Ironman, section fire with the SA80 assault rifle is effective to 600m, individual fire is effective to 300m.
That is standard British Army doctrine.
That may be true, but there were plenty who wore coats too - my father saw plenty of them. The temperature reached -40 below. The soldiers were wearing something, because a man cannot be sent into battle at -40 F (Chosin) without a coat. He would die of frostbite in less than 1 hour at -20 F. He would not even be there. I lived in Montana for a few years, and spit on the ground when it was -42 F. My spittle shattered when it hit the ground!
Plenty of Chinese were killed at Chosin with an M1 Carbine. Many hundreds.
Sure ? I seems so stupid or my english so bad so my typo in sniper’s name need such correction ? I know pretty good who is Simo Hayha, already about 15 years know - my instructor was mad about that greatest finnish sniper.
And i meand in my post (in case if my english nevertheless so bad) - don’t matter wich weapon used shooter - shooter does matter.
I can bet it - so great shoter as Simo Hayha was - can shoot well with any kind of military rifle. 'Cos weapon newer shot by itself- shooter does shot.
When the enemy gets 40 yards and less away, you would be a war machine if you could magically switch your carbine to a Thompson!
In addition to my earlier post, F7 is a Thompson machine gun and holding down shift whilst typing “walther the war machine” gives you god mode.
Get the idea IRONING-MAN You have possibly the least experience in this thread. Section fire is effective in its upper band at 600 metres, this is not up for debate. this is the truth. (effective need not mean lethal) I can think of several people who would willingly pick up assault rifles and stand 600 metres from you to demonstrate the effectiveness of section fire - If you genuinely trust eight men aiming at you not to hit you from 600 metres then Id be greatful to educate you.
Effective section fire IRONINGMAN is real its not imaginary, its not a new fangled idea, its a basic principal of infantry soldiering.
Do not dig yourself into an argument about the principals of section fire. It is one that you are sure to lose and you can cut your losses by sticking to your claims that the pistol with a long barrel is an assault rifle and demonstrating a lacking knowledge of ballistics. Please do not encroach on the matter of how Infantrymen work. You are already in enough trouble with your ballistic knowledge, not one of my hot areas which is why I have listened to my betters and retracted my earlier poorly expressed views on bullet “rise.”
I am not arrogant enough to slate Pretorian when he educates me, You however are arrogant enough to believe you are the only one inthis forum that understands weaponry. I have a lesser knowledge than many here and am only reassured that my knowledge is being demonstrated as superior to yours.
Dont try to teach me about section fire, I would rather ask my instructors superior officers and men who know, AKA not you.
At the end of 3 days fighting, in conditions of -43 degrees, the Chinese men were malnourished, cold, in poor clothing, at the bitter end of his supplies. with little hope of resupply and were ordered to charge a dug in position with no personal weapon. This is where you can talk about morale - its fairly clear, they arent going to be overjoyed at the prospect.
Ive given you the reference for of USMC Major that was there (in his own words the enemy were not defeated by the USMC but heavily aided and abetted by the weather conditions) Ill try to find an internet source, so that you can read it, if you dont have access to one of the the National libraries within 300 metres.
Sleep well.
Bluffcove
Ironman I am not sure if the effort to educate you is worth it but I will try one last time.
We have told you that the .30 is a pistol round
We have told you it was issued for support troops
We have told you that a rang of 200-250m is not suitable for AR
Because it may have been used in one engagement by support troops who had to fight their way out of an encirclement does not make it an AR.
Armies do not have truck loads of extra weapons just encase they are needed. You do not only change the weapon but the logistic tail also needs to change. And this was an expeditionary force at the end of a long advance. Handing out weapons on the spur of the moment will not happen.
Comments from
http://www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=60&start=210
It must be noted that during the war in Korea M1 carbines received some bad fame due to reliability problems in extremely low temperatures and also due to underpowered cartridge, which was sometimes unable to effectively penetrate the thick winter uniforms of North Korean and Chinese soldiers at extended ranges.
Now lets turn to sights. The sights are their to help you hit the target. Sights can be adjusted to suit the range. The military normally zero at 100m. the MPI (mean point of impact) is different from the POA (point of aim) and rifle are zeroed not to hit the POA at 100m but at a distance beyond that. In the British army we zero at 100m with he MPI about 150mm above the POA so that when engaging at 300m the round will hit the POA. Sights are always set at 300m range. If you are firing beyond 300m you set your sights at that range. One way of judging that range is what people look like at various ranges. 100m every ting is clear. 300m you can identify the part of the body and weapon. At 600m the head has merged with the body. Judging distance is an infantryman’s skill and one that is practised.
So your belief that you could not fire at targets over 300m is based on false info?
The following are extracts from people who have taken part at Bisley and some of the shoots.
proceeded to the “section-match” shoot. The section match is a mobile shoot, supposed to represent a “fire and manoeuvre” advance by the rifle group and gun group elements of the section, starting at 600 metres and progressing to 300 metres. In reality it’s a cross between an Olympic relay race and a coconut-shy, using rifles and a machine-gun. Not assisted by several stoppages on the machine gun we only managed a mediocre score in this first event.
We held a good pace all the way and the only bad point came where a well known member of Bn HQ mysteriously deprived of his rubber-mac felt he must find some new way of seeking attention, and made us put our hats on, on the move, so that we could be photographed. At the end of the march phase, we carried out the shoot. A 100 metre run-down to 300 metres to engage falling plates, which we knocked down quickly and effectively.
Two different shoots, the second one is the falling plat, which is fired on a gallery range and is enjoyed by all. The plats are metal squares painted white 1 inch thick and 12 inches square. They are firing at 300m and the shoot stops when all plats (12 I think) are down, normally under a 60 seconds and I have seen it done in 10 seconds.
We practice shooting at ranges we expect to fire at. You insistence that we do not engage targets at greater ranges is based on what?
A man with an open sight carbine can hit a man in the chest at 250 yards by compensating,
No he alters his sights and is taught to aim off for wind.
You insist that most of the casualties at Chosin had been caused by the M1. How do you know? Did they get up and check the bodies? Are you aware that following experience in WW2 the US army and USMC had changed is squad organisation. The USMC now had squads built around the BAR, 3 teams of 4, one BAR three M1 Garands no carbines except for the leader.
It seems safe to say that it is clear, as that preatorian has show us, that an assult rifle is pretty worthless at 600m and soldiers are not going to shoot together at men 600m away with them
No he has shown that the .30 round is worthless. What he was trying to show was that rifle trajectory does not rise and if you look closely you will see that a bullet drops about 3 inches at 300m. That is why we zero with the MPI 4 inches above POA. The trajectory will only appear to rise if you point the rifle up, that is what the sights do.
Imagine also that your platoon is pressing into a city. You must fight from building to building, often going inside them to clear them, often encountering a man or three. You are also in firefights down city streets at ranges form 5-100m. You are going to want a large capacity magazine and a light, short weapon. Again, the carbine or AR is the preferred choice, and that is why today special police forces use bullpup assult rifles.
And so we all change our rifles and rezero so that we can do FIBUA. Get real.
Oh? Well you just said that assult rifles need a range of 600m, and then you say that you would not be required to hit anything, which you almost assuredly would not. Dude, you are totally absofreakinglutely lost. Like I said once before, you don’t know what to think.
After joining the army at 16 I served for 23 years as an infantryman. Eight and a half years of that time spent on operation eventually commanding an infantry platoon on active service. I have competed at Bsley and represented the army in nfanrty competitions, I am a small arms instructor, a small unit tactics instructor, an MFC, a mortar instructor, an NBC instructor, I am qualified to setup small arms and heavy weapons ranges and you have the arrogance to tell me I do not know what I am talking about. Wake up.
Quote:
Assult situations with rifles take place at 0-100\200 yards, but not not at 600m.The assault begins as soon as you get inside the range of the enemies Weapon, or he gets into mine, and if the situation calls for me to engage him with section fire at up to 600 metres I can!
You cannot state at what range fire fights will occur - So Dont
Anythign you have said to do with compensation for shooting at range can stay, It is remarkably simple (as opposed to impossible) to compensate for range, There is a dial attatched to the sights. It is not impossible to lay effective fire at ranges of up to 600 metres, Drop the stick and walk away.
Argue about anything else but not a basic principal of infantry fighting that will be accepted by anyone who has any level of military experience from Cadets aged 13 to Generals, at no level of training or knowledge is this fact removed and replaced by the
Quote:
“COD, The Walther war machine, big book of soldier knowledge”To fire standard Nato 5.56 at 600 Metres in windless condtions you would aim 7.5 feet over the targets head. You can either guess this or set the sights to six hundred and take a shot as you would normally!
< this space left intentionally left blank - insert terms of frustation here >
This paultry snipe at IRONINGMAN has been removed in deferrence and respect to the carpet bombing of his position by 2nd of foot.
2nd of foot, I thankyou.
Due to abnormally high Bovine Faeces content, Copies of
“COD, Walthers war machine, big book of soldier knowledge”
have now been removed from sale
Bluffcove, you are either as sad as me or have noting better to do at this time of the morning? 
Now that we are all done here, can we please ajourn to
www.ww2incolor.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=127&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=
and rectify this earlier blunder:-
It was cowardly of the British to send in troops comprised of people from another nation instead of using British-born soldiers. That’s cheap, and it tells you that Britian still has it’s nose in the air thinking that it’s too good to spill it’s littly-white blood in battle if some non-English subject is willing and stupid enough to do the fighting for them. I suppose to those Gurkas, a British military salary is better than hearding goats on a hilside in their native country. At least they would get free food.
And were they not on the front lines? Were they those not the first to be sent into battle on foot? It’s not as if they were so short-handed that they had to have them to fight. They didn’t need them at all.
british sent foreigners into battle to save British lives
You are wrong on all counts. I have already explained to you that the US does not employ foreign soldiers, but your head is so filled with liberal rag press that you actually believe that we do. The US has never sent a foreign soldier overseas to fight for the US.
you still havent explained what this video shows IRONINGMAN
http://images.radcity.net/5781/985381.wmv
is it a contradiction to your earlier comment?
yes or no?
You get the General idea. back on the bus, back on the bus, next thread next thread.
IRONINGMAN, All this can be avoided if you say,
Sorry
For someone that has never used a Garand and has no experience of the armed forces, much less being on a two-way range, Tinwalt has a lot to offer us.
While I’ve never had to use a Garand in action, I was taught the drills by one who had, and what I took on board make the reloading a damn site quicket than a mag change.
Drills apparently are not as useful as the function keys on a pc keyboard, I wish to hell I’d known this when being at the sad end of real fire, it would have affected the way I’d instructed crows & toms later.
But maybe the guy that taught me was wrong, after all he only spent his time avoiding Japanese, German and Korean/Chinese lead rather than hi-tech incoming from a video game.
It really is like beating one’s head against a brick wall…
Knowing Bluffcove as I do, I can confirm that he is, indeed, as sad as can be. :lol: :lol: :lol: 
Yes. It is true I drew pleasure from IRONINGMANs demise,
Im sad.
Dude, that man used a Mosin Nagant M28 rifle. Not a freaking carbine assult rifle. That’s why he was able to make kills at 500 yards. You said that you could do it with open sights at 600m with an assult rifle. :roll:
Dude, that man used a Mosin Nagant M28 rifle. Not a freaking carbine assult rifle. That’s why he was able to make kills at 500 yards. You said that you could do it with open sights at 600m with an assult rifle. :roll:[/quote]
I have fired at 600 yards with iron sights (SA-80) when I was in training - iit was done as an extra to training by the training staff to show us that even an untrained section (as we were) could have a chance of hitting somethine with EFFECTIVE PLATOON FIRE AT 600M WITH AN ASSAULT RIFLE ANDIRON SIGHTS. A carbine and an assault rifle are not the same weapon.
NO, that is not what i have siad, Ill let someone else explain this.
Dude, that man used a Mosin Nagant M28 rifle. Not a freaking carbine assult rifle. That’s why he was able to make kills at 500 yards. You said that you could do it with open sights at 600m with an assult rifle. :roll:[/quote]
I think you’ll find that what was said was that section fire was effective from assault weapons at 600 yards.
This statement in no way implies that you can snipe with an assault rifle at this range.
Dude, that man used a Mosin Nagant M28 rifle. Not a freaking carbine assult rifle. That’s why he was able to make kills at 500 yards. You said that you could do it with open sights at 600m with an assult rifle. :roll:[/quote]
I think you’ll find that what was said was that section fire was effective from assault weapons at 600 yards.
This statement in no way implies that you can snipe with an assault rifle at this range.[/quote]
and furthermore that the human eye can identify the target at this range and aim at it succesfully - something you claimed was impossible without telescopic eyes.
Dude, that man used a Mosin Nagant M28 rifle. Not a freaking carbine assult rifle. That’s why he was able to make kills at 500 yards. You said that you could do it with open sights at 600m with an assult rifle.
If it was impossible for a person to identify a person and engage them and hit them over 500m why were the Boers removing gun crews at 1200yds with open sights? Just thought I would ask. :?
And I have shot in competitions at 600m, and hit a standard target and am an average shot.
I’ve shot a Mosin-Nagant M44 carbine (for the benefit of TINWALT: this is a bolt-action carbine based on the Mosin-Nagant M1891 rifle and features a barrel lenght of 20 inches, and a pretty short sight radius) at 600 yards with open sights (post and U-notch) and was regularly hitting a 3 foot circle, and that was with dodgy old Russian light ball ammunition. Not enough accuracy for individual fire at that range (I estimate that probably 20-40% would have hit a figure target had it been there), but get a section opening up with them & it would still spoil your day (i.e. section fire).
IIRC, part of the the USMC rifle qual is aimed fire at 600m with iron sights and the M16A2.
M44 carbine
I wasn’t implying their activities were illegal. Their operation is about as inconspicuous as a family of red-arsed baboons Xmas shopping in Oxford St. They have ads and flyers in every guidebook and conceirge desk on the strip. I was probing tinwalt’s expertise on the US legal system and asking him to explain the inconguities between his BS and what I know to be fact.
While it is fun to rock on down there to try some of the toys out, it’s a lot more fun to go down there with a bunch of your mates and bet on who gets the tightest grouping after 5 pints.
P.S. To all the spams- thanks for putting on Red Flag at Nellis, a two week detachment just a 15 minute ride from the Vegas strip. Who could ask for more?
MG-42
Hitlers’ Germany entered the World War 2 with the MG-34 as a major multipurpose machine gun, but it soon was discovered that MG-34 was less than suitable for high volume wartime production, being too time- and resource-consuming in manufacture and also somewhat sensitive to fouling and mud. The search for newer, better universal machine gun begain circa 1939, and in 1942 the final design, developed by the German company Metall und Lackierwarenfabrik Johannes Grossfuss AG, was adopted as a MG-42. It was manufactured in large numbers by companies like the Grossfuss itself, Mauser-Werke, Gustloff-Werke, Steyr-Daimler-Puch and some others. Being undoubtfully one of the best machine guns of the World War 2, MG-42 still shines and is still in production in more or less modified forms in many countries. In most countries, like the Germany ,Italy and Pakistan, it is used rechambered for 7.62x51mm NATO ammunition, under the names of MG-42/59 and MG-3. In some countries, like Yugoslavia, it is used in its original chambering, 7.92mm Mauser. In any case, some 60 years since its first adoption, MG-42 and its direct descendants are among the best in the world in its class. Total numbers of the MG-42s built during WW2 are estimated as not less than 400 000, and keeping in mind that it is still manufactured in some countries, total numbers of the MG-42 and ist direct descendants produced in the world up to date, can be near the million.
MG-42 was designed with the some wery basic ideas in mind: it must be universal in use, fast and cheap to manufacture, and as reliable as possible. It also had to provide maximum available firepower by adopting a relatively high rate of fire. To achieve the fast manufacturing and a relatively low cost, Grossfuss company used as much steel stampings as possible. In fact, instead of the separate barrel sleeve and receiver, both machined from blocks of steel (as found in MG-34), MG-42 used a single piece receiver/barrel sleeve unit, stamped from one sheet of steel. This feature alone saved a lot of steel and time, but other measures also have been taken, so overall cost of the MG-42 was about 30% lower than of MG-34, and it required 50% less raw materials and man labour, than MG-34.
MG-42 is a short recoil operated, automatic fire, belt-feed weapon. To simplify the design, select-fire and magazine-feeding features of the MG-34 were abandoned, and MG-42 could be fed only from the left side. The belt feed of the MG-42 is quite simpe and effective, and it was used as a pattern for numerous latter designs. It uses a single swinging arm that operates a belt-feed claws. Both arm and claws are mounted on the hinged receiver feed cover. Arm has a curved cam track, in which the bolt stut rides forward and backward, when receiver is closed, thus oscillating the arm and operating the feed. MG-42 used same belts as MG-34, in same 50-round truncated cone shaped containers or 250 rounds boxes.
MG-42 uses a short recoiling barrel with muzzle recoil booster, somewhat similar in appearance to one found on MG-34. This booster uses muzzle blast to accelerate barrel recoil, and also served as a flash hider. Barrel locking is acieved by the pair of the rollers, located in the bolt head. When bolt becomes in the forwardmost position, bolt body, with its forward inclined part, pushes two rollers aside and into the locking recesses in the barrel extension, achieving a rigid lock between the barrel and the bolt head. When shot is fired, after the short recoil of the barrel with the bolt locked to it, rollers are pushed inward by the shaped cams in the receiver, releasing the bolt head from the barrel. Barrel is then stopped and bolt continued to travel backward, extracting and ejecting a spent case, operating a belt-feed and chambering a fresh round on its return into the battery. MG-42 is fired from the open bolt, allowing for fastest possible barrel cooling. Due to high rate of fire, barrel must be changed quite often (about every 250 - 300 rounds of sustained fire), so a very simple and effective method of barrel change was introduced. Barrel is held iside its sleve by the simple bearing at the muzzle and by the yoke at the rear. To remove the barrel, one must simply unlatch the yoke and swing it out, so rear part of the barrel will be withdrawn out of the sleeve to the right. After that, barrel can be simply withdrawn to the back and replaced by the fresh and cool one. Then, simply turn the yoke back and gun is ready to rock. Barrel replacement could be made in as short time as 6 to 10 seconds, allowing for high practical rate of fire. Every gun usually was issued with two or three spare barrels, which were stored in special containers.
Every MG-42 has a light, folding bipod from which it could be fired in Light machinegun role. It also could be used from earlier infantry and Anti-Aircraft tripods, designed for MG-34. It was issued mostly to infantry and was rarely seen on the vehicles or tanks, because the MG-34, with its ambidextrous feed capabilities and straight-backward barrel withdrawal, was more suited for tank mountings. There also was less dirt inside the tanks than in front trenches, so MG-34 worked quite well in this role, while MG-42’s unsurpassed reliability ruled the battlefields.
As a last note, i should point out that MG-42 system of operations is often confused with one, developed by the Mauser-Werke in 1945 and made famous by various CETME and Heckler & Koch rifles (G3), machine guns (HK21, HK23) and submachine guns (MP5). These systems, while both using two rollers located between the bolt head and the bolt body, are completely different in operations. In MG-42, the barrel is movable and recoils for short time, while being rigidly locked. In H&K designs, barrel does not move, and rollers are used not to lock the barrel, but only to slow down the bolt head rearward motion at the initial stages of the reloading cycle. The only other weapon, produced in large numbers, that used MG-42 roller locking, is a Czech-made vz.52 pistol, not to mention the MG-3 machine gun, which, in this respect, is the same as MG-42.