1. Forum
  2. General Discussion
  3. General Chatter
  4. Today and Tomorrows war.

Today and Tomorrows war.

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    The M4 is not inherently less accurate than the M16A2.  The reduced site radius (roughly the same as the maligned AK) makes it less accurate in actual use than the M16A2 when using irons only.  As pretty much laddy doddy everybody has an optic of some sort, the two weapons are equally accurate.

    Reliability of the M16A2 was initially a little better than the M4.  But M4 feed ramps, improved ejector springs, etc., have made the difference negligible or nonexistent.

    The handling as you noted is greatly improved.  I have a 1SG buddy who has a Signal Company with a number of smaller statured females in it.  That company recently turned in their M16A4s for M4s and had a radical improvement in qualification scores.  (Bear in mind the qual now incorporates standing, kneeling, and barricade).  Amazing what you can do with a weapon that fits.  

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    I look at it another way.  The AR was so innovative when introduced it's been near impossible to improve upon in 66 years.   Inline stock, space age light weight materials, this weird at the time concept of ERGONOMICS, inherently accurate design.  Stoner was a genius.  

    Other rifles have arisen over the years that might better the AR in one area or another.  But no rifle has truly exceeded it in totality.... at least not by a margin making it worth adoption.

  • JTam

    @Blutze  

    100% agree with this.

    100% disagree with this.

    1.  Those are pretty normal females in pretty normal poses above.

    2.  There is no nefarious plan by the IDF to have sexy female recruitment drives.  The IDF has prohibited the tailoring of uniforms to combat the most egregiously form fitting examples.  (With obviously mixed success on enforcement).

    3.  What you are seeing is what happens when you draft an entire population.  All the females who wanted to post sexy selfies or be Instagram "Influencers" continue to do so... they are just in uniform now.

     

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    That's a great story/insight into serving with British forces.  I remember thinking the L85 was super "high speed" when I was a youngster.  Seemed really modern and forward thinking.  I suppose it was, minus the actually working part.

    My first Team Leader had attended the French Commando school. 

    My Father went to the NCO Academy in Bad Tolz.  When I visited Bad Tolz, the Academy had been converted into low income housing.

    I did a training exercise with the Kazakhs and British a few years back.  I was partnered with a British Rifles CPT to OC/T.  He talked like Prince Charles so no problems.  I literally could not understand a single thing his Regimental Sergeant Major said.  He and the CPT would talk and it was like a Charlie Brown cartoon where a kid talks to an adult.  I think the Sergeant Major was from Yorkshire?

    Ironically I didn't get a Schutzenschur the 4 years I was stationed in Germany.  Got it years later when we did some training with the tiny German contingency at FT Huachuca. 

  • Grumpy Gnome

    @Blutze  
    Despite living in Germany for many years now my German is still abysmal, especially my spelling. Sorry about that. The correct spelling is of course Schützenschnur, thanks for the correction. For some reason my rusty memory seemed to think it was “shootzensnare” phonetically so deferred to Jtam’s spelling. I should have checked it first. Again, apologies.

    I agree with your points about the G36. Some fair observations and likely causes.

    @JTam  I am not surprised at all to see smaller framed people do better on the M4, especially with an adjustable stock. I have seen similar things with folks do better with smaller framed pistols in law enforcement firearms qualifications.

    L85... SA80. I have heard folks call it both and I have been trying to remember, without much luck, which was preferred back in the Royal Welch. The design goes way back to the 40‘s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EM-2_rifle

    Training with the Brits was a blast, punctuated with some not so nice stuff. Like getting battered one night in the barracks by four drunk squaddies from another company. I looked like a raccoon for a couple of weeks. 

    The various accents and the slang can be difficult to navigate for some of us Yanks. Throw in Cymraeg (Welsh) and Gaelic, it can make your head spin. 

    International cross training is awesome. I miss that. Sounds like you had some great opportunities. 

    Home of the Grumpy Gnome

    https://thegrumpygnome.home.blog/

  • GM

    As a none military man I still enjoy your amazing comparisions to todays and yesterdays weaponary. It reminds me of conversations I had with an American Major named Bob Weaver who was stationed at Bobington Camp Wareham, he was an evaluation officer for vehicles, like the M1A1, as opposed to Chieftain, Bradley, to the Fv 432 /Cv180. There was a German officer who  evaluated German vehicles also. Bob had a very keen interest on WW2  and Vietnam vehicles. Did a bit of modelling and both of us would rant and rave about the lack of our Wargaming  materials. I often wonder what he would say now going into 2022 with still many of our favourite gaming items not being available.  We still haven't, as yet, go to the Cold War, yet alone the 'Hot war' of the future. All the best lads, cheers. Geoff.   

     

     

  • Blutze

    The design goes way back to the 40‘s.

    Not really the design itself (EM-2 was some flapper system, whereas the first SA60 prototypes were literally Sterling-made AR-18s chopped apart and assembled in a silly order IIRC), but the idea to go with a bullpup as main rifle very likely carried over from one project to the next.

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    Looking back there has been some great opportunities.  I guess if you stay in long enough there has to be some highpoints among the relentless pounding by the big green weinie.  

  • Grumpy Gnome

    @JTam  The US Army... finding ways to suck the joy out of hiking, camping and target shooting for over 200 years. Hoo-ah! 

    Home of the Grumpy Gnome

    https://thegrumpygnome.home.blog/

  • JTam

    @Geoff Maybury 

    Added some Stryker and MRAP photos here:

    https://wargamesatlantic.com/community/xenforum/topic/53697/museumhistoric-sites-displays-photo-thread

    Though honestly I think they represent the past not the future.

    Road bound thin skins with no firepower were OK for the GWOT but are near useless for full spectrum warfare.  

     

  • JTam

    The US Army has finally (supposedly) adopted a new rifle and squad automatic weapon.

    New Rifle and SAW

    The rifle seems to offer no real capability increases over the M4 other than the new round.  The SAW replacement is welcome as the M249 always kind of sucked.  

    That being said, I'll believe it when I see it.

    (I also find it interesting that both the Japanese and Italians moved away from 6.something rounds some 70 years ago due to perceived lack of range/punch.)  

    The 5.56 Enhanced Penetration Round (EPR) was starting to challenge body armor plates.  I wonder what a 6.8 EPR round will be able to do?   Sigh.... probably start a race leading to heavier and heavier plates.  Maybe this will lead to the exo-skeleton adoption?

  • JTam

    https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/19/army-chooses-sig-sauer-to-build-its-next-generation-squad-weapon/

    0 likes
  • Grumpy Gnome

    Perhaps as SOCOM weapons rather than general issue? 29,000 weapons is a small fraction of force wide replacement.

    "In its proposed 2023 budget, the force is requesting 29,046 new weapons. But that budget still needs to be approved by Congress.”

    Reminds me of the Rangers getting SCARs.

    This caliber change flies in the face of NATO standardization.

    Researching this topic led me to discover the British now have a new Ranger Regiment! That comes as a big surprise to me. Just shows how out of touch I am these days compared to when I served.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_Regiment_(United_Kingdom)

     

    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-british-armys-new-ranger-regiment-what-will-they-be-used-for/

    Home of the Grumpy Gnome

    https://thegrumpygnome.home.blog/

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    These weapons are supposedly to be fielded to all US Army "close combat forces."  I would assume that translates to grunts, cav scouts, FISTERS, and SF.  

    It took a little bit to get all the Army Infantry units M4A1s recently.  Your unit tended to get them as they got ready to rotate into Afghanistan.   

    ‐--------

    The casual reader may not realize what a big deal this is.   The new caliber thing is huge.  As Grumpy Gnome pointed out, there goes NATO commonality.  That being said, where the US goes NATO generally follows.    This is the first new rifle for what 65 years?  The M16/M4 is the longest serving rifle in US history.  

    If WGA wanted to work on near future Infantry they should probably arm them with these.  Note how the US M4 or variants has become the weapon of choice for pretty much every SF unit in the Western world.  As I like to say, anyone who has a choice, chooses the M4.  We may (or may not) see the same with this rifle.

    ________

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/heres-everything-we-now-know-about-the-armys-new-squad-rifles

    Eight and half pounds empty before you add the a mag filled with ammo, a suppressor, and that giant ass (and heavy) optic.  (Does the optic incorporate an IR laser?  If not add a PEQ of some sort too).  Better start eating your Wheaties.  

     

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    I wasn't tracking the UK Rangers either.  Seems like a very recently formed formation.  Strange to start a new unit (if I'm understanding everything correctly) when they had to shut down so many storied Regiments.

  • Grumpy Gnome

    Two weapons just for “close combat forces” seems a lot like more the Rangers getting SCARs than the US Army changing its main rifle. Ammunition commonality will be an issue not just within NATO but within US Forces. A different caliber than US Marines? What? This seems ill advised.

    Home of the Grumpy Gnome

    https://thegrumpygnome.home.blog/

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    Progress has to start somewhere. You could.have made the same arguments against 5.56 once upon a time.  Or even 7.62x51 before that.

    This seems like it has more legs than the SCAR thing which only lasted a handful of years.  And it's a MUCH bigger fielding.  Basically everyone who isn't a pogue will get one.

    Could go universal eventually.  Remember the HK rifles the USMC got as Automatic Rifles........ and then snuck them in for loddy doddy most everybody?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M27_Infantry_Automatic_Rifle

    You got to play the appropriations game.

  • GM

    @Yronimos Whateley Cheers mate, yep your`e right its not uniforms or equipment in general it would be nice to have a few modern vehicles even if they are 20 years out of date cheack out Rubicons proposed "Nam" range that will give most the "Twilight 2000 " range. The MVCG of my makeing is very Falling Skies I really need to dig em out and photo. As I said they are made with WW2 americans and Modern civilians all old Wargames Foundry, a modern weapon in there hands or on the back by sling makes any time period. 

  • JTam

    Later update on this:

    https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/05/10/shooting-farther-with-more-punch-the-army-finally-found-an-m4-and-saw-replacement/

    Article starts dismally with the author not understanding the difference between 7.62x39 (AK47, AKM, SKS, etc ammo) and 7.62x51 (G3, M240, FN MAG, etc.) / 7.62x54 (SVD, PKM, etc.)

    The M4 and its 5.56 is a match for any common service rifle out there in range and lethality.  5.56 is almost certainly a superior round to 7.63x39 and gives up only a little to 5.45 (Maybe nothing, the 77 grain stuff is amazing).

    The enemy will have SOME 7.62x54 stuff but we have two 240Bs per PLT.

    After that, the article has some useful information.

    I'm not sure if this is counting the weight of the 2.5 lb optic.  As I was saying Joe better start eating his Wheaties.  

    Fielding:

    Here's a different article on Alaska Strykers:

    https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/05/10/army-looks-to-ditch-stryker-vehicles-in-alaska/

    Turns out Strykers can't operate effectively in deep snow and are basically road bound.  Obviously light armored vehicles stuck on roads in a peer conflict are going to have a bad day.

  • Grumpy Gnome

    Grim times when the Army Times can be so off target on military matters as in the opening of that article.

    The Army is surprising me with going back to Battle Rifles but I do not think it will be the disaster that ACU was. Hopefully. I dislike the idea of relying so heavily on the Vortex optics but I am prepared to be proven wrong on that.  Recoil seems an issue to me but then I did not like the recoil on the M14 either. And realistically, I will never fire the thing. I understand the need to defeat body armor but I think that trying to get every infantryman to engage targets out beyond 200 meters in most combat situations is unrealistic.... just like folks said when Assault Rifles replaced Battle Rifles before. This feels like lessons from WW2 are being forgotten in the search for wonder weapons.

    Was the 7.62 SCAR really so effective in combat with the Rangers that it encouraged this broader change?

    No surprise on the Stryker problem in the arctic. Get those CATs sorted before the real Russian kickoff starts I say.

    @JTam  When did folks in the US Army stop caring what their BDU cap looks like? I am seeing photos where most of the troops, including Generals, all look like basic trainees. Incorrectly fitting, crooked, flattened brims, crumpled tops. Sloppy looking. I get that not everyone is going to Ranger Block their caps but wow, my Inner NCO is going crazy right now.

    Home of the Grumpy Gnome

    https://thegrumpygnome.home.blog/

  • JTam

    @Grumpy Gnome 

    Ref:

    No real surprise.  It's painfully obvious most Army Times writers have no idea what they are writing about.  Bear in mind the Army Times is a civilian rag trying to profit off Joe.  I.E. it should not be confused with the Stars and Stripes.  (I know you know that Grump Gnome, but that may not be common knowledge for other readers).

    I started to see the 7.63x39 vs 7.62x54/51 confusion from "journalists" around the time they were writing all the M4 hit pieces post Wanat.

    https://www.cleveland.com/world/2009/10/in_2008_afghan_firefight_us_we.html

    The press reached all kinds of garbage conclusions from that fight.  You go near cyclic for twelve mags with ANY rifle on earth it's going to go belly up.  You think an AK would do any better?  Nope.

    Ref:

    I largely concur with your concerns/conclusions.  

    Unless that optic really is magic, qualification scores will go down with the increased recoil. 

    And even if the round and magic optic combo allow ones to shoot and hit out to X far.....  Nothing changes the fact you will never see the enemy X far away in real life.  

    I doubt it.  The Ranger Regiments adoption/flirtation with the SCAR only lasted a few years if I remember rightly.  And I believe the majority of rifles were 5.56.  The Army IS fielding a 7.62x51 designated squad marksman rifles to Infantry squads these days.  But the fielding is in slow motion.  Evidently HK can't build a 7.62 rifle that doesn't double feed.... at least that's the word on the street.

    https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/03/30/squad-level-sniper-rifle-to-complete-fielding-by-next-year/

     

  • JTam

    @Geoff Maybury 

    Great sale:

    https://us.warlordgames.com/products/project-z-spec-ops

    This is sadly sold out already:

  • ADC

    @Grumpy Gnome When I was very (sigh) young, after Kippur and Vietnam, there were a LOT of people that prophetized the end of aircrafts and tanks, bcz the missiles were seen as "invincibles". Then naturally arrived Lebanon, where the IDF mopped the floor with the Syrians and their "invincible" (latest models) SAMs, the Falkland war, and naturally GW1. Now the russians are losing a LOT of tanks thanks to bad leadership, worst training and horrible logistic. They tought that it would've been a simple walk as in Czechoslovakia in 1968, but were wrong, I think that without the nuclear menace Russia would've ended at the end of the food chain a LOT of years ago, also before the 1991.

    P.s. who didn't want an Emily Blunt's mini in exo-armour?

  • ADC

    @JTam Well Force Z wa outnumbered and outclassed, the japs probabilly would've crushed them also without aircrafts, don't forget that they'd a strong superiority either in numbers and (at least at the start of the war) in quality. How two warships could alter the balance of power against the IJN? Or the RN tought about them as incapable of waging a modern war? They'd just conquered HK in less than one month, plus their forces were numerous and highly motivated, surely they weren't the Italian Navy.

  • GM

    @Alessio De Carolis Oh yes Please  that is one to buy for sure.

    0 likes
  • JTam

    @Alessio De Carolis 

    I'm sure you meant nothing by it....  But where I come from that's a racial slur.

    0 likes
  • ADC

    @JTam Sorry, in Italy "japs" isn't intended as racial slur, next time I'll write "japanese", after all my generation grew  with Hollywood's war movies of the Pacific war, way before anime & co.

  • JTam

    @Geoff Maybury 

    If The Damned Kickstarter reaches (a mere) $500,000, Wargames Atlantic will do a plastic kit for this:

    https://gamefound.com/projects/mwg--wargames-atlantic/the-damned#/section/more-stretch-goals-coming-soon-22247

    https://wargamesatlantic.com/community/xenforum/topic/87512/deathfields-crowdfunding?page=1

    A vehicle that looks like it could fit from roughly 1935 to 2135.

    0 likes
  • 1
  • 2 / 2
Please login to reply this topic!

Search

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Page views (24h):
939
Page views (30d):
37,273
Topics:
930
Posts:
15,205
Members:
1,779

Newest members

© 2024, Wargames Atlantic | Powered by Xenforum