U.S. Army gets a new machine gun
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Posts: 9,198
Car Info: 05 STi
Ha, they don't do much killing with that thing. They get lucky once in a while just by spraying tons of ammo through them. IEDs do most of their work.
#47
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Participating in some Anarchy!
Posts: 15,494
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
Bullets used by British soldiers 'too small to defeat Taliban'
I remember that the M249 was a pretty good weapon; adjustable/high rate of fire, fairly accurate, easy to carry, etc.
The one issue that I recall was that they would malfunction when feeding from M16 magazines.
The 240 series was still a few years away, so we had VN era M60s.
Utter pile of feces. Would malfunction all the time, would run away after shooting 1000+/- rnds, heavy.
On a side note, my 1960's M16A1...made by HydraMatic...was much more accurate than my brand new M16A2.
A survey of more than 50 servicemen who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan concluded that the 5.56mm calibre rounds used by British soldiers 'tailed off' after 300 metres yet half of all Helmand firefights are fought between 300 and 900 metres
The one issue that I recall was that they would malfunction when feeding from M16 magazines.
The 240 series was still a few years away, so we had VN era M60s.
Utter pile of feces. Would malfunction all the time, would run away after shooting 1000+/- rnds, heavy.
On a side note, my 1960's M16A1...made by HydraMatic...was much more accurate than my brand new M16A2.
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: I gotta have more cow bell!!!!
Posts: 9,198
Car Info: 05 STi
Yeah, the 240s are even heavier than M60s though. Our unit uses a variant of the Stoner LMG made my KAC instead of the SAW. I love it but I refuse to carry it because I'm left handed and I eat brass from time to time with it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
lojasmo
Teh Politics Forum
11
12-24-2005 06:24 PM