Jump to content


Photo

Video: M27 Critique By Former Marine User


  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#1 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,480 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 29 December 2017 - 1914 PM

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=39Gpf92W1xE

Edited by shep854, 29 December 2017 - 1920 PM.

  • 0

#2 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,322 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 December 2017 - 2109 PM

"Tradition of resisting change" is believable in the sense that they're young and probably not aware that it's been done before, because if they were it would instead simply have been described as a desire not to step backwards and repeat old mistakes ;)

Of course some said switching to the 249 was a step backwards, so I guess it just depends on their philosophy of use.  Thanks for the link


  • 0

#3 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,651 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 29 December 2017 - 2133 PM

Resisting change is alive and well right here on TN. The commercial market tends to have a much compressed decision cycle, mainly because the end user is also the decision maker. A good example is the TangoDown bipod which was the hot new thing back way back when. I bought one, it lasted one week. There were good points to it but it was literally in pieces after a few days of durability testing.


  • 0

#4 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,198 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 29 December 2017 - 2256 PM

Simon, it's just great that we have someone of your unrivalled wisdom and experience to enable us to overcome change and embrace new concepts. I can only imagine what immense rigours you must have put that bipod through in one week of your non-stop operator/warfighter lifestyle. 


  • 0

#5 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,651 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 29 December 2017 - 2318 PM

I did not. It was given to some warfighters working up who were looking for an alternative to the Harris. They broke it and gave me back the pieces. It was instructive and was sent back to TangoDown. Some improvements were made. I merely plunked out the money to fast track the process.

No doubt you would do the same and have.
  • 0

#6 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,541 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 30 December 2017 - 0533 AM

At the end of every military rifle is a commercial manufacturer and most of those have upgrades coming out all the time and have improved accessories coming out quickly, but as the video showed this does not help the end user a lot, because in the end it depends on how you use the weapon. If you use the weapon carefully and more like a DMR or of you use it like a M240G and crash it in the dirt with full force makes a lot of difference for the weapons system. In the commercial market buyers can modify their weapons to their needs, but that does not work for the military as it would mean a logistical nightmare with each weapon being customs configured.

 

The problem with weapons i always more on organisational problem than a technical problem, especially if you consider that most soldiers are no gun enthusiasts. Special Forces who often work with an arms room concept seem to have generally less problems, as they pick the weapon to suit the mission an option not available to the normal grunt. 


Edited by seahawk, 30 December 2017 - 0613 AM.

  • 0

#7 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,480 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 30 December 2017 - 0832 AM

I wasn't surprised that the Grip-Pod failed. I can't help but believe that a LOT of direct purchases were made for the cool factor rather than actual field utility.
  • 0

#8 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,651 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 30 December 2017 - 1239 PM

The GripPod sold in large quantities to the UK forces as part of their L85A2 . That was a particularly interesting case of commercial accessories taking the place of government furnished equipment, with almost all of it coming from US commercial suppliers. Daniel Defence provided the rail forearm. Magpul did the magazine. Even the optic mounts were rigged up to enable replacement of SUSAT with Trijicon ACOGs. If it had depended on UK government furnished equipment, there would be nothing.


  • 0

#9 bd1

bd1

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:estonia

Posted 30 December 2017 - 1413 PM

i can hardly imagine any rifle accesory being  decisive in any war. 


  • 0

#10 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,651 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 30 December 2017 - 1936 PM

Optics.
  • 0

#11 bd1

bd1

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:estonia

Posted 31 December 2017 - 0732 AM

´´decisive´´


  • 0

#12 Olof Larsson

Olof Larsson

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,271 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 31 December 2017 - 1002 AM

´´decisive´´

 

The closest one, that I can come up with, was the bayonette charge by the 20th Maine, on the second day at Gettysburg.

 

And Gaddafi was sodomized with a bayonette. But I guess, that after being bombed by NATO jets and UAV.s, being fragged by his own men and shot multiple times, the bayonette was not decisive to even his death, let alone the outcome of the war.


  • 0

#13 CaptLuke

CaptLuke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,137 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco, CA, USA

Posted 31 December 2017 - 1352 PM

Interesting video, thanks.

 

One thing that confuses me is the comment about the SAW being very inaccurate at 4-600 meters, which echos a criticism that Tony Williams brought up, the UK also reporting a very short effect range for the M249 in A-stan (even shorter IIRC).

 

This makes no sense to me, especially with a relatively heavy weapon like the SAW.  Does anyone know if this is some particular problem with the Minimi and whether there are similar criticisms of the Negev, MG4, or other 5.56mm LMG?


  • 0

#14 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,440 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 31 December 2017 - 2231 PM

i can hardly imagine any rifle accesory being  decisive in any war. 

Charger loading? 

Magazines? 

Poor vs excellent sights? 

Socket Bayonets vs Plug Bayonets? 


Edited by rmgill, 31 December 2017 - 2232 PM.

  • 0

#15 toysoldier

toysoldier

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,736 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Miami is a beatiful city
  • Interests:Sci-fi, history, gameplay

Posted 31 December 2017 - 2334 PM

i can hardly imagine any rifle accesory being  decisive in any war. 

 

Good point. However at this point its mostly about having a COIN and advisory "thing" with as little casualties as possible, and correct me if i am wrong but rifle accessories kinda have a greater effect than usual.


  • 0

#16 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,651 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 01 January 2018 - 0051 AM

I guess that's why all major militaries are running iron sighted, slick rifles and disposing of their optics and suppressors. These accessories are the force multipliers to the infantry, which for many militaries is a carefully husbanded resource that is difficult to replace.

 

Most have chosen the optic as best return on investment since it gives infantrymen much more reach for detecting, identifying and engaging targets. Optics not only increase reach and precision of fire, they also reduce training burdens. Yes, you do teach iron sight usage but almost all BUIS is worked around a battlesight zero and there really isn't dialing range taught anymore.

 

Suppressors are universal in SF because they offer so many benefits for not so much weight. Eliminating muzzle flash, significantly reducing recoil and audio signature means you are much harder to localize after you start firing. If they can't find you, they cannot take you under effective aimed fire. The resistance to suppressors for the infantry is based on pure ignorance. 

 

Clip on NightVision/Thermals. That forward top rail today is meant for an in-line night vision device that lets you use your optical sight. This means your reticule and zero do not change. A helmet mounted NOD cannot be used to aim with any magnified optic.

 

Any one of these accessories is a decisive advantage over an enemy that does not have it. If every time my infantry engages the enemy and wipes them out without been spotted or localized for return fire, the enemy is going to have a severe morale problem long before he runs out of infantry.


Edited by Simon Tan, 01 January 2018 - 0116 AM.

  • 0

#17 bd1

bd1

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,963 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:estonia

Posted 01 January 2018 - 0647 AM

small wars stuff. what about mortars, artillery,anything exploding,  the stuff that kills most?

 

the mere fact that stuff like rifle thermal imagers are even talking points shows how unserious western (modern) society is about war. 

IMHO


  • 0

#18 toysoldier

toysoldier

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,736 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Miami is a beatiful city
  • Interests:Sci-fi, history, gameplay

Posted 02 January 2018 - 0157 AM

small wars stuff. what about mortars, artillery,anything exploding,  the stuff that kills most?
 
the mere fact that stuff like rifle thermal imagers are even talking points shows how unserious western (modern) society is about war. 
IMHO


You are only too right.
  • 0

#19 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,541 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The land where time stands still

Posted 02 January 2018 - 1052 AM

Especially when you might compare a government provided sight to a commercial sight with similar functions. Or a government supplied rail system with an after market one.


  • 0

#20 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,627 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 02 January 2018 - 1255 PM

Simon, it's just great that we have someone of your unrivalled wisdom and experience to enable us to overcome change and embrace new concepts. I can only imagine what immense rigours you must have put that bipod through in one week of your non-stop operator/warfighter lifestyle. 

 

the tango down bipod grip's legs are known to break and are not a really good platform to shoot off of. The leg spread ia too narrow to provide stability.  Haven't broken any myself, but it is nott too stable to shoot off of and more like an improvised rest. You can just use a regular fore grip on the ground and get pretty much the same support. One of those things that seemed like a good idea.

 

edit: they are useful for parking your rifle on the ground though.


Edited by Panzermann, 02 January 2018 - 1305 PM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users