|
LatwPIAT posted:Because the exact words used were Broadly speaking you're trained to point your weapon at what you want to kill and shoot in full auto and hope for the best. and it's the claim that training is to mainly use full-auto fire that I plainly don't believe. I know I can get really argumentative over small things, but like... I thought this claim was really dumb and misinformed? Training is not a single thing, where everything is taught exactly to doctrine. I was a Marine. Marksmanship was constantly emphasized. You're taught - hell, over and over, starting at almost Day 1 - that you take precise, accurate shots. "One shot one kill." This is re-emphasized at your MOS school (if it is combat arms), in training out in the Fleet, during your annual rifle and pistol quals, over and over and over... And at the same time, when you're out in the FMF you go out to Range 10 or some other shot-up hillside sometimes you hear "gently caress it, open up with the .50, hose 'em down. Do what it takes. Cut loose." Sure, you're aiming, but you're shooting a .50. While short controlled bursts are the ideal you train for, sometimes you just let it all go, even in training. If you're in 'tracks you lob belt after belt of Mk-19 grenades downrange at targets, full auto all the time. I was never a grunt, but I'd bet a paycheck that they go through the same thing at some point; train to shoot 'til they stop twitching. If you want to come out swinging over this contradiction, well, I don't know what to tell you. LatwPIAT posted:I can probably try to come out less strong about these things in the future??? I can tell you that it is a little off-putting to feel like one's direct personal first-hand experience is being challenged by someone who hasn't done it themselves, and that's all I'll say on this.
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 06:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:10 |
|
|
Cessna posted:I can tell you that it is a little off-putting to feel like one's direct personal first-hand experience is being challenged by someone who hasn't done it themselves, and that's all I'll say on this. Sorry. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 06:37
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:Because the exact words used were Broadly speaking you're trained to point your weapon at what you want to kill and shoot in full auto and hope for the best. and it's the claim that training is to mainly use full-auto fire that I plainly don't believe. I know I can get really argumentative over small things, but like... I thought this claim was really dumb and misinformed? To be clear, I was not offering a scientific description of the army's approach to marksmanship training, but rather, an exaggerated and or humorous (perhaps not?) general observation about what combat feels like. Or felt like, to me anyway...most of my memories are me and mine shooting a whole lot rounds at targets you couldn't see, most of it either in full auto or as fast as one can pull the trigger in semi. Except for the DMs, they actually aimed. I went through basic training in 1999 (as a matter of fact, I shipped 20 years ago this week!), and BRM at that time taught you 1) shooting one round at a time very carefully from a foxhole and 2) shooting one round at a time carefully from your elbows. I literally cannot think of a single time I did either of these things in combat. It was all reflex shooting at corners and edges while on the move, all day every day. Similarly, ROTC did a great job of preparing me to lead patrols in the woods ala Vietnam, which was of course profoundly not what we experienced in either GWOT theater. I can't tell if you're genuinely interested in this stuff....if you are, I can have a friend who is currently the 3 of an IBCT describe how the field doing things right now. I'm not in any way an expert on it. I haven't touched a gun in years and don't plan to again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 06:54
|
|
|
bewbies posted:To be clear, I was not offering a scientific description of the army's approach to marksmanship training, but rather, an exaggerated and or humorous (perhaps not?) general observation about what combat feels like. Or felt like, to me anyway...most of my memories are me and mine shooting a whole lot rounds at targets you couldn't see, most of it either in full auto or as fast as one can pull the trigger in semi. Except for the DMs, they actually aimed. Yeah, OK, that makes sense. I came on very strong because I thought you were answering a serious question with a serious answer about training. Sorry, I was being kind of a jerk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 07:01
|
|
|
Was the FN FNC every issued for broad service? I knew a dude who used one and he said it overheated for a good word.Slim Jim Pickens posted:I think the weirdest thing about the 1ID is how they ended up with a lower casualty rate than some of the divisions that were only fighting from D-day onwards. How does that even happen? It's somewhat improbable, but not weird. Normandy after the landings was a plodding, bloody mess (in part due to terrain and stiff resistance, but there were also leadership and morale issues), and the 1st ID could have either been deployed to areas with less fighting or gotten lucky with other factors. It's not really my area though, so perhaps someone else can elaborate
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 07:41
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:It's the 40's and 50's. The cars of the period aren't safer. The regulations that require collapsible steering columns don't happen till the late 60's. Volvo doesn't start using the three point seat belt till 59 and it takes a few years till you see wide adoption on them. You don't see disc brakes as a mainstream thing until the 60's in the US. Hell, even radial tires aren't a mainstream thing in the US until 70's. I mean I loving love old cars. But gently caress they were horrifyingly unsafe. Plate glass windows, no crumple zones. Rolling death traps but god were they beautiful. HEY GUNS posted:statistically speaking our parents and grandparents had way more sex outside of marriage than our generation does Do you have a source for this? I don't think I doubt you but I'd like to have something to link to in case I ever have to throw it back in the faces of some boomer gently caress whining about "those drat millennials" Milo and POTUS fucked around with this message at 08:15 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 07:51
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Do you have a source for this? I don't think I doubt you but I'd like to have something to link to in case I ever have to throw it back in the faces of some boomer gently caress whining about "those drat millennials" reporting on the scientific study https://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-millennials-less-sex-20160802-snap-story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...becb_story.html the scientific study https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-016-0798-z i don't think it's because we're all overworked and anxious (like people weren't anxious in the 40s? like people weren't overworked before the 40 hour work week became law?), i think it's because we're less bored.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 08:49
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:i don't think it's because we're all overworked and anxious (like people weren't anxious in the 40s? like people weren't overworked before the 40 hour work week became law?), i think it's because we're less bored. There's more than one kind of anxiety. If we were openly facing a potentially all-annihilating and easily-comprehensible foe like the Axis Powers circa 1940whatever, I'd wager there'd be a lot of "the world might be ending so let's just gently caress" casual sex going on. Hell, there might well be this happening anyway, just not for us MilHist dorks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 08:58
|
|
|
Instances of "I'm going overseas to a huge meatgrinder of a war" probably played a factor for the 40s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 09:18
|
|
|
I remember bewbies posting about Afghanistan in I think it was DnD of all places back in '04, when I first came here. Think we're about the same age. It was crazy at the time to contemplate the difference between his life experience and mine. e: peak Iraq war was a crazy time on these forums.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 09:48
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:in fact we have less sex in general, although i'm less pessimistic about it than these authors There's also this article from the Atlantic, which talks about changing social cultures making sex/flirting less likely (somewhat depressingly) https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/ Less bored is probably a reason couples do it less, but people are getting into fewer couples and starting later to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 11:06
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoBWUs8poYU It’s a sound that kills freedom fighters, unless you fake out the fasc by tossing an empty clip so they think you’re out of ammunition. The guy in the video loads it wrong. Hold back the bolt so it doesn’t spring forward and smash a thumb. He got lucky. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:10
|
|
|
I thought the whole 'you can hear the ping of the garand above the din of battle, and it was a disadvantage' thing has been widely debunked at this point?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:14
|
|
|
Tias posted:Was the FN FNC every issued for broad service? I knew a dude who used one and he said it overheated for a good word. This year is the 40th anniversary of its acceptance to service with the Belgian Army. It's also license built by Sweden and Indonesia. I can't recall hearing any major complaints about it from any of the operators.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:18
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:It’s a sound that kills freedom fighters, unless you fake out the fasc by tossing an empty clip so they think you’re out of ammunition.  Fangz posted:I thought the whole 'you can hear the ping of the garand above the din of battle, and it was a disadvantage' thing has been widely debunked at this point? Right! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbGoU-yx8YA
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:32
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I thought the whole 'you can hear the ping of the garand above the din of battle, and it was a disadvantage' thing has been widely debunked at this point? Oh, it’s an overstated risk to be sure. I just think it’s strange to say that the “empty” sound kills fascists. Surely the “bang” is what kills them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTMfZqASrLo&t=59s
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:34
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I thought the whole 'you can hear the ping of the garand above the din of battle, and it was a disadvantage' thing has been widely debunked at this point? Yeah it’s bull poo poo, as is the bit about throwing an empty on the ground to fake out the enemy that you’re reloading. There’s layers of why it’s dumb but I’ll just say from personal experience that if a modern range is hot and active with more than “sighting in my bench erst gun” levels of fire you can’t hear it more than a few, maybe a dozen tops, feet away. Now factor in that everyone on a WW2 battlefield has traumatized eardrums and is half deaf because guns are loud.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:37
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Oh, it’s an overstated risk to be sure. It’s a zero risk. It’s a dumb myth along the lines of the clacker / k98k bolt thing popularized by “The Longest Day” Also the part you’re zeroing in on is a joke, a reference to “this machine kills fascists.” Google it and listen to some Woodie Guthrie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
I know what it’s a reference to. I made this hilarious joke once that I will now subject you to: Platystemon posted:
Platystemon fucked around with this message at 12:45 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 12:42
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Not really. The Brits built the best carriers they could afford but got hosed by the American military-industrial complex in a replay of Skybolt. Oh give me a break. It has nothing to do with the Americans at all. In fact the US offered to sell the Brits a brand new America-class assault carrier and they said no, they could do it on their own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:46
|
|
|
To be fair not an act of selfishness, building things like carriers and warships is still (a very small) but existing industry and if we just started importing yet more people would be hungry and or homeless. Doesn't excuse the out touch over things around our carrier insecurities though.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:51
|
|
|
EvilMerlin posted:Oh give me a break. It has nothing to do with the Americans at all. Yeah there's a reason we didn't go with the option to road-test the US's brand new ship design with a CATOBAR system that hadn't been used before. e: the UK has the carriers and planes it decided it wanted given the range of mission requirements and the fact that we could only realistically afford to buy one set of things to do all of them. e: for clarity, America class was on the drawing board when we were looking, the proposed EMALS system for the Ford class was offered when we were looking at conversion to CATOBAR options. Both would have been bad choices. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 13:58
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Yeah there's a reason we didn't go with the option to road-test the US's brand new ship design with a CATOBAR system that hadn't been used before. What in the gently caress are you talking about? Are you thinking of the Ford-class? Hint, the America-class and the Ford-class are two totally different ships. The Queen Elizabeth-class doesn't even have CATOBAR systems. As to the designs, its kinda hard for the Ford to be offered before the America, as the America class was designed and built before the Ford class... EvilMerlin fucked around with this message at 15:29 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 14:04
|
|
|
Hmmm why did everyone turn into a raging dickhead in the last 24 hours -OR- Gentlemen, You Can't Fight in Here
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:02
|
|
|
FrangibleCover posted:This year is the 40th anniversary of its acceptance to service with the Belgian Army. It's also license built by Sweden and Indonesia. I can't recall hearing any major complaints about it from any of the operators. The Swedish version of the FNC, the Ak5, has a whole bunch of minor modifications to improve reliability, so it's not quite an FN factory-standard FNC. Among the issues with the FNC that necessitated these modifications are mentioned cracks appearing in the hammer and feed issues arising from the way the magazines interface with the rifle. The Ak5 had its own series of complains, some of which may apply to the FNC in general:
Most of this is from an article hosted here, which is in Swedish. Swedish isn't my first language so I may have missed or misrepresented some issues, and how many of these complaints you consider "major" is of course another question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
there's plenty of blame to spread around both sides when two of the longest lasting and closest allies in world history, both of whom are leaders in both naval and aeronautical engineering, cannot come together with anything resembling efficiency on a major and critically important naval/aeronautical weapons system. i personally choose to blame canada and france aphid_licker posted:: peak Iraq war was a crazy time on these forums. man if you want some hilarity you should go look at my posting from back then. i won't say I was necessarily hawkish but I was definitely an amusing mix of naive and overly optimistic. bewbies fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Feb 6, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:14
|
|
|
Mazz posted:You’re strawmanning pretty loving hard if you actually read the post/follow up conversation. Yes it made sense in 1932, no one said it didn’t. Regardless the Garand and BAR would’ve been better guns in .276 and it might’ve avoided us doing dumb poo poo like making the M14 being married to .30 instead of developing/accepting something closer to a .280 FAL. Hypotheticals, in my history thread!? There’s no need to make every single machine gun use an intermediate round if you don’t have to. Larger .30 caliber cartridges get more range and power, and with certain purposes for your gun you don’t necessarily need the smallest and lightest possible. GPMGs like the M240 also pull duty on vehicle mounts and other fixed positions, so you only need to make one gun that can have different fire control groups/grips for different roles. The Russians actually follow the same pattern as just about everyone else today. Assault rifles and LMGs or automatic rifles (think RPK) in an intermediate cartridge, GPMGs and marksman rifles in a .30 caliber cartridge. Add in pistols and HMGs and you can equip all of your ground forces’ small arms with 4 different rounds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
SimonCat posted:You also stated that all M4s are full auto. I think you're full of poo poo. bewbies posted:m4a1. my mistake. There were times on Parris Island when my DIs referred to our rifles as "M-16s," not "M-16A2s." Clearly they were full of poo poo. Stolen valor, probably! - - - You know, I understand that the whole "stolen valor" thing is real, that there are people who lie about having been in the military or about being in combat/Special Forces or whatever. But at the same time the response seems to be more than a bit excessive, almost feeling like a witch-hunt at times. It wasn't really a thing when I was in (late 80's-mid 90's, a long time ago). I don't think I ever heard the term until post-9/11. And it was really perplexing to the old Vietnam vets I interviewed when I was in school; if anything, they had gone in the opposite direction. Being a Vietnam Vet was NOT a good thing in the '70s, so if anyone asked you sort of mumbled excuses or changed the subject. I.e., "Where were you in 1969?" "I was too stoned to remember."
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:33
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:Nothing says he can't be a military expert. He just has to be one who doesn't know how the US Army fires its rifles.  ""Maj. Gen. Darrell K. Williams, commanding general, CASCOM and Fort Lee, fires his 9mm semi-automatic pistol during qualifications today at the installation range complex. Williams joined a handful of Soldiers who fulfilled their yearly weapons qualification at the facility.""
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I know what it’s a reference to. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:
Is he doing something wrong
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:50
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:They ranged from pretty decent to poo poo. Wrong, the really lovely part of Italian rifles is that the Carcano required a stripper clip, were drat flimsy, easy to lose, and the design necessitated a big hole in the bottom of the magazine that was great for sand and debris to enter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
You don't hold your pistol scrunched in like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:Is he doing something wrong Compare how he’s shooting: To this:  His position looks all kinds of off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:03
|
|
|
Cessna posted:Compare how he’s shooting: This looks... wrong. Plus you would think the General would be using the new M17's.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
Cessna posted:
Because now people think they can get free stuff. Discounts. Handouts and what not... because people suck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
obviously the general had just come out of a combat roll and was shooting around an obstacle
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
I was going to say the shot might have been taken after he fired and he was in mid stance or moving to adjust his aim?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
The higher ranking the dumber they get. During pre deployment i once saw my BC take out his pistol and stare down the barrel. We didn't have ammo at the time, but jesus, wtf are you doing?!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:10 |
|
|
zoux posted:Is he doing something wrong He's doing everything wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2019 16:14
|
|