Army sees urgent need for M14s in Iraq & Afghanistan

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Minimi and those nasty ass auto grenade launchers are not deployed in a 9-12 man squad. There needs to be a few
Click to expand...

I'm guess your "nasty ass auto grenade launcher" would be a Mk 19. Are you volunteering to be the squad member that carries it? It only weighs 72 lbs, not counting cradle and tripod. Even the newer, much lighter Mk 47, which I saw used in Afghanistan, still weighs forty pounds.

I built my M4 into a own SDM-style rifle, with a 16" Stag upper and 1.5-4x scope because of the long potential shots in Afghanistan, but if you have the choice, engaging with crew-served weapons is the way to go. Horse Soldier, I'm curious where you get your figures about engagement ranges in Afghanistan? My fire base was always engaged from 500 meters or more out. Once when we returned fire, my gunner fired a literally 1 in a million shot, dropping a first round on the target in direct lay mode with a 120mm. He was using range data for 2200 meters...

John
 
Great post MTMilitiaman.

When I get back from the range with my M1As, I do the following:


1. Open bolt and run Hoppes #9 Solvent through bore with boresnake
Wait 30 minutes.
2. Use bolt to push chamber brush into the chamber about 3/4 of the way, while rotating the chamber brush. Remove chamber brush.
3. Run boresnake dry through bore two times.
4. Wipe off grease on action and re-apply new grease.

Every few hundred rounds I'll take the gas piston out and clean that up.

For regular maintenance there is no reason or need to separate the barreled action, stock, and trigger group. Of course you have to do it to change the recoil spring, recoil spring guide, grease the bolt roller, or clean out sand or dust.
 
I was under the impression that most were donated or sold to guerrilla upstarts de jour that happened to have a common enemy with the U.S. that week.
Click to expand...

That is friggin awesome! I could not have nailed it better myself. That sums up just about everyone that we have been fighting in the past few years... Al Qaeda, Saddam's regime, the Taliban, etc, etc, etc, add infinitum. All put in place by ol' Uncle Sam.

Maybe if we would just stop making "strategic", short-term "alliances" of this nature, we won't need M14's, M16's, M-whatever for anything besides plinking in the desert.
 
I forgot my initial point, which was that the 180 Infantry had a whole connex filled with M14s and brand new, in the wrap mags. We weren't using them.

J
 
Just my 2 cent

With ref to the training the Armourers, I can safely say that give me, or any of my fellow tradesmen 2-5 days on any weapon system you like and we will be more than proficient in the upkeep/ full rebuild/ repair of said weapon.

with ref to the whole afghan range business, We have just fielded the new .338 AI sniper system across the Army & Marines, based purely on reports from Afghan/ Iraq that the 7.62 wasnt cutting it.

Beauty of it from my point of view is the similarity between the 2 rifles.
 
MTMilitiaman said:
For one, the US was never a signatory member of the Hague Accords. It honors the language of the Accords to gain world favor. Two, the Hague Conventions only dictated rules of war among signatory members and those who abided by its terms, and then, only for as long as the terms of the Accords was abided by. This would obviously exclude Al Qaeda and the Taliban. So in truth, we could use whatever we wanted.
Click to expand...

So why doesn't the military issue hollow points for all the guys toting M16's? Cost measure perhaps? Seems like it would at least help the current situation without completely overhauling the armory. It's not like our situation in Iraq is doing anything to increase our world favor anyway so we might as well do what is right for our troops.
 
...fielded the new .338 AI sniper system...
Click to expand...

at first, i read that as "338 Ackley Improved" and thought... holy crap, what were they thinking? what's next? 338 LM Dasher?
 
MTMilitiaman, if you're taking insult from my remarks, you need to rethink what I said and remember I'm a veteran as well. Don't put insults in my mouth.

I had no problems maintaining the SR25 in combat. I have a hard time believing that the SR25 isn't superior in ease of use, familiarization, and the important area of blending in with your fellow troops. There seems to be a lot of arguments based on nostalgia here. For those clinging to the M1 platform, try shooting a stock M1 against a stock DPMS .308
 
try shooting a stock M1 against a stock DPMS .308

Why?

I don't think anyone here would argue that ARs are, in general, much easier to make accurate.

Did you miss the part about the Smith Enterprise rifle that's unbedded that shot under 1moa at 1000 yards when it was tested by the Army?
 
(psssst - while everybody's arguing, can somebody drop one of those nasty old M-14's in my yard? Maybe one of those grimy old obsolete Thompsons too?):evil:
 
The key word is stock, For Freedom. As in I go buy a DPMS for $1100, you have that much to spend on an M1A off the shelf.

With all due respect, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
 
so why does SEI promote the use of the turner biothane 1907 style sling? did any of you with military service in the last 20 years ever actually sling up High Power style (not just using it like a hasty sling)?

(i'm assuming not, since the keepers on all those slings are bottomed out)
 
For Freedom,

Regarding the Smith photo - it seemed an effort to imply it was Iraq or Afghanistan...

So what you are saying is that it fundamentally no different than if I were to take a similar assortment of rifles and place them on display in my carport with a fuzzy kitty lying beside them...

Also, being paid off doesn't mean its ideal. The army has a butt load of paid-off M60 tanks across the country. It sure wouldn't be ideal to dust them off for combat. Ditto for all those paid-off M1's at the CMP, or heck, those paid-off battleships USS Alabama, Texas, North Carolina, and others.

Yeah, I know, those are extremes...except that the M60 is newer technology than the M14...

We could dust off those F4's that are newer technology than the m14 for ground attack roles, too.

Yeah, a modernized Phantom. That would be cool.

Or even better, lets use some modernized Sheridans.

Sorry, not really trying to be flip. The m14 is a good DMR rifle. But being paid off is not a good criterion for determining value.

Also, the Thompson was not obsolete by any stretch of the imagination. It was heavy and too darn expensive and time-consuming to produce, but obsolete in WWII it was not. You need to check the definition of obsolete, as the Thompson was more reliable than the STEN.

Ash
 
I have dark brown Turner all weather slings (AWS, Biothane) on my M1As. They keepers are a little tough to move but with a little practice the AWS is easy to put on and easy to get off. I find that I don't get much support from a "hasty" sling.

14004.gif
 
I'm a huge M14/M1A fan, but after shooting AR-10s and an SR-25, there's no way the M14 platform can compete. You don't see M1A/M14 at service rifle matches any more.

It also doesn't help that scoping an M14 is much more of a chore than for the AR-10 clones. The M14 was designed for iron sights, and you need a serious cheekpiece to get good cheek weld for a scope M14 - or a new stock.

Finally, and as noted, there is a huge benefit in having the same manual of arms for your rifle, carbine and DMR. A number of components are even interchangeable.

The M14 is a classic rifle, and a great example of 1940's technology. I'll never give my M1As up.

With regard to longer range, the adoption of a true intermediate cartridge would go a long way towards having a more 'universal rifle'. This has been discussed at length already on this board.
 
Harry Bowman, I read the whole article before I posted last. But I can't just copy it here, since this is my employer's subscription to Janes (I can read Janes at lunch:D ) and I don't....want to get...fired... this week. For copyright violations.

There wasn't much more. The article is about buying the replaceable pieces to make the precision rifles, not about any new rifles.

Bart Noir
 
Ash Wrote:

For Freedom,

Regarding the Smith photo - it seemed an effort to imply it was Iraq or Afghanistan...

Well that's where they were headed. Those are on M14 receivers.

So what you are saying is that it fundamentally no different than if I were to take a similar assortment of rifles and place them on display in my carport with a fuzzy kitty lying beside them...

No, these were going to Army units.

Also, being paid off doesn't mean its ideal.

I don't think anyone would try to further that argument. Remember, the Army tested a Smith rifle that did 1moa at 1000 yards.

The army has a butt load of paid-off M60 tanks across the country. It sure wouldn't be ideal to dust them off for combat. Ditto for all those paid-off M1's at the CMP, or heck, those paid-off battleships USS Alabama, Texas, North Carolina, and others.

Those don't do 1moa at 1000 yards.


Yeah, I know, those are extremes...except that the M60 is newer technology than the M14...

We could dust off those F4's that are newer technology than the m14 for ground attack roles, too.

Yeah, a modernized Phantom. That would be cool.

Or even better, lets use some modernized Sheridans.

Sorry, not really trying to be flip. The m14 is a good DMR rifle. But being paid off is not a good criterion for determining value.

Also, the Thompson was not obsolete by any stretch of the imagination. It was heavy and too darn expensive and time-consuming to produce, but obsolete in WWII it was not. You need to check the definition of obsolete, as the Thompson was more reliable than the STEN.

Ash
Click to expand...

Ash your anti-M14 bias is well known. Everyone knows that you would like to see FALs used instead.

Now you should know that I don't have a job, or any other hobbies, so I can argue this for quite some time!:evil:
 
I don't dislike M14's at all and haven't brought up the FAL at all. I'm no fanboy of any rifle, save for my 22 LR Western Field that was my first rifle. For DMR's, I'm sure the M14 would be better than the FAL. For general infantry issue, the FAL was head and shoulders better, in my opinion. It's something I have been consistent on. I also think that if you have to have a pistol grip and all the extra add-ons, then you might as well go ahead and buy the FAL and be done with it. No point buying an M14 only to make it more AR or FAL like. Modernizing? Seems like FN and Fairchild had it right in the beginning - no need to modernize. Yet, again, I did not bring up the FAL in this discussion.

Being tested is meaningless, just as being paid off is. There are more weapons tested by the military which were discarded than were accepted. Also, the photo being indeterminant remains a valid point. Where they were going is irrelevant. I made no point otherwise, save that were they with said fuzzy kitten about to be shipped off, the photo is just as meaningful.

In any case, as to your notion of being MOA at 1,000 meters, you may be right. But, I'll wager a 16" cannon that is merely 3 MOA will still make a single hole. And, in any case, said 16" probably would be just fine at, say, 10 MOA, at 1,000 meters.

Oh, and I do know that said 16" is still at point-blank at 1,000 meters.

As to the M60 not being MOA at 1,000 meters, 105 millimeter rounds probably don't have to be MOA at that distance, either. What do you suppose would be more fearsome at 1,000 meters?

In any case, being paid off remains a meaningless defense. Gettysburg is filled with all sorts of paid-off ordnance in firing condition.

Were I planning to get into racing, should I consider using my 1996 Jeep Cherokee with 239,000 miles because it is paid off?

Ash
 
I don't know about 105mm, but I've been assured that 40mm (L60?) are better than MOA.

John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
So what rifles are being used in Iraq and Afghanistan?
2 3
Replies
67
Views
5K
Tezza
T
C
  • Locked
Army Report: GIs Outgunned in Afghanistan
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
4K
X-Rap
X-Rap
B
  • Locked
Army Times: M4 to be tested against other rifles including XM8
Replies
3
Views
714
Kaylee
K
B
  • Locked
Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer: A critique.
2 3 4
Replies
98
Views
7K
d2wing
d2wing
C
  • Locked
Taking Back The Infantry Half-km: Britain’s L129A1
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
JShirley
JShirley
Back
Top