Sturgeon Posted December 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 54 minutes ago, Ramlaen said: Wow that article has more than double the comments it did when I read it last night. It turned into a huge dumpster fire. Nobody really said anything productive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khand-e Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 14 minutes ago, Sturgeon said: It turned into a huge dumpster fire. Nobody really said anything productive. You can literally say that about the comments section of any article you've written ever and it would still be true! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 16 minutes ago, Sturgeon said: It turned into a huge dumpster fire. Nobody really said anything productive. Comments like the guy wanting an M27 with QD barrel make me wonder how many actually read the article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khand-e Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ramlaen said: Comments like the guy wanting an M27 with QD barrel make me wonder how many actually read the article. Well don't worry, successful military reformist and AH/Fiction author Tony Williams apparently didn't read it either so it's ok. Quote autogun said... stancrist said... http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/12/04/first-last-saw-squad-belt-fed-dead-end-brief-thoughts-005/? That's pretty much the same conclusion I came to in my recent article on future small arms, only from a different angle: that armies are increasingly finding that belt-fed 5.56mm LMGs are not worth the bother, so they're switching to 7.62mm LMGs like the Minimi instead. Oh wait, he read all of one line and decided to take the rest of the article completely out of context including the demonstration of point video using a 7.62x51mm Mk.48! My mistake. Quote Not quite: To close with and destroy the enemy through fire and maneuver is the mission of the Infantry in both services – yet the SAW concept is detrimental to that mission. Although it is capable of prodigious firepower, it sacrifices key characteristics of individual weapons to achieve it, and in doing so becomes something that is neither fish nor fowl. It is too heavy, cumbersome, and finicky to be a good individual weapon, and its caliber is too small to serve as a very good crew-served machine gun. Therefore it exists in a space where it is neither one nor the other. That is clearly a condemnation of 5.56mm belt-feds, which sit in between individual weapons and crew-served 7.62mm belt-feds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 Quote Yes, the M27IAR is to machine guns what the M1 carbine is to an infantry rifle. Why can't I fit this square peg in the round hole? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khand-e Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 Well you see It's not like other nations use beefed up rifle platforms as mach..... .....Oh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 Whenever @Sturgeon's posts are linked to Tony's forum, Tony: Scolopax 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 10 hours ago, Sturgeon said: Oh boy, my little dumpster fire has spread to Tony's forum. Tank-net as well. Quote Squad belt fed only sucks cause Minimi is pretty inaccurate and heavy for 5.56. It is just a bad compromise between real firepower and effective range that comes from 7.62 belt feds and light weight that was supposed to be 5.56 weapon. As for text it has so many myths inside that Mythbusters would not dare tackle it. Favorite one - "semi is better for suppressing" - yes, if you go by rounds fired for it, but not if you go by the number of engagements and time shooter has to be exposed to do so... Irony being that it is US clinging bitterly to a French WW1 infantry squad model when majority of the world went German WW2 model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted December 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 I do love when folks completely misread what I wrote. I also love the meme that the WW2 German infantry model is dominate - is why they won the war, right??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted December 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 That post has like 15,000 views, but it really has me wondering if anyone actually read it. This isn't even really an exaggeration, I had one guy bitch me out over it all day long over social media ("I was grunt", "I carried a SAW", "you contradict yourself!", etc), and then he finally admitted he hadn't even read the fucking thing. Donward 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 26 minutes ago, Sturgeon said: That post has like 15,000 views, but it really has me wondering if anyone actually read it. This isn't even really an exaggeration, I had one guy bitch me out over it all day long over social media ("I was grunt", "I carried a SAW", "you contradict yourself!", etc), and then he finally admitted he hadn't even read the fucking thing. Valorius or whatever his name is? Also, linking Tanknet here to this page has set off my safe site warning whatever on my browser. Thanks Obama! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 I removed the link, I have to tell Firefox it's okay whenever I go there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted December 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 47 minutes ago, Donward said: Valorius or whatever his name is? No, not Valorius. Someone who isn't in the comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguetechie Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 9 hours ago, Sturgeon said: Had a few guys in the comments say shit like "oh yeah, but L86" and even one guy who said I wanted to bring back the Chauchat. I particularly liked the one guy who insisted that it was impossible to get so low to the ground that the bullpup's magazine clonked into the floor. Has he ever even once seen a bullpup fired prone aka the yoga pose known as downward facing MONKEY FUCKING A FOOTBALL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguetechie Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Sturgeon said: That post has like 15,000 views, but it really has me wondering if anyone actually read it. This isn't even really an exaggeration, I had one guy bitch me out over it all day long over social media ("I was grunt", "I carried a SAW", "you contradict yourself!", etc), and then he finally admitted he hadn't even read the fucking thing. I actually read it and advanced some suggestions/opinions of what I'd like to see in an IAR, including a qcb but for at least a reason with SOME logic behind it. Are my ideas stupid, idk maybe... But at least I put thought behind them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguetechie Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 And imagine that.... It's major Tom who made the chauchat crack... Color me surprised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted December 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 Jesus Christ what did Tanknet ever do to Google that even after you removed the fucking hyperlink my browser is still warning me that it's a dangerous site? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khand-e Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 Tanknet was hacked before and that got it flagged by google. Once your site is on Google's watchlist it's damn near impossible to get off it no matter what the circumstances were or how legitimate your site normally is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khand-e Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 3 hours ago, Sturgeon said: I do love when folks completely misread what I wrote. I also love the meme that the WW2 German infantry model is dominate - is why they won the war, right??? Well that's also why all modern tanks are based on the Tiger and Panther with doctrines based on those used by CRACK TIGER ACES! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 Tanknet gave us the VD. I guess the only question is which sucks it harder, Tanknet, the blonde, the brunette, the redhead, or the .45 ACP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 10 minutes ago, Donward said: Tanknet gave us the VD. I guess the only question is which sucks it harder, Tanknet, the blonde, the brunette, the redhead, or the .45 ACP? .45 ACP... Duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious_CB Posted April 22, 2018 Report Share Posted April 22, 2018 I would highly suggest listening to this segment of this podcast from a highly experienced SOF veteran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxn Posted April 22, 2018 Report Share Posted April 22, 2018 On 12/6/2017 at 9:44 AM, Khand-e said: Tanknet was hacked before and that got it flagged by google. Once your site is on Google's watchlist it's damn near impossible to get off it no matter what the circumstances were or how legitimate your site normally is. I'm still getting warnings when looking at this page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted April 22, 2018 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2018 10 hours ago, Vicious_CB said: I would highly suggest listening to this segment of this podcast from a highly experienced SOF veteran. That debate is pretty intense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious_CB Posted May 9, 2018 Report Share Posted May 9, 2018 After listening to it again I think one of the most overlooked in this discussion is the doctrine difference between the US Army and USMC squads. The IAR concept in the USMC works because of the 13-man squad can still maintain 1 fire team armed with a SAW for base of fire. The 9-man squad in the US Army has you so limited in man power that you have to pick and choose what capability to have. Are you mainly doing building entries? OK you probably don't need a SAW gunner. Need to cover fire teams on a bounding assault? Yeah, you probably want a SAW for that continuous base of fire to cover the assault element for that last 50-100m to the objective. The worst decision the Army could have made was base the squad size on how many Joes you can fit into an M2 Bradley... Increase the squad size to 11-men. Maintain the SAW with an AG and keep them with a SL and actually teach them machine gun theory so he can actually direct fires via propper fire commands and give the maneuver elements IARs for organic fires to keep them light and fast, and to deal with anything the support element doesnt have line of sight to. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a225438.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.