enhances lethality. Just look at how much NVG's and LAD's have made a difference. When I came in we were lucky to have 3 per squad. Once the entire platoon had them it was like damn near operating in the sun at night.
Oh, and yes I do think that some of the requirements are a pipe dream.
Last edited by Mike C; 05-29-2017 at 08:07 AM.
When I read these type threads, I think back to the days when I was planning direct fire engagements for an Infantry Platoon, Company, or Battalion - this was during my Mechanized Days with BFVs. When we thought about 600+ yards engagements, we were talking crew served weapons. Even in my Light Fighter days, we were talking M60s and mortars for 600 yard engagements. I would think that today the M240B's would be used along with snipers for 600 yards.
The M240B's are the bee's knees at 4-6, but max there are 3 per platoon and what should be a 3 man team is often less. Additionally guys running M24's are in shorter supply than the 240's hence the move to add SDM's as an organic element in infantry squads/platoons as a stop gap. When I was still in a scout unit back in 2001 we had only 6 M24's for the entire BN out of those sniper/observer teams there were only 3 school house trained NCO's with a B4 identifier. I'd be willing to bet those numbers are the same or smaller now and recent past with the deployment rates. When I was still in there was little time to get guys to the school house plus guys would end up getting promoted and moved off the teams. Same goes for your 60mm teams, not a lot of those dudes to go round and screw carrying a base plate, mortar tubes, and rounds up the side of a mountain.
Ranger, what did sniper/scout coverage look like in your days, (broken down over companies or treated as BN asset)?
I honestly can't recall but my understanding was they were talking about hitting a man size target. It's been a long time and during peacetime. Not counting Panama and Grenada, the last shooting war for them at the time was Vietnam. I ended up switching to AF so I could deploy with air conditioning and swimming pools. Lol!
As for ease of hitting at that distance I found it relatively easy. At 600 yards during F2S's heavy carbine class I tried my 16" 5.56 that I'd brought as a backup to my .308. First round barely missed the plate and then I could ring it like I bell. Of course that was with a free-floated quality barrel, LPV, spotter, and 77gr pills. And as you noted - nobody was actively trying to kill me. It's been over a decade since I shot a .mil M16/M4 but clearly the important parts weren't the same spec. One day I'd love to see how I do with a stock 6920 or similar.
I guess that was the point I failed to make. In addition to better training... if they want to throw money at the issue I'd prefer they use better bbls, free-float them and get better ammo. I believe that would be much more effective than a change in caliber or rifle. But I admit I could be off the mark. Being in LE my world is much smaller. If I have to take a shot beyond 50 yards it would be very rare.
Last edited by El Cid; 05-29-2017 at 08:54 PM.
The KAC RAS was designed before my nephew was born; he'll be at Fort Knox this summer. We're still buying M4A1s with a 20 year old picatinny hand guard. Free float options have been in military service (the Daniel Defense RIS II leaps to mind) for at least a decade. A simple switch from the RAS to the RIS II (long in use across USASOC to include the Ranger Regiment) would be a simple, proven, cost effective upgrade. Instead we continue to invest in dated technology...
"When the phone rang, Parker was in the garage, killing a man."
Agreed. The SOF community is usually ahead of the curve regarding small arms. Big Army still doesn't do preventive maintenance as far as I know. They just shoot it until something breaks. I thought I read the Marines want their next M4 iteration to be free-floated. Between that and their large scale suppressor testing they seem to have figured out the best path. Maybe having Maggie as SECDEF will help the Army.
Reply With Quote