Jeff White
New member
The institutional knowledge of employment of machine guns is almost lost in our Army. The current FM 23-67 on the M60 MG covers this, but only very basically. I was taught by a soldier in the British Army on an exchange program. They actually have a mount designed or this role and remove the buttstock from their GPMGs, mount a mortar type sight and use aiming stakes.
STLRN - See if someone on Ft Sill has a copy of the current Infantry. I got mine last week. The date is May-August 1999 but they have had some problems getting the right dates on the last few issues. They are requiring the observer to make his corrections based on the gun target (GT) line instead of the squad leader converting their observer target line corrections into GT left and rights. I think this would be slower in combat as it will require the observer to know where the guns are all the time.
I realize that manning problems are the reason for the cutback in the number of guns and combat vehicles, but I feel that we owe it to the nation to be intellectually honest and not try to say we have the same combat capability when we really don't.
I'm not suggesting that we cut R&D out altogether, but that we procure enough of the current generation of equipment to meet our needs before we start fielding the next. The prospect of a high intensity conflict with China is not that far fetched. In a large scale war like that, we will have to use just about all the forces this nation can muster. This includes 3 generations of trucks, 3 generations of radios, 4 different versions of the M16 rifle that require two different types of 5.56mm ammo. and this is just the ground forces. Many of the new systems such as the new Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles are only made on one assembly line. In WWII we converted plants to war production in a matter of weeks and months and turned out the weapons and equipment we needed to equip a force of 6 million. Much of our new equipment requires materials and skills that will not be easily obtainable in a short time.
Over in the other thread on the future combat rifle we are discussing rail guns to be used against both aircraft and AFVs. this is great and interesting, but I'm worried about what I'll fight with next week or next month or in the next five years if the need arises.
Jeff
STLRN - See if someone on Ft Sill has a copy of the current Infantry. I got mine last week. The date is May-August 1999 but they have had some problems getting the right dates on the last few issues. They are requiring the observer to make his corrections based on the gun target (GT) line instead of the squad leader converting their observer target line corrections into GT left and rights. I think this would be slower in combat as it will require the observer to know where the guns are all the time.
I realize that manning problems are the reason for the cutback in the number of guns and combat vehicles, but I feel that we owe it to the nation to be intellectually honest and not try to say we have the same combat capability when we really don't.
I'm not suggesting that we cut R&D out altogether, but that we procure enough of the current generation of equipment to meet our needs before we start fielding the next. The prospect of a high intensity conflict with China is not that far fetched. In a large scale war like that, we will have to use just about all the forces this nation can muster. This includes 3 generations of trucks, 3 generations of radios, 4 different versions of the M16 rifle that require two different types of 5.56mm ammo. and this is just the ground forces. Many of the new systems such as the new Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles are only made on one assembly line. In WWII we converted plants to war production in a matter of weeks and months and turned out the weapons and equipment we needed to equip a force of 6 million. Much of our new equipment requires materials and skills that will not be easily obtainable in a short time.
Over in the other thread on the future combat rifle we are discussing rail guns to be used against both aircraft and AFVs. this is great and interesting, but I'm worried about what I'll fight with next week or next month or in the next five years if the need arises.
Jeff