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?[/quote]
I must apologise Crabtastic, I did not mean to imply that you said that their activities were illegal, it was towards Tinwalt that the comment was directed as that idea was inherent in his post.
Not with assult rifles it’s not. The rifle that a picture of was posted is not an assult rifle. It’s a bolt action rifle which has better velocity and range than an assult rifle. Sorry. Nobody uses AR’s at 600m for anything. If you are refering to that DOC file on the Net where some idiot states otherwise, you have fallen prey to a military “wannabe”'s ludicous opinion. Don’t be gullible.
Well my friend, it was I who educated you. You see, it was I who first posted in this thread the explaination that bullets rise from the point of fire, not Preatorian. What Preatorian did afterward (and he did it so well) was provide a chart that helped make that fact easier for you to understand. You got that bit of education from me my friend.
How dare you imply that those many Marines who killed Chinese soldiers with an M1 Carbine (and many did at Chosin, my father included) either did not do so or were only able to do so because the Chinese were freezing their asses off. The Marines were freezing their asses off too you know. Shame on you for slighting the sacrifice of those men. Shame on you.
I have indeed used a 30-06 my friend. Not a Garand, but a rifle using the same round. I am also a former hunter with hundreds of hours experience in the field firing everything from a .22 to a Remington bolt action 30-06 at various ranges. I have probably fired more rounds than you by 3 times over. LOL I mean, judging by your posts. FacialCuts, you are blathering hot air again. You condemn others without knowledge of them, and that makes you silly.
Now that’s just silly. Read the above. He taught you that assult rifles are used for section fire at 600m? Yea, he is definately was wrong. AR’s are not used at 600m, ever. As for your attempt to change the discussion by claiming that AR’s are good for section fire at 600m (because you have learned that they are no good for singular fore at 600m) is worthless too. Section fire at 600m does not include AR’s. Maybe at 400m, but not 600m. Section fire at 600m is what MG’s and cannon are for. Nobody uses AR’s at 600m for section fire. Sorry. Not the British, Americans, Canadians, Australians, French - nobody. Sorry. It does not happen. Soldiers are not expected to be idiots. They have other weapons for such tasks. LOL
I know it’s a long post, but please read it. 2nd foot, I am trying to help you understand why your contentions are incorrect.
No, it is not pistol ammunition. This is not pistol ammunition. It’s fits no pistol in the WWII / Korea US military.
We all know that. But how many support troops do you think were forced to engage the Chinese at Chosin when they stormed by the thousands over a hill only @ 200 yards away? In fact, WWII, the M1 Carbine was extensively used as an assult rifle, mostly in the Pacific Theatre, where it was used to clear out Japanese positions when the US troops got into close range.
Furthermore, how many USMC do you think picked up an M1 Carbine from thier dead commrad because it held over 3 times as many rounds as the Chinese approached? The answer is: Many. You are contending that because the M1 Carbine was a weak rifle, that it was not used much in battle, and that is incorrect. We all know that the M1 Garand was the standard issue rifle, but you are not understanding how much and how diversely the M1 Carbine was used.
You just don’t know what to say do you? But you have been saying that an AR is effective at up to 600m in previous posts! And that is absurd. Do you realize how adbsurd that sounds? Who do you think you are talking to? We are all weapon affectionados here. Some of us are even highly experienced hunters with a great deal of firearms experience. Everyone here knows that an AR is worthless at 600m. And section fire at 600m does not include assult rifles. Assult rifles are designed for close range combat. To land rounds anywhere near a target with an AR at that range would mean raising the barrel several degrees and trying to estimate the impossible. You could not possible land a round anywhere near a man at 600m with an assult rifle. Shooting at a man with an AR at 600m would be utterly pointless, and nobody does it. That is work for sniper rifles (like the .50 cal. sniper rifle), large calibre machineguns and light cannon, bur not assult rifles. You obviously have no idea how far 600m is.
At first you say an AR is effective at 600m, and I show you (and Pretorian’s charts show you) that this is not so. Then you say they are used for section fire at 600m to try to salvage your disproven claim. Then you say assult rifles can be effective for up to 500-600m because you realize that 600m is too far, then you say they are no good beyond 250 yards. As I have said before, you just don’t know what to think, and what you say changes with the wind as you try to salvage your disproven claims.
Did I not already make those statements in previous posts? Why do you keep repeating some of the things I have already said as if you are making an argument against me? I was the 1st one in this thread, even before Preatorian, to state that a bullet trajectory is curved because of compensation. It was because someone else said otherwise of my statement that Preatorian posted that information. Now you want to explain that to me. :lol:
And many did just that I suppose, since the M1 Carbine was many times actively selected for close-quarter fighting - at Chosin and in the Pacific in WWII a great many did.
But it was not used in 1 engagement. It was used in a great many engagements, particularly in the Pacific Theatre, as I stated some time ago.
I agree that by the modern definition of an assult rifle, the M1 Carbine is technically not an assult rifle. However, it has all of the characteristics of an assult rifle circa WWII era except selective fire. In WWII the M1 and M2 carbines were used as assult rifles on Japanese positions. At Chosin, the M1 Carbine was used for dozens and dozens of assults on enemy positions. Also, many soldiers grabbed one off the ground and headed off toward enemy numbers and wiped out enemy positions with carbine fire. If that is not an assult role, none is. What kind of weapon is good for such an assult in WWII? An M1 Carbine is, that is for sure. But then, most assults don’t take place at over 100 yards, do they? Ofcourse they don’t. Something I have already stated: It is my opinion that the M1 Carbine is an assult rifle when used in assult situations because it has the characteristics of an assult rifle. The M2 Carbine, is without question an assult rifle.
No, it must not be noted, but since you did, it must be noted that everything gets “bad fame” in humid -42 F weather, especially the human beings! The problem with the action on the M1 Carbine problem was addressed by applying hair tonic to the action when available. But it did not stop USMC from killing hundreds of soldiers with M1 Carbines at Chosin. I have even provided the testimony of a vet who was there that the weapon had no trouble penetrating the enemies coats at the ranges in which it was used (0 to 150 yards), and have not been able to find the testimony of a vet who was there that states the M1 Carbine had trouble penetrating those coats anywhere on the Net after extensively searching. Why do you suppose that is? It is because the M1 Carbine is not a weapon that a soldier would use to shoot at men over 200 yards away. The M1 Carbine was used, at Chosin, at ranges of under 200 yards, and often in an assult role. Shooting at 200+ yards range what the M1 Garande is for. Before you read all of this post, you will begin to understand.
No, I never said most of the casualties at Chosin were due to cabines. Don’t put words into my mouth so you can later invalidate them. Quote me saying most of the causalties were made by the carbine. I said that many kills were made with it at Chosin. However, I do have the ultimate source: my father, who was there, and whom I visit weekly, and whom has told me many times about that battle.
At Chosin, the time for being a support person and carryinf things or loading BAR’s for others came to a quick end when thousands of Chinese came by surprise running over a hill 200 yards away tossing hand grendes. That’s when every support soldier within range dropped what they were doing and started firing furiously at the sea of humans running at them. In that battle, great numbers of Chinese soldiers ran in waves at the USMC. They did not stop when they got 100 yards away and said, “OK, so this is the front line, we go no farther.” Instead, they charged ahead right up into the USMC positions. It was the most heated infantry battle in the history of modern warfare. Ok, think about that one for a minute…
Thought about it? Ready to continue? Starting to get the picture about why so many M1 Carbines were used to kill the enemy at Chosin? Let’s hope so, finally.
Very few of the support personel with an M1 Carbine within 100-150 yards of the mass of Chinese soldiers could afford to continue to spend their time reloading doing what they were doing. He was shooting at Chinese like an arcade game to say alive. And the battle, just like that, went on for 10 days. The Chinese attacked in waves, and each time they met fire from numerous M1 Garands AND M1 Carbines. For 10 days, hundreds of USMC fired M1 Carbines at Chinese soldiers within 200 yards. Hundreds I said my good man… for 10 days.
If only one in 8 men were a support person and an M1 Carbine, and there are 7,000 USMC alone on the front line, then there were hundreds of (800-900?) support personel on the front lines shooting an M1 Carbine at the sea of soldiers running toward them over a hill 200 yards away while tossing bagfulls of hand grenades. Why do you think they were given an M1 Carbine instead of a pistol? Could it be because they needed to shoot at an enemy that might be anywhere from 0-200 yards away? Yup, that’s it my friend! I don’t know about you, but if I had a carbine and a few thousand men come running over a hill only 200 yards away, I am no longer carrying mortar rounds. Now I am shooting at men and reloading as fast as I can. Many Chinese soldiers were dropped by the M1 Carbine in that battle alone, and many were also drooped by it in the Pacific in WWII.
I understand that much of your reason for not believing that many have been killed with M1 Carbines is because you do not realize how much that little support rifle was used. It was used far more than it was ever suspected it might be, and in ways it never was intended to be used. This is why it is such a famous rifle: because it proved to be so effective at close range.
Please read the following. It will help you to understand that many more men have been killed with an M1 Carbine than you believe. Just because it is a weak rifle, and just because the Garand is far more powerful, does not mean the M1 Carbine is ineffective at 200 yards, that it was not activley chosen for assult situations, or that was not used to kill many many soldiers. I think if you read the following are but a tiny few of the many hundreds of times the M1 Carbine was used as a combat weapon and an assult weapon, you will forget about arguing that the M1 Carbine was inneffective at close ranges, not a weapon suitable for assult (1940’3-50’s era), or that it was not used to kill many hundreds of soldiers. Enjoy.
"On the eastern slope of the Taebaek Mountains most of the Marines were unaware of what was happening in the west, or just how badly outnumbered and surrounded they were. The first indication came on the morning of November 27th as two companies of the 5th Marines began the push from Yudam-ni westward. Before noon they ran into an enemy roadblock. Unaware of the numbers of enemy around them, the Marines engaged the Chinese, destroying the road block. Then enemy fire began to rain on them from all directions. The Marines knew they were in for a fight, one that lasted for nearly four hours. Then, when the firing subsided, the Marines attempted to dig in. The intensity of the battle convinced them that they were facing more than straggling units of North Korean soldiers. They knew the enemy would attack again, in force, under the cover of darkness. They did!
[b]“The American Marine First Division has the highest combat effectiveness in the American armed forces. It seems not enough for our four divisions to surround and annihilate its two regiments. (You) should have one or two more divisions as a reserve force.”
MAO ZEDONG’s orders to Chinese General Song Shilun[/b]
As night fell on November 27, tens of thousands of Chinese soldiers came out of hiding, attacking American soldiers and Marines at all points around the Chosin Reservoir. The two companies dug in to the west of Yudam-ni were shivering from the cold in make-shift foxholes when the overwhelming force attacked. In the darkness the Chinese swarmed the hill, coming within yards of the embattled Marines to toss grenades among them with deadly effectiveness. In one sector of the American perimeter, protected by two machine-guns, the horde quickly over ran one of the key defensive positions. When a grenade landed near the only remaining machine-gun, Staff Sergeant Robert Kennemore recognized the danger to nearby soldiers, as well as the gun emplacement. Quickly he stomped his foot on the grenade to push it into the snow, the subsequent blast throwing his body into the air.
The Marines somehow held through the night, but their heavy losses were quickly visible in the breaking daylight. For S/Sgt Kennemore the cold may have been a lifesaver. He was found, the stumps of his legs frozen in blood-caked snow, still alive. Others were not so fortunate. And it was only the beginning.
From November 27th to December 10th, American soldiers and Marines would find themselves in a battle unlike any other in history. Survival would call for leadership, teamwork, and immense courage. From it was born a brotherhood perhaps unmatched by veterans of any other battle.
The following are a few of the most revered soldiers in US history (Chosin Reservoir Campaign). They are recipients of the US Medal of Honor (the highest award in the US). Roughly half of those who received a MOH in Korea were using an M1 Carbine:
“charged the enemy positions armed with only carbine and a grenade. At the first bunker, he silenced its occupants with a burst from his weapon. Gaining the top of the hill, he killed 2 enemy soldiers, and then went down the trench, killing 5 more as he advanced. He then hurled his grenade into a bunker and shot 2 other soldiers as they emerged. Having exhausted his ammunition, he returned through the enemy fire to obtain more ammunition and grenades and charged the hill once more. Calling on others to follow him, he assaulted 2 more enemy bunkers. Although those who attempted to join him became casualties, Cpl. Rosser once again exhausted his ammunition obtained a new supply, and returning to the hilltop a third time hurled grenades into the enemy positions. During this heroic action Cpl. Rosser single-handedly killed at least 13 of the enemy.”
“Quickly seizing the wounded marine’s carbine, he placed his own body as a shield in front of him and lay there firing accurately and effectively into the hostile group until he himself was fatally wounded by enemy machinegun fire.”
“he staunchly carried the attack to the top, personally annihilated 1 enemy bunker with grenade and carbine fire and captured the objective with his remaining 8 men.”
“On 3 December, while being flown low over enemy lines in a light observation plane, Colonel Page dropped hand grenades on Chinese positions and sprayed foxholes with automatic fire from his carbine.”
“Promptly organizing a squad of men when the enemy launched a sudden, vicious counterattack against the forward elements of his company’s position, rendering it untenable, Staff Sergeant Windrich, armed with a carbine.”
“Sgt. Long coolly directed accurate mortar fire on the advancing foe. He continued firing his carbine and throwing handgrenades until his position was surrounded and he was mortally wounded.”
“Corporal Ronald Rosser was forward observer in the hills near Ponggilli when his platoon came under fire from two directions. With just a carbine and a grenade, he charged the enemy position and knocked out two bunkers and cleared a trench. Twice he ran out of ammunition and twice he crossed through enemy fire to resume his attack.”
“When hostile forces attacked in battalion strength during the night, he maintained a constant flow of devastating fire upon the enemy, alternately employing 2 machineguns, a carbine, and handgrenades.”
“…his hands became blistered by the extreme heat from the weapons and, placing the guns on the ground to allow them to cool, continued to defend the position with his carbine and grenades.”
“After scoring a direct hit and killing the sole surviving tankman with his carbine as he came through the escape hatch, he boldly fired 2 more rounds of ammunition at the oncoming tanks, disorganizing the attack and enabling our tank crews to continue blasting with their 90-mm guns.”
“Encountering the enemy at close range, he proceeded to hurl handgrenades into the bunkers and, utilizing his carbine to best advantage in savage hand-to-hand combat, succeeded in killing at least 3 of the enemy.”
“As enemy action increased in tempo, his machinegun was destroyed by a grenade but, undaunted, he grabbed a carbine and continued his heroic defense until mortally wounded by a mortar burst.”
“In the subsequent fighting when the fanatical enemy succeeded in penetrating the position, he personally charged them with carbine, rifle, and grenades, inflicting many casualties until he himself was mortally wounded.”
“When the assaulting element was pinned down by heavy machinegun fire, he personally rushed the emplacement and, firing his carbine and lobbing grenades with deadly accuracy, neutralized the weapon and killed 3 of the enemy”
“Although again wounded, he continued the fight with his carbine, still exposing himself as an example to his men. When this final overwhelming assault swept over the platoon’s position his voice could still be heard faintly urging his men to carry on, until he lost consciousness”
"He landed in Pusan on July 31, 1950, a little more than a month after the fighting began. He was given only two hours before he was firing his carbine rifle with the No. 9 painted on the side. "
Those are only a few of the hundreds of men at Chosin who used an M1 Carbine. It was used by even more in the Pacific in WWII, as a weapon of choice, especially in close quarters.
Ever seen a documentary film on the Pacific Theatre in WWII? I’ll bet you $10,000 that if you count the weapons in the hands of the men in combat on the islands in that film, far more of them are carrying an M1 Carbine than an M1 Garande. The bet is open to anyone. Why do you suppose that was so? It was because the M1 Carbine is a good weapon for close range combat, assulting enemy positions, and because it was effective at up to 200 yards. DOAH!
Again, just because it was a weak rifle, or the Garand was more powerful and the standard issue rifle, or newer assult style rifles are more powerful and have greater range than an M1 Carbine, it does not support any of your claims that…
…the M1 Carbine is not effective at up to 200 yards
…the M1 Carbine has not been used to kill a great many men
…the M1 Carbine has not been many times selected as the weapon for the task at hand
…the M1 Carbine was not many times deployed as an asullt rifle
…assult rifles are used at ranges of 600m
…section fire consists of assult rifles firing together at ranges of 600m
None of these, your claims, are correct my friend. Not one of them. You should have learned by now that,
…the M1 Carbine has been used to kill thousands of men.
…the M1 Carbine was used extensively for roles for which it was never intended, because it suited the role
…the M1 Carbine was used extensively as an assult rifle in both WWII and Korea
…assult rifles are worthless at 600m
…section fire at 600m does not include assult rifles
2nd foot, you have been provided plenty of information to help you see the folly of your claims. Let it sink in. We all make mistakes.
Now, can we get back to the topic of the thread please?
I am not a ballistic master as some of the people on this forum are, I am a trained, and still in training infantryman, I have actually held an assault rifle and fired at targets on a real range, where one hand holds the stock of the rifle and the other holds the trigger etc.
This is “different” to where one hand holds the ASDW keys and the other hand holds the mouse.
Please take this comment
…section fire at 600m does not include assult rifles
and choke on it. You are wrong, we already have an unwelcome visitor…elswhere. you are welcome to be the next and recieve your education if you wish.
Secondly by suggesting that it was the cold and the lack of morale that contributed to the deaths of the Chinese at Chosin reservoir, I merely quote a US Marine Major, if he belittles the efforts of the USMC take it up with him!
Thirdly, How am I belittling them the efforts of the Marines, they were better equipped and better provisioned. Surely this is a compliment to them, as their logistical supply chain is better organised than their opponenets they succeeded! COD two might even include a “loggies” add on where you can discover the thrilling world of supplying your troops with the necessities to wage a war. The USMC had better Loggies and supply than the Chinese so I am not disrespecting them.
You have disagreed with a Major that was their at the time, you are the one contesting their victory not me!
I am in the pay of HMG as a soldier catB you are not a soldier of any description who are you to talk of denegrating the military. The men that fought at Chosin regardless of which side they were on chose to stand and fight for their principles you havent, you are a hasbeen living out a fantasy, you are a WALT whose greatest action so far is to educate the military! the serving military!
Forget WALT, IRONINGMAN I believe you are the ICEMAN of Eugene O’Neill Fame, if only because you re-iterate one point for five hours with laborious accuracy before in the end revealing you have done nothing with your life and live out your fantasy for anyone that will listen.
Ironman, why are you still arguing with serving soldiers about what serving soldiers do? I’ll refer you (again - you ignored it last time) to my last post in this thread
Only if Call of Duty counts! You do realise that probably half the people trashing you in this thread are serving soldiers, and unlike in the US armed forces they fire a lot of rounds in training. With the current political situation, I’d hazard a guess that most of them have been on a two-way range in the last few years.
Now, when you start using fully automatic weapons to go hunting, and the rabbits start firing back with Kalashnikovs, Mortars and the like I might start paying attention. Until then I think I will perhaps defer to those who have actually been there and done that, rather than those who haven’t but think they have.
Point is, these guys are soldiers and they have used assault rifles at those ranges and found them to be effective. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be making such comments.
Actually, you seem to be the only person claiming assault rifles are ineffective at 600m. Come to think of it, you’re also the only person not to handle such weapons as part of their job - coincidence?
this is fun but its a bit fake, like drag hunting, can we let the dogs on a real fox and have it destroyed! so much more rewarding when the dogs dont get called off, can we ajourn and introduce him to some real soldiers?
already offered him the opportunity, but of course being built of IRON, the IRONINGMAN is, when not under the thumb, a fearsome warrior impervious to all weaponry,
press shift and control and type “walther war machine” on COD, always works!!!
question IRONINGMAN, why do you think soldiers (remember they are the ones you arent!!!) have rifles in the first place?
if by your own admission the 30-06 is effective at 250 yards do you not think the “big” cartridges they use in proper big boys rifles are slightly more effective at greater ranges? rather than an extra 50FT
You got that right. At least not if you think section fire with AR’s is done at 600m, or that you “can make out the leg of a man at 600m with iron sights” and such. LOL
Show us the website of a current military instructor or official military website of a nation which states that section fire at 600m is done with carbine assult rifles. Then you can stop choking on it.
You say you can’t? Ofcourse you can’t! No military weapons instructor would say such an idiotic thing. It’s just in your head. Be careful about making ridiculouis claims about firearms to people who are experienced with firearms.
No, you insulted the many USMC who faught and died there by implying that the intense cold is the reason for the USMN 10-1 KILL RATIO. And that is shameful my boy. BTW, a kill ratio means people who got shot or blown up, not died of frostbite. :lol:
You have provided a web site to a USMC Major who states that the USMC did not achieve a 10-1 kill ratio or that the USMC killed so many Chinese because of the cold?
WHERE? I don’t see it.
A 30-06 is effective at much farther than 250 yards, ofcourse. However, you were saying that section fire takes place at 600m with assult rifles, not 30-06, 7mm, or .50 calibre sniper rifles, and that you can shoot a man at 600m with an assult rifle using open sights. Both of which are absurd. After making such statements, I would think you’d be so embarressed that you would avoid this thread like the plauge. :lol:
Who mentioned Carbine assault rifles you idiotic walt? Whenever you are proved wrong do you change the subject to whatever the voices in your head tell you? Patronising moron!
Section fire with an assault rifle (note: no mention of carbine) is effective to 600m. That is standard British military doctrine. This statement is fact not speculation.
You can get hit by a bullet of small calibre that does not initiate hydrostatic shock and survive, then decide as you are poorly armed it not with getting up to only geet shot again and lie in the snow and die!
I can show you a website but as I am a new guy on that site I might have to wait for someone else to offer you an invitation first, etiquette and all that. etiquette comes from Britain - you know the place with the history!
secondly i do not ever recall saying a carbine was effective 600 yards I will stnad by it because with the shower of shite you ahve coming your way itll be funny to watch you cling to it, however, Assault rifle fire is effective at its upper band at 600 yards when fired in section, (have I said that before) accuracy decreases but the lethality of the round remains high! and serves its purpose to effectively suppress enemy movement and activity!
The USMC survived and won the battle and went home alive the Chinese did not therefore they won Kill ratios only matter on high score boards at teh end of a computer game, normally soliders are more concerned with beer shagging and being alive than worrying aoubt their tally.
If you want to argue with the USMC Major who claims that the Chinese were defeated in part by their failed logistics crew you may. This is the article.
The heavy casualties the Chinese suffered from ground and air action were compounded by the cold. The terrible cold was at once our own worst enemy and our greatest ally. Chinese combat power was greatly weakened by the awful losses the poorly clothed Chinese suffered from frostbite and exposure. And, compounding the weakening of the Chinese forces by combat and cold was the failure of their logistic system. In two or three days of fighting most Chinese units had used up the meager allotment of ammunition they had carried when they crossed the river, and were beginning to suffer shortages of food.
(Incidentally if you had any military experience you would have some level of understanding that half the time you get more problems with supply than you do with the enemy - no offence to loggies present)
it doesnt lessen the achievement of the USMC who faced the same climate, its merely the Un forces were better supplied a victory regardless! though evidently COD demands a “tally” or “kill-ratio” to make the high score board.
like I said your invitation is in the post! unfortuantely it will not really be a poll to prove you are wrong more likely a verbatim recital of lesson 4A of the British infantrymans training!
I really want to buy you a pint after this and laugh cheers mate.
incidentally that pistol round in the carbine - effective to 250 yards as at Chosin. You havent explained how all that extra “cartridge” in a real rifle catridge will effect its load and therefore its range?
Um, my misguided friend, lean close so you can hear this…
ASSULT RIFLES ARE CARBINES. Great Scots! A dude argues about assult rifles and does not even know what one is. :shock:
Post us the link that states it, an official one. You can’t? Oh. I didn’t think you could. But it’s NOT effective. Nothing coming from the barrel of a carbine (oooh! That word you hate so!) is effective at 600m. You’d be lucky to punch through thier cotton uniform with an AR at 600m. You’d be better off throwing rocks at someone at 10m that shooting an AR at them at 600m. Come back when you have the slightest idea how much a bullet loses velocity and drops from a carbine (oooh! That word again!) at 600m. :lol:
Strandard British assault Rifle - this is the version they hadnt even tweaked at vast expense to make “good!”
Read it paying attention to the speciifications listed below the pretty pictures of the rifle.
Includes - I think you will agree testamenet to the individual rifles capability to be effective out to 500 metres.
now this is with a susat granted but if you remember a short while ago you went on a rant about Simo Hayha, now then;
Simo Hayha - non telescopic eyes iron sights accurate sniper at over 500 yards - weapon notwithstanding
Lee Enfiled SA80 - marksman not withstanding can deliver an effective shot to 500 Meters this is a standard 5.56 NATO cartirdge
A Human can identify and aim at a target at over 500 metres - proven
A 5.56 cartridge can be effective in individual fire at 500 metres.
Any argument you may have with that can be resolved by saying - X8!
Section fire removes the large majority of variables the accuracy decreases but it catered for by 8 shots going down instead of one!
If you have any further questions go to a gun club in your delightful nation and stand 600 metres from a guy with an Assault rfle and tell him he slept with his sister!
please accept the invitation when you get it!!! PLEASE
Whisky Tango Foxtrot? If all assault rifles are carbines, why does the US Army describe the M-16 as an assault rifle but only it’s shorter cousin the M-4 as a carbine?
That website lists the standard effective range of an individual SA80 Assualt rifle (one of the shortest about) as being 500m. I’m sure you can appreciate that section fire would put it up to 600m at least.
I have seen section fire on falling plate targets at 600m with my own two eyes, and I saw the plates fall. IT DOES WORK, IT IS TRUE, and IT IS THE JOB OF NUMEROUS PEOPLE ON THIS FORUM TO DO THAT.
As to the cold at Chosin, I believe it is me who first brought this up; the severe weather conditions were undoubtedly a factor that caused some of the Chinese to die of wounds that would otherwise have not been fatal. It was undoubtedly a factor which caused some who were wounded to loose enthusiasm. I am in no way intending to take a dig at the USMC, they are a fine body of men and I have no beef with them, and I am not suggesting that the ‘body count’, delightful US concept that it is, is soley due to the weather, BUT I will say that extreme weather conditions will increase fatalities amongst wounded soldiers. I never said they all died of frostbite, and I don’t think Bluffcove was implicating that either.
Ultimately though, I have only this to say to you. You proffess to know a lot about war, and you like to talk about it. Your country is at war against its enemies, so I suggest that you make your father a proud man and volunteer for the USMC where you can see it all including combat, for yourself.
EDIT: And before you mention it; I have signed on the dotted line, (several, actually!) and will be away to lands sandy and hot after I finish my strategy degree. I don’t profess to know how I’ll get on, but at least I’m trying to find out.
