C7 or M16 for CQC

Status
Not open for further replies.
it seems to me that half the arguments in this thread aren't about the abilities of the weapon but that of the individual shooters and termanology and S.O.P.'s from unit to unit. lets face it standardization across the board is a pipe dream although we should continue to at least try to make it happen so we can get back to what's important. the c-7 isn't perfect for everything. however.... in my opinion (here it comes) it was a good choice as the backbone weapon of canada's military. it's fairly easy to care for and shoot (half the people in the army never held a rifle before joining). it works well as long as you keep it reasonably clean (battleschool standards not required). and the c79 can take a lickin and keep on tickin. and to top it off it's versitile enough to be used effectively in almost any situation. what more do we need???
 
Well for me if my memories don't let me down, when i did my URBAN WAREFARE COURSE in Fort Drum we had our c7 with the elcan, it did the job !and we kick the yankees ass ! loll even in the live ammo section of the course we did 100% .of course in the tire village it was ok but in the tire house it was a bit big, we did not use elcan we did instinctive shooting.

later when i went as an instructor we had a group of u.s. ninja turtle with us to exchage technique and we had c8 with elcan that's it no tri rail, no flash lite no ####..only rifle,ammo,nvg's and noddler the c8 perfomed very well !
as for the m16 i don't give a s!"/$%?T.

for the job the c7 c8 & m16 are not the rifle of choice but that's what is issued !!!!!
 
buttom line, the c7,c8, or m16, they work, you just have to train, its not a matter of who has seen combat on here or who hasnt, or whether we should be using SMGs or not, the pioint, M16 or C7 experiences in an urban enviroment,

And both are excellent
Its how you train that is the biggest deal
M16 or C7
They are good to go
And plenty of us on here, reg force, reserve have done it
and backed it up with personal experiences from training
 
Hey I am sure you all seen Terminator One, the M16 definately excelled in CQB, the movie has to be right, shooting from the hip on full auto, lol, pieing those corners, lol, I am sure it all would have worked if the old T1 wasnt bullet proof. This was a very accuarate account on the M16 used in CQB I am sure you would all agree, very well done indeed, lol. It infact closes the door on any debate on this thread! Although I am sure Chuck Norris and Steven Segal would have a few things to say!
 
I have been following this thread and reading others points of view and insights. I would like to add to the discussion and agree with those that feel the C7/8, do the job as expected CQB is way more then booting in a door and shooting up everything inside. In a protracted fight in urban terrian ranges can and will run from zero meter to the small arms max range. First you have to fight to get into the building and may be working well out in the open (long range) then once inside things shorten considerably (short range/across the room distance) but with differnt buildings one could suddenly be going short to long. An example would be factory interiors, parking garages, long hallways and warehouses.
Those that say the fight is fought with what you have been issued are correct, we all have are own ideas as to the ideal CQB rifle and some feel the C7 is to long but you go with what you got. The last time I checked WW2 and Korean War history the troops got the job done with Lee Enfields/Garrands, Brens and BARs so length of gun is not a issue. What I am perplexed about is the drive to have "less gun and more gadgets" by wanting C8s with 14.5 and 16 inch barrels. Personally I think the C7 works fine (and no I have not been there and done that) just my point of perception.
Lastly I ask the question to all, what makes a better bullet for CQB? Think back to those cool old Brit Army Fibua training films with a bunch of squadies clearing out the building with L1s in 7.62. The 7.62mm round could punch thru walls, floors and ceilings while the 5.56 ball may be hard pressed to do the same (or a mud brick wall, if anyone has insight on that I would like to hear). The point I am trying to get across is there is no one gun for all purposes. One closing question is for those have been to Afghanistan what would the soldiers basic load be IRT SA ammo ie. number of mags and contents.
 
airjmc87 said:
Wow a lot of you guys commenting on this thread really shouldn't be commenting on this stuff because you really do not have a clue. For the most part you guys talking military, I can tell 99% of you are not Infantry and probably not even in a combat trade and if you are I know for a fact you do not get enough practical and in depth training on these subjects to be discussing and "teaching" others about it, let alone the "air force" and "NAVY" guys who are putting there two cents in. For you who are military, if I remember correctly in BMQ one of the big things they push is do not talk about what you don't know. And all you guys talking about the elcan for room clearing and "gun fighter" crap you definitely do not have any experience or real training in the subject because you would know you do not use the elcan, nor do you even bring it to that set of training, you bring your issued flip-up iron sights and whatever other close quarter sights you like depending on your Company SGM rules.
Click to expand...



Ok....I'll bite.

With your vast BMQ experiance, what do you recomend??




USP...what are the ROEs here?????
 
Quick on the draw as usual ...good to see.


Ok....I was trying to be funny. maybe I should stay off later tonight when I am half cut.
 
Well, I have to admit I like where this thread is (generally) going with this.

Training and the correct mindset is the only solution for the CQB enviroment and the challenges it creates, or any combat situation for that matter.

That being said, a weapon with characteristics that enable that shooter to move faster in that enviroment is a bonus, but not a deal breaker.

ABCZAR you kill me bro....:D
 
Rfn said:
Well, I have to admit I like where this thread is (generally) going with this.

Training and the correct mindset is the only solution for the CQB enviroment and the challenges it creates, or any combat situation for that matter.

That being said, a weapon with characteristics that enable that shooter to move faster in that enviroment is a bonus, but not a deal breaker.

ABCZAR you kill me bro....:D
Click to expand...



Good post.:cheers:
 
for GORDON PRINGLE. although it probably wouldn't be hard to find out. operational combat loads are considered operational security and shouldn't be discussed. no harm in asking but there could be harm in answering. as far as bullet penetration on mud walls i don't think it's any secret that you might just as well throw rocks or maybe spitballs at them. 7.62 or not
 
btw excellent point about urban combat. there is more to it than just in a house you have to get to the village and get into the house too. and that may require more than some little 9mm peashooter smg.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom