Weapons failed US troops during Afghan firefight

Status
Not open for further replies.
Its called funding.

You can't run a ground war for years - expand your military and do a budget cut, and run testing on a new weapon system all at the same time.
 
I agree with KevinB he is spot on.

My question is, how did their mortars work? AGLs? You know those things that you use to kill people when in a local defence situation. A mortar has far more fire power than any rifle.

This love affair with the AK has to stop. If you have never fired one how can you say that it is the end all be all service rifle.
 
sounds like poor leadership from the section commanders up. why weren't the sec/cmd issuing and directing fire orders and maintaining fire discipline? why didn't the plt/cdm call indirect support? why didn't the coy/cmd have better intel and have such a small force operating with out support?
 
From what is reported an RPG took out the Mortar pit at the beginning of the attack.
The (or some of the) attackers where at an elevated position as well and under the cover of rock formations.

It was a formed Artillery unit that made a Platoon, they had two Afghan platoons as well in their location (part of the COIN expanding inkspot idea).

They eventually (1 hour and 45min or so) have AH-64 support, and 120mortars and more firing in support.

The Squad Leader of one of the squads is the guy running his suck hole the most about the poor performace of the M4.

A lot of it IMHO comes down to Aim more -> shoot less


I had been told it was a unit just ready to rotate out, but it seem now they had only been on the ground a few days from what a unit just down the road tells me in email.
 
Wanat

I posted the story about the details of the firefight at Wanat on Page 8 of this thread. A link to that story and video can be accessed here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/05/eveningnews/main5364715.shtml

I'd also visit:http://hgworld.########.com/2009/01/after-action-report-wanat-aftghanistan.html


http://1.bp.########.com/_F_ZyVOpu07M/SYKjiDyMrJI/AAAAAAAAA2Y/FhuW-6u6iTw/s400/battle+aft.jpg
 
w squared said:
You took my line.

There have been about 6 or 8 intelligent posts here - mostly from those who have been to the sandbox. The rest is about as useful (and well though out) as the political grandstanding by the senator in the OP's quote. :jerkit:
Click to expand...

?? How do you know.

Now we are qualifying the validity of a posts contents by the presumed experience or knowledge of the poster.
But who qualifies the qualifier?
What qualifies you (anyone) to say a posts content is correct and contains useful pertinent information?

Doing a tour should not qualify an individual as an expert on the AR platform , knowledgeable to the inner workings of C&C or the political machinations of the American War Machine.


and.....maybe a nice scope will help them when shooting form mountain top to mountain top. I bet most of those guys were shooting 100's of meters using a 4x. (but what do I know, I am not qualified...)
 
To the guys picking apart the American's tactics, use of fast air/mortars/UAVs/helos, go and read the reports as to how the COP was sited and the surrounding terrain and also the way the battle started. It will explain alot of what you are wondering.

M4s had little to do with this fight.
 
rivetc78 said:
?? How do you know.

Now we are qualifying the validity of a posts contents by the presumed experience or knowledge of the poster.
But who qualifies the qualifier?
What qualifies you (anyone) to say a posts content is correct and contains useful pertinent information?

...
Click to expand...

I was going to ask that, but as far as I know, mine were among the unqualified posts. I guess this discussion's only open to the combat-hardened.
 
roadkill7205 said:
I was going to ask that, but as far as I know, mine were among the unqualified posts. I guess this discussion's only open to the combat-hardened.
Click to expand...

roadkill7205 said:
I don't wear a uniform so I really can't claim any real knowledge of the situation, but stories like that will likely keep Americans from questioning the costs associated with the US military's attempts to find a new rifle for the various branches. Those who even *know* about the programmes, that is.

Apparently, some units requested the M14s because they have longer range than the M16s they were using.. I've never even bothered to look that up, so someone else here could likely tell us if that's true or not.
Click to expand...

You said it yourself....

The problem with alot of the discussions on CGN is that posters seem to mistake insertion of rumour/internet article/cousins story for intelligent debate. There's nothing wrong with dissenting opions as long as they are backed up with fact, experience, research...
 
Big_Red said:
You said it yourself....

The problem with alot of the discussions on CGN is that posters seem to mistake insertion of rumour/internet article/cousins story for intelligent debate. There's nothing wrong with dissenting opions as long as they are backed up with fact, experience, research...
Click to expand...

Okay, that's fair enough. the earlier point seemed a little ... harsh, but I don't disagree with you on the rumour mill/'fact' part. The gods know that I've read a lot of bizarre stuff around here that couldn't possibly be true. I generally think the discussions are pretty good with a dash of 'wtf,' rather than a slew of stupid with an occasional bright spot, though. Generally.

What I was referring to not looking up was the ballistics table of the M14 cartridge versus the current NATO round. Up until about three weeks ago, I was happy as a clam staying just in hunting rifle land, so I read articles like the one about the Marines using M14s almost by accident. I'm only now getting 'educated' in the whole black/green rifles area. What I've been *reading* makes me like the 7.63 round better, but I admit that it's all just theory to someone like me. Real-world experience with Taliban or zombies would tend to have a bigger effect on one's philosophy than a bunch of articles and CGN discussions, I think...
 
re: KevinB's Post, #95 in this thread
and http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=471790
and post #120 below

I had to look up a bunch of the acronyms.

AFSOC: Air Force Special Operations Command
AOR: area of responsibility
CF: Canadian Forces
COP: Combat Operating Post
FOB: forward operating base
FOW: Family of Weapons
KD Range: Known Distance range
LAV: Light Armored Vehicle
LAV-3: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAV_III
M855: 5.56mm ammunition cartridge that is used in the M16 and the M4 rifles
NSN: National Stock Number
OEF: Operation Enduring Freedom
OIF: Operation Iraqi Freedom
OTM: Open Tip Match
PM: Preventative Maintenance
PMAG: Polymer MAGazine. Is a lightweight 5.56 NATO, M-16 compatible magazine.
QRF: Quick Reaction Force
Quad 50's: http://www.rt66.com/~korteng/SmallArms/50quad.htm
TIC: Troops In Contact

The M4 has selective fire options including semi-automatic and three-round burst (like the M16A2), while the M4A1 has a "full auto" option in place of the three-round burst.

I never did find out what FOW was (as in 'M16FOW'). Although "FOrge Welded" was a possibility. "Fog Of War" didn't seem appropriate.
 
Last edited:
The official account

I think after reading the investigation of the Wanat TIC at the link below you will get some idea of the initiation, sequence and tempo of the battle. To confirm the performance of their rifles was the least of their worries. They had been ratted out, their FOB was in a free fire kill zone and they were outgunned and unsupported.

http://www.stripes.com/08/nov08/wanat01.pdf
 
The US Army uses smaller COP's (Combat Operating Post) and have no LAV-3's in location. While not a LAV fan, it can dish out a lot of death and make sneeking up on rather tough with the II and thermal sights.

Several Cdn units have got in tough spots and been bailed out by QRF, other subunits or sheer audacity (first Aussie AFSOC operations bailed out a CF entity that had run dry after a very long TIC)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom