US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5
#59
Firepower isn't measured in weapons per man, or caliber per man. It is measured in volume of fire per time, plus effects.

A guy with a SAW has way more firepower than a guy with an M4, which is why our SAWs were at least 50% of the firepower of the Rifle Squad, carried by 2 men. It all makes sense when you fire and maneuver with them and see for yourself.

Our priorities of work, positions, seniority, experience, maintenance, and training were heavily focused on the belt-fed weapons in every single Infantry line platoon I was in.

M4s are for cleaning up the mess after we rake an objective over with echelons of fire from organic and non-organic indirect fires, followed by 7.62 belt-fed weapons, then SAWs, AT4s, and 203s.

Amongst the rubble, Riflemen and their Team Leaders will pull enemy bodies from the dust, while SAW and M240 gunners pull security on blocking positions overmatching avenues of approach.

If some tard thinks my riflemen should be doing EPW and EKIA searches with 7.62 NATO or .260 Rem rifles, they need to come see me.

We can let them search the bodies while I put a new Private behind a .260 Rem in the prone, covering him in case of grenade or SIED vest.

Then we can go over to the shoot house and talk with range control about the walls, then have an operational test and evaluation Platoon conduct live fire drills with .260 Remington or 7.62 NATO carbines in the house.

I'll stand outside and chuckle.
NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

www.AR15buildbox.com
Reply


Messages In This Thread
US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5 - by LRRPF52 - 04-26-2017, 10:36 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)