Combat Rifle Evaluations
December 18, 2007
The primary weapon carried by most soldiers into battle in Iraq and Afghanistan performed the worst in a recent series of tests designed to see how it stacked up against three other top carbines in sandy environments.
After firing 6,000 rounds through ten M4s in a dust chamber at the Army's Aberdeen test center in Maryland this fall, the weapons experienced a total of 863 minor stoppages and 19 that would have required the armorer to fix the problem. Stacked up against the M4 during the side-by-side tests were two other weapons popular with special operations forces, including the Heckler and Koch 416 and the FN USA Special Operations Combat Assault Rifle, or Mk16.
Another carbine involved in the tests that had been rejected by the Army two years ago, the H&K XM8, came out the winner, with a total of 116 minor stoppages and 11 major ones. The Mk16 experienced a total of 226 stoppages, the 416 had 233.
The Army was quick to point out that even with 863 minor stoppages -- termed "class one" stoppages which require 10 seconds or less to clear and "class two" stoppages which require more than ten seconds to clear -- the M4 functioned well, with over 98 percent of the 60,000 total rounds firing without a problem.
"The M4 carbine is a world-class weapon," said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, the Army's top equipment buyer, in a Dec. 17 briefing at the Pentagon. Soldiers "have high confidence in that weapon, and that high confidence level is justified, in our view, as a result of all test data and all investigations we have made."
Though Army testers and engineers are still evaluating the data, officials with the Army's Infantry Center based in Fort Benning, Ga., said they planned to issue new requirements for the standard-issue carbine in about 18 months that could include a wholesale replacement of the M4. But the Army has been resistant to replace the M4, which has been in the Army inventory for over 18 years, until there's enough of a performance leap to justify buying a new carbine.
"We know there are some pretty exciting things on the horizon with technology ... so maybe what we do is stick with the M4 for now and let technologies mature enough that we can spin them into a new carbine," said Col. Robert Radcliffe, director of combat development at the Army's Infantry Center. "It's just not ready yet. But it can be ready relatively rapidly."
That's not good enough for some on Capitol Hill who've pushed hard for the so-called "extreme dust test" since last spring. Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn placed a hold on the nomination of Army Secretary Pete Geren earlier this year to force the Army to take another look at the M4 and its reliability.
In an April 12 letter to the still unconfirmed Geren, Coburn wrote that "considering the long standing reliability and lethality problems with the M16 design, of which the M4 is based, I am afraid that our troops in combat might not have the best weapon." He insisted the Army conduct a side-by-side test to verify his contention that more reliable designs existed and could be fielded soon.
Despite the 98 percent reliability argument now being pushed by the Army, one congressional staffer familiar with the extreme dust tests is skeptical of the service's conclusions.
"This isn't brain surgery -- a rifle needs to do three things: shoot when you pull the trigger, put bullets where you aim them and deliver enough energy to stop what's attacking you," the staffer told Military.com in an email. "If the M4 can't be depended on to shoot then everything else is irrelevant."
The staffer offered a different perspective of how to view the Army's result. If you look at the numbers, he reasoned, the M4's 882 total stoppages averages out to a jam every 68 rounds. There are about 30 rounds per magazine in the M4.
By comparison, the XM8 jammed once every 472 rounds, the Mk16 every 265 rounds and the 416 every 257 rounds. Army officials contend soldiers rarely fire more than 140 rounds in an engagement.
"These results are stunning, and frankly they are significantly more dramatic than most weapons experts expected," the staffer said.
Army officials say the staffer's comparison is "misleading" since the extreme dust test did not represent a typical combat environment and did not include the regular weapons cleaning soldiers typically perform in the field.
So the Army is sticking by the M4 and has recently signed another contract with manufacturer Colt Defense to outfit several more brigade combat teams with the compact weapon. Service officials say feedback from the field on the M4 has been universally positive -- except for some grumbling about the stopping power of its 5.56mm round. And as long as soldiers take the time to clean their weapons properly, even the "extreme" dust testing showed the weapon performed as advertised.
"The force will tell you the weapon system is reliable, they're confident in it, they understand that the key to making that weapon system effective on the battlefield and killing the enemy is a solid maintenance program and, just as important, is a marksmanship program," said Sgt. Maj. Tom Coleman, sergeant major for PEO Soldier and the Natick Soldier Systems Center. "So, you can't start talking about a weapon system without bringing in all the other pieces that come into play."
That's not enough for some who say the technology is out there to field a better, more reliable rifle to troops in contact now.
"It's time to stop making excuses and just conduct a competition for a new weapon," the congressional staffer said.
The primary weapon carried by most soldiers into battle in Iraq and Afghanistan performed the worst in a recent series of tests designed to see how it stacked up against three other top carbines in sandy environments.
After firing 6,000 rounds through ten M4s in a dust chamber at the Army's Aberdeen test center in Maryland this fall, the weapons experienced a total of 863 minor stoppages and 19 that would have required the armorer to fix the problem. Stacked up against the M4 during the side-by-side tests were two other weapons popular with special operations forces, including the Heckler and Koch 416 and the FN USA Special Operations Combat Assault Rifle, or Mk16.
Another carbine involved in the tests that had been rejected by the Army two years ago, the H&K XM8, came out the winner, with a total of 116 minor stoppages and 11 major ones. The Mk16 experienced a total of 226 stoppages, the 416 had 233.
The Army was quick to point out that even with 863 minor stoppages -- termed "class one" stoppages which require 10 seconds or less to clear and "class two" stoppages which require more than ten seconds to clear -- the M4 functioned well, with over 98 percent of the 60,000 total rounds firing without a problem.
"The M4 carbine is a world-class weapon," said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, the Army's top equipment buyer, in a Dec. 17 briefing at the Pentagon. Soldiers "have high confidence in that weapon, and that high confidence level is justified, in our view, as a result of all test data and all investigations we have made."
Though Army testers and engineers are still evaluating the data, officials with the Army's Infantry Center based in Fort Benning, Ga., said they planned to issue new requirements for the standard-issue carbine in about 18 months that could include a wholesale replacement of the M4. But the Army has been resistant to replace the M4, which has been in the Army inventory for over 18 years, until there's enough of a performance leap to justify buying a new carbine.
"We know there are some pretty exciting things on the horizon with technology ... so maybe what we do is stick with the M4 for now and let technologies mature enough that we can spin them into a new carbine," said Col. Robert Radcliffe, director of combat development at the Army's Infantry Center. "It's just not ready yet. But it can be ready relatively rapidly."
That's not good enough for some on Capitol Hill who've pushed hard for the so-called "extreme dust test" since last spring. Oklahoma Republican Senator Tom Coburn placed a hold on the nomination of Army Secretary Pete Geren earlier this year to force the Army to take another look at the M4 and its reliability.
In an April 12 letter to the still unconfirmed Geren, Coburn wrote that "considering the long standing reliability and lethality problems with the M16 design, of which the M4 is based, I am afraid that our troops in combat might not have the best weapon." He insisted the Army conduct a side-by-side test to verify his contention that more reliable designs existed and could be fielded soon.
Despite the 98 percent reliability argument now being pushed by the Army, one congressional staffer familiar with the extreme dust tests is skeptical of the service's conclusions.
"This isn't brain surgery -- a rifle needs to do three things: shoot when you pull the trigger, put bullets where you aim them and deliver enough energy to stop what's attacking you," the staffer told Military.com in an email. "If the M4 can't be depended on to shoot then everything else is irrelevant."
The staffer offered a different perspective of how to view the Army's result. If you look at the numbers, he reasoned, the M4's 882 total stoppages averages out to a jam every 68 rounds. There are about 30 rounds per magazine in the M4.
By comparison, the XM8 jammed once every 472 rounds, the Mk16 every 265 rounds and the 416 every 257 rounds. Army officials contend soldiers rarely fire more than 140 rounds in an engagement.
"These results are stunning, and frankly they are significantly more dramatic than most weapons experts expected," the staffer said.
Army officials say the staffer's comparison is "misleading" since the extreme dust test did not represent a typical combat environment and did not include the regular weapons cleaning soldiers typically perform in the field.
So the Army is sticking by the M4 and has recently signed another contract with manufacturer Colt Defense to outfit several more brigade combat teams with the compact weapon. Service officials say feedback from the field on the M4 has been universally positive -- except for some grumbling about the stopping power of its 5.56mm round. And as long as soldiers take the time to clean their weapons properly, even the "extreme" dust testing showed the weapon performed as advertised.
"The force will tell you the weapon system is reliable, they're confident in it, they understand that the key to making that weapon system effective on the battlefield and killing the enemy is a solid maintenance program and, just as important, is a marksmanship program," said Sgt. Maj. Tom Coleman, sergeant major for PEO Soldier and the Natick Soldier Systems Center. "So, you can't start talking about a weapon system without bringing in all the other pieces that come into play."
That's not enough for some who say the technology is out there to field a better, more reliable rifle to troops in contact now.
"It's time to stop making excuses and just conduct a competition for a new weapon," the congressional staffer said.
0
-
M-14's rule!! and if some candya$$ can't control it on full auto thats a personal problem. I carried the m-14 for 1 1/2 years in Nam, Fired it on full auto many times. The round would go where no m-16 round could. Ever fought in elephant grass? AR's would cut through it, the m-14 would cut through it, the m-16 round might go 10 feet,and then bounce back half the time. If you gotta double tap with a rifle well then you might as well get a pistol to go to war with. The .308 is the best stopper for battle. (any rifle youu do battle with is a battle rifle) simple...... 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Da-Tank
M-14's rule!! and if some candya$$ can't control it on full auto thats a personal problem. I carried the m-14 for 1 1/2 years in Nam, Fired it on full auto many times. The round would go where no m-16 round could. Ever fought in elephant grass? AR's would cut through it, the m-14 would cut through it, the m-16 round might go 10 feet,and then bounce back half the time. If you gotta double tap with a rifle well then you might as well get a pistol to go to war with. The .308 is the best stopper for battle. (any rifle youu do battle with is a battle rifle) simple......
(any rifle youu do battle with is a battle rifle)
I hear that![:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Da-Tank
(any rifle youu do battle with is a battle rifle) simple......
Lemme see if I got this: If you do battle with an assault rifle, it is a battle rifle; but if you assault with a battle rifle, it is still a battle rifle. If you take your 10/22 to a battle it is a battle rifle, but if you leave your M14 in your condo it is not.
Is that about it?0 -
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
quote:Originally posted by Da-Tank
(any rifle youu do battle with is a battle rifle) simple......
Lemme see if I got this: If you do battle with an assault rifle, it is a battle rifle; but if you assault with a battle rifle, it is still a battle rifle. If you take your 10/22 to a battle it is a battle rifle, but if you leave your M14 in your condo it is not.
Is that about it?
Smart A$$!![:D][:D][:D]
I was thinking the same little sarcastic remark![}:)][:D][}:)][:D]
The way I look at it, if I bring a longgun in to an armed conflict and a use it to kill the enemy, it is a battle rifle. IMO0 -
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
Smart A$$!!
I think the point is that, if any rifle you do battle with is a battle rifle, then whence the need to distinguish battle rifles from any other class of rifles, i.e., the term "battle" (as with the term "assault") is wholly gratuitous to purpose for which intended.0 -
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
Smart A$$!!
I think the point is that, if any rifle you do battle with is a battle rifle, then whence the need to distinguish battle rifles from any other class of rifles, i.e., the term "battle" (as with the term "assault") is wholly gratuitous to purpose for which intended.
I'm confused now, to much to drink this evening, sorry!![:p][:p]
I was meaning Smart A$$ in a good way!0 -
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
I was meaning Smart A$$ in a good way!
I know. And I was proving why you shouldn't.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
Smart A$$!!
I think the point is that, if any rifle you do battle with is a battle rifle, then whence the need to distinguish battle rifles from any other class of rifles, i.e., the term "battle" (as with the term "assault") is wholly gratuitous to purpose for which intended.
My sports car is now a "work truck" if I haul some nails and glue to the job site.
And my work truck can now be a funny car if I chirp my tires and take off real fast when the tree turns green.
HEHE I like new ideas.0 -
quote:Originally posted by scrollwork
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
Smart A$$!!
I think the point is that, if any rifle you do battle with is a battle rifle, then whence the need to distinguish battle rifles from any other class of rifles, i.e., the term "battle" (as with the term "assault") is wholly gratuitous to purpose for which intended.
My sports car is now a "work truck" if I haul some nails and glue to the job site.
And my work truck can now be a funny car if I chirp my tires and take off real fast when the tree turns green.
HEHE I like new ideas.
ROTFLMAO!![:D][:p][:D][:p]0 -
quote:Originally posted by scrollwork
My sports car is now a "work truck" if I haul some nails and glue to the job site.
And my work truck can now be a funny car if I chirp my tires and take off real fast when the tree turns green.
HEHE I like new ideas.
Now you've got it. And if you drive your work truck to a battle, it's a battle car, even when you're speeding up for a vehicular assault. I was once involved in a drive-by fugu pelting: Battle sushi.0 -
Now don't nobody go jumping into this conversation sqwauking about what the definition of assault rifle verses battle rifle should be because we just hammered it out plain n simple. They are what they are.
By some peoples definition, an assault rifle should never be used in Battle, because what do armies do in Battle???? They assault!!!
So assault rifles are used in Battles which makes them now a Battle rifle.
Now lets look at the definition of Battle Rifle, which I guess some would claim that a Battle rifle is only good for use while in retreat, because "they are not an assault rifle". Assault meaning going forward>>>>>>>.
Because as said, a battle rifle is not an assault rifle and since armies assault in battles then a Battle rifle can only be used while engaging in retreat and never while engaging in assaults.
Please correct me if I am wrong young man.0 -
If I beat him with a cucumber I guess it would be an assault weapon![:p][:p] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
If I beat him with a cucumber I guess it would be an assault weapon![:p][:p]
If you beat DancesWithSheep with a limp cucumber you could probably call it an Excite Weapon due to all the excitement it gives him.0 -
quote:Originally posted by scrollwork
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
If I beat him with a cucumber I guess it would be an assault weapon![:p][:p]
If you beat DancesWithSheep with a limp cucumber you could probably call it an Excite Weapon due to all the excitement it gives him.
Better not do that then![:D]0 -
Sorry guys, it's my turn to be a Smart A$$
Main Entry: assault rifle
Function: noun
Date: 1972
: any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use
That is the DEMOCRATIC definition from Websters dictionary!
I was under the impression all these years that an assault rifle was a rifle designed with a high-capacity and a cartidge that was not as powerful as persay the cartridge of a service rifle so it could be better controled in an automatic rate of fire for direct and close quarter engagements. Example, how the 7.62x39mm was a cartridge born of the 7.62x54R just for this purpose.
An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine firing ammunition with muzzle energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and battle rifle ammunition. Assault rifles are categorized between light machine guns, intended more for sustained automatic fire in a support role, and submachine guns, which fire a handgun cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.
The term battle rifle can have different meanings. Usually, it refers to rifles firing a full-sized (as opposed to intermediate) cartridge, such as .303 British, .30-06 Springfield, 7.62x54R, or 7.62x51 NATO, from a full-length barrel. A main battle rifle is a battle rifle that is used as a military service rifle. Battle rifles may be bolt-action, semi-automatic, burst fire, or full-automatic. Modern battle rifles are capable of selective fire.
During the latter half of the 20th century, the assault rifle, and later the carbine, (firing an intermediate cartridge) has gained in popularity and superseded the battle rifle as a general infantry weapon in most modern armies. Tacticians during World War II noted that small-arms engagements rarely occurred at distances greater than 300 meters. This meant that the great range and penetration power of the battle rifle was mostly wasted. The assault rifle presented a smaller and lighter package more suitable for close quarters combat, while still delivering accurate fire at the maximum range generally required. The lighter intermediate rounds enabled the user to fire more quickly due to reduced recoil, and to carry more ammunition.
Because many modern battle rifles share similar characteristics with assault rifles such as look and basic function, people unfamiliar with firearms may confuse the two. The main difference between a modern battle rifle and assault rifle is caliber. As previously stated, a battle rifle employs a full sized cartridge while an assault rifle utilizes an intermediate cartridge.
The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally meaning "storm rifle"), "storm" used as a verb being synonymous with assault, as in "to storm the compound". Sturmgewehr was coined by Adolf Hitler to describe the Maschinenpistole 44, subsequently re-christened Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first widely-used assault rifle and served to popularize the concept. The translation "assault rifle" gradually became the common term for similar firearms sharing the same technical definition as the name giver StG 44. In a strict definition, a firearm must have all of the following five characteristics to qualify as an assault rifle:[1][2][3]
Is a carbine sized individual weapon with provision to be fired from a shouldered position.
Barrel length is usually 400 mm to 500 mm (16" to 20")
Is capable of selective fire.
Fires from a locked breech.
Utilizes an intermediate powered-cartridge.
Ammunition is supplied from a large capacity detachable box magazine.
Most common is a capacity of 30 rounds, sometimes 20 rounds.
The following features are commonly found on assault rifles, but those are not exclusive to assault rifles, as those features are shared with many submachine guns, battle rifles, automatic rifles and machine guns:
Protruding pistol grip.
Folding, retractable or otherwise collapsible shoulder stock.
Bipod
Muzzle device like a muzzle brake or a flash suppressor.
There are commentators who use the expression "assault rifle" more loosely to include other types of arms, particularly arms that fall under a strict definition of the battle rifle, or civilian semi-automatic off-shoots of military rifles for commercial or political reasons. Some militaries of nations outside of the English-speaking world also have a different definition of assault rifle. For instance, the analogous term in the Swedish Armed Forces is automatkarbin (literally "automatic carbine") which includes both assault rifles and battle rifles.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.0 -
quote:Originally posted by scrollwork
Now don't nobody go jumping into this conversation sqwauking about what the definition of assault rifle verses battle rifle should be because we just hammered it out plain n simple. They are what they are.
By some peoples definition, an assault rifle should never be used in Battle, because what do armies do in Battle???? They assault!!!
So assault rifles are used in Battles which makes them now a Battle rifle.
Now lets look at the definition of Battle Rifle, which I guess some would claim that a Battle rifle is only good for use while in retreat, because "they are not an assault rifle". Assault meaning going forward>>>>>>>.
Because as said, a battle rifle is not an assault rifle and since armies assault in battles then a Battle rifle can only be used while engaging in retreat and never while engaging in assaults.
I am working on a design for a "battault rifle", which will have the characteristics of both battle rifle and assault rifle. The battault rifle will fire a reduced power cartridge from a 30rd en bloc clip, but still weigh 10 pounds and have a 22" barrel. A special penetrator round will also be developed to ensure nobody gets hit by their own ricochets when firing into elephant grass, as well as a long-range round for those 500 meter shots so common in THE 'NAM and every battle subsequent.0 -
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
Sorry guys, it's my turn to be a Smart A$$
Main Entry: assault rifle
Function: noun
Date: 1972
: any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use
That is the DEMOCRATIC definition from Websters dictionary!
I was under the impression all these years that an assault rifle was a rifle designed with a high-capacity and a cartidge that was not as powerful as persay the cartridge of a service rifle so it could be better controled in an automatic rate of fire for direct and close quarter engagements. Example, how the 7.62x39mm was a cartridge born of the 7.62x54R just for this purpose.
An assault rifle is a selective fire rifle or carbine firing ammunition with muzzle energies intermediate between those typical of pistol and battle rifle ammunition. Assault rifles are categorized between light machine guns, intended more for sustained automatic fire in a support role, and submachine guns, which fire a handgun cartridge rather than a rifle cartridge.
The term battle rifle can have different meanings. Usually, it refers to rifles firing a full-sized (as opposed to intermediate) cartridge, such as .303 British, .30-06 Springfield, 7.62x54R, or 7.62x51 NATO, from a full-length barrel. A main battle rifle is a battle rifle that is used as a military service rifle. Battle rifles may be bolt-action, semi-automatic, burst fire, or full-automatic. Modern battle rifles are capable of selective fire.
During the latter half of the 20th century, the assault rifle, and later the carbine, (firing an intermediate cartridge) has gained in popularity and superseded the battle rifle as a general infantry weapon in most modern armies. Tacticians during World War II noted that small-arms engagements rarely occurred at distances greater than 300 meters. This meant that the great range and penetration power of the battle rifle was mostly wasted. The assault rifle presented a smaller and lighter package more suitable for close quarters combat, while still delivering accurate fire at the maximum range generally required. The lighter intermediate rounds enabled the user to fire more quickly due to reduced recoil, and to carry more ammunition.
Because many modern battle rifles share similar characteristics with assault rifles such as look and basic function, people unfamiliar with firearms may confuse the two. The main difference between a modern battle rifle and assault rifle is caliber. As previously stated, a battle rifle employs a full sized cartridge while an assault rifle utilizes an intermediate cartridge.
The term assault rifle is a translation of the German word Sturmgewehr (literally meaning "storm rifle"), "storm" used as a verb being synonymous with assault, as in "to storm the compound". Sturmgewehr was coined by Adolf Hitler to describe the Maschinenpistole 44, subsequently re-christened Sturmgewehr 44, the firearm generally considered the first widely-used assault rifle and served to popularize the concept. The translation "assault rifle" gradually became the common term for similar firearms sharing the same technical definition as the name giver StG 44. In a strict definition, a firearm must have all of the following five characteristics to qualify as an assault rifle:[1][2][3]
Is a carbine sized individual weapon with provision to be fired from a shouldered position.
Barrel length is usually 400 mm to 500 mm (16" to 20")
Is capable of selective fire.
Fires from a locked breech.
Utilizes an intermediate powered-cartridge.
Ammunition is supplied from a large capacity detachable box magazine.
Most common is a capacity of 30 rounds, sometimes 20 rounds.
The following features are commonly found on assault rifles, but those are not exclusive to assault rifles, as those features are shared with many submachine guns, battle rifles, automatic rifles and machine guns:
Protruding pistol grip.
Folding, retractable or otherwise collapsible shoulder stock.
Bipod
Muzzle device like a muzzle brake or a flash suppressor.
There are commentators who use the expression "assault rifle" more loosely to include other types of arms, particularly arms that fall under a strict definition of the battle rifle, or civilian semi-automatic off-shoots of military rifles for commercial or political reasons. Some militaries of nations outside of the English-speaking world also have a different definition of assault rifle. For instance, the analogous term in the Swedish Armed Forces is automatkarbin (literally "automatic carbine") which includes both assault rifles and battle rifles.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
What does it say about unicorns?
I will not go into why this parroting of dictionary and Wikipedia definitions is pointless; suffice to say that the terms "battle rifles" and "assault rifles" to refer to classes of military weapons demarcated by caliber or any other characteristics were not contemporary to introduction of either the StG44 or AK47, and will not be found in any historical or military record prior to civilian gun writers inventing these terms in the early 60's. You or anyone else need only present one example to the contrary and I will forever shut up on the matter. Been saying this for years here, but still no takers.0 -
Hehehehehehe!!!
quote:What does it say about unicorns?
The unicorn (from Latin unus 'one' and cornu 'horn') is a legendary creature. Though the modern popular image of the unicorn is sometimes that of a horse differing only in the horn on its forehead, the traditional unicorn has a billy-goat beard, a lion's tail, and cloven hooves - these distinguish it from a horse.[1] Marianna Mayer has observed (The Unicorn and the Lake), "The unicorn is the only fabulous beast that does not seem to have been conceived out of human fears. In even the earliest references he is fierce yet good, selfless yet solitary, but always mysteriously beautiful. He could be captured only by unfair means, and his single horn was said to neutralize poison."
I said I was just being a Smart A$$!!
My opinion of an assault weapon is a weapon designed for a military using a intermediate power cartridge capable of a high cyclic rate yet controlable for one soldier to use in direct engagement of an opposing force. I don't classify an assault weapon for barrel length, muzzle break, pistol grip, etc.
If you are gonna get your skivvys in a twist I'll just can it.
It's so FRICKIN HYPOCRITICAL of people now days to be sarcastic but when someone else does they piss and moan.
It was all in good fun fella! Sorry if I pissed in your Wheaties!0 -
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
My opinion of an assault weapon is a weapon designed for a military using a intermediate power cartridge capable of a high cyclic rate yet controlable for one soldier to use in direct engagement of an opposing force. I don't classify an assault weapon for barrel length, muzzle break, pistol grip, etc.
If you are gonna get your skivvys in a twist I'll just can it.
It's so FRICKIN HYPOCRITICAL of people now days to be sarcastic but when someone else does they piss and moan.
It was all in good fun fella! Sorry if I pissed in your Wheaties![/red]
It isn't just that you missed the point; it is the vast distance by which you missed it. The point is that no military in the world refers to or has ever referred to any service rifles in inventory by class as either "battle rifles" or "assault rifles"; that the term "sturmgewehr" did not originate with the StG44 and Hitler, but (as with "sturmtruppen" or "stormtoopers") with the Mauser '98 and Kaiser Wilhelm in the late 19th Century; that the taxonomic excesses gun rag hacks took to sell copy were somehow over time confused as facts, and perpetrated by readers born after and wholly ignorant of the facts.
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, that opinion is meaningless without corroboration disputing the facts of the matter. Mere language use (or misuse) is not a defense; fact is, the terms "battle rifle" and "assault rifle" do not refer to anything real, nor did the terms even exist contemporary to introduction of the weapons they supposedly name.0 -
Welcome to "THE SEMANTICS FORUM".
Jeez you guys.
We all know that the term "Assault rifle" is a buzz word that demonizes a military or military look-alike iron.
The term "Battle rifle" is used as a convenience to distinguish it from than all other military(style) rifles.
Face it:
M-16/4 = OK
M-14 = great
No point in stirrin' a bunch of furrin stuff into the mix.
No charge.
Thank you.
Doug0 -
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
My opinion of an assault weapon is a weapon designed for a military using a intermediate power cartridge capable of a high cyclic rate yet controlable for one soldier to use in direct engagement of an opposing force. I don't classify an assault weapon for barrel length, muzzle break, pistol grip, etc.
If you are gonna get your skivvys in a twist I'll just can it.
It's so FRICKIN HYPOCRITICAL of people now days to be sarcastic but when someone else does they piss and moan.
It was all in good fun fella! Sorry if I pissed in your Wheaties![/red]
It isn't just that you missed the point; it is the vast distance by which you missed it. The point is that no military in the world refers to or has ever referred to any service rifles in inventory by class as either "battle rifles" or "assault rifles"; that the term "sturmgewehr" did not originate with the StG44 and Hitler, but (as with "sturmtruppen" or "stormtoopers") with the Mauser '98 and Kaiser Wilhelm in the late 19th Century; that the taxonomic excesses gun rag hacks took to sell copy were somehow over time confused as facts, and perpetrated by readers born after and wholly ignorant of the facts.
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, that opinion is meaningless without corroboration disputing the facts of the matter. Mere language use (or misuse) is not a defense; fact is, the terms "battle rifle" and "assault rifle" do not refer to anything real, nor did the terms even exist contemporary to introduction of the weapons they supposedly name.
So I guess the M16A2 "SERVICE" rifle that I was issued in the Corps and carried into "BATTLE" was just a frickin toy! And I guess my DI's and Weapons instructors were wrong when they classify a M4 as a "CARBINE", the M9 as a "SIDEARM", AK47/AK74variants as "ASSAULT" rifles, the M249 as a "LIGHT MACHINE" gun, and my M40A1 as a "SNIPER" rifle. So I guess I just used a bunch of imaginary items! Well I am a "JARHEAD" so I guess I'm ignorant. Better scoot right on out to MCRD San Diego and tell all the guys in campaign hats that they are ignorant too, doubt that will go over to well.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
Welcome to "THE SEMANTICS FORUM".
Jeez you guys.
We all know that the term "Assault rifle" is a buzz word that demonizes a military or military look-alike iron.
The term "Battle rifle" is used as a convenience to distinguish it from than all other military(style) rifles.
Face it:
M-16/4 = OK
M-14 = great
No point in stirrin' a bunch of furrin stuff into the mix.
No charge.
Thank you.
Doug
I know Doug, I know! I got carried away! It's just I know what I have learned. And From what is being told to me now I guess the Military is training us with "false" info. I'll give it a rest for sanity's sake.
DancesWithSheep, I don't want to offend you, but just because the Evil Gun Banners refer to civilan variants of military weapons as "Assault" weapons, doesn't mean assault rifles and battle rifles aren't real. I just don't see how the Stg44 and AK47 and other present day weapons weren't designed to use an intermediate power cartridge with higher capacity to "assault" an opposing force. The last time I looked they were refering to them as assault rifles long before Sarah Brady, Ted Kennedy, and all those other QUACKS were trying to take our Rights away from us.
This is it for me, I'm not saying you are totally wrong, because I can not provide any hard physical evidence at this time, but likewise you have not provided me with any either. I do see your point and I do respect that! Sorry I wasted your time, but I am sure you got a laugh or two in so it wasn't a total waste.[:D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by jtmarine0831
DancesWithSheep, I don't want to offend you, but just because the Evil Gun Banners refer to civilan variants of military weapons as "Assault" weapons, doesn't mean assault rifles and battle rifles aren't real. I just don't see how the Stg44 and AK47 and other present day weapons weren't designed to use an intermediate power cartridge with higher capacity to "assault" an opposing force.
Continuing to lift your dress and pout and reiterating a view is not a reasoned rejoinder. What is it you don't get? The StG and AK47 and all intermediate-power cartridge select-fire rifles subsequent were not distinguished by design or purpose to be "assault rifles"; neither were the FAL and M14 and all full-power select-fire rifles subsequent distinguished by design or purpose to be "battle rifles". No military in the world has ever made such distinction. EVER. The terms "assault rifle" and "battle rifle" are fictions contrived by gun writers, and have no meaning off the pages of gun rags or in the minds of parrots like you. An M16 is neither an "assault rifle" nor a "battle rifle"; it is a service rifle with nomenclature "US Rifle Caliber 5.56Nato M16A2" AND THAT IS ALL IT IS. Both the M16 and AK47 attended the seige at Khe Sahn and the Battle of Hue; does that make them "battle rifles" or "assault rifles"?
To insist that "battle rifles" and "assault rifles" exist solely on a contrived taxonomic distinction made by civilian gun writers inserts significance where none exists. What difference does caliber size, barrel length or select-fire capability have to do with military purpose and use? Answer: None. The maximum effective range of the M1, M14 and M16 is exactly the same: 500 meters. Now what?
Having been a Marine you should know better. Where in your Guidebook For Marines is the service rifle referred to as either an "assault rifle" or "battle rifle"? Where are these terms used anywhere in the Marine Corps? Provide a single document. Just one.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Doug Wilson
The term "Battle rifle" is used as a convenience to distinguish it from than all other military(style) rifles.
This statement is utterly without meaning. Do you come up with this mindless ca-ca all on your own? Amazing.0 -
quote:maximum effective range of the M1, M14 and M16 is exactly the same: 500 meters. Now what?
Hahaha!
I may ignorant but if you believe this, you can't shoot!
quote:What difference does caliber size, barrel length or select-fire capability have to do with military purpose and use? Answer: None.
Military purpose and use( see below)
Caliber size = bullet diameter, weight, velocity, and material make up are critcal to their use in combat. Large caliber, high velocity rounds are more suited to longer range, heavier covered targets. Smaller calibers are suited well for shorter ranges, lighter more controlable recoil and the ability carry more ammunition per pound compareed to the larger cartridges.(opps, that's one use and purpose)
Barrel length = shorter barreled weapons provide easier manuvering in close quarters and limited cover, and also reduce weight in hence reduce fatique to mild extent.(opps, that's two uses and purposes)
Select-fire capabilites = selecting fire to semi-automatic enables the soldier to place a single round on target, being more accurate and conservative with munition supply,(oh no, another one). Selecting fire to three-round burst/full-automatic enables soldier to place multiple rounds on target in quick succesion, lay down cover fire for troop movement including assault fire which is advancment by fire and maneuver.(yep, another purpose and use)
quote:I was under the impression all these years that an assault rifle was a rifle designed with a high-capacity and a cartidge that was not as powerful as persay the cartridge of a service rifle so it could be better controled in an automatic rate of fire for direct and close quarter engagements. Example, how the 7.62x39mm was a cartridge born of the 7.62x54R just for this purpose.
And where did I say that here that a rifle was designed to be specifically called an assault rifle?
quote:The term battle rifle can have different meanings. Usually, it refers to rifles firing a full-sized (as opposed to intermediate) cartridge, such as .303 British, .30-06 Springfield, 7.62x54R, or 7.62x51 NATO, from a full-length barrel. A main battle rifle is a battle rifle that is used as a military service rifle. Battle rifles may be bolt-action, semi-automatic, burst fire, or full-automatic. Modern battle rifles are capable of selective fire.
And here again, Where did I say a MILITARY refers to their service rifle as battle rifles?
quote:So I guess the M16A2 "SERVICE" rifle that I was issued in the Corps and carried into "BATTLE" was just a frickin toy! And I guess my DI's and Weapons instructors were wrong when they classify a M4 as a "CARBINE", the M9 as a "SIDEARM", AK47/AK74variants as "ASSAULT" rifles, the M249 as a "LIGHT MACHINE" gun, and my M40A1 as a "SNIPER" rifle. So I guess I just used a bunch of imaginary items! Well I am a "JARHEAD" so I guess I'm ignorant. Better scoot right on out to MCRD San Diego and tell all the guys in campaign hats that they are ignorant too, doubt that will go over to well.
And here, where did I say that the term ASSAULT rifle was in a government document? We(as Marines) are trained to refer to these types of weapons in these classifications to clarify probable capability and aramament of enemy forces and positions to superiors so they will be able to adaquetly stage offensive responses.
This is the reason I refer to some firearms as assault weapons, it is called training! Not because I have been brainwashed with Evil Gun Banner rhetoric like half of the populus or this country into thinking if it holds more than five rounds in an external magazine it is an assault weapon, or if it can shoot over a hundred yards and can be fitted with a scope it is a sniper rifle, or that if I carry a conceled weapon for personal protection that I am some gunslinger from the wild west just wanting to kill anyone I see.
This has been rather entertaining to an extent and yet frustrating at the same time. Not frustrating because I believe that I am right or you are wrong, because by no means am I attempting to apply that conclusion either way, but that due to the type of communication we are using it is sometimes quite difficult for me to actually describe what I am meaning to say and difficult for me to understand exactly what you are attempting to convey. The hostility and vigour in which you began to respond after I posted the clips from Wikipedia tells me that you did not full understand my intentions of being a "SMART A$$" when I placed them. And I am sorry that you misconstrued that post in to thinking those were my beliefs. As far as a "battle rifle" goes, my opinion is that it is a shoulder-fired service weapon that is used in battle. Regardless of caliber, barrel length, select-fire, I use it in battle to kill my enemy.0 -
Egads. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by DancesWithSheep
Egads.
[?]like I said, I'm ignorant! What exactly does that mean? Can't say I recall seeing that before or to much cold beer one[?]0 -
It's either a rifle, pistol, or machine gun. No sub-catagories for me! Gotta admit, though, it was an entertaining read. Best to all, and be safe this Christmas/New Year. Joe 0 -
quote:Originally posted by givette
It's either a rifle, pistol, or machine gun. No sub-catagories for me! Gotta admit, though, it was an entertaining read. Best to all, and be safe this Christmas/New Year. Joe
Merry Christmas Joe!
It was entertaining! It is just so hard to understand someone and not get "off the beatin path" if you will when you can't talk with them face to face. I was a bit of an arse though, but oh well I'm sure everyone got a laugh so it wan't total pointless[:D][:D][:p]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
59 comments