British weapons missing?

[Shadow4ce]

See what I'm thinking is there is almost no difference between the British and Americans basic squads which is a bit dull. IF the LSW had been remembered then that would have reflected the differences, the British long standing ethos on accuracy over volume of fire.
The M16A4 is in use currently btw.
The British rifle was so accurate that the marksmanship test had to be redesigned, I'd personally have given the gun a little more range to represent that rather than the USMC and Brits being carbon copies (aside from inteligence feeds)

Agreed, differentiation would be nice. My bad on the A4, I was thinking something else. While I am aware of the better accuracy of the weapon, I am also going to remind folks we're talking about US Marines, who even the cooks are considered riflemen first. USMC train the finest marksmen in the world when it comes to long range rifle shooting. It goes to the core of their very being. Now, US Army might have some spray-n-pray types, but US Marines subscribe to the rifle-fire ethos of accuracy over volume as well. For what it is worth, in my games I'm claiming training makes up for weapon deficiency and this makes sense of it for me. 8)

 

[emperorpenguin]

This is my rifle, there are many others like it but this one is mine.....


That ethos? :wink: That was one of the best half-movies ever!

 

[The Old Soldier]

Nothing prepares you (video games, live fire range, ect.), to what happens when there is someone shooting back at you. Only the most harden fighter will be accurate. Mainly men with lots of combat experiance, and ice in thier veins.

 

[Hiromoon]

It certainly doesn't prepare you for recoil. Anyone who's played Call of Duty and then gone to the range for fire a Kar98 or an M1 Garand knows this for a fact.

The Garand doesn't recoil, it kisses your shoulder. However the bolt carrier does bite if you're feeding stripper clips one-handed. :wink:

Uh-huh....

I found the M1 Garand to be a dog's leg compared to the Kar 98....course, both have metal buttplates...

 

[CorranP90]

in response to only fire back accurately if a veteran or woteva well obviously dont know bout battle of al amargh(think thats how u spell it )
thought by 2 sections of paras who killed hundreds with only a hundred rounds each using 1 shot 1 kill and at the end of the battle some of the paras were on last round(hence name of the book) but most on half mag,
seen as most of the soldiers were newbie privates wiv no battle exp then that last statement shows it has no real meaning in current events compared to ww2 where only 2% of soldiers were willing to kill or shoot accurately. also shudnt the yanks have m8's not m16's....LSW is not bein replaced but is kept on in section for long range engagements and minimes for suppression. also shudnt brit troops get intelligence feed like bonus but called hearts and minds which has been in use with our troops for decades and neva fails?!

 

[Shadow4ce]

in response to only fire back accurately if a veteran or woteva well obviously dont know bout battle of al amargh(think thats how u spell it )
thought by 2 sections of paras who killed hundreds with only a hundred rounds each using 1 shot 1 kill and at the end of the battle some of the paras were on last round(hence name of the book) but most on half mag,
seen as most of the soldiers were newbie privates wiv no battle exp then that last statement shows it has no real meaning in current events compared to ww2 where only 2% of soldiers were willing to kill or shoot accurately. also shudnt the yanks have m8's not m16's....LSW is not bein replaced but is kept on in section for long range engagements and minimes for suppression. also shudnt brit troops get intelligence feed like bonus but called hearts and minds which has been in use with our troops for decades and neva fails?!

M8 program got scrapped and the US is going with the FN SCAR series. Poor HK, always a bridesmaid, never a bride. (Too bad too, as it is a superior weapon, I've fired both).

Paras are, I thought, SF types who as "the old soldier" would put it are "down for the fight." This is what he meant about being able to return fire accurately in combat.

Old Soldier and I are to the age where we can get away with calling today's front-line soldiers kids. And most kids, when fired upon use the "spray and pray" method of unaimed fire in combat; hoping they hit something without being hit in return. "Operators" and veterans use what I call the "Stray and Prey" or as most militaries of the world teach - "Fire and Maneauver" method. They are trained to make every shot count, and how to get to a better firing position without becoming a choice target yourself.

Basically, a "cool-under-fire" vet can flank and take out a scared kid who is "tunnel visioned" in a firefight quite easily. Surviving your first fire fight is the hardest, as you tend to become focused on one enemy to the exclusion of the fluid battle around you.

Old Soldier was just saying what your example proves, only using phrases from a different generation, his & mine, hehe. :wink:

*edited for spelling

 

[Shadow4ce]

Oh, forgot to throw my 2 cents in relative to video games for training. While you might increase hand-eye-coordination and get a smidgeon of the same adrenalin rush, video games create one huge problem for training with the real thing:

Trigger Jerk!

As a firearms instructor and law enforcement officer who used to be an "Operator" for the military I've seen this time and time again and it seems to be getting worse. Next time you fire up Ghost Recon or Call of Duty or Medal of Honor or Rainbow Six, about half way thru a mission watch your hands. Better yet, video tape yourself playing. You'll see an awful lot of unnecessary hand movement and mashing of buttons when in the middle of a firefight. In a real battle, hitting what your aiming at requires steady aim until the bullet leaves the muzzle of the weapon. This means gentle consistant pressure on the trigger and follow thru after recoil, not mashing the trigger back and yelling insults at polygons on the screen. You also do not get a "steady-cam" view. You'll be moving, your target will be moving, and the ground will not be flat and clear of obstructions.

Video games, arguably increase hand-eye coordination (and as an unintentional side-effect illustrate tunnel-vision due to the fact you can't keep your head on a swivel and have no peripheral vision). The same video games are, unfortunately, a great place to pick up bad habits which are hard to break.

2 cents from a guy who's "been there, done that, bought the t-shirt" and made it back to tell the tale.

 

[CorranP90]

american soldiers may spray an prey but brits dont as all skirmishes an battles of late have shown as we train our troops the empty lung technique when firing and on ranges neva use auto and if in basic training u "accidentally" go auto u get beasted like a b***h. paras have same training as infantry but they tend to be fitter and stronger and are not really considered SF although they do go on ops wiv SAS such as operation barras in sierra leone back in 2001 where 50 sas an 150 paras took on west side n*****s numbering approx 500 - 1000 an came out the firefight with 1 casualty. also due to our experience in ireland over past decades we rely on single shot accurate fire to win the day over spraying an killin everythin in sight even our privates have this pholosophy drilled into them from day 1 and only go auto when assaulting a building an room clearing...or suppression obviously lol

 

[Shadow4ce]

Pray is not the same as prey. :wink:

I refuse to argue whose troops do what better, as this is a subjective measurement. I will say I've personally witnessed the "spray and pray" method from every country I've seen in combat when new troops first come under fire. I don't care who trained you or what your training is, when the first bullet whizzes by your ear things tend to take on a life of their own. How professional a troop is, is then demonstrated by how quick they return to what they should do. For my money, I'll bet on the boys who've been there before to be the first back in the fight to offer accurate fire. Until you can prove to me you've seen regular green blokes who've never heard a shot fired in anger fight hardened battle-tested men and win, I'll agree 100% with the old soldier. Absent an extreme disparity in numbers and/or equipment, veterans will recover from the first salvo quicker and start laying into the enemy with precise aimed shots.

Basically, CorranP90 I am totally agreeing with you on the methodology of fire control, just also stating from what you wrote I feel you misunderstood what I feel the old soldier meant. For some reason it appears (not sure it really is, but just appears) you are getting nationalistic and defensive as though we are attacking Brit military philosophy. I don't believe tos is and I know I am not. I have a high regard for British troops, regular and "Operator" types.

I really am not as familiar with the paras as I've never worked with them. I assumed from the name they jump out of perfectly operational aircraft, which makes them SF to me, as it takes a special breed of warrior to not be a leg. Seriously, jumping out of aircraft which can still land is not a normal act. (Neither is rappelling inverted out of a helicopter, which sorta makes me double-strange, hehe).

Anyway, I'm not disagreeing with you at all, just trying to explain something I felt was mis-communicated.

One thing the British, Australians, Germans, USMC and others have shown the world is "Training is a far better answer than replacing full-auto with 3-rd burst." 3-rd burst limits your tactical flexibility and the ability to put serious suppression fire on the enemy when moving another squad up. I spent 3 years convincing folks the single shot was your friend and the 3 rd burst was a wasted stopping point between SS and FA. If you want a 3 round burst, then learn trigger control while in FA.

AFAIK the US military has thankfully returned to the trigger control philosophy, but I've been mostly away from it since '94 and out of touch with it entirely this century. Perhaps a current US vet can chime in and confirm or deny this. Please tell me my last intel stating we were returning to training over a switch on the weapon is true.

 

[The Old Soldier]

^ He talks a whole lot better that this dumb old soldier. :wink:

Suppress the hell out of them with superior firepower, then manuever and take the kill shots. I doubt too much has change since the 70s and early 80s when it come to human nature. I still believe the hardest thing a soldier can do, is to move once the lead flys. Damn I still can't believe I'm alive still, I sure as hell shouldn't be.

 

[Mr Evil]

in the british forces jumping from air craft and helicoptes isnt SF actions.

eeeekk evan some TA (part timers) are trained to jump from aircraft and such, so are you sugesting our part time boys are classed as special forces ?

bursts are good as sprays get the enemy to stick their heads down, one guy will pluck a few shots in hittin the area to get their heads down as your other guy sets up, enemy pop their heads up after shots to fire back and you pop one of followed by a birst, then other guy doese the same, you end up supressin more men with less shots and more kills.

is it better ? its different and has different effects, for the size of our forces it works extreemly well, if we had 10 times as many men then spraying would possably be a tactic.

most forces work with what they got, we have a lack of troops so we have more time to train them, in what some countries would consider to be SF tactics.

end of the day brits use 3 shots to do what a usmc would achieve with 9 shots for example but end of the day both would achieve the same results, and its results that count.

i have to add here, ive totaly forgoten what this thread is about.

 

[Shadow4ce]

end of the day brits use 3 shots to do what a usmc would achieve with 9 shots for example but end of the day both would achieve the same results, and its results that count.

i have to add here, ive totaly forgoten what this thread is about.

I agree with the last, disagree somewhat with the first. Now for the first if you want to say US Army National Guard... :lol:

US Marines are VERY focused on one-shot, one-kill! More so than any other force I've ever worked with.

It's the guys with little or no experience who tend to get into the spray bullets as fast as you can method. But, I'm sorta tired of repeating myself and not communicating what I mean. Sort of starting to feel like I'm throwing marshamallows at a brick wall. *shrug*

It'd be nice though to see hard data on ammo expended vs. enemy casualties, just as a difference between the USMC and US Army would be interesting to study, and then see how it stacks up with other forces.

Oh, and by SF, I mean just the component words Special & Forces, not equivalent to US Army Special Forces Operators, SAS, or others of that calibre, but a unit set apart because they do something special, like jump out of airplanes for example.

 

[PilGrim]

Evil
I think you are mistaking US Army with the Marines. The USMC has always had a rifleman ethos and are bloody good at it. They have a similar approach to fire combat as the "controlled aimed fire" that the Brits use (or used to use).

I like the marines, their only real problem is they have their semper fi ethos drilled into them so far and hard that they are often seen as arrogant. Without wishing in any way to slight anyone, they do seem to get the job done better than some

 

[Mr Evil]

just looked ...

point of this thread...

missing weapon from brit team !!!!!!

be nice to hear from the mongoose guys on the ethos behind this rather than spining of.

 

[Hiromoon]

M8 program got scrapped and the US is going with the FN SCAR series. Poor HK, always a bridesmaid, never a bride. (Too bad too, as it is a superior weapon, I've fired both).

The XM8 is undergoing a re-evaluation (darn war is sucking up funds like crazy... $9 Billion a month) for a cheaper rifle. It's the Marines who are going for the SCAR.

 

[Chiwie]

also shudnt the yanks have m8's not m16's.

nup, XM-8 got canned cuz it was'nt a good enough improvement over the M16 and M4....... in other words i reckon the US DoD didnt have the funds...

 

[emperorpenguin]

eeeekk evan some TA (part timers) are trained to jump from aircraft and such, so are you sugesting our part time boys are classed as special forces ? .

err Evil, the 23rd SAS are TA part-timers........ :wink:

 

[sassgt]

In the Corps we had a saying "It's not the dope on the rifle it's the one behind it". A Marine is taught how to use the max effective range on his weapon. (Shoooting from 500 meters, w/ sight allignment, sight picture, and by calculating proper windage at that range). Qualifing at 200 ins't the same. For you Brit brothers out there, do your boy's qualify at those distances? Also most troops using the AK-47 are not as disciplined shooters with max effect at about 350. FYI I averaged 8 of 10 bullseyes at that range.

 

[emperorpenguin]

(Shoooting from 500 meters, w/ sight allignment, sight picture, and by calculating proper windage at that range). Qualifing at 200 ins't the same. For you Brit brothers out there, do your boy's qualify at those distances? .

yup 500 for the British

 

[Mr Evil]

well it seems were not gonna go back on subject, here

isnt it true the marines dont fire on full auto as their weapon can only do semi/burst.

in that case nothing to do with training at all !!!

just out of interest whats the diferances between the USARMY and USMC and do the USMC have as many women serving as the USARMY ?