Guns Thread

[Demon of Undoing]

Serious reservations about buying the AR. The Scot in me is cursing fulminously at $800 for a rifle, $500 for a good sight , $250 for a battery of fire , etc. Tha's scads of guineas, ya 'knoo. I got me a damn fine Russian bolt gun ...

[CgDs]

[Demon of Undoing]

A battery of fire meant ammo in the gun and with enough on hand to take on one more fire mission. Basically , a personal loading which for an AR means 180-500 rounds, depending on disposition. As to the sight , one of the main things that makes the AR a dominant platform is how well you can integrate reflex type sights. They are not gimmicks; if you are trained up on one , it's a game changer. First shots are lightning fast and precisely aimed , follow ups stay on target with minimal movement. Upshot is that the whole point of the rifle is to be quick. Its plenty fast with irons , but try it with a holosight. It's cheating , which I heartily approve of. A friend who knows his way around iron sights says the modern sights take the fun out of it as they make getting fast hits much easier. Well , take the entertainment slap out for me , please. This isn't a plinker.

Yes, I can get cheaper versions , but I would likely spend further time and money trying to get it close to what I want. An ACOG would be the last sight I would put on it, and when it comes to durability and ease of holding zero , you get what you pay for.

Anyway, still not decided. Grrrrr.

[CgDs]

[Demon of Undoing]

First question as to envisioned role of the rifle / individual rifleman in general. First off , do understand that historically , for me , burning 300 rounds handgun , 50 shotgun and when I have had rifles in the past, 100-250 rifle rounds is a normal day at the range. If I had one in my basement , that would not be the case. However , I can generally manage only two or maybe three real shooting sessions a year. We make a day of it , and it's a workout. So having 500 rounds may be a year's worth of ammo , just practice. Second , used in the ways the light rifle has evolved into by the best shooters of the generation means using the rifle as a different kind of tool. One shot one kill is always preferable. However , when you have 60 rounds in the gun ( jungle mag) and can dump them into the space of a pie plate , you can do things rifles aren't thought of doing , certainly not by civillian marksmen.

You can bounce rounds off of cover and around corners by walking the rounds in. You can degrade cover. You can avoid taking a stairwell by obliterating most of the floor of the floor above you. All sorts of things that enhance survivability. Firepower saves lives. But doing that is not possible with many platforms. It is not possible without significant ammo available. It does presuppose a different regulatory environment , but is that not what the blue helmeted zombie scenario envisions ?

As to caliber , adopting the modern method presupposes multiple hits whenever possible. The number of times that the 5.56 comes up short is no greater than any other caliber when used properly. This is something I am both ideologically inclined not to agree with and something I have researched extensively. In Afghanistan , would I want 6.8 SPC ? Yep , but I won't be there , and if I really feel the need can convert later.

As to the one vs twenty scenario , I can't envision that too readily. Castle defense, maybe , but if that's a likely scenario , there would be defensive architechture and depth and all sorts of things. No , I envision ( in a pegged - meter scenario) being required to go into larger metropolitan areas to retrieve people or possibly as part of a posse off to shut down something ugly. An AR is perfect for either. The idea is to be so equipped that you can carry out any task tge vagaries of the situation might call for where a limited offensive role is envisioned. The sight maximizes that.

Lotta dough, though. Oof.

[Mr. Perfect]

I'm starting to think of the M-16 as a shrunken M-14, and the M-4 as an overgrown submachine gun. In terms of bulk and the effects on your particular application.

[Mr. Perfect]

What that means to the concept of rifleman as discussed above IMV is... you need two guns.

[Sennacherib]

[Demon of Undoing]

I like it.

As long as they avoid becoming just another spec ops unit and fulfill the sniper doctrine more effectively, why not ? Due to advances in technology , telescopic gun bunnies have gone from skirmishers that pick off high value targets and harass troops to the point where a team might legitimately be expected to hold down a whole valley. If you had six guys on long range platforms with all an Alpha strike can deliver in the wings ? Yes , bad jihad.

[Mr. Perfect]

I've been following this debate for some time now, and think the obvious solution is to have two types of teams, the two man and the six man instead of crosstraining and diluting everybody. There are uses for both.

[Sennacherib]

The usual Canadian practice has been three-man teams: sniper; spotter; guard. Afghanistan has changed so much else, why not this too? I can well see the need for extra protection.

[CgDs]

I think there is an American Indian proverb with the general sentiment, "Two men walking in the woods make the sound of four." I can see in some instances a 1, 2 or 3 man operation which requires more than a bit of stealth. Other times, since the sniper can be such an asset, the asset requires more protection. But I don't think the "Enemy at the Gates" style is necessarily obsolete either.

[Sennacherib]

[Demon of Undoing]

That's what I'm saying. It's just kind of unavoidable if you are on that path. With a blank sheet , you can maybe come up with something better , but considering the logistics of an actual undertaking to replace it ,it's almost impossible.

[Mr. Perfect]

The thing about the AR is that it has had the benefit of being in use at the right time and place. A lot of other platforms doubtlessly would have been it's equal or better if they had the benefit of 50 years of constant tweaks.

The 5.56 in a small gun is I think is a clear improvement over the 9mm as far as real close CQB submachine gun stuff, but I think the 6.5-6.8 choices would be what I would want if I was going into any of these war theaters, particularly since short bursts are apparently the way to go.

[CgDs]

How to have a bad day...

[Mr. Perfect]

Yeah. I really don't like those Glock "safeties" either.

[Colonel Sun]

[CgDs]

[rednblacklumberjack]

XM25 blast radius:

[Sennacherib]

[Demon of Undoing]

Chance on surviving , yes. On being hit , no.

There is a very good sniper out there somewhere.

[noddy]

banning guns isnt a slippery slope, and the modern inner city types arent knee jerking fear worshippers who can fix all of lifes problems with more laws.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011 ... 184681.htm

[CgDs]

[noddy]