HA HA! You're in the Canadian army.
Originally Posted by GuiltySpark
At least he's not in the RCAF
i just nearly pissed myself laughing. that made my afternoon- thanks, guys.
Sure was a lot of water in Afghanistan!
Last edited by vigilus; 6/13/2007 4:12pm at .
Blame it on the poor American education system and the lack of curling and ice hockey eh?
I also blame Neildo, for posting a picture of an F-16 from Shaw AFB, SC.
That'd be funnier if it was actually a Canadian aircraft. ;-)
o rly? blame the dumb canuck whos hosting that image then.
I wouldn't expect a Canuck to get it right, but you, Mr. Random Internet Poster I Know Nothing About, you should know better.
Originally Posted by Neildo
PDw concept is silly.
Just issue and train everybody to use pistols. There is no need for a scaled down carbine, added logistical pain, etc. It sucks that the right people don't get them, but that's not a engineering problem. That's a personnel problem. I've seen it, I know about it.
Go back to a pistol caliber worth having(45) and leave it there. Training makes up for a lot of imperfect equipment, not that a PDW is perfect equipment anyway.
If they want to issue a sub-gun, just issue mac10s in 45 or something. Extremely cheap, easy to operate, easy to unjam and field strip, pretty durable. Use the same round for pistols and the machine pistol/PDW, make them cheap(so they can be ubiquitous, no sense having a great weapon nobody has because it's too expensive), and train everybody how to use them.
As far as rifle rounds go, 5.56mm is fine, as is 7.62, but they should have really picked one. Having everybody use the same ammo makes up for a lot of the shortcomings of whatever round has in particular.
Biggest problem with the m16 family is the gas system, IMO. Which has been addressed by a new generation of gas tappet system rifles(hk 416, etc).
Burst needs to go. Semi or full auto. Everything inbetween is unnecessary complication and reduces the MTBF. I experienced in the switch from the m4 to the m4a1. Big difference. Hampering equipment to address a TRAINING problem was retarded.
The mp5 is a sensible weapon for a certain mission profile, but it's MILITARY use is limited. Easily supressed, lightweight, fairly compact, VERY accurate, pistol caliber rounds that don't penetrate through 5 walls and hit babies next door, ammo is cheaper for limited budget agencies that would expet to use them, etc. If the targets are expected to be unarmored and engagements are going to be close-quarters, why not? Easier on the ears, I still think my hearing is fucked from firing carbines indoors. Messing up my Britney spears listening experience
As far as crewspace, I've been in most of the passenger carrying choppers in the US inventory, there is room to store carbines if necessary. Blackhawks have room, our Frogs certainly had room, the Navy hueys have room, etc. LAR platoons manage to carry their rifles just fine. If anything get a carbine witha FOLDING stock instead of a telescoping stock. I've always thought that was a way better option. The g36c is my favorite rifle/carbine, ergonomically. Telescoping stocks gotta go.
There is time to train crews to use the ****, but too much time is spent on unnecessary ****, IMO. It doesn't take a ton of time to learn how to shoot a pistol, carbine, or pistol really. Especially when Delta Force level shooting accuracy isn't required.
The m9 magazine problem is very real and it's cost me a friend. I've actually sent quite a few magazines abroad. The m9 was a political choice, so it's not the best. Basically, because we forced 5.56 on Europe, they forced 9mm on us, and the rest is history. It took me a while, but I'm pretty much married to the 1911 now, and wilson magazines.
One basic rifle, folding stock, barrel length options, common receiver. One basic pistol caliber for subgun/pistol(45), but I think pistols and a folding stock carbine should pretty much cover the requirements for vehicle crews.
Yeah, but you're forgetting that the MP7 is so darn cute.