The ak-74 uses 5.45X39 calibur ammunition while the ak-47 uses 7.62X39 calibur.

Yeah I was going to correct myself above, I was thinking before that the 74 used Nato rounds, sorry folks.

Originally posted by WestPoint23

As far as amunition goes, it's better to have and not need than to need and not have.

My god you are a genius we really did not know that until you told it to us thank you very much we would have never know that
But seriously that is why future battles will include lasers rather than bullets no ammo but you better pack some batteries with you

Geez you don't have to be arsey about it, I was just summing up everything into a general comment.

ok, I know we're a bit past this now but I'd just like to clear up to topic of Covering (supressing) fire and the 3 Shot bursts, Covering fire is used by any weapon, wether it be small arms, a heavy machine gun or some form of explosive... its used to make people duck down so they cant fire back while soldiers move forward. Its a tactic that is useful and works, as you cannot think straight while your under fire, all you can remember is training, insitinct (and in an officers case) strategy, so if sombody fires roughly at your position you duck, you dont think "ah i will hide in a better place so i can shoot them back" you just think "get down and stay down til the firing has stopped".

Also

In the Case of the 3-shot burst mode on the M-16, they only have a VERY few with that mode on, nearly all M-16's have 3 modes: Safety, Single Shot and Fully auto. The Soldiers just shoot in short bursts using full auto, since that is how they are trained, and they keep the fully auto incase you run into a room full of soldiers at close quaters or for use as covering fire.

[edit on 29-7-2004 by The_Squid]

No, the M16A2 has 3 trigger groups, safe, single, and 3 shot. The M16A1s and M4s have fully auto.

Also, supressing fire is more psychological then anything else. If the enemy thinks he's going to die by sticking his head out, that's good. You want guns that scare the # out of people, like the .50 BMG, makes a nice big sound.

the 5.56mm makes a nice sound, and the M-16A2 isnt standard weapon its the A1 thats standard, as i said some have the A2 but most have the A1.
Any weapon above .223 is good for covering fire, cause if sombody shoots at me nomatter what round it is im ducking mate. So will everyone else.

well that certainly shut everyone up, what gives?

Originally posted by The_Squid
well that certainly shut everyone up, what gives?

from what I can see no matter the training, if the otherside pours suppressive fire on your position , your pinned in place with your head down just waiting to be overrun.

yes but what else are you supposed to do? stand up to try and stop them and get shot?

When pinned you can simply return fire, this works well if done right because when a force is supressing(through direct fire) it is exposed and vulnerable. You can also shift to another position, or call in support. It's all a matter of fire and maneavuer, outshoot and outscoot your enemy.

The A2 is standard for the Army, A4 standard for the Marines, both have single and burst, the A1 is only in very second line units. The Army removed the fully auto is because during the vietnam war, soldiers would often dump all their ammo into one target, at 750 rounds a minute the M16 fires 30 rounds in 3 seconds. When you're pissing your pants and being shot at you just let it flow.


[edit on 3-8-2004 by Kozzy]

[edit on 3-8-2004 by Kozzy]

Nope if your pinned down behind something and think your going to be over run, I would toss a couple of frag grenades without sticking by head up just throw em if any one is near the will be Swiss cheese
If you don't have grenades through flash grenades or a smoke grenade.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
the military tired [sic] to make the M-16 more efficient by making it only capable of a 3 round burst instead of full automatic.

I know that the modern M-16s have been given a three round burst option on the selector, but even as far back as my training, riflemen were trained to use three round bursts for accuracy and to save ammo. Things always have a way of getting out of hand in a firefight, so I would be very disappointed if the option for full automatic fire was removed from the M-16.

Disciplined well-aimed fire is the key. As Chesty Puller once said, "You can't kill 'em if you don't hit 'em."

Most soldiers during Vietnam were drafted, not well trained, and scared. Thus more likely to "rock n' roll"

You get the same result as full auto if you pull the trigger rapidly when firing burst anyway.

Special Forces were unhappy with the burst-fire device and so another M4 was adopted, the M4A1, which differs in having the ability to fire fully-automatically, rather than only burst-fire. There had been complaints from the Army about the burst-fire device since the adoption of the M16A2, because it doesn't reset when the trigger is released if only one or two shots are fired. I'm not sure whether this change to ordinary full-auto was a good idea or not, because apparently SOCOM have been unhappy that the M4A1's barrel gets too hot and there are cook-offs when Special Forces personnel attempt to fire six or more magazines through the gun continuously on fully-automatic! The M4 is not an MP5. MP5 submachineguns can fire tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of rounds without a problem on full-auto, but 5.56mm NATO is a much higher pressure round and the M4 is a carbine and meant to be used as such, not a machinegun!

As a consequence, many M4A1s are now fitted with a heavier, thicker barrel, which has flats on the side to allow the M203 mount to fit on it. In addition, another new feature of recent M4s and M4A1s is a thicker handguard with double heat shields, although SOCOM seem to prefer the Knight's Armament RIS, or later versions, such as the RAS (although not all M4A1s are used by SOCOM):

The M4 was adopted because Spec Ops needed a lighter, more compact weapon for close up. I don't think the trigger group had much to do with it, because the 3 round burst is preferable close up. You can put 3 rounds with one pull, in an inch area.

Finally everyone is talking again *sighs with relief*

Oh and the 3 shot burst is so you can recover from the recoil and put more than one shot roughly in the area your aiming. You will still expirience recoil however, so you wont put 3 shots in an inch, infact i doubt you'll put 1 in an inch when your under fire and the adrenaline is pumping and your nerves are making you shake.

Well, # happens. Well trained soldiers should be able to hit things, thats pretty much a rule.

Originally posted by Kozzy
When pinned you can simply return fire, this works well if done right because when a force is supressing(through direct fire) it is exposed and vulnerable. You can also shift to another position, or call in support. It's all a matter of fire and maneavuer, outshoot and outscoot your enemy.
]

sounds good in theory but doesn't work in practice. The side that gets the supressive fire going on their enemy has gained 'firesuperiority' or so I'm told. Once thats in place its the other way around. They can manuever around you and bypass or attack flank or rear...you on the other had break down into individuals fighting for your lives instead of fighting as a unit.

Sure good squad leaders can pull the squads 'nuts out of the fire'....but that has every thing to do with morale and training while haveing nothing to do with 3 round burst or M whatevers.

Originally posted by Kozzy
Most soldiers during Vietnam were drafted, not well trained, and scared. Thus more likely to "rock n' roll"

You get the same result as full auto if you pull the trigger rapidly when firing burst anyway.

Those are some pretty ignorant statements, Kozzy. The men who fought the Vietnam war were the most well trained ever sent into battle. Most were not draftees, but volunteers and anyone who was not "scared" was crazy. The fear factor is exactly the reason there are medals for valor.

An M-16 can empty a 20 round magazine before the first casing hits the ground when fired from the standing position. Nobody's finger is that fast.

As has pretty much been beaten into the ground here, the whole key to squad tactics is to supress enemy movement and fire with your base of fire weapon and to destroy him by indirect fire, or by manuever. An infantry squad with 4 fireteams (which is the army way of doing things as i understand- each marine unit breaks into 3 smaller units from squad to corps) will have 4 M-249 SAWs tasked with making the enemy lay on their face behind some solid object and not ever dream of moving a muscle. In addition, there will be 12 M-16 assault rifles, 4 of which should be equiped with M-203 grenade launchers, so that while the enemy is laying on their face not dreaming of moving a muscle, the rest of the squad can either move into a good location for shooting them, or simply blow them up without looking at them (assuming that somebody can actually -aim- the darn M-203).

This requires a whole lot of ammo. The point isn't to "spray your whole magazine into the bushes without hitting anything then retreat because you're out of ammo" as a certain joke suggests. It is simply to make the fight one-sided.
The 3-round burst feature on the M-16 has no bearing here because it was not added simply to conserve ammo. It was added in large part because the M-16 was not a good base of fire weapon, and because it was prone to jamming in full auto.

I hate to point out how little you know about military hardware (or anything else for that matter) Westpoint, but the M-60 has been replaced in weapons platoons by the M240G and on vehicles by the M240B.

Finally I can only assume (which may be a mistake) that the US government will find a way of supplying our troops with ammunition (although in theory it may take an embarrassing failure and political fallout to prove the need). If somehow the government can't free up any money for this however, I suggest that all get together and hang a few politicians to free up that pay.

EDIT:
It's already been said, but I gotta just emphasize because it shocked me to hear squid say that the A1 was standard. The M-16A1 is a thing of the past for regular forces. Right before I was discharged I heard some buzz about the M-16A4 being issued at Camp Horno (a section of MCB Camp Pendleton), but in the USMC I never saw or heard of any M-16 version other than A2 being used, except for that one bit of scuttlebut about Horno (which from a post I just read, sounds like it must have been true).

PS to hell with the M-4. I can't back that up.. thats just how I feel about it.

[edit on 4-8-2004 by The Vagabond]