Jump to content


Photo

What Is A "battle Rifle" Or "battlefield Rifle"?


  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

#81 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 29 July 2019 - 1611 PM

LMG + DMR are real firepower of the squad, and it is easier to carry additional LMG ammo than to issue everyone 7.62x51 rifle which not a lot of troops even know hot to get most of.


  • 0

#82 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,686 posts

Posted 29 July 2019 - 2127 PM

LMG + DMR are real firepower of the squad, and it is easier to carry additional LMG ammo than to issue everyone 7.62x51 rifle which not a lot of troops even know hot to get most of.

 

Mortars and machineguns on tripods. 556 is good enough for mopping up the rest and easier to shoot. But still, Turkey decided they want the .308 for its range and power in all guns.


  • 0

#83 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 0158 AM

That is Plt (MGs) /Co (mortars) firepower. :)


  • 0

#84 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,815 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 0958 AM

If you are relying on your rifles for "firepower", you're an idiot.  Mortars, GL's, RPG's/RCL's, things that throw explosives.  MG's are to facilitate movement via suppression fire over time.  Everything else is folly.  S/F.....Ken M 


  • 0

#85 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,686 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 1054 AM

That is Plt (MGs) /Co (mortars) firepower. :)

 

Yes, but a squad has to cover about 500 meters by itself (can reach out to 800-1000, but not as reliably and only with the MG and the DMR if there is one), for longer ranges they call on machine guns and mortars. And there are are of course the small 60 mm mortars or things like fly-k.  "Overmatch" is a concept born out of hobbling rules of engagement and long distance harassing fire. 


  • 0

#86 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 1134 AM

The distance that the squad (or even platoon) has to reach out by itself is even much smaller than 500 m.

Mortars and the nowadays quite accurate arty can help out at 300 m at the latest.

 

Infantry that gets shot at 300+ m does something wrong (does not hide), period. To give your own position away to hostile observers 200+ m away is suicide if you have competent military opposition. To even only think of this is an extremely bad and incompetent habit borne out of beating up incompetents in occupied Muslim countries.

 

If you platoon leader exposes your platoon to observation by Russian infantry in battle at 300+ m distance for more than a minute or two - kill him ASAP. He's an incompetent idiot and about to get you (and himself) killed.

 

 

Besides, step out of your home or office. Look around. 200 m is very, very far away. It should be nearly impossible to see a competent opponent at that distance (he wouldn't be there if the terrain was allowing to see him at such distance despite competent fieldcraft). It's hard to hit a man at such distances in battle stress when a few seconds exposure of your own head could get you killed. Runners are very hard to hit with a rifle at such a distance even without battle stress.

 

from

https://defense-and-...bat-ranges.html

infantry+combat+ranges+graph.jpg

 

We should go for lightweight arms and munitions in light of the general infantry combat overload problem. To add range and shooting at long ranges only adds weight to be carried. That's OK for a sniper/DMR per platoon (or at most one per squad), but not for dismounted infantry in general.

 

Infantrymen who get shot at from 400+ m need to have superior(s) removed from service, period.


  • 0

#87 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,686 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 1141 AM

Infantry that gets shot at 300+ m does something wrong (does not hide),

​

 

How do you hide up in the mountains or flat desert? In recent wars it was just not possible.

 

 

I wrote 500m, becasue the effective ranges have certainly increased with the general issue of scopes. The overweight problem is mostly one of lack of mission focus. Soldiers are sent out on patrol without clear orders so they have to prepare for every eventuality instead for a specific mission. So they have to everything from ammo to the kithcensink with them just in case.


  • 0

#88 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 1151 AM

Deserts are no infantry terrain. Who sends infantry to fight in deserts???? Idiots do.

 

Mountains; simple. Stay on the reverse slope. Offensive action in mountainous terrain is extremely costly and slow against capable opposition unless you use airborne approaches.

https://defense-and-...e-problems.html

 

The overweight problem is not only about mission focus. I was unable to devise a loadout of acceptable weight even going quite radical in terms of weight savings.

https://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2018/05/ultralightweight-infantry.html You can scrape off some excesses if you omit excess Pzf3, limit the amount of water and rations and batteries carried, but you still end up at some too heavy loadout.

 

There's almost no way of going below 20 kg without neglecting something essential (drinking water, night vision equipment, comms equipment, munitions, anti-BMP firepower, helmet). 20 kg is already quite an impediment to a man's mobility; you rarely run even only 50 m distances when loaded that much.


Edited by lastdingo, 30 July 2019 - 1200 PM.

  • 0

#89 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,621 posts

Posted 30 July 2019 - 1507 PM

Deserts are no infantry terrain. Who sends infantry to fight in deserts???? Idiots do.

 

Mountains; simple. Stay on the reverse slope. Offensive action in mountainous terrain is extremely costly and slow against capable opposition unless you use airborne approaches.

https://defense-and-...e-problems.html

 

The overweight problem is not only about mission focus. I was unable to devise a loadout of acceptable weight even going quite radical in terms of weight savings.

https://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2018/05/ultralightweight-infantry.html You can scrape off some excesses if you omit excess Pzf3, limit the amount of water and rations and batteries carried, but you still end up at some too heavy loadout.

 

There's almost no way of going below 20 kg without neglecting something essential (drinking water, night vision equipment, comms equipment, munitions, anti-BMP firepower, helmet). 20 kg is already quite an impediment to a man's mobility; you rarely run even only 50 m distances when loaded that much.


Even on the civilian side of things, getting a hiking load out light enough that you can focus on enjoying the trip, while addressing the basic necessities and maintaining some semblance of risk mitigation can be challenging.  I've settled on roughly ~15 pound base weight for a 3 season setup, and it's closer to 28 pounds in the hot summer after you add water and food, and that's just the backpack.   Adding minimum fighting equipment on top of that, plus force multipliers, enablers, and risk aversion stuff piled on top,  and I'd be surprised if you don't get heat casualties waddling out to the aircraft on the pad.


 


Edited by Burncycle360, 30 July 2019 - 1508 PM.

  • 0

#90 T-44

T-44

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 582 posts

Posted 12 August 2019 - 1456 PM

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=xHUpdFh0MUE
  • 0

#91 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,520 posts

Posted 12 August 2019 - 1928 PM

https://m.youtube.co...h?v=xHUpdFh0MUE

Note how the three classic battle rifles form the lowest subgroup in this test. I was a bit gratified to see the M14 pattern at the top of the three.
  • 0