Worst Current Issue Weapon(Rifle or Pistol)
AussieNick
Forum Digger
We do not use hollow point bullets. They are against the Geneva convention.
jackehammond
Active member
Canadian ROSS and the US Reising and the worst the Chauchat
Folks,
My three candiates are the:
* The French CHAUCHET light machine gun of WW1. It was so bad it is famous today. It is the bench mark for a terrible small arms design.
* REISING Model 50 .45 caliber submachine gun. This submachine gun was so aweful that a USMC general after the first Pacific battle it was used in ordered all of them sealed in barrels and dumped in the ocean.
* The ROSS Mk 2 .303 Rifle. It was a great target rifle but a terrible combat rifle. Canadian soldiers were shipped to France with the Ross in 1914 and soon began throwing them away and picking up British Army .303 rifles they found abandon or from wounded or killed soldiers. Many were sold on the civilian after market and killed a few people who did not realize the bolt could be inserted the wrong way and when they fired it they got the bolt back in the head! Is any of you find a Ross at a yard sale etc make sure you have someone who knows show you how to field strip and reassemble the dang thing!
Jack E. Hammond
NOTE> Honorable mention is today's French Armh AAT Mle 52 and the US Army Vietnam era M60 belt fed machine guns.
Folks,
My three candiates are the:
* The French CHAUCHET light machine gun of WW1. It was so bad it is famous today. It is the bench mark for a terrible small arms design.
* REISING Model 50 .45 caliber submachine gun. This submachine gun was so aweful that a USMC general after the first Pacific battle it was used in ordered all of them sealed in barrels and dumped in the ocean.
* The ROSS Mk 2 .303 Rifle. It was a great target rifle but a terrible combat rifle. Canadian soldiers were shipped to France with the Ross in 1914 and soon began throwing them away and picking up British Army .303 rifles they found abandon or from wounded or killed soldiers. Many were sold on the civilian after market and killed a few people who did not realize the bolt could be inserted the wrong way and when they fired it they got the bolt back in the head! Is any of you find a Ross at a yard sale etc make sure you have someone who knows show you how to field strip and reassemble the dang thing!
Jack E. Hammond
NOTE> Honorable mention is today's French Armh AAT Mle 52 and the US Army Vietnam era M60 belt fed machine guns.
jackehammond
Active member
AussieNick said:
Dear Member,
Actually technically Hollow Points are not illegal under the preWW1 Hague Conventions (ie the 1949 GC does not address the issue). What the Hague Convention on Warfare referred to was Dum-Dums which was where soldiers would take a razor and X the front of the bullet -- ie during the Philippines Insurgency after the Spanish American War a lot of US Army and Marines and Philippine Volunteers (ie they were basically like the private contractors in Iraq today) did it a lot when fighting the Moslem Moros on Mindinao Island who were hyped up on Hashish.
Jack E. Hammond
PS> The term Dum-Dum comes from a British arsenal in India which some how or another an urban legend (maybe not an urban legend) came about that they made these kind of bullets for their Enfield muzzle loaders. Who knows?
jackehammond
Active member
AussieNick said:
Dear Member,
Not the 5.56mm rounds of today which I believe is the NATO M109(?). The reason being body armor. Also the tubbling effect of the 5.56mm round has been way overstated. The 5.56mm has a high MV than the older 7.62mm rounds. This causes a massive shock wave in the body as it passes through causing massive damage around the area it passes through. I have some drawings and photos in a file showing the effect when fired into geliten (sp?) blocks. It is something to be seen with X ray photography that slows it up.
Jack E. Hammond
03USMC
Active member
Re: Canadian ROSS and the US Reising and the worst the Chauc
Reising guns weren't bad until you put them in the Jungle enviroment. Most of them were reissued to guards at war plants after the Raiders and Para Marines got rid of them and after that they were given to Police Agencies. We still have 3 Reisings in our Armory Room. Fun to shoot and accurate. Just not a field weapon.
jackehammond said:
Reising guns weren't bad until you put them in the Jungle enviroment. Most of them were reissued to guards at war plants after the Raiders and Para Marines got rid of them and after that they were given to Police Agencies. We still have 3 Reisings in our Armory Room. Fun to shoot and accurate. Just not a field weapon.
jackehammond
Active member
Re: Canadian ROSS and the US Reising and the worst the Chauc
Dear Member,
I can not remember where I read it, but Ian Hogg (a British small arms expert) stated that the problem with the Reising was that after they used they disassembled them and put them in cleaner bath and then reassembled them. The bolt of the Reising has some machining ramp on it of some sort that if you switch bolts from one gun to another after its been fired a number of times it will cause problem if the same bolt is not used in the reassembly.
Finally, for the record I have just joined the forum. I would like to explain my background before I am asked. I was for almost ten years either the AstSysop or Sysop of Compuserves MILITARY FORUM which from 1990 to 1991 was the largest military forum (AOL took it over and basically killed it). I was given the job because before that from about 1981 to 1992 I wrote and consulted on Military and Defense articles. I got picked for the job, because every time they tried to use a military person (ie retired most common) there would be a cat fight because that Sysop would favor his service. I was the neutral party. Last the information I post was from my sources when I wrote articles and discussion with military and civilian defense contractors which in that time period many belong to Compuserve (ie at that time the internet was not the big and Compuserve was the only one that had a world wide computer forums hook up by telephone). I always tried to be fair. The article I did in 1982 on the Abrams I sent a list of questions that was big in the news on the subject. I got the list back with the answers and a short note stating that it would not make the article (ie at that time the news media would not report postitive or balanced articles). It did and I was surprised after that at the co-operation including sending me an exposed but undeveloped roll of film of the new Abrams on exercises -- ie that meant I had the copyright to the pictures. All the US military wanted was both sides of the story to be presented. I have a huge amount of photos, etc in file cabinest of weapons, etc that was sent to me from about 1980 to 1995 I hope to share with the members on this forum. I am totally retired now from both jobs and have plenty of time. And also, I am hoping to learn information etc I am unaware of. But today, compared with ten years back, military information is so massive that it is nothing compared to back then.
Thank your everyone for taking a second to let me explain
Respectfully
Jack E. Hammond
03USMC said:
Dear Member,
I can not remember where I read it, but Ian Hogg (a British small arms expert) stated that the problem with the Reising was that after they used they disassembled them and put them in cleaner bath and then reassembled them. The bolt of the Reising has some machining ramp on it of some sort that if you switch bolts from one gun to another after its been fired a number of times it will cause problem if the same bolt is not used in the reassembly.
Finally, for the record I have just joined the forum. I would like to explain my background before I am asked. I was for almost ten years either the AstSysop or Sysop of Compuserves MILITARY FORUM which from 1990 to 1991 was the largest military forum (AOL took it over and basically killed it). I was given the job because before that from about 1981 to 1992 I wrote and consulted on Military and Defense articles. I got picked for the job, because every time they tried to use a military person (ie retired most common) there would be a cat fight because that Sysop would favor his service. I was the neutral party. Last the information I post was from my sources when I wrote articles and discussion with military and civilian defense contractors which in that time period many belong to Compuserve (ie at that time the internet was not the big and Compuserve was the only one that had a world wide computer forums hook up by telephone). I always tried to be fair. The article I did in 1982 on the Abrams I sent a list of questions that was big in the news on the subject. I got the list back with the answers and a short note stating that it would not make the article (ie at that time the news media would not report postitive or balanced articles). It did and I was surprised after that at the co-operation including sending me an exposed but undeveloped roll of film of the new Abrams on exercises -- ie that meant I had the copyright to the pictures. All the US military wanted was both sides of the story to be presented. I have a huge amount of photos, etc in file cabinest of weapons, etc that was sent to me from about 1980 to 1995 I hope to share with the members on this forum. I am totally retired now from both jobs and have plenty of time. And also, I am hoping to learn information etc I am unaware of. But today, compared with ten years back, military information is so massive that it is nothing compared to back then.
Thank your everyone for taking a second to let me explain
Respectfully
Jack E. Hammond
jackehammond
Active member
Folks,
Here is an interesting question to this topic: Today, which major army has the worst assault rifle that is mass issued to its troops? And this is not opinion. This armies own government inquire has stated it. Its about in the catagory that that the US Army's Trapdoor Springfield was in the late 1800s of reputation.
Jack E. Hammond
Here is an interesting question to this topic: Today, which major army has the worst assault rifle that is mass issued to its troops? And this is not opinion. This armies own government inquire has stated it. Its about in the catagory that that the US Army's Trapdoor Springfield was in the late 1800s of reputation.
Jack E. Hammond
bushpig1998
Active member
jackehammond said:
During the Boer War, the Brits used to execute Boer Kommando's on the spot if they found Dum-Dum bullets on them. The Boere would sit on the hills and scrape the bullet tips against rocks to flatten them, then take a knife and X it - all this while laying in wait of a British Patrol to move into the ambush.
The Boere almost bought the horrid Martini Henry .577 (IIRC). Luckily a Mauser Rep showed up during the triels and did a quick demo - he had a soldier with a martini on the range and he shot with a 7mm Mause (pre 94) himself - in the time it took the soldier with the martini henry to shoot down a certain number of targets, the rep with the mauser shot twice the amount of targets -at greater range and with more accuracy.
In South African history, my vote is for the martini henry and the new R4 AR.
bulldogg
Milforum's Bouncer
My contribution would be to nominate the Chinese SKS as the most pathetic pos (this is not a knock against China just the weapon folks). If you grab ahold of one of these bad boys one of the first thing you might notice is the amount of play in the weapon. It doesnt give you that warm tingly solid feel of say a baseball bat or a Mini-14. And the accuracy is something that requires a healthy dose of Kentucky windage. I thought maybe it was just a bad weapon or two but after getting to handle more than a dozen I am pretty much 100 percent behind my nominee to take top (dis)honours.
:rambo:
:rambo:
AussieNick
Forum Digger
Sorry Jack... You.Are.Wrong.
It is the 7.62 that creates a bigger "shock" wave on the body.
The 5.56 has a different strike and disintergration/travel pattern through the body... that is what causes the damage, not the shock. This is a well documented and heavily taught fact in the Australian military mate.
bulldogg
Milforum's Bouncer
Heard the same thing in comparing the 7.62 vs the .223 round Nick. Piercing round (7.62) versus the tumbling round (.223). I also remember the trade-off was accuracy as a blade of grass could deflect a tumbling round whereas the piercing round continues on towards target.
Right or wrong?
Right or wrong?
AussieNick
Forum Digger
It's true about the deflection of the rounds, M16 rounds were notorious for deflection in the Vietnam undergrowth, but the SLR 7.62 wasn't troubled in the same way.
jackehammond
Active member
AussieNick said:
Dear Member,
We will just have to agree to disagree. A lot of things are taught military forces -- ie for years they were taught that HEAT warheads like those used by the M72 LAW burned through armor. So we will have to disagree.
Jack E. Hammond