The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old January 30, 1999, 12:50 AM   #1
4V50 Gary
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 20,704
OK, we've got the M16A2 and its smaller sibling, the M4. The Brits have the L85, the French the FAMAS, Swiss the Stgw 90 (Sig 550/551), and so on and so forth. As the General Officer in Command of "your" nation, what arm would you choose and why?
4V50 Gary is offline  
Old January 30, 1999, 03:51 PM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: December 3, 1998
Location: SLC Utah
Posts: 3,740
If I could equip an army with whatever I wanted (cost not being the big issue) I would go with the m-16/m203, with full auto instead of the 3 round burst (better trigger pull) for the infantry squad. Durable optics, with keeping the iron sights handy. FN minimi (m249) for the light machine gun (interchangable mags). FN Mag for the medium machine gun. Old reliable Browning M2HB .50 for the heavy. For rear echelon, I would use a variation of the M-4, but instead of the standard collapsable stock, I would have it equiped with a folder & short gas system, like on the Z-M light rifle. (shorter that way). Handgun, USP .45, the tactical version. Good all around, takes a suppresor, smaller than the SOCOM. SEP Dard anti tank rockets, & Mk 19 model 0 40mm about rounds it out. Oh yea, Armalite Ar10 T or Barret light .50 for the snipers, and a few ssk .300 whisper ar-15's for special purposes. Man, that was kind of fun.
Correia is offline  
Old January 30, 1999, 11:22 PM   #3
Jeff White
Senior Member
Join Date: October 29, 1998
Location: Kinmundy, IL, USA
Posts: 1,397
I'd equip my army with the Canadian C7 and C8. Full auto (I'd train my soldiers to use it not depend on a mechanical device)and the tougher A1 type sights. I don't see any need for the average rifleman to have the A2 sight.

For squad automatics I'd use the M249. the original version, before the American Army "improved" it. The one with the skeletonized stock the adjustable gas regulator and no handguard. The only "improvement" I'd keep would be the fold down carry handle.

At platoon level it woulld be the FN MAG 58 with the FN tripod and dial sight to allow plunging fire. My machine gunners would be trained to use the MG to it's full capabilities, not just as a heavy automatic rifle.

There would be a company level heavy weapons platoon that would have two MK 19s and two M2 .50 caliber MGs with the FN fixed headspace modification. Three M252 81mm mortars and four Javelin Anti Armor teams and one Stinger Team.

Jeff White is offline  
Old January 31, 1999, 12:37 AM   #4
Junior Member
Join Date: December 14, 1998
Location: Georgia USA
Posts: 5
For the troops M-16 A2 with full auto, squad auto MG-82 or MG-3, or if possible a BAR in 7.62nato with a quick change barrel provision. For the heavy stuff Browning .50 cal. and Barrett rifle. Sub gun, Thompson M1 with synthetic furniture or Uzi. Side arm, .45 auto or Browning Hi-Power. Reasons, because its my country and I said so. No really, these are all proven guns and I think reliable and don't believe there are any better. I would also match the calibers of sub gun to side arm.
BMB is offline  
Old January 31, 1999, 01:24 AM   #5
Edmund Rowe
Senior Member
Join Date: November 18, 1998
Location: Warner Robins, GA USA
Posts: 351
One of my favorite topics!!! ...and I thought I was the only one concerned with theoretical TO&Es.

The backbone of my Army would be infantry, of course, who are trained in:
- basic

-M249 SAW
-Claymore mines follow-on training
-M2 .50
-Mark 19 40mm
-M-40A1/A2/A3 sniper rifle
-Stinger missile
-Arty/Air direction specialist training

and familiarization training with just about anything the grunt may run into on the battlefield, such as Klatchs, Mausers, handguns, land mines, Bradley IFV 25mm, etc.

I think my army would be small, expensive, and very professional. Something like 7 year minimum enlistments like Commonwealth militarys. Live fire training OFTEN. The infantry would be multi-task capable, such as heliborne, mechanized, or foot assault, and individual weapons would be configured depending on the mission, such as:

8 man Rifle squad, mechanized, MOUT:
-2 x M-16/M-203
-1 x SMAW
-1 x M-240G
-2 x M-16 (assistant MG and SMAW men)
-2 x M-14
...all in some APC which doesn't exist yet, like a super-Bradley with a semi-auto 120mm mortar for busting buildings.

Edmund Rowe is offline  
Old January 31, 1999, 01:36 AM   #6
Jeff White
Senior Member
Join Date: October 29, 1998
Location: Kinmundy, IL, USA
Posts: 1,397
Why the M14s in your squad configured for MOUT? Greater penetration of the 7.62x51?
And do you think one man is enough for the M240G?

These aren't flames, I'm just curious as to your reasoning. I've always found 2 men to be a light crew for a medium machine gun.
Jeff White is offline  
Old January 31, 1999, 05:26 AM   #7
Edmund Rowe
Senior Member
Join Date: November 18, 1998
Location: Warner Robins, GA USA
Posts: 351
Jeff White:

Yes, I was thinking penetration through hard cover with the M-14s.

I agree 2 men can't carry much ammo for the 240G if its a really hostile day, (Somalia?) but hopefully extra ammo would be in the APC.

This is all theoretical of course. Best thing might be train all the grunts in my visionary army in all the available small arms I list, then let them pick what they want for the mission.

I read about a 17-man SAS patrol in the Falklands that had like 8-10 FN MAGs. For a brief while they could really open a can of
whup*ss on any Argies they ran into.

Edmund Rowe is offline  
Old January 31, 1999, 12:34 PM   #8
Michael Carlin
Senior Member
Join Date: October 13, 1998
Location: Fredericksburg, VA USA
Posts: 193
Rifle: M16A2 just like it is!

Ni ellegimit carborundum esse!

Yours In Marksmanship


Michael Carlin is offline  
Old February 1, 1999, 06:44 PM   #9
cornered rat
Junior member
Join Date: November 30, 1998
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 920
OK. Now some thoughts from armchair general.

I'd suggest M14 simply because it is tough and has no obvious weak spots. Equip most rifles with a bipod and a low-magnification scope, with iron sights visible under it.

However, it would be awkward in close-range fighting...guess we are back to a .223 inteded to bridge the rifle/subgun ideas here. AUG looks good, but not sure how that works in real combat, having never shot a bullpup...

[This message has been edited by cornered rat (edited 02-01-99).]
cornered rat is offline  
Old February 6, 1999, 06:34 PM   #10
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 1999
Posts: 1,173
As Chief of My Country... I would choose:

For Regular Infantry:
HK G-36 Weapon System. This gives you the options of changing the barrel lengths and set up as you need it.
Pistols - and every one would get one - USPs.

For Fire Support: HK OIWC. This is basicaly the G-36 inder a 20MM smart gun - the Marines are going to be buying them up to replace the M-203 system - I would too!
Snipers would get SR-25s, Rem-700s in 300 WINMAG and Barret light 50s.

For Armour Crewmen:
HK UMP .45
Isreali Merkava MBT
MLRS indirect fire support systems

For Air Teams:
French Rafale, Russian SU-27s Mig-33s & 29s,
J-Stars... all that stuff.
I would also like to get them X-WINGS, B-WINGS and a couple IMPERIAL SUPER STAR DESTROYERS for serious fire support.
And all my General Staff would look like Salma Hyak and Jennifer Lopez

Kenetic Defense Institute
"Sir Heckler"

Kodiac is offline  

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 02:41 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05528 seconds with 10 queries