The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Semi-automatics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 2, 2015, 12:49 PM   #201
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
What'd they do with their other weapons?
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 03:13 PM   #202
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 7,097
Quote:
If you think a squad of guys in the open, armed with M-4's and a SAW are on equal footing with a guy with a PKM at 500+ yards firing from a prepared position ..... if you don't think that squad will feel "outranged" ..... IDK what to tell you.
Technically the enemy is in range of all organic squad weapons. In this scenario the range isn't the issue.

If the position is prepared well enough, even the 7.62x51 from the PLT 240s aren't going to change the situation much at all. You really need to step up to a Ma Deuce or Mk19, or call for indirect (the preferred method, always shoot other peoples bullets first).

To put it plainly, like a very smart COL once told me, the American Army wins by making the enemy have to fight in two directions. The enemy can duck behind a wall, but our indirect set to air burst will then kill him. The enemy can run from behind a wall to escape th indirect, and right into our machine gun fire. Even our basic fire and maneuver tasks is set to create a base of fire to fix the enemy in place, so that the moving element can flank.

A squad against a fixed position 500 yards away isn't in a position to make the enemy fight in two directions on their own. Doctrinally if the enemy was a fire team size element with one PKM we would need at least three fire teams to take that position, by moving fire teams so that we would have to make the enemy try to fight in two directions.

Now would the squad feel better about having heavier bullets in that scenario? Probably. The M14s were very popular for scout platoons when operating where artillery, cca, and cas, were scarce.

Jimro
__________________
Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.
Jimro is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 04:00 PM   #203
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
Well, at least they aren't expected to just sit there and trade shots. Nothing gets accomplished that way. Is there not a designated marksman somewhere there armed with a 7.62 rifle?

I might suggest reading "Bugles and a Tiger." It was written a long time ago about a British officer serving with the Indian Army. At the time the Northwest Frontier of India was where all the action was. Same enemy. It is probably a little hard on the morale of anyone sent to that part of the world to realize they've been fighting off foreign armies since Alexander the Great made a visit. It makes you wonder why people still try. It's sort of like trying to fight the Apaches.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 04:22 PM   #204
SPEMack618
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Is there not a designated marksman somewhere there armed with a 7.62 rifle?
Yeah, more often than not he was with the other section doing another patrol, or returning to the FOB.

My first tour we didn't have M-21s down to the squad level all the time.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Read my blog!
"The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig or .41 Magnum!"
SPEMack618 is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 05:01 PM   #205
gbc123
Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2015
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062 View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMO_Hi-uA-s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR63dEIH7yY
I feel pretty confident some of these are hopeless. If not these, than at least a few of the hundreds of others on youtube. A couple feature those in uniform.
Outside the context of a mass education/training system my statement is not true. It isn't that they stop learning and improving, it is that people at the top don't need hand holding to learn and improve. That is why they outpaced everyone else who was paced along with the training regimen. They certainly don't need training at a pace moderated by the lowest common denominator.

If the average infantrymen isn't going to hit beyond 300 anyways, why bother with a cartridge that will decrease rapid fire control within that range to get good hits past that range? It seems, as many more experienced than I have stated in this thread, the need is for more mix and development of SDM roles. I like the idea of switching the 249 for a second 240B/L. Maybe something entirely new. Something that comes close to a modern BAR. Maybe the lighter variants of the BAR. The SAW replaced the BAR more or less, right? 10-15 pounds unloaded instead of the 240L's 22.3lbs or 240B 27.1 pounds. Designed more with sustained aimed semi-automatic rapid fire in mind, but capable of dumping a mag if needed. Possibly with a magazine similar to the SAWs box magazine with capacity proportional to the size&weight ratio of 308&556). I know it is a box holding belted ammunition. How many rounds would that be? About 100? Maybe less would be better to cut the weight. A BAR held 20, but I think the need has changed slightly and something in between is probably best. I've always loved the M249 magazine(I don't have any significant experience with the M249 or its mag). Quick change barrel. Open Bolt. Close to the HCAR, BUT in 308, with QC barrel, and beltfed. Could that be accomplished with three pounds?

Buying weapon, training on weapon, training on maintenance, inventory of parts, but at least no new ammunition.

Maybe The option should be open to those who qualify a certain score.
I agree the saw was a definite step in the right direction. Open bolt firing is the way to go for lmg gunners. It basically cut the need for an ammo man too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueTrain View Post
You bring up some very good points. It is possible that some of them have already been addressed by the army or the Marines but I don't know. But clearly the mix of weapons at platoon and squad/section level is important, though not necessarily critical.

First of all, the SAW, M249 light machine gun, did not replace the BAR. In most infantry units there was no special squad automatic. Some used to have an M60 machine gun. Originally, the BAR was supposed to be replaced by a heavy-barreled M14, which I think was the M15. What they did end up with was a regular M14 with a different stock and a bipod. I have no idea what the users thought of it but I do recall being on the range for annual qualification and the man with the M14A had the best score.

When the M16 became general issue, apparently someone decided that more firepower was needed at the squad level and eventually the M249 was adopted. It is an FN weapon and it appears to be a very widely used weapon, so there must be something good about it. We also got around to adopting the M240, our version of the FN machine gun that the British had been using since the 1950s.

Various armies have had all sorts of combinations of weapons at the platoon level. Some worked well, some didn't and in some cases, the other side really did have a better weapon. Not necessarily better in the sense that it was finely crafted or anything like that but more reliable in spite of other shortcomings. Aside from little details like reliable weapons, most of it boils down to doctrinal differences.

Most of the advances in automatic or semi-automatic weapons have been in attempts to provide more mobile firepower to the infantry, where it counts. Firepower kills. But all of these wonder weapons are "thirsty" and call for a good supply of ammunition as well as good fire discipline.

The original BAR, by the way, was still being used by the National Guard in the 1970s.
gbc123 is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 05:19 PM   #206
gbc123
Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2015
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueTrain View Post
You bring up some very good points. It is possible that some of them have already been addressed by the army or the Marines but I don't know. But clearly the mix of weapons at platoon and squad/section level is important, though not necessarily critical.

First of all, the SAW, M249 light machine gun, did not replace the BAR. In most infantry units there was no special squad automatic. Some used to have an M60 machine gun. Originally, the BAR was supposed to be replaced by a heavy-barreled M14, which I think was the M15. What they did end up with was a regular M14 with a different stock and a bipod. I have no idea what the users thought of it but I do recall being on the range for annual qualification and the man with the M14A had the best score.

When the M16 became general issue, apparently someone decided that more firepower was needed at the squad level and eventually the M249 was adopted. It is an FN weapon and it appears to be a very widely used weapon, so there must be something good about it. We also got around to adopting the M240, our version of the FN machine gun that the British had been using since the 1950s.

Various armies have had all sorts of combinations of weapons at the platoon level. Some worked well, some didn't and in some cases, the other side really did have a better weapon. Not necessarily better in the sense that it was finely crafted or anything like that but more reliable in spite of other shortcomings. Aside from little details like reliable weapons, most of it boils down to doctrinal differences.

Most of the advances in automatic or semi-automatic weapons have been in attempts to provide more mobile firepower to the infantry, where it counts. Firepower kills. But all of these wonder weapons are "thirsty" and call for a good supply of ammunition as well as good fire discipline.

The original BAR, by the way, was still being used by the National Guard in the 1970s.
I've carried all versions of the weapon (fn R1/4/5). The R1 was best for accurate shots but was heavy and barrels couldn't handle sustained automatic fire, triggers were not the greatest either. The R4 is an R1 configured in 5.56mm built to comply with the Geneva conventions idea that a wounded soldier is better than a dead one. It has a nicer trigger.

The R5 was by far the best carry weapon in the bush. It is 4 inches shorter and with a folding stock is much the same as carrying a full size colt45acp(pretty easy), much easier to walk through dense bush with. I would imagine this would come in handy in urban conflict.

The 5.56 is a good compromise between reliability and accuracy. If its clean its great, can take some punishment and keep going... But its no ak with reliability. It is also becoming dated. I prefer it to an at though and plan to have one by years end.

The bull pup is innovative and I'm sure in another 20 years it will be the standard in most militaries. That being said, I still don't like the idea of the chamber being so close to my head, not to mention that lefties need a complety different gun and could swap in combat.
gbc123 is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 05:27 PM   #207
gbc123
Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2015
Posts: 86
Agreed, there are composite launchers available now that can literally clip onto weapons and have a round pre installed. They are no matter cumbersome than teargas grenades and leave the rifle free from "bulkiness" as they are one time use and disposable after. They also deform enough that they cannot be reloaded after use making them "safe" war carrion.
gbc123 is offline  
Old March 2, 2015, 05:36 PM   #208
gbc123
Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2015
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueTrain View Post
Well, at least they aren't expected to just sit there and trade shots. Nothing gets accomplished that way. Is there not a designated marksman somewhere there armed with a 7.62 rifle?

I might suggest reading "Bugles and a Tiger." It was written a long time ago about a British officer serving with the Indian Army. At the time the Northwest Frontier of India was where all the action was. Same enemy. It is probably a little hard on the morale of anyone sent to that part of the world to realize they've been fighting off foreign armies since Alexander the Great made a visit. It makes you wonder why people still try. It's sort of like trying to fight the Apaches.
When we were given r1s, we knew it would be heavy... Nuff said
gbc123 is offline  
Old March 3, 2015, 12:35 AM   #209
DaleA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,292
Quote:
gbc123-Open bolt firing is the way to go for lmg gunners. It basically cut the need for an ammo man too.
Just curious...how does the open bolt design cut the need for the ammo man? Don't you still want somebody carrying the extra rounds for you?
DaleA is offline  
Old March 3, 2015, 07:13 AM   #210
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
I think he meant the SAW itself cut the need for an extra ammo man (whether or not it does).

I think some good things here are starting to come out. I always like to see people get a better understanding of the big picture with small arms and the military. I also like to dispel notions that the enemy is superior in any way to our own military, whoever the enemy might be. Sometimes, we have the idea that they are faster, stronger, shoot further with older weapons and can overcome anything. That has always been a problem in warfare, which is basically the psychological side of the fight. Some of it is propaganda. Some of it is natural fear. The Germans invaded Poland and France in 1939 and 1940 with what was basically a horse-drawn army for the most part and lost a high proportion of their tank strength in the process. But their propaganda made up for it. Besides, they did win those two campaigns.

If the enemy in Afghanistan can outshoot American (or French or German) soldiers, that is a problem. If we merely believe they can whether they do or not, it's still a problem. The fact that Afghan men have been fighting outsiders for generations practically is a serious issue. We only go there for from six months to a year and a half at a time. Given that, issues with weapons tend to melt away.

But progress with weapons is still possible, although the doctrinal element is still there. That means how we use what we have and how the ground element is organized to do it. That sort of thing tends to be invisible to a casual observer more interested in just guns. But it's the kind of thing they think about back in Ft. Benning and Quantico (and Warminster and Paris).

There are clear trends among infantry weapons. Squad automatics are out. Light machine guns (belt-fed) are in. The basic infantry rifle is now shorter (if not lighter) and typically equipped with an optical sight. Bullpups (that's where this whole thing started) have become common, though they only seem to offer only a shorter overall length for a longer barrel length, although both of those are good things. They may not have triggers that a precision shooter (that doesn't include me) would love, given that the trigger would have a longish linkage.

The cartridges are unlikely to change anytime soon, although the Chinese didn't know that. It's possible a new cartridge could be introduced for some uses if there was any real point to it. Having different cartridges in the system is probably not such a serious issue. In the 1960s, for instance, we had troops using three different rifles that used three different cartridges.

Possibilities abound.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old March 3, 2015, 07:50 AM   #211
Tucker 1371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,649
Quote:
There are clear trends among infantry weapons. Squad automatics are out. Light machine guns (belt-fed) are in.
The Corps apparently didn't get that memo, see the M27 IAR. Not making an argument for the IAR, I think it's a terrible idea but thats a whole 'nother thread.
__________________
Sgt. of Marines, 5th Award Expert Rifle, 237/250
Expert Pistol, 382/400. D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!!
If you start a thread, be active in it. Don't leave us hanging.
OEF 2011 Sangin, Afg. Molon Labe
Tucker 1371 is offline  
Old March 3, 2015, 08:05 AM   #212
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
They're free to use whatever they wish, as is anyone else, as far as I'm concerned. That's how trends start, too.

Do you realize the M249 has been in use for 30 years already? Long time but not a record. I don't know if things last any longer than they used to but changes are made less frequently than formerly. The M1 rifle was standard for barely 30 years but not as long as the M1903. The Single Action Army revolver was standard for only about 20 years. I say "standard," not how long something was actually in use. M1903s are still used by honor guards in Washington. Mauser bolt actions are used by honor guards in Germany. Also, "standard" does not imply that everyone gets it anytime soon. I got out of the army in 1968 and had never seen an M16.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.

Last edited by BlueTrain; March 3, 2015 at 09:07 AM.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old March 3, 2015, 02:14 PM   #213
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
I notice that one of the solid complaints abut bullpups is the trigger. I notice geiselle make a Tavor trigger. Has anyone tried it? I find it hard to believe the triggers are really incapable of matching a stock M4 trigger. Yes it is money, but in the scheme of things it is really small compared to some other DOD costs.
There are two ways to measure this:
Dollars and lives. Politicians hold the purse strings. I think the electorate is likely very open to an argument that infantry is being neglected in favor of flashy technology. I think a comprehensive campaign to upgrade the capabilities of the infantryman with the overriding intent to increase survivability would be a surprisingly easy sale. For starters, I think it has become strikingly obvious to anyone who has their eyes open that the tail end cost of a casualty often far exceeds many of the possible upgrades discovered. Is a new rifle the on the top of the list of things in that campaign? Probably not, but there is more to it than lighter stronger body armor. A new rifle with a $350 trigger group might fit somewhere.
I also believe increasing the resilience of the infantryman greatly increases effectiveness of the entire package. Throughout history the stories of enemies that won't die have had an astounding effect on many conflicts.

Can a 200,000 person Army that is better equipped function better than a larger one as is now equipped?
If a soldier believes they have the full support and the best possible equipment which increases survivability available to their nation are they able to handle longer deployments? How many problems are caused when units rotate and all the work with locals is erased?
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old March 3, 2015, 04:10 PM   #214
Tucker 1371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,649
I can deal with the crap trigger on a bullpup, I can't deal with spent casings being ejected in my face, I shoot left handed. For both the AUG and TAVOR you have to have a special left handed bolt which will inevitably be lost by the armorer or never be ordered by the unit in the first place.

I also hate how magazine changes happen out of your peripheral vision (if you're keeping your eyes down range).
__________________
Sgt. of Marines, 5th Award Expert Rifle, 237/250
Expert Pistol, 382/400. D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!!
If you start a thread, be active in it. Don't leave us hanging.
OEF 2011 Sangin, Afg. Molon Labe
Tucker 1371 is offline  
Old March 6, 2015, 08:59 AM   #215
Bart Noir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2000
Location: Puget Sound, USA
Posts: 2,215
Tucker, the Tavor can be fired from either shoulder, using the right-hand ejection port.

There are some videos on this glorious internet showing guys firing left handed, with the cases flying by their noses without making contact. Frenchmen now, they might have a case-in-the-nose problem

Forgive me for the above remark, but I am in France at this moment and I can say that the Gallic nose does exist. As in Charles de Gaulle nose.

Bart Noir

Edited to refer to Charles de Gaulle, not his much less famous cousin George.
__________________
Be of good cheer and mindful of your gun muzzle!

Last edited by Bart Noir; March 7, 2015 at 04:28 PM.
Bart Noir is offline  
Old March 6, 2015, 09:30 AM   #216
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
Quote:
Forgive me for the above remark, but I am in France at this moment and I can say that the Gallic nose does exist. As in George de Gaulle nose.
The most glorious of wines and cheeses cannot be experienced by the mouth alone.

Bullpups. Never shot one, but I like them.

Have seen a M.A.C. review of the Tavor, I was very impressed by the thought that has gone into it. Too expensive to re-equip an army the size of the US's but I bet anyone armed with one would not be too miffed.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old March 6, 2015, 12:04 PM   #217
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 6,141
How did left-handers manage with bolt-actions?
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old March 7, 2015, 11:34 PM   #218
dvdcrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 5, 2010
Posts: 665
Was at a convention featuring the latest experimental drones and charging systems. These things will fly themselves up to a bridge or lightpole equipped with wireless charging tech. and automatically recharge thereby staying in the field almost indefinitely. If they arm these little things and mass produce them, the rifle issue suddenly takes a back seat. You remember the hitchcock movie about birds right? The only reason you feel safe is that the birds arent really intelligent and arent out to get you. Well gentlemen there is a new breed of bird out there.
dvdcrr is offline  
Old March 8, 2015, 11:00 AM   #219
Tucker 1371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,649
Quote:
If they arm these little things and mass produce them, the rifle issue suddenly takes a back seat.
No. No. NO. I don't care how far technology advances you can't win a war without (somebody's) boots on the ground or without a thinking human brain controlling a body pulling a trigger. Technology will advance and play an increasing role in warfare and indeed many systems will likely become unmanned but there is no substitute for a living breathing thinking human being making the conscious decision to take another human being's life when necessary.

IMHO I think we've fairly well beaten the dead horse on this subject.

Just to reiterate what rifle myself, as a Marine who carried an M16A4 in Afghanistan, would like to see my armorer hand to me through the window one day before my next deployment-

8.5 lb rifle loaded with optics (preferably ACOG with piggybacked RDS)
Folding stock
Piston driven
Charging handle mounted forward and ambidextrous
Ambidextrous magazine release and bolt catch/release
Chambered in a 6.5mm or 6.8mm cartridge throwing a 95-110gr pill at 26-2700fps (6.5 MPC uses the 5.56 case and is capable of this)
Issued with GOOD magazines and my fellow Marines taught how to spot a bad one
__________________
Sgt. of Marines, 5th Award Expert Rifle, 237/250
Expert Pistol, 382/400. D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!!
If you start a thread, be active in it. Don't leave us hanging.
OEF 2011 Sangin, Afg. Molon Labe
Tucker 1371 is offline  
Old March 8, 2015, 02:17 PM   #220
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
Quote:
No. No. NO. I don't care how far technology advances you can't win a war without (somebody's) boots on the ground or without a thinking human brain controlling a body pulling a trigger. Technology will advance and play an increasing role in warfare and indeed many systems will likely become unmanned but there is no substitute for a living breathing thinking human being making the conscious decision to take another human being's life when necessary.
Not right now, but there are schools of thought that envisage a situation where, given current achievements in A.I. and the rate of progress in robotics, such career paths as lawyers, doctors and teachers will be almost obsolete due to A.I. taking over those roles.
When distilled down to the basic process some such jobs entail analysing patterns, be it patterns of symptoms or patterns of judgment. Some programs are already able to duplicate real world legal case verdicts simply by entering the legal considerations submitted in the case.

Based on that are you still sure that the human brain will be indispensable in the battlefield? Our analytical abilities but faster, more extensive and without emotions.
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old March 8, 2015, 02:27 PM   #221
jimbob86
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
Quote:
Our analytical abilities but faster, more extensive and without emotions.
Without emotions.

As if that would be good thing.

Welcome to Skynet.
jimbob86 is offline  
Old March 8, 2015, 04:05 PM   #222
Pond, James Pond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 12, 2011
Location: Top of the Baltic stack
Posts: 6,079
Quote:
Without emotions.

As if that would be good thing.

Welcome to Skynet.
Never said it would be a good thing, just that science is progressing even if its somewhere we may wish we hadn't gone. Emotions are probably one of the last things that technicians are able to recreate: logic, self-teaching and analysis are probably quite easy to create algorithms for, by comparison.

Humans are very bad at imposing limits and thresholds on themselves when there is nothing else to stop them going further. Science is like that. The know-how in itself is not a problem. The issues arise when big business start to take an interest. That's when it tends to spiral!!

I can dig up the links to the radio broadcast and PM them if you are interested. (so as not to send the thread off on a tangent)
__________________
When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic.
Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.
Pond, James Pond is offline  
Old March 8, 2015, 08:22 PM   #223
AKexpat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 5, 2014
Location: SW WA State
Posts: 490
Bullpups For Southpaws?

Never happen. The receiver is too close to the face, for one, in case of a blow-up...

and the ejection port on the right side of the gun just ain't right for lefties.

I'm a righty and have always entertained a want for a bullpup Rem 870 pump, and there once was a prototype for a retrofit kit 20+ years ago for it, but it never got past that into production. Can't remember the manufacturer.

Then there was always the High Standard Model 10:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Standard_Model_10

and you saw how long that lasted (both renditions).

Good idea. Bad application, IMO
__________________
To be governed – is to be watched, inspected, directed, indoctrinated, numbered, estimated, regulated, commanded, controlled, law-driven, preached at, spied upon, censured, checked, valued, enrolled – by creatures who have neither the right, nor the wisdom, nor the virtue to do so. - Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
AKexpat is offline  
Old March 9, 2015, 01:20 AM   #224
Tucker 1371
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 29, 2008
Location: East TN
Posts: 2,649
Quote:
Humans are very bad at imposing limits and thresholds on themselves when there is nothing else to stop them going further. Science is like that.
Sounds like an excuse to let the wrong idea prevail. If you don't like it then don't stand for it.

That said. This thread is about rifles, not the plot of the Terminator series of movies.

I've said what I would like to see in the next standard issue rifle as a combat veteran. What say you, TFL?
__________________
Sgt. of Marines, 5th Award Expert Rifle, 237/250
Expert Pistol, 382/400. D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!!
If you start a thread, be active in it. Don't leave us hanging.
OEF 2011 Sangin, Afg. Molon Labe
Tucker 1371 is offline  
Old March 9, 2015, 01:35 AM   #225
johnwilliamson062
Junior member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
Quote:
Never happen. The receiver is too close to the face, for one, in case of a blow-up...
There are a number of design options that make the proximity of the chamber in case of a catostrophic failure no more of an issue than with traditional designs(Kevlar reinforced stocks for instance). How often do military rifles have such catastrophic failures with the ammunition they fire? It isn't that great of a concern.
Current production Rem 870 and Moss 500 bull pup retrofit kits are commercially available. That was just from a quick google search. I believe there are quite a few other companies doing it. Newer designs are also ambidextrous(with a few parts changes). Other large militaries have already switched successfully without major technical issues.

I would be surprised if lawyers go away, but the others may.
Similarly, I would be surprised if AI is pulling the trigger against human targets anytime soon. At least on a large scale with any major government admitting it. Destroying other automated systems or even clearly military vehicles such as tank or military aircraft possibly.
A human controlling a turret on a UAV, probably. Just imagine the potential of a "UAV sniper" hovering/gliding 200-400 meters above an engagement supporting ground troops. Being able to quickly change angles by repositioning at a rapid speed, safely draw fire, provide detailed intelligence, engage targets with precision aimed fire. AT what point does every soldier/fireteam on the ground have a guardian angel floating over head with a triggerman many miles away in a secure area?
OPFOR opens up from 600 meter with an RPK, soldiers run for cover, drones with rifles close with enemy and attack from high behind within a minute or two with the sun directly behind the drones.
Would you sacrifice a fireteam for such capability? A Humvee/APC that is designated to refuel/recharge them one at a time instead of carry a fireteam?
The only reason I can think it hasn't happened yet is humans in the field are still cheaper. Using the UAVs to drop big bombs is great, but where they will really shine is once they are developed to the point where they replace the A-10 with even higher precision capabilities.

The first attempt at an around the world manned solar only flight started this weekend. It really won't be long until we have solar UAVs that can hover, stay in the air for a very very long time, and support 100 pound payload.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.08291 seconds with 8 queries