Just wanted to note on the whole tank argument, tanks are indeed going the way of the dodo in lieu of Stryker/Bradley vehicles as it is. The only tanks I've ever heard of being stolen in the past few decades were some shermans that were laying around at a museum and an Abrams that a vietnam vet who used to be a tank driver hopped into at one point.
It isn't quite that simple, the Guard of today gets the exact same training(We are trained at the same schools in the same classes as active duty), we're deployed even more(as our bases only need minimal full time staff present to stay open), and we know the geography in the areas around our armories since they are our homes.
The downside to this is we have alot of gaps that need plugging in the equipment department, and aside from some of the more gung-ho people as well as full time Guardsmen, there's also some serious lazy ass slouches who shouldn't even wear the uniform in the Guard.
^^ That's one reason why military experts believe that MBTs have been rendered obsolete by more cost-effective alternatives. That, and the widely-available variety of sophisticated anti-tank weapons, mostly the Soviet/Russian-made ones circulating in the black market, which can take out even the M1 Abrams in a few hits - and immobilize with one good shot at the tracks. And let's not forget the top-attack antitank missiles used by the likes of the AH-64 Apache.
edited 25th May '10 5:02:36 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.So they are having a slew of rifle related stuff over on Fox now asking this simple question.
Is the US outgunned in Afghanistan? M4 vs AK-47.
I'd have to side with the AK. The M4 is more accurate at 300m but has no punch and is supremely unreliable. The AK-47 can shoot while still wet, muddy, half frozen, and on fire all at the same time.
Additionally, the engagement ranges in Afghanistan are more akin to World War One and World War Two battlefields in terms of distance than Vietnam. That is to say, much further than 200m.
A possible short term solution is re-introduce the M14 albeit modernized like the M14k or the EBR. It would shut up all the reliability concerns in an instant and your average GI in Afghanistan would have a superior rifle at distance. The only real drawback is your average GI would have less ammo for the same weight than he has now.
A longer term solution however is ultimately a new cartridge that is lighter than 7.62 NATO but is more powerful than 5.56. Something in the 6.5 to 6.8mm ranges might do if you find a suitable cartridge.
But enough of my theorycrafting, what say you? Are American GI's using inferior weapons compared to the AK?
No, the weapons are a different issue, the training is what makes the difference. As long as the US military keeps up with having good marksmanship skills and the Insurgents fire from the hip and generally have poor accuracy I don't think it's worth even debating.
That being said, I would LOVE to have an EBR. I'd carry the extra weight just to be kitted with one of those in a heartbeat.
The US Marines who got caught in a surprise assault a few months ago and suffered multiple disastrous weapon failures would disagree with you. No training in the world would help you if your weapons decide to break down before you even shoot the first bullet.
Winning isn't everything; you also have to reduce causulties, otherwise you'd ultimately end up with a pyrrhic victory situation.
edited 26th May '10 2:34:24 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Well, there are weapon clearing procedures you're meant to follow when your gun misfires. Unlike in Holywood, the weapon might still be operable depending on the type of misfire.
However, it'd probably be best to get behind cover or to get one of your colleagues to protect you from enemy fire while you're clearing it.
Locking you up on radar since '09The weapon failures did not involve lack of maintenance procedures. The weapons themselves had serious flaws. It was all on Yahoo! News a few months ago.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Hopefully that cost effective gas piston conversion kit they are coming out with will change that, though to be completely honest I clean my weapons obsessively and don't have issues. Yeah, I can get jams, but when those jams happen they are also very quick to fix, and if all else fails a sidearm on a cross draw is a pretty quick solution.
Not saying it isn't a problem, just saying it's rarely an actual mission effecting issue. I'd blame the fact that the marines were ambushed for their casualties more than I would blame the weapon.
You misunderstand me. There are drills you follow to clear a misfired round: a misfire isn't always a death sentence!
Locking you up on radar since '09They weren't just misfires. Their M4 rifles just plain broke down in much worse ways that could not have been remedied on the spot; one had to abandon his machine gun in frustration when it refused to operate correctly at all.
Seriously, look up "Afghanistan" + "Marines" + "ambush" + "weapons" + "failure" to get the whole story.
edited 26th May '10 5:41:42 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.The only problems I could find with my short research were weapon failures due to overheating, given that you run 360 rounds through an assault rifle in a short amount of time, not so suprising. There's just so much an air cooled barrel can do.
An interesting comment I read about that subject is, that those events mean that fire discipline is horrible, i.e. that the soldiers pointlessly fire into a general area without a clear target.
Pour y voir clair, il suffit souvent de changer la direction de son regard www.xkcd.com/386/A significant portion of M4/16 failures are caused by shitty magazines as opposed to issues with the DI system (although it certainly doesn't help matters in this regard).
The horribly built STANAG magazines were the first things HK got rid of when they were contracted to fix the British SA 80 rifles a few years back.
I hate to break it to you our direct impingement system sucks. It fucks up the bolt face and causes heat stress directly on the bolt. Add to that direct fouling to the bolt from carbon gases of the weapon system.
Add in the ambient fine powder dust of the area they were in makes the weapons wear out very very fast. When your in the middle of a fire fight the last thing you want to be doing is breaking down your rifle or carbine for an emergency cleaning or maintenance check.
The weapon that broke down was a S.A.W. a weapon that has notorious barrel problem. Plus the feed system suffers badly in that environment. Oh and the gas regulator gets blocked up pretty easily. Fixing that is a stone cold bitch.
A gas rod system would be much better period. Less maintenance intensive, would improve the operation life of the weapons, and would reduce most issues from fouling and carbon on the bolt face.
Your rifles and carbines need very thorough cleaning after firing about 200-300 rounds. If your in combat you go through that easily. Its even worse for automatic weapons.
Who watches the watchmen?The main place tanks seem to have the advantage is open combat with staying power. Specifically, areas where it can have free range to fire at will, but doesn't have constant fuel expenditures for loitering like aircraft. I think I mentioned a while ago that I think future design for tank tanks will be an artillery/tank hybrid with thicker more averaged out armor (due to adoption of AMS) and urban areas will have something more along the lines of a light tank. Smaller, probably wheeled, with a much smaller gun and again, more averaged armor.
Fight smart, not fair.You're talking about the likes of the Mobile Gun System and the Stryker (aren't they two names for one thing?), right?
edited 26th May '10 6:01:29 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.I'd just like to point out another possible reason the South Koreans and their allies have been reluctant to topple the teetering North Korean regime: any invader who takes possession of the country also takes possession of an entire population on the brink of starvation.
I think the U.N. powers that be and the Norks financially-solvent sister country realize that ousting that crazy bastard would be a matter of a few days, but it will be a humanitarian disaster.
And you know what? F*** the AK. Yeah, yeah, you can run over it with a tank and it will still fire. But that's because the tolerances on that thing are so loose that anything other than the spray-and-pray method is useless if you actually intend to hit your target.
Going to a gas system is a much more sensible suggestion (whoever brought that up). I understand that M14s are seeing limited re-distribution, and not just among spec war guys, but Marine and Army infantry as well. I'd bet that they are test monkeys to determine whether large-scale deployment of M14 receiver based weapons is worth the time. Remember it was replaced in first place, you can carry an assload more ammo (and other stuff, I suppose) when your weapon weighs as little as an AR M16.
^^^ That issue was prominently raised by the South Korean Ambassador in Behind Enemy Lines II: Axis of Evil; it's only then that I realized just how f***ed over has the DPRK's population been due to the government's "Military First" economic policy of the last couple of decades.
^^ Which Klashnikov are you talking about? There are myriads of derivates of the original AK-47
.
edited 26th May '10 7:00:06 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.The stryker is the APC with a 25mm auto-cannon. The Mobile Gun System is a stryker with a 105mm gun mounted on top. Heh reread my own post. Its basically the stryker with a 105mm gun for heavy ground support in urban environments.
Actually it was on the first page. Links to post.
1
The post has links to follow.
edited 26th May '10 11:34:00 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?

NK "populace", or NK "troops"? Because I don't think any NK "citizen" thinks highly of the incumbent regime. Just because a country is ruled by a Communist government doesn't mean that every citizen upholds the same ideology. Ex-Soviet Russia and the PRC are prime examples; don't even bother counting the number of their political prisoners - I can guarantee you that at least just as much are being held in secret state prisons beyond the eyes of even the CIA. Gulag, anyone?
BTW, my last post was ninja'd while you were posting. You may want to re-check it.
edited 25th May '10 4:22:05 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.