US small arms assessment
-
i am surprised that US army had to buy their own stuff
to kill!!
This is a very detail report for small arms assessment.
SOLDIER WEAPONS ASSESSMENT TEAM REPORT 6-03,OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM,
31 July 2003,PM Soldier WeaponsHowever, soldiers and units continue to purchase commercial items, fabricate or resort to field expedience to overcome shortcomings in the AOR.
2.This is inspired by:
US assault rifles and sighting systems - Stopping power
In late 2006, the US Center for Naval Analyses (CNA) conducted an extensive survey of more than 2,600 US Army soldiers who had seen combat in Iraq or Afghanistan. In both Operation 'Enduring Freedom' and 'Iraqi Freedom', US soldiers raised concerns about the performance of small arms in close-quarter battles; the service's Project Manager Soldier Weapons commissioned the survey to gauge soldiers' confidence in their weapons.
[first posted to http://jdw.janes.com - 23 July 2007] -
Another +1 thread,
This has already been know for a long time.
What makes you think our stuff kills better then the Yanks? Last I checked we also use the same bullets and are not equipped with the special stuff the Yanks often go into battle with.
If anything, we are often woefully underequipped when you compare it with the basic stuff the Yanks are issued with, and the fact that they spend to level up their stuff is a clear indication of the professionalism of their own forces and how seriously they take their work.
And why so quiet on the Aussie rocket launcher thread? Cat got your tounge? -
And are you forgetting how much of their own hard earned NS pay the NSF is often forced to spend in beach road?
How come our army cannot provide them with small stores assessment? -
hmmm..... I don't see where in Lion's thread got say Sg are better....... presumption or an inductive approach from your end?Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Another +1 thread,
This has already been know for a long time.
What makes you think our stuff kills better then the Yanks? Last I checked we also use the same bullets and are not equipped with the special stuff the Yanks often go into battle with.
If anything, we are often woefully underequipped when you compare it with the basic stuff the Yanks are issued with, and the fact that they spend to level up their stuff is a clear indication of the professionalism of their own forces and how seriously they take their work.
And why so quiet on the Aussie rocket launcher thread? Cat got your tounge? -
Dude, follow Lionnoisy's topics and you will start to bubble in irritation well.Originally posted by wisefool83:hmmm..... I don't see where in Lion's thread got say Sg are better....... presumption or an inductive approach from your end?
-
As others have said, if lionnoisy starts a thread asking some "questions" about some other nations, usually with a negative tone... you can be sure he is attempting to draw a picture of why Singapore is better. This pattern has become so set you wonder if this dude is on sgforums for any other purpose except to try to find strange ways to toot our nation's horn.Originally posted by wisefool83:hmmm..... I don't see where in Lion's thread got say Sg are better....... presumption or an inductive approach from your end?
In any case it is apparent he makes most of his threads with an appaling lack of knowledge of actual military equipment and procedures. -
besides snacks,some personal stuff,i dunt think SAF need to buy
equipments to fight. -
????????Originally posted by lionnoisy:besides snacks,some personal stuff,i dunt think SAF need to buy
equipments to fight. -
cooll
-
And you think this because? Or is it just wishful thinking?Originally posted by lionnoisy:besides snacks,some personal stuff,i dunt think SAF need to buy
equipments to fight.
If the Yanks, whose basic loadout is far more advanced then ours see the need to buy their own stuff, what does that say about us? -
wah lau eh...the article 4 years ago liao.............
no pic leh -
Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.Originally posted by wisefool83:???????? -
If a rifle can fire without stoppage only when
it is clean,is it a good rifle?
US Army shall call for tender to have a fair and open
competition to see if there is a better rifle to replace
M4.
Pl prepare one hour to read!!
The USA's M4 Carbine Controversy
30-Jul-2007---http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/.....Gannett's Army Times magazine also obtained a copy of Project Manager Soldier's Weapons Assessment Team's July 31, 2003, report:
"The executive summary said that M16s and M4s "functioned reliably" in the combat zone as long as "soldiers conducted daily operator maintenance and applied a light coat of lubricant." "
Soldiers had their own comments, however, which were also included in the report and relayed in the magazine article:
3rd ID soldier: "I know it fires very well and accurate [when] clean. But sometimes it needs to fire dirty well too."
25th Infantry Division soldier: "The M4 Weapon in the deserts of Iraq and Afghanistan was quick to malfunction when a little sand got in the weapon. Trying to keep it clean, sand free was impossible while on patrols or firefights."
82nd Airborne Division soldier: "The M4 is overall an excellent weapon, however the flaw of its sensitivity to dirt and powder residue needs to be corrected. True to fact, cleaning will help. Daily assigned tasks, and nonregular hours in tactical situations do not always warrant the necessary time required for effective cleaning."
75th Ranger Regiment member, SOCOM: "Even with the dust cover closed and magazine in the well, sand gets all inside; on and around the bolt. It still fires, but after a while the sand works its way all through the gun and jams start."
The 507th Maintenance Company, ambushed outside Nasariyah in 2003 during the opening days of the ground invasion of Iraq, might concur with all of the above. The post-incident report released by the US Army had this to say:
"Dusty, desert conditions do require vigilance in weapons maintenanceÂ… However, it is imperative to remember that at the time of the attack, the 507th had spent more than two days on the move, with little rest and time to conduct vehicle repair and recovery operations.....''
Even without those extenuating circumstances, however, there have been problems. A December 2006 survey, conducted on behalf of the Army by CNA Corp., conducted over 2,600 interviews with Soldiers returning from combat duty. The M4 received a number of strong requests from M-16 users, who liked its smaller profile. Among M4 users, however, 19% of said they experienced stoppages in combat – and almost 20% of those said they were "unable to engage the target with that weapon during a significant portion of or the entire firefight after performing immediate or remedial action to clear the stoppage."
The report adds that "Those who attached accessories to their weapon were more likely to experience stoppages, regardless of how the accessories were attached [including via official means like rail mounts]." Since "accessories" can include items like night sights, flashlights, et. al., their use is not expected to go away any time soon.
The last word will be left to SOCOM's Major Chaz Bowser:
"We buy new laptop computers every few years across the gamut, so couldn't we do the same with our single most important piece of military equipment? .... Waiting for a leap-ahead technology based on a kinetic energy weapon platform is a waste of time and money, so we need to look at what is out there nowÂ…. What the Army needs is a weapon that is now ready for prime-time and not a developmental systemÂ…. The requirement comes from the field, not from an office in some garrison activity, not from some consultant and definitely not from a vendor.
Let's do this quickly without all the bureaucracy typically associated with change. Find someone in our ranks who can make a decision – who hasn't floated a retirement resume with a gun company – and make the decision now. Just look how fast we were all issued the 'highly coveted' black beret or the digital uniform. Find that recipe card, change out the word 'Velcro' with 'battle rifle' and that may be a start to finding a solution [DID: which, he acknowledges, could be Colt's M4 if that's what the competition shows]. Our men and women deserve much better than we are giving them, and shame on us." -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
You can read and understand all that?
If a rifle can fire without stoppage only when
it is clean-blahblabblah
Pl prepare one hour to read!!
[b]The USA's M4 Carbine Controversy
30-Jul-2007---http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/
[/b][/b]
And I think we take less then an hour to read it, but for you we understand lah.
Anyway what you are posting is old news, nothing in here we already don't know.
So what's the point of your thread?
To inform?
Nope, all this info any gun buff will already know long ago and if you read some threads you will realize that.
To educate?
Certainly not, it appears you are the one needing education instead.
To entertain?
Well it's not very entertaining yet, but let me help you with that:
There you go.