Worst Current Issue Weapon(Rifle or Pistol)
Whispering Death
Active member
What I'm saying is the Nimitz class carriers are miles better than anything else out there. The F-22 Raptor is generations beyond anything else out there. Our professional infantryman is stuck with a weapon on the exact same level as any Iraqi civilian can get for free. That is inexcusable that our generals and politicians would handicap our infantrymen in such a way.
AussieNick
Forum Digger
Hmmm, but aren't those people killing your infantry using equally old rifles? Would it not come down to a skill based issue then? I don't think you can possibly blame the M16 for the deaths in Iraq.
We still use the Browning HP as our side arm. It's reliable and BATTLE PROVEN, and we used the SLR L1A1 (FN FAL) till a few years ago (got the Steyr AUG now)... Neither of these "old" firearms have been detremental to our soldiers, and have been used very effectivly in past campaigns. Because if your soldiers can shoot well, and know how to use the weapon, then they are as good or better than a soldier with the most new-fangled assault rifle. So after all this rant I'm trying to say, the rifle has nothing to do with the deaths of your soldiers.
Do you honestly think that a rifle upgrade would be a magical cure, get some perspective.
03USMC
Active member
AussieNick is right a new whiz bang rifle with gadgets and optics is no magical cure. The Rifle no matter what type is only as good as the Rifleman and the design.
The M16 series is not a bad weapon it has served well. And the M4 is just a retooled and modified member of that family.
The M16 series is not a bad weapon it has served well. And the M4 is just a retooled and modified member of that family.
Whispering Death
Active member
First off there is no magic on the battlefield, that's why they call it military science. The M-16 was a good rifel in its time, but it was time for a replacement in the 90s and now, finally, it is looking like the military will take the step in 2005.
The whole point is that the armed forces should take every step to outclass an oponent so the least number of our guys have to die. Making the playing field even is wrong wrong wrong. If I get mugged by a guy with a knife I'm going to shoot him, I don't want to be on an even playing field with that guy, I want to live! The U.S. miltiary has the funds. We can create all these other phenomenal pieces of technology for all the supporting forces yet when it comes to the men that do all the dying on the field we don't give them the same treatment. That is not a good doctorine and the U.S. infantry deserves to get the upgrades all the other forces have been bennifiting from for the past 60 years.
The whole point is that the armed forces should take every step to outclass an oponent so the least number of our guys have to die. Making the playing field even is wrong wrong wrong. If I get mugged by a guy with a knife I'm going to shoot him, I don't want to be on an even playing field with that guy, I want to live! The U.S. miltiary has the funds. We can create all these other phenomenal pieces of technology for all the supporting forces yet when it comes to the men that do all the dying on the field we don't give them the same treatment. That is not a good doctorine and the U.S. infantry deserves to get the upgrades all the other forces have been bennifiting from for the past 60 years.
FO Seaman
Active member
Whispering Death said:
The Arny ha Interseptor, and the M1A2 and now the T.H.E.L.A.
Whats your point? The Army is fielding the XM8 now the M8 LAR.
The M16 is a aesome weapon it is still a graet gun and will be for 20 more years thats why Canada copyed it and called it the C7.
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as61-e.htm
r031Button
Active member
Whispering Death said:
There comes to point at which you really have to look at the simple facts of the Infantreers job. They do not have the luxery of being removed from conflict as a carrier would. Nor do they hav the luxery of space and weight given to a MBT. Furthermore, they cannot afford to have to deal with complex systems in the heat of the battle. The M-16 is a proven, light, dependable system. Does it jam? Yes. Can you easily fix that jam? Yes. We have not quite arrived at a point in time where this new technology is light enough and durable enough to be efficient and effective at the level on the intrantry.
Whispering Death
Active member
Adam - That is my point exactly, they should be fielding the XM8->M8 because we are long overdue for a new rifel.
Button - Is that what is holding up the OICW? I haven't heard anything about it since the XM8 started making waves, All I know is that our infantry can't wait till' 2012 for some pie in the sky weapon.
Button - Is that what is holding up the OICW? I haven't heard anything about it since the XM8 started making waves, All I know is that our infantry can't wait till' 2012 for some pie in the sky weapon.
r031Button
Active member
Whispering Death said:
My amature understand of the OICW was that it was simply too bloody heavy; and a fair bit too complicated for the Infantry man.
03USMC
Active member
r031Button said:
I agree with Button 100%. The XM8 and land warrior system may look good on the Discovery Channel. Proximity munitions, data read outs tracking etc. But the techies at R&D ALWAYS forget the first rule of the Infantry " If something can fail. It will." and the 2nd Rule K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid.)
Currently very few problems such as failures to feed, failures to fire etc need the assistance of an armorer or tech to make the weapon function and keep the rifleman in the fight.
Lil Hulk 1988
Active member
Keep it simple is the best way to explain it. I have argued on this site about how ignorant it would be to give everyone optics on the battlefield. They are great without mud, dust, rain snow and all the other crap that is actually present or happens during combat. I could really see performing a combat swim and hoping I could see through my optics while swimming onto the beach or better yet, all the "wiz bang" electronics working while full of water. I am not against technology, it is what I do for a living now, but I am against technology for a grunt that only makes it more difficult for him to complete his mission. I want my pointman to look for enemy, not reboot his weapon because it vaporlocked!
The french maybe?
Anyone think maybe the FAMAS? I have never shot one, so Im not going to point any accusations. However, i have read some field reports ( possibly biased) of how completely ungangly it is to use.
Or how about the Lewis gun, ( not trying to pick on the french) issued by the french during WWI . It was the one that had a slit cut in the magazine so you could see how many bullets you had left, i THINK that was the Lewis gun, not sure. It kinda looks like a bren gun almost. Anyway, that dandy little slit just did wonders for a gun in the muddy trenches of France. Troops said the jam rate was ATROCIOUS. I read one report that claimed 1 - 50 shots jammed. Though im sure thats a LITTLE exaggerated.
Anyone think maybe the FAMAS? I have never shot one, so Im not going to point any accusations. However, i have read some field reports ( possibly biased) of how completely ungangly it is to use.
Or how about the Lewis gun, ( not trying to pick on the french) issued by the french during WWI . It was the one that had a slit cut in the magazine so you could see how many bullets you had left, i THINK that was the Lewis gun, not sure. It kinda looks like a bren gun almost. Anyway, that dandy little slit just did wonders for a gun in the muddy trenches of France. Troops said the jam rate was ATROCIOUS. I read one report that claimed 1 - 50 shots jammed. Though im sure thats a LITTLE exaggerated.
r031Button
Active member
The topic is currently issued weapons. If we're talking past, I'dhave to bring up the Ross rifle, a target rifle issued to Canadian troops during WW1.
AussieNick
Forum Digger
Yeah the Lewis gun was used with great effect during both the air war and trench warfare during WW1.
M1 thompson
The M1 thompson was one kick ass weapon. It seems to be more powerful that the submachine guns we have today, with a drum mag, you can go Mafia or kill some Neo nazis. The M14 was a good rifle also but not good with firing full auto because its a freakin plain old rifle not an aasault rifle. Its meant to be semi. Not to meant it was pretty hefty. Yah anyways back to the topic ,we're talking about the WORST CURRENT ISSUE. I can't say much about the M16 since I've only fired a 5 clips both in semi and auto, but I heard that if you use the RIGHT KIND of ammunition it would greatly reduce the jamming. The lead in a bullet can drammitcally affect its functioning because too much lead can cause overkill to its bolt system. Now how about the m9. I can say something about this because I've fired it quite a few times, its not the 9mm bullet, but the pathetic gun itself which was made by not the US but the former Axis italians. After firing a 57 rounds and being aciddentally dropped into some sand I tried firing it but the gun sound as if had no more bullets left which is strange because the slide didnt go back and made that *click* I pull the slide off and saw that it was fine, but was unchambered, then I check the mag and the spring was jammed by a some sand. Whe I took the bullets out the spring was just plain stuck and it became bent easily. I can tell that this pistol didn't have the reliability to be in the military, more like civilian stuff.
The US should try replace the berreta back to the good ole SIG SAUER PISTOLS. Sure it costs a tad bit more, but its worth it!
The M1 thompson was one kick ass weapon. It seems to be more powerful that the submachine guns we have today, with a drum mag, you can go Mafia or kill some Neo nazis. The M14 was a good rifle also but not good with firing full auto because its a freakin plain old rifle not an aasault rifle. Its meant to be semi. Not to meant it was pretty hefty. Yah anyways back to the topic ,we're talking about the WORST CURRENT ISSUE. I can't say much about the M16 since I've only fired a 5 clips both in semi and auto, but I heard that if you use the RIGHT KIND of ammunition it would greatly reduce the jamming. The lead in a bullet can drammitcally affect its functioning because too much lead can cause overkill to its bolt system. Now how about the m9. I can say something about this because I've fired it quite a few times, its not the 9mm bullet, but the pathetic gun itself which was made by not the US but the former Axis italians. After firing a 57 rounds and being aciddentally dropped into some sand I tried firing it but the gun sound as if had no more bullets left which is strange because the slide didnt go back and made that *click* I pull the slide off and saw that it was fine, but was unchambered, then I check the mag and the spring was jammed by a some sand. Whe I took the bullets out the spring was just plain stuck and it became bent easily. I can tell that this pistol didn't have the reliability to be in the military, more like civilian stuff.
The US should try replace the berreta back to the good ole SIG SAUER PISTOLS. Sure it costs a tad bit more, but its worth it!