The Best Light Machine Gun.

Site Issues 2005 Archive Room
#361

http://gofree.indigo.ie/~acoy20bn/steyr.html - admittedly this is one company in the Irish TA and the sight URL looks a bit homemade, however it does relay the fact that the Steyr AUG, assault rifle - not a carbine;

Is effective as an individual weapon at 500 METRES and as a section fire weapon at 600 metres.

furthermore. this is an SA80 asault rifle - not a carbine,
there are in fact 3 variants an Sa-80 an sa80 carbine and an sa80 carbine for tankies

they are not the same thing
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/pw_sa80.htm
this is an SA80 carbine - there is a difference
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?s=dba0a33dae2203fe992f03b7078d4999&attachmentid=70504&stc=1&thumb=1
in design above and on trials below
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/attachment.php?s=dba0a33dae2203fe992f03b7078d4999&attachmentid=70505&stc=1&thumb=1

#362

Tinwalt, WE have established that it is effective (we have quoted the British Army Pams at you), whereas you asked your daddy who said “they couldn’t hit a thing at this dist…”

#363

Actually, we have established that a number of bogus claims made here are not true:

You can’t make out a man’s leg at 600m with open sights.

The M1 Carbine does not use pistol ammunition.

The M1 Carbine was in fact used as an assult rifle in WWII and in Korea.

The M1 Carbine experienced no reported penetration problems at Chosin.

The M1 Carbine was activley selected over other weapons many times.

Assult rifles are not effective at 600m.

sigh

I know it aches you, some of you, to finally admit, after many pages of squirming toward the truth, that you bogus claims are untrue. but it serves the young and impressionable that we clear them up so they don’t read the crap and go away saying to their friends,

“Hey dude! I read that assult rifles are effective at 600 freaking meters! I also read that the M1 Carbine used pistol ammo! I even learned that the M1 Carbine was only issued to support personel and was never used as an assult weapon! Man I learned so much!”

Let’s not teach the kiddies such falicies anymore. Let’s be more responsible, ok?

bye bye now.

#364

OK, so we have established that assult rifles are not effective at 600m. And it only to you 15 pages of bullcrapping and trying to change the subject of the debate to come around and admit it.

Next time you make a bogus claim just jump to the admission part right off and you will save yourself all that trouble, eh?

Good job guys![/quote]

No, we have established that a single assault rifle is not considered effective at ranges above 300m. We have also established that assault rifles (plural) are effective at ranges up to 600m when used in section fire.

Now, why don’t we return to your bogus claim that all assault rifles are carbines?

And while we are at it, it is you that has constantly changed the subject and/or ignored any facts that don’t agree with your own personal reality.

#365

the 501st metre, tell me about it!

#366

Why would you want to? I have always been taught to aim at the centre of the body not the leg.

The M1 Carbine does not use pistol ammunition.

I don’t know the weapon in question well enough to prove or disprove this

The M1 Carbine was in fact used as an assult rifle in WWII and in Korea.

The M1 Carbine experienced no reported penetration problems at Chosin.

The M1 Carbine was activley selected over other weapons many times.

So you say, none of this has actually been proved.

Assult rifles are not effective at 600m.

Yes they are, in section fire. We have proved this.

sigh

I know it aches you, some of you, to finally admit, after many pages of squirming toward the truth, that you bogus claims are untrue. but it serves the young and impressionable that we clear them up so they don’t read the crap and go away saying to their friends,

“Hey dude! I read that assult rifles are effective at 600 freaking meters! I also read that the M1 Carbine used pistol ammo! I even learned that the M1 Carbine was only issued to support personel and was never used as an assult weapon! Man I learned so much!”

Let’s not teach the kiddies such falicies anymore. Let’s be more responsible, ok?

bye bye now

Patronising tw@t

#367

Tinwalt: You have established nothing, you have only repeatedly contradicted people. Contradiction does NOT constitute argumentation.

You stand at 600m and I will hit you with an assault rifle such as SA-80, M16, AUG etc. I might not hit you first shot (particularly if it’s windy), but I’ll hit you. I would not engage you with an M4, since it is a carbine. I would, however, hit you with my Mosin-Nagant M44 carbine, which is also a carbine but is significantly more powerful.

The M1 carbine round is effectively a lengthened .32ACP. It’s a fairly unique round, but it is a souped-up pistol round nonetheless (110gn @1975fps)

The M2 carbine /could/ arguably be an assault rifle, depending on how you apply the definition (select-fire, intermediate cartridge), but it is totally out classed by real assault rifles. Usage does not fall under the description (the Brown Bess was used in assaults too).

Yes, people did choose the M1 carbine, since it was light and handy. It’s also known to be a poor manstopper. However, it is almost impossible to change your wpn depending on what you’re doing.

As has been demonstrated, 5.56mm has more energy at 600m than 9mm at the muzzle, yet you say you might as well chuck rocks.

You also don’t seem to understand the purpose of section fire, and the difference between what constitutes effective individual fire and effective section fire.

Perhaps we should continue this on another forum?

#368

of the things the “kiddies” will learn;

Hey dude! I read that assult rifles are effective at 600 freaking meters! I also read that the M1 Carbine used pistol ammo! I even learned that the M1 Carbine was only issued to support personel and was never used as an assult weapon! Man I learned so much!"

assault rifles are effective at 600 “freaking” metres - metres not meters! - TRUE
M1 carbines used pistol ammo - the cartridge of an M1 carbine is comparable in a number of respects such as loadout effective range and weight as the pistols it was designed to replace.
the m1 carbine was used as an asault weapon - it was indeed used to assault things, but this does not make it an assault any more than rogering you with a prize winning leek makes it an assault weapon,

the M1 carbine may have been used as an assault weapon - this does not make it an assault rifle - and not all assault rifles are carbines!

2 questions

1)what happens if you stand 501 metres from an SA80 -effective range 500 metres - individually though im lead to believe it is 300 by all my training so we will call it 301 metres if you would prefer!
2)Are all assault rifles carbines? - as you have been noted as saying.
3) do you fiddle with kids?

#369

Ironman clearly you know nothing about firearms, the real world is not like Rainbow Six :roll:

Firstly you say the M16A2 is a carbine not a rifle :oops:

:roll: Lets ask Colt…Oops its a rifle

Have a look http://www.colt.com/mil/M16.asp

Secondly the M16A2 has an effective range of 300M :oops:

:roll: Lets ask Colt…Oops its 600 metres

Have a look http://www.colt.com/mil/M16_2.asp

Incidentally the Carbine (denoted as such by Colt due to the shorter barrel) also has the same effective range.

You also mention the M1 Carbine is an assault rifle :oops:

:roll: The M1 carbine has a woeful effective range and no ability to support fully automatic fire (the M2 did but the M1 was semi auto only) therefore it does not satisfy the criteria much as you might want it to.

Let me quote “Shooting Times”

“The M1 Carbine was not an assault rifle; it was an intermediate tool: “more than a pistol, less than a rifle.” The cartridge itself was a simple, downsized modification of the .32 Winchester Self-Loading round of 1906”

http://www.galleryofguns.com/shootingtimes/Articles/DisplayArticles.asp?ID=785

You Sir are a Walter Mitty of the first order a cad a bounder and a charlatan :roll:

I wish you good day

Richard

#370

Wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong

Once the bullet has left the barrel, it is the ballistics that count and not what it was fired from.

Hence, ignoring wind, if it’s accurate to 20cm at 500m as you say, it’ll be accurate to 24cm at 600m. This linear relationship will continue until the projectile passes back through the sound barrier, when it will suffer buffetting and will then lose accuracy at a much higher rate. I have seen this happen myself, in the difference between 144gn and 155gn 7.62mm at 1000 yards - with the 144gn I can shoot the same elevation group (0.5-1.25 minutes of angle) from 300yds to 900 yards, but it opens out at 1000. With the 155gn I can shoot the same elevation group at 1000yards.

5.56mm does not drop back below the sound barrier until well past 600m.

You also say somewhere else that the bullet drop at 600m is excessive and you’d never be able to elevate the barrel enough:

Aberdeen Proving Ground test data - M855 (SS109) 55.6mm ball gives a drop of 359cm at 600m. This requires a correction of 0.343° on the rearsight, or 20.6 minutes of angle (MOA). Prosecution rests, m’lud.

#371

TINWALT, you are cordially invited to continue this discussion on the Army Rumour Service website in the following thread, where your many contentions (particularly with regard to effective range) have been put to the Infantry members:

http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=17262.html

Come on in, we’d love you to join us.

#372

Bring lubricant, your gonna get fucked!

#373

Ironman you are full of shit, your infamous and inacurate waffle will come back to haunt you. If you had any real experience rather than virtual fantasy you would know that the 1.9 twist is there to extend the effective range and quite capable of lethal terminal ballistics and accurate shot placment out to and beyond 600 yards

#374

Steady, we only need to prove 600 at the moment, words like “and beyond” give him another five pages of crap thread to play with!!!

Notice how, 0f the 24 pages of this thread from page 10 onwards it has all been trying to make IRONINGMAN retract his claim that the M1 carbine is an assault rifle! - its going to take more than one post to knock him down, I was thinking, 5 knuckles and a bicep!

#375

There was to much crap to read and i have a cracking headache but how could anyone with even a passing interest in gats not know it was a replacment for the pistol as a light pointable sidearm but beame popular for use upto 200 yards.

#376

welcome to the “Walther the war machine’s big book of soldier knowledge”

#377

I trained as an infantryman several years ago, with the SA80 or L85A1 as it was then. A section could easily be expected (and was trained) to engage targets at upto 600 metres, no problem. A friend of mine who trained with the SLR (British variant of the FN FAL) regularly engaged targets at 600 metres as an individual.

Ironman, I put it to you that you have no experience at all of firearms other than in the virtual world of computer games.

#378

I fear he may have gone to ground. If only he would stand 600yds away waving his willy in defiance sure in his limited knowledge.

#379

We’ve offered, there were 8 of us who are fairly competent with an L85 who would be more than glad to be a ‘section’ just to prove the point. :lol:

I think we are a few more now, maybe we could fire on him as a platoon? :shock:

(Or just get RichardH to take 1 shot with his AR15.) :wink:

#380

Twould be infinetly more rewarding to wrap a broomhandle in barbed wire and give his back the good news!