GWOT lessons and the future carbine.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Big_Red said:
The amount of scoped weapons in use by the enemy in Afghanistan is minimal. As in less than 1% of their weapons are equipped with them.



Few of the soldiers killed in Afghanistan were shot by a .30 caliber cartridge. Most casualties are from injuries other than GSW.
Click to expand...

OK. you've decided to sidestep. But you do realize that we are talking about the great number of nato soldiers that HAVE been killed or wounded by GSW, right? We are not talking about IEDs here and you surely understand this.

One British regiment (perhaps Welsh Guards) lost 5 or 6 soldiers in one deployment to an insurgent with a scoped rifle. Clearly you know we are talking about these occurrences, and the lethality of the weapons they have chosen to employ? (as compared to the cartridge nato has chosen to field)
Nevermind. Run along scamp. lol
 
ggh said:
I was being colourful and discussing the fight in Afghanistan, but since you have taken the time to judge me, tell me what aspect of Taliban rule you find forward-thinking?
Are they not enforcing a very simple way of living on the populace? ie: no sports, music, etc
And how would you describe their treatment of women in recent years?

Bigot? Since I see the Taliban as a brutal and dangerous regime?

Go off and find another thread then. Embarrassing? Political correctness to blindness - that's embarrassing.
Click to expand...

You just proved my point.

You are here to stir the pot and make political statements.

Use Google and educate yourself about those that you condemn. The basic title of your thread proves this.

We tried discussing Rifle platforms, but you steered it towards the political.




And we can tell by your responses to those that actually know what they are talking about. aka. Big Red .. You are just here stirring the pot for amusement and don;t really want an answer or care to learn.

You started the thread but have ended up the troll.
 
So let me sum up this thread before abandoning the sinking ship.
- soldiers = bad shots!
- 5.56 = great, nothing could be better so lets not try, or even discuss it.
- Taliban = wacky bunch of fun-loving guys. Just misunderstood and don't dare say otherwise.

"Shut it down."
 
rivetc78 said:
You just proved my point.

You are here to stir the pot and make political statements.

Use Google and educate yourself about those that you condemn. The basic title of your thread proves this.

We tried discussing Rifle platforms, but you steered it towards the political.
Click to expand...

With one quick simple statement you now condemn me. Interesting how quickly you've adopted a bigoted stance by judging me by the one statement that I made about the afghan insurgents. And that is what you would call being a hypocrite. Do you have a problem with hypocrites as well?

So politics can be discussed, but only if it is political correct and in agreement with your twisted view. Nice. good bye and riddance.
 
ggh said:
How in the hell would any of us here have that data? You are free to go.
Click to expand...

If you know you don't have this information, you should also know that your assertion that FI shows that larger calibers do not adversely affect accuracy is not supported by anything.

And, in fact, information on this subject is available to people who have researched it. This is why you are not being taken seriously. Go and do some reading on the subject; you will find that there is a reason why certain people are saying what they are.

Not that the 556 is the be all end all...it's just that it's not the main hurdle to clear. The 556 is adequate for the time being. Weapons overmatch is not what is getting guys killed in theatre.
 
Nice try, you can't deflect your own short comings. Deflection and re-direction is a common trait of those that are caught red handed.
Your desperate grasping at saving face is failing. Implying I have a twisted view...or somehow am in league with the Taliban. LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry you got caught.

Stop now. You are embarrassing yourself.

As you said "Good bye and Riddance."

Lock it
 
misanthropist said:
If you know you don't have this information, you should also know that your assertion that FI shows that larger calibers do not adversely affect accuracy is not supported by anything.

And, in fact, information on this subject is available to people who have researched it. This is why you are not being taken seriously. Go and do some reading on the subject; you will find that there is a reason why certain people are saying what they are.

Not that the 556 is the be all end all...it's just that it's not the main hurdle to clear. The 556 is adequate for the time being. Weapons overmatch is not what is getting guys killed in theatre.
Click to expand...

Ok. Very simply.....hits were achieved with a full caliber in FI. Its not like no one hit anything. I was just saying that just because the caliber was bigger, did not mean accuracy completely fell off. Simple.

Taken seriously? As if I am the only one in the last 12 years that has suggested that .223 is at the lowest edge of acceptability? I've carried 7.62, 9mm, 40 cal and currently 5.56 on duty. I know what each can do.
 
This was touched upon earlier in the thread: weight. The type of environment & mission will make all the difference.

I know some guys in iraq carried 13+ MAGS 390/rds -- although most carried 6+1 MAGS @ 210/rds.

How much extra weight will you be adding with a heavier round? Is it better to carry 100-150 rounds of <insert caliber here> than carry 210/rds of 5.56?
 
ggh said:
Ok. Very simply.....hits were achieved with a full caliber in FI. Its not like no one hit anything. I was just saying that just because the caliber was bigger, did not mean accuracy completely fell off. Simple.

Taken seriously? As if I am the only one in the last 12 years that has suggested that .223 is at the lowest edge of acceptability? I've carried 7.62, 9mm, 40 cal and currently 5.56 on duty. I know what each can do.
Click to expand...
But without both sets of numbers - I.e. effects on hit percentage AND effect on terminal performance given like terms - there is no way to do the differential on which round was more effective.

So...not simple.
 
rivetc78 said:
Nice try, you can't deflect your own short comings. Deflection and re-direction is a common trait of those that are caught red handed.
Your desperate grasping at saving face is failing. Implying I have a twisted view...or somehow am in league with the Taliban. LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry you got caught.

You are a hypocrite. Caught? By you? You haven't a clue. To think that you can ascertain my political views by a few posts shows how you are trying to "yell' over me. Get lost yourself.

Generally speaking the Taliban are brutal, generally speaking the 5.56 is inadequate. Generally speaking you are a judgemental hypocrite screaming bigot.
Generally speaking I have wasted my time talking to you.
Click to expand...
 
Well. I have actually wasted my time.

Again, throwing out insults and accusations is a method of deflection and re-directing.

You are screaming like a little boy pouting that no one is listening too.

I apologize to those that actually know what they are talking about, This could have been an interesting discussion. But the underlying agenda that was revealed is sickening.
Shame on the O.P for bring that Drivel here on CGN.

Time for my Nap
 
Lol
You are projecting, nothing more.
I used the terms, simple, backward, jihadists and brutal. Who in their freaking right mind, besides justin trudeau, would not at some point use those terms to describe the taliban regime? I ll bet 90% of cgn when they are feeling honest.

Curious. Are the talibs bigots? Or are you not allowed to say that for fear of having to then label yourself a bigot?
 
Just because I love to stir the pot - the caliber of infantry rifles is largely irrelevant, the vast majority of casualties are the result of area weapons. So given a choice between a more effective rifle round, and a more effective 25mm/105/155 round, airdropped explosive, etc. the brass will always (and should always) go with the area round.
 
I think more resources should have been spent investigating the 7.92x33kurz. The Spanish did some work with it and were getting some interesting results.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom