Political Crossfire Forums

[Green]

There has not been a significant improvement in small arms technology since the last World War. It is amazing how long it took for many guns to become obsolete. Some weapons that are still in use have been around since what feels to be forever.

These are some very old weapons still in use-

Lee-Enfield- 1907- This weapon was derived from a mechanically similar Black Powder rifle called the Lee-Metford made in 1888. It is used by
Commonwealth countries by law enforcement and is used in the Middle East.



Colt-45-Everybody knows about this powerful pistol.



Ak- 47 - much better than the M-16. It is reliable, and powerful. US soldiers usually opt for an Ak 47 compared to their M-16s. It is still massively used.



Please put posts about other long ago invented weapons that are still in use. [/img]

[Demonic Spoon]

mmm...the Ak-47 is good, but I wouldn't say it's clearly BETTER than the m-16. The AK-47 has more stopping power and is full automatic. However, the AK-47 has an effective range of 300 meters, whereas the M-16 has an effective range of about 460 meters. Since most combat is outside (The M-4 carbine is used for close combat), this is a HUGE advantage, and fully automatic fire is nigh useless at longer ranges.

I know the AK-47 was far more reliable than the M16A1, but the M16A2 was made to be far more reliable as well, so they are probably roughly similar.


Although I still say the AK-47 is far superior, not beacuse of its use, but the fact that it's comparable to the M-16 A2, a relatively new rifle, whereas it was made in 1947. Plus, the AK-47 is cheap as hell.

[bob.appleyard]

Didn't know US soldiers preferred AK47s, that is intersting.

[Jehan]

bob.appleyard wrote: Didn't know US soldiers preferred AK47s, that is intersting.

Did you know that Vietnamese soldiers would use the M16 whenever they could get their paws on it?

[Altayblahm]

Jehan wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: Didn't know US soldiers preferred AK47s, that is intersting.

Did you know that Vietnamese soldiers would use the M16 whenever they could get their paws on it?

Never knew that.

[bob.appleyard]

Jehan wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: Didn't know US soldiers preferred AK47s, that is intersting.

Did you know that Vietnamese soldiers would use the M16 whenever they could get their paws on it?

That's the thing I can learn for today!

[Nico]

Jehan wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: Didn't know US soldiers preferred AK47s, that is intersting.

Did you know that Vietnamese soldiers would use the M16 whenever they could get their paws on it?

Because the ammo was widely available and the firing sound signature didn't give them away as enemy forces quite so quickly? :P

I was trained with the A1 and it worked well when clean, buit was a complete dog when the going got filthy. Nothing like doing IAs when the pressure is on :lol: Hence the cleaning regimen was incredibly strict. The AK was good in high dirt contitions.
The A2 was nice but give me a steyr AUG any day :wink:

[Green]

Nico wrote: Jehan wrote: bob.appleyard wrote: Didn't know US soldiers preferred AK47s, that is intersting.

Did you know that Vietnamese soldiers would use the M16 whenever they could get their paws on it?

Because the ammo was widely available and the firing sound signature didn't give them away as enemy forces quite so quickly? :P

I was trained with the A1 and it worked well when clean, buit was a complete dog when the going got filthy. Nothing like doing IAs when the pressure is on :lol: Hence the cleaning regimen was incredibly strict. The AK was good in high dirt contitions.
The A2 was nice but give me a steyr AUG any day :wink:

So, It would be a good idea to use an AK- 47 in close range urban combat and an M- 16 in ranged combat. Just don't get the m- 16 dirty. The thing that is cool about the M-16 is that is was made in 1947 instead of the seventies.

[Rebiu]

The M16 has been around since the 60s.
The M14 is still issued as the M25 sniper rifle and is often used in mountain fighting.

The AK-47 was developed by the Russians after facing large numbers of German Sturmgewehr MP 44. The US did not face large numbers of Germans armed with this weapon so they used the semiautomatic M14. When they faced the AK 47 in large numbers they were badly outgunned they learned the lessons the Russians had learned in WWII. The AK 47 with its less powerful bullet was fully automatic and could be controlled unlike a full automatic M14. The M16 was rushed to the troops. It did have some jamming issues in the beginning but it is superior to the AK 47 in most important respects. The lighter M16 round is more lethal than the heavier slower AK 47 round. The lighter bullet and lighter gun allow much more ammunition to be carried.

[Rebiu]

The Gurkhas of Nepal have used this weapon in modern warfare as foreign soldiers in the British military.

It is called a Kukri and is actualy a common agricultural implement that also makes an effective weapon.

[blitz]

These are rocks, used by cavemen in times when murder was commonly practiced, and yes they are still used today in the middle east to kill criminals who have been sentanced to death.

[cap'n queasy]

Demonic Spoon wrote: mmm...the Ak-47 is good, but I wouldn't say it's clearly BETTER than the m-16. The AK-47 has more stopping power and is full automatic. However, the AK-47 has an effective range of 300 meters, whereas the M-16 has an effective range of about 460 meters. Since most combat is outside (The M-4 carbine is used for close combat), this is a HUGE advantage, and fully automatic fire is nigh useless at longer ranges.

I know the AK-47 was far more reliable than the M16A1, but the M16A2 was made to be far more reliable as well, so they are probably roughly similar.


Although I still say the AK-47 is far superior, not beacuse of its use, but the fact that it's comparable to the M-16 A2, a relatively new rifle, whereas it was made in 1947. Plus, the AK-47 is cheap as hell.

There was an incident near my house a feww years back.. Some teen agers stole an AK-47 from a house and ended up throwing it in a nearby creek. Some guy found it five years later and grabbed the barrel to pull it out of the creek and the gun discharged, killing him. It still fired after five years submerged in water.

The M-16 is cooled by a groove in the barrel and if this gets anything in it it will over heat and jam the weapon.

That is why the AK is a better weapon. Also the majority of ammunition in the world is 7.62 so captured ammo can be used. Probably this is why the US military chose a weapon that fires a different round. So our ammo cannot be used if captured.

[cap'n queasy]

Rebiu wrote: The Gurkhas of Nepal have used this weapon in modern warfare as foreign soldiers in the British military.

It is called a Kukri and is actualy a common agricultural implement that also makes an effective weapon.

I'd like to have one of those. :lol:

[Rebiu]

The M2 browning 50 cal Machine gun was first used in 1920s and is still the primary heavy machine gun of US and NATO militaries.

It was originally designed as and antiaircraft weapon. Effective range is 1.2 miles but can hit targets as far as 4 miles.

It is used from a tripod, light vehicle mount, on tanks, ships and aircraft. Most US WWII fighters used multiple 50s mounted in the nose or wings.

In Vietnam M2 were sometimes mounted with scopes and used as a sniper weapon.

[cap'n queasy]

I'd hate to get hit with one of those. :lol:

[Rebiu]

cap'n queasy wrote: There was an incident near my house a feww years back.. Some teen agers stole an AK-47 from a house and ended up throwing it in a nearby creek. Some guy found it five years later and grabbed the barrel to pull it out of the creek and the gun discharged, killing him. It still fired after five years submerged in water. That is true. The AK 47 pays a price for reliability in weight and accuracy. IF you want a weapon to dip in mud before you fire then It is better. If you want to carry twice the ammo then it is not better. cap'n queasy wrote: The M-16 is cooled by a groove in the barrel and if this gets anything in it it will over heat and jam the weapon. Jamming is not a problem if you keep the weapon clean. The AK 47 is still an inaccurate heavy pig with an inferior bullet profile when it is clean or dirty. cap'n queasy wrote:

That is why the AK is a better weapon. Also the majority of ammunition in the world is 7.62 so captured ammo can be used. Probably this is why the US military chose a weapon that fires a different round. So our ammo cannot be used if captured. That is an interesting perspective. Captured ammunition often includes sabotaged bullets and therefore usable if that is all you have but never a good choice.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Jamming is not a problem if you keep the weapon clean.

Keeping a weapon clean in the field under fire can be problematic at times. Often times the trooper is literally covered with mud. And so is his weapon.

[Bobicito]

50 caliber sniper rifle can pick off someone a mile away and still have enough power to blow his brains out. Ouch time.

[Nico]

cap'n queasy wrote:
There was an incident near my house a feww years back.. Some teen agers stole an AK-47 from a house and ended up throwing it in a nearby creek. Some guy found it five years later and grabbed the barrel to pull it out of the creek and the gun discharged, killing him. It still fired after five years submerged in water.

The M-16 is cooled by a groove in the barrel and if this gets anything in it it will over heat and jam the weapon.


Most stoppages I experienced were due to the bolt lugs not engaging fully, due to contamination. the bolt assist will serve you most of the time but if this didn't work then doing a totally unprofessional IA of leaving the mag in [so the action would move forward without the bolt group release having to be used] and manually cycling the action as quick as your shaking hands and state of panic would allow usually succeeded after about three rounds through. Change out the mag after it's empty. It's still better having the extra 5 seconds and being 3 rounds short than doing your clear-weapon/check chamber/mag on/release/check aim/attempt fire/check IA like an automaton on the range. At least you are back in charge :lol:
Overheating due to barrel cooling contamination was something I never saw. You would have to pack a load of dirt under the gaurds I think. I guess it could happen if the space got filled with mud or something. There were no cooling fins on the A1 barrel if i recall, and the A2 used a heavier barrel.

Quote:
That is why the AK is a better weapon. Also the majority of ammunition in the world is 7.62 so captured ammo can be used. Probably this is why the US military chose a weapon that fires a different round. So our ammo cannot be used if captured.

the 7.62 that the russians used would not chamber in a NATO weapon as far as I know. It's a bit shorter [39mm or so versus 51mm].

I am in 2 minds about 5.56mm. I think it's too light. I think a 6.5 mm round would be ideal. 7.62 NATO is a bit heavy at section level. A few days lugging a GPMG is enough to change even a die-hard's mind :) The theory of wounding with intent to tie up resources is a little worse for a grunt than the shooting to put on the ground policy IMO. Wounded guys can fire back. :P

[Rebiu]

cap'n queasy wrote: Keeping a weapon clean in the field under fire can be problematic at times. Often times the trooper is literally covered with mud. And so is his weapon. I understand your perspective. I assume the battlefield environment can be dirty enough to make this a primary consideration. The extra weight would be less of an issue is the troops do not have to walk much also. The common battlefield ranges and what kind of cover the enemy uses can alter what type of bullet is appropriate.