As far as I’m aware, the correct parlance was “Bee Eh Ar”
yes, that’s correct. :arrow:
whats confusing about B.A.R?
in books they refer to B.A.R not BAR, what books do you have that call it bar?
man all over the history channels that document wwii, its always B.A.R by historians and wwii vets they interview and in all the books ive read. the only explanation that i can think of that leads to it being called bar is by people that dont know what the hell it is (maybe peopel from other countrys). but other than this, infantry know their weapons.
At a guess i would guess that soldiers the world over will use the smallest word possible for a piece of equipment. Thus BAR rather than B.A.R. is a perfectly acceptable phrase, even if not documented.
Well I have firstly, THE MILITARY HISTORY OF WORLD WAR 2 1995 edition, WORLD WAR 2 2004 edition, THE WORLD AT ARMS: THE READER’S DIGEST ILLUSTRATED HISTROTY OF WORLD WAR 2 1989 edition and other WW2 books but they do not talk about the Browning Automatic Rifle or BAR.
In other books I have read they will sat Browning Automatic Rifle AKA BAR.
I will quote out of THE MILITARY HISTORY OF WORLD WAR 2. “The last production variant of the Brownin Automatic Rifle (usually know by its intials as the BAR)…” So do not think I did not read up about it. I do not know the ins and outs of the gun but I kew what they also called it. I never said they did not call it B.A.R but they also calle dit the BAR.
Where do you get your information Jon725.
Henk
Here is a list of the BAR’s manufacturer’s:
M1918: Winchester, Colt, marlin-Rockwell
M1918A2 (WWII): IBM, New England Small Arms
M1918A2: (Korean War Mfg.): Royal McBee
Now you listen here mate. How is running sideways daft huh you tell me that. I even bet you ran sideways once or even backwards 
And why would this have anything to do with playstations. MAYBE YOU SHOULD BACK YOURSELF UP AND STOP THINKING ABOUT YOURSEKF AND HAVE SOME BLLODY CONSIDERATION FOR OTHERS I"M VERY SURE OTHERS WILL AGREE WITH ME!
I agree with hiddenrug
Never thought you wouldn’t Erwin. You used to be a soldier Erwin, were you ever taught to fire on the move?
Hiddenrug get a grip of yourself. I have run sideways and backwards, mainly in PT, but never fireing from the hip!!! Moving and shooting has never been used as a tactic, there maybe instances of it happening but it has never been put to paper. You move OR you shoot.
Even if you watch the film HEAT you will see that the 3 men in the fire fight will stop to fire rounds even if running, this allows accurate fire, which is impossible to achieve whilst moving. This scene was alledegedly advised by Andy McNab.
I would suggest you re-read your original post and the way you flipantly add in a comment towards me about the use of fireing from the hip. THis part for example…
and 1000ydstare shooting from the hip was only really used when running side ways across a street and the recoil
Have you asked your cadet instructor about fireing from the hip? What did he say?
I am actually thinking of you rather than myself, turn up for training with these sort of ideas and your Section Screw will just love you. As I am sure anyone on this site with military experience will agree.
I like him,and i hate you,isn’t that enough reason???!?!?!?! :twisted:
I like him,and i hate you,isn’t that enough reason???!?!?!?! :twisted:[/quote]
Well not really, no.
1000’ has posted sensible replies in what should be an adult discussion.
To comment in such reasoned debates merely because of one’s antipathy or affection for a particular participant would be less than mature or indeed rational.
I’m sure, given the facts above, that you would agree that it would be vernal to pursue any reasonable argument in this manner.
Oh…
Please do not feel constrained to reply to this, I’ve just realised why you posted in the fashion to which we have become accustomed.
BUT If you have to know. A considerable amount of soldier were repeat were inexperienced and shot from the hip and im sure that movie HEAT would have sopme fairly un accurate things in it.
ALSOCan you imediatly cease to bring up the cadet factor with it as it has nothing to do with the cadets you are thinking of as you are not repeat NOT AUSTRALIAN Im very sure Australian cadets differs from British cadets!
I get your point about the soldiers in World War 2 being inexperienced and thus may shoot from the hip. My arguement to this would be that the soldiers would have passed through a training regime of some sort where this sort of thing would have been taught to them.
This arguement however is nothing to do with what started it. You claimed that soldiers would have fired from the hip running sideways across streets, and that this in some way countered my ideas of why fireing from the hip is used. Your idea is tactically unsound and would not have been in widespread use, and definitely not taught. Mine is based on what was actually taught at the time, I have a my grandads training manual from 1938 and from 1942, and my own experience and training in modern methods.
As for HEAT, the firefight scene was choreographed by one Andy McNab, of B20 (feel free to google) fame who is ex 22 SAS. It is widely believed to be one of the best screen firefights on film. It even includes a mag change, believe it or not,a nd from my experience I believe it to be a very accurate showing of how you should move in a firefight especially val kilmer and robert denero covering each other as they move and change mags.
I will cease to bring up the cadet factor when you stop talking like a kid.
It appears I know alot more about your country than you do about mine, but then I have been on Exercise Long Look, I doubt that you have done anything similar.
However instead of saying you are very sure Australian cadets differ from British ones, why not do some research, please read the following…
From your side of the world on www.cadetnet.gov.au
Who we are
The Australian Defence Force Cadets (ADFC) is a community-based organisation of 25,000 Cadets and 2,500 Cadet Staff in 500 Units throughout Australia.
The ADFC aspires to be Australia’s leading youth development organisation, recognised by the community for developing young people with:
a sense of purpose;
responsibility;
respect for self and others;
leadership ability; and
a commitment to voluntary service.
As a Cadet, young Australians are able to take part in adventurous, fulfilling and educational activities in a military setting.
Now from my side of the pond from www.armedforces.co.uk/army/listings/l0072.html
THE ROLE OF THE ACF
The role of the Army Cadet Force (ACF) is to inspire young people to achieve success with a spirit of service to the Queen, country and their local community, and to develop the qualities of good citizenship, responsibility and leadership.
Army cadets are said to make up between 25% - 30% of regular army recruits. There are about 1,674 ACF detachments based in communities around the UK with a strength of around 44,000 cadets. The ACF is run by over 8,000 adults drawn from the local community who manage a broad programme of military and adventurous training activities designed to develop character and leadership.
Basicaly as an ex-cadet myself, whilst I was down there I visited some of your cadets on camp, as I have visited the canadian ones when I was over there. And guess what, they are the same, as is the New Zealanders. So do some research next time so you don’t look quite so stupid, especially putting it in bold like that, that just adds insult to injury!!!
You are in a youth organisation that uses a quasi-military regime to function (I have instructed on some of the cadet camps also, so I am very familier with cadets) not in some all encompassing Special Forces unit. I am also aware of your history and the British cadets history, which is also broadly similar.
You appear to have a very blinkered view of the world hiddenrug.
I look forward to your next post with anticipation.[/quote]
:shock: It’s a bit amazing that people are still pondering what the BAR was like to fire after I related my personal experiences. I simply don’t get it. As mentioned, my best friend’s Dad was a BAR man in the Pacific and I mentioned his descriptions of using every firing position imaginable and yet folks are still talking about if it’s possible to shoot while running around.
Combat is a fluid thing and consistantly being hampered by a one style of weapon handling is unheard of. If BAR guys weren’t taught hip sweep firing they certainly learned it from veterans when they arrived at the front.
Part of the strangeness on these forums are that people push opinions instead of established facts and continue to argue any subject with prejudice instead of clinical data to support their points of view. Topics are never left alone and become thrashed for the sake of arguement only. This is the very distastefull juvenille attitude that unfortunately is the norm here. Let’s fight with someone on the internet! Weee!
Bee-Aay-Arr
Well, I guess it was too much to expect the Americans to exercise a bit of fire discipline!!! Did you run sideways across roads in Vietnam firing your M60 from the hip?
With the exception of FISH (Fighting In Someone’s House) and other extremely CQB situations, unaimed fire is wasted fire.
Again in a film, specificly Saving Private Ryan, the sgt clearly states that two men is a target one man is a waste of ammo, soldiers don’t waste ammo. Ammo has to be carried, it can’t be wasted. Even tanks, right up to the modern day, have to stop in order to fire.
The type of fire that you describe is nicknamed “spray and pray” for good reason. It has no useful place on the battlefield.
Combat is a fluid thing and consistantly being hampered by a one style of weapon handling is unheard of. If BAR guys weren’t taught hip sweep firing they certainly learned it from veterans when they arrived at the front.
There is only one style of weapon handling used in combat. Aimed shots. Vetrans would not teach recruits the “hip sweep fireing technique”, because it has no useful function in battle other than to turn rounds in to brass.
When fireing an automatic weapon I think you will find that where the bullets land is called the “beaten zone”, basically a circlur area where the rounds land, there is no requirement to sweep the weapon whilst fireing, you shoot a couple of bursts of 2 -3 rounds each, change direction, start again. simple.
Even if fireing from the hip in CQB, the firer would be stationary and aiming using the “shot gun” style (as it is known now where he looks down the barrel to ensure the burst is going in the right direction) in bursts of 2 - 3 rounds.
The only hip sweeping fire action I have seen is on film, when the firer is getting shot to buggery and instinctivly squeezes the trigger.
Also this sort of firing negates the whole point of the BAR, that is to provide accurate fire of sufficient weight to make enemy think twice at longer ranges than with a rifle. In this way the rest of the section can move whilst the BAR gunner covers them. When they are in place they fire as a group to allow the BAR gunner and mate to catch up.
In defence the gunner, fireing bursts, could deliver effective fire at what 500-600 meters on his own. A rifle would only be effective, individually, to about 200 meters, maybe 300 if the firer was good.
A 9 man section of infantry with one BAR, assuming the gunners mate was acting as link man, would mean there was 7 rifles to the fore. They would fire maybe 30 rounds a minute including aiming at peak rate. So if all rifles were fireing they would only be half the rate of the BAR.
Please note I am not argueing for arguements sake, I actually do know about this sort of stuff. I haven’t entered the B.A.R./Bar debate other than to state that soldiers the world over shorten things to the lowest denomination.
Which cadet unit did you visit and when?
Now you listen here mate. How is running sideways daft huh you tell me that. I even bet you ran sideways once or even backwards
And why would this have anything to do with playstations. MAYBE YOU SHOULD BACK YOURSELF UP AND STOP THINKING ABOUT YOURSEKF AND HAVE SOME BLLODY CONSIDERATION FOR OTHERS I"M VERY SURE OTHERS WILL AGREE WITH ME![/quote]
Hey, just say “grow up” in other words, don’t drive you crazy about it.
It began with a simple question and look where it comes. :arrow:
I like him,and i hate you,isn’t that enough reason???!?!?!?! :twisted:[/quote]
sorry for the non spanish spkesman.
Dejate de joder, eso es una boludez!!! :arrow:
i beleive it has been sorted out now. :?
Ah, the dance begins…
Sorry, Hiddenrug, but I am going to stamp on your toes rather than dance to your tune.
You have asked me how running around, sideways or otherwise, while shooting from the hip is daft and I have answered you, using my knowledge and experience.
Why don’t you tell me how doing such a thing isn’t daft? What merits does it have?
You have stated that you thought that Australian Cadets were very different to British Cadets, I have shown you that they are, in fact, very similar. Yet all you can do is ask what unit it was that I met (although if you read what I posted you will see I didn’t meet a particular unit. I came across a joint camp of several units that happened to be taking place on the base that I was sent to on Exercise Long Look and had a mooch).
I know what you are doing, you will continue to ask questions of me until I can’t answer them anymore and then claim that I have never met an Australian Cadet or that I am making this all up. That is childish.
When you have acknoledged the points above, i.e. the merits of fireing from the hip on the move and the differences between our two countries’ Cadet Forces, I may answer your questions.
Now off you pop.