does the military need a new service rifle
11-23-2006, 01:42 AM
#41
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 28
RE: does the military need a new service rifle
The M16 is a fine weapon. Could it be better? What man made object could'nt?
Most combat is within 100 yards anyways. So if you are that close to the enemy would'nt you rather have a whole lot of ammo. I have heard we fired 500000 rounds per kill in vietnam.
Most combat is within 100 yards anyways. So if you are that close to the enemy would'nt you rather have a whole lot of ammo. I have heard we fired 500000 rounds per kill in vietnam.
11-23-2006, 10:21 PM
#42
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Body in SE WI, mind in U.P.
Posts: 4,781
RE: does the military need a new service rifle
The M14 is a nice gun for shooting long distances but that's about all. Having it as the standard battle rifle for the shortest period of time of any American battle rifle should say something about it. BTW, the Stoner/M-16 platform has been in use for about 30 years already, that should say something as well.
11-24-2006, 04:20 AM
#44
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: MISSOURI
Posts: 1,157
RE: does the military need a new service rifle
Well from my military experince ( mylast year as a drill ) this is the first time most of those soldiers handled a rifle. They are all going to have different abilities of shooting. They are not all going to be firing a rifle as there main weapon. It is there that the military uses this rifle as a platform to put all sodiers on. All equal so to speak. And I know we said battle rifle but this rifle in the hands of a skilled rifleman can be firied with some precision. But the over whelming majority are support and they are not trained to be a skilled riflemen. So now this offers them some protection with the ability to fire a sustained fire fight with yes the spray and pray quote. You would be a fool to believe that the infantryman or any of the special forces cant fire that weapon with some sort of skill.Not all combat is about killing it is about casualties or wounded men , not to say some missions carry a high or higher objective.
11-24-2006, 04:31 AM
#45
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: A flat lander lost in the mountains of Northern,AZ
Posts: 3,171
RE: does the military need a new service rifle
ORIGINAL: DANTHEHUNTER
Well from my military experince ( mylast year as a drill ) this is the first time most of those soldiers handled a rifle. They are all going to have different abilities of shooting. They are not all going to be firing a rifle as there main weapon. It is there that the military uses this rifle as a platform to put all sodiers on. All equal so to speak. And I know we said battle rifle but this rifle in the hands of a skilled rifleman can be firied with some precision. But the over whelming majority are support and they are not trained to be a skilled riflemen. So now this offers them some protection with the ability to fire a sustained fire fight with yes the spray and pray quote. You would be a fool to believe that the infantryman or any of the special forces cant fire that weapon with some sort of skill.Not all combat is about killing it is about casualties or wounded men , not to say some missions carry a high or higher objective.
Well from my military experince ( mylast year as a drill ) this is the first time most of those soldiers handled a rifle. They are all going to have different abilities of shooting. They are not all going to be firing a rifle as there main weapon. It is there that the military uses this rifle as a platform to put all sodiers on. All equal so to speak. And I know we said battle rifle but this rifle in the hands of a skilled rifleman can be firied with some precision. But the over whelming majority are support and they are not trained to be a skilled riflemen. So now this offers them some protection with the ability to fire a sustained fire fight with yes the spray and pray quote. You would be a fool to believe that the infantryman or any of the special forces cant fire that weapon with some sort of skill.Not all combat is about killing it is about casualties or wounded men , not to say some missions carry a high or higher objective.
11-25-2006, 01:59 PM
#47
Spike
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location:
Posts: 54
RE: does the military need a new service rifle
If the military did consider the 6mm bullet the way to go I suspect the 243 Winchester would likely loose out to another case configuration. Personally I am a little bias towards the 6mm Remington. Suppose the longer 6mm Rem. cartridge may be an issue in the action length required and may create issues with carrying capacity of ammo.
The carrying capacity of ammo seems to be a very good argument for sticking with the 223 Remington. Another valid argument for sticking with the 223 Remington might be that our goal is to incapacitate the enemy not necessarily to kill them. A wounded solder may account for 3 solders effectively incapacitated. As one could make the argument that 2 additional men may be required to care for the wounded.
The carrying capacity of ammo seems to be a very good argument for sticking with the 223 Remington. Another valid argument for sticking with the 223 Remington might be that our goal is to incapacitate the enemy not necessarily to kill them. A wounded solder may account for 3 solders effectively incapacitated. As one could make the argument that 2 additional men may be required to care for the wounded.
11-26-2006, 04:17 PM
#48
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Western OK
Posts: 856
RE: does the military need a new service rifle
Thecurrent M16 isa fineservice rifle. What the military needs is a proper Squad Automatic Weapon in 7.62 caliber that can penetrate concrete blocks, etc. The current SAW in 5.56 caliber just does not have enough oooomph. The M60A4 would be great in the SAW role. It is lightweight with a quick change barrel.
