Do any of the military types here have a problem with this?

[Verres]

I was trying to point out that I do not believe in the war as a whole. I foolishly assumed you might see this as being slightly relevant to the original topic of this thread

[Az]

weird. In the IDF SS109s are used by sharpshooters, and the standard issue is the regular bullet. We've been all getting regular bullets.

Oh and you're right about the ability of non-foot soldiers to fight as foot soldiers. For example, in the IDF, Though we all do pass rifle school, we end up as 'Rifleman 02' at graduation, when there are Rifleman 03, 04, 05, 07, and IIRC, 11. Their basic training is a bit longer.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Darsnan
What concerns me, though, was an article in the ABC News last night where a Senator stated that he's getting angry phone calls from parents of GI's being shipped to Iraq now saying their kids are being sent without the kevlar inserts into their flack jackets! Thats gotta be depressing to the soldiers in that they are being sent by their government into Harm's Way, but they aren't going to be given an essential piece of equipment!


D

Most likely, they're getting their Kevlar issued in the field, since there's a fair number of vests with superficial external damage, but perfectly good Kevlar. It makes more sense to take care of that stuff in the field than it does to fly them in with new Kevlar, then fly out damaged vests to be repaired back here then shipped (yet again) out to whoever would get them next, only to eventually get shipped (yet again) over to Iraq.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Verres
I was trying to point out that I do not believe in the war as a whole. I foolishly assumed you might see this as being slightly relevant to the original topic of this thread

A few months ago, say in early March or prior, it might have been. Right now, the war is there, and liking it or not liking it isn't going to make it go away.

And BTW, I opposed it for lack of an adequate casus belli, for lack of urgency to go when we did, and for the failure to make enough of a case in the international community (not necessarily the UN ) so that the "coalition of the willing" was actually a little more willing.

That's all water under the bridge now - we're there, like it or not.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Azazel
weird. In the IDF SS109s are used by sharpshooters, and the standard issue is the regular bullet. We've been all getting regular bullets.

We still used the standard ones on the range I think, and they can be optional issue. You guys probably have millions of the other ones lying around, and the M855/SS109 is more expensive to make. It's a mixed bag - if you've got some ******* in a brick or adobe or block building who pops up at a window to shoot at you then ducks down below, you just plink him right through the wall. If you've got some crazy in a street charging at you, it can take more fire to drop him.

Oh and you're right about the ability of non-foot soldiers to fight as foot soldiers. For example, in the IDF, Though we all do pass rifle school, we end up as 'Rifleman 02' at graduation, when there are Rifleman 03, 04, 05, 07, and IIRC, 11. Their basic training is a bit longer.

I'd guess your 11's would either be senior NCO's, or maybe specialized like Rangers or commandos or something. Most of the difference is learned on the job. The question is are you learning it from real infantry, or hobbyists.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Azazel
The AK, and weapons with similar loading mechanisms maybe heavier, but at least they don't jam! Our commander promissed to teach us about the Galil, though.

The Galil is sweet.

[Lefty Scaevola]

I assume the buracracy would be more to get additional USA weapons issued to the tankers, than to use the captured AK-47s.

[Sava]

I'm a little bit disappointed that our military isn't being given the supplies to get the job done. I'm also disappointed that the Colt M16 and M4's still are unreliable and require high maintenance. Our military should have the best equipment for the lowest price... i.e. most efficient. Perhaps we should rethink this trend towards privatization and using for-profit companies as the main supplier of weapons.

[Az]

I'd guess your 11's would either be senior NCO's, or maybe specialized like Rangers or commandos or something. Most of the difference is learned on the job. The question is are you learning it from real infantry, or hobbyists

11 are SO, and so are 07. I don't remember which is which.

This is hardly relevant, since I am going to be in the rear. Only child, must have parents' permission to go to combat. Plus, I am getting a pretty sweet deal THIS way. I am getting education right after school, for free. The trade-off is 6 years in the army, though those will be as an officer, only 3 of those will be on real pay.


About the Galil: After that M16-in-the-sand shock I had, I look forward, though I heard it lags in accuracy, and is heavier.


Fun fact: now I am carrying an antiquity of sorts. One of the rifles that you guys shipped here in 73'.(engraved on it '10-73 ANAD'). Actually, I think it was one of the first M16s produced ever. The writing says 'Colt AR-15 Property of U.S. Government M16', and then a visibly later added engravement says 'A1'.

[Sava]

What is the general consensus about the German HK-G36 Assault Rifles? I've never fired or seen one up close. I've fired M-16, M4 Commando, and an AK47... how reliable is the G36? Would it be a viable alternative to the Colt guns that are standard issue in the US military?

[Az]

IIRC, the general concensus on the G36s, is that they rule.


but what about the G11?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Sava
I'm a little bit disappointed that our military isn't being given the supplies to get the job done.

They are dear. There is a longstanding BOIP for PDW's for armor pukes, and the BOIP is what it is because it isn't common practice in the grand scheme of things for armor pukes to patrol dismounted.

I'm also disappointed that the Colt M16 and M4's still are unreliable and require high maintenance.

Which is primarily bull****. My posts here over the years on the subject of military firearms should demonstrate that I'm not a great fan of either weapon, but all weapons require maintenance, and accurate weapons require more under operational conditions in the field. The old style Kalashnikovs can take a lot of neglect and fowling before they misfire, but their accuracy at range and rate of fire is far less than any same-type NATO issue weapon. If you look at what Kalashnikov currently offers, from the AK-74 on to the 100 series, they've dropped the "durable piece of crap for untrained knuckledraggers" legacy of the AK-47 and gone in the same general engineering direction as the US, Europe and Israel.

The unreliability knock on the M-16 series has always been popularly exaggerated, and field maintenance is pretty damned easy.

Our military should have the best equipment for the lowest price... i.e. most efficient. Perhaps we should rethink this trend towards privatization and using for-profit companies as the main supplier of weapons.

What "trend towards privatization" and since when has a state-owned not "for profit" company been a supplier to US forces? Any issue weapon design for US forces has to go through the Army Infantry Board before it can be authorized for procurement, and getting weapons designs past the Infantry Board isn't easy. Crap designs don't make it.

There is no "best equipment for the lowest price" - there are a lot of distinct choices out there, and most are considerably more expensive than the M16A2 and M4A1.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Azazel
IIRC, the general concensus on the G36s, is that they rule.


but what about the G11?

The FASS-90/StG-90/SG550 series by SIG are better weapon overall than the G36.

The G11 is a cute "Starship Troopers" piece of **** that works great under range conditions and scripted field trials. I'd still like to have one, but it wouldn't be my piece of choice if my life depended on it.

[Sava]

What about the SG552 Commando? How does that stack up?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Go old style and semi auto - the H&K PDW. Small round, but never jams and high rate of fire.

What "trend towards privatization" and since when has a state-owned not "for profit" company been a supplier to US forces? Any issue weapon design for US forces has to go through the Army Infantry Board before it can be authorized for procurement, and getting weapons designs past the Infantry Board isn't easy. Crap designs don't make it.

In theory maybe, but in practice, no. Just read 'About Face' or 'Steel my soldier's hearts' both by Colonel David H. Hackworth. That is enough to show that the AR-15, and the M-16 sucks in field conditions.