|
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Army threatens grunts who purchase their own body armor.
11 comments:
-
Anonymous said...
-
FWIW, I heard thru some military people that guys were going out of their way to obtain older M14 carbines & ammo when they got sent to Iraq the 1st time.
-
1/15/06, 1:36 PM
-
Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
M14 carbines in Iraq??? Did you mean Nam?
-
1/15/06, 1:44 PM
-
Jake said...
-
Their commander must be a martinet. A sergeant said that many of the items that soldiers bought for themselves in Afaganistan. became standard issue to the soldiers in Iraq.
The army bought those items from distributors just as Sears would. So I think the army is pretty quick to adopt new things that are not army issue. -
1/15/06, 2:14 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Yeah, I heard it thru the grapevine but the story was they wanted the bigger .762 (knockdown) power.
-
1/15/06, 2:39 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Rumors flourish in a hotbed of ignorance. Nobody killed on active duty in any way, shape, or form is denied their SGLI benefit. Oh yes I know there is an exclusion for someone found not acting, "In the line of duty", but that doesn't apply in cases like this. In fact it almost never applys.
As for the efficacy of Dragonskin, I know nothing, but the stuff we issue is pretty damned good. Contracting rules have changed a lot in recent years, and its pretty simple to get the commercial off the shelf stuff out to the tip of the spear, but nothing happens overnight.
Casca -
1/15/06, 4:06 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
OK, I've read the Dragonskin stuff. If it's true, this stuff will become the new gold standard.
Casca -
1/15/06, 4:29 PM
-
Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
Send your kis some Casca
-
1/15/06, 5:49 PM
-
Forceleader999 said...
-
I think Vonster is actually correct, Rog. I'm not sure if it was the carbine or the full length rifle, but troopers headed for the 'Stan and Iraq definitely wanted the M-14. As Micheal Yon has pointed out time and again, the M-16 and derivatives are woefully underpowered.
For a while, the XM-8 was going to be chambered in either 6.5 or 6.8, either of which offer almost the same knockdown as the 7.62, with very little more recoil than the (spit!) 5.56. Dunno how that one turned out. -
1/15/06, 6:53 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Let me be vague: I guy I know who went to the... Mesopotamian Theater, heard before he left that for those in... his line of work, that 7.62-anything with a folding stock was the shit. Before you flame me please note that this was contingent on the experience of the... unit that they were replacing. YMMV. Also, related to the article, such deviations from "standard-issue" was not frowned upon.
-
1/15/06, 10:06 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
iirc, one of the "intended benefits" of the smaller cal was the old addage that "wounded soldiers require two to care for".
But we are fighting a different war - against a different enemy. Just as our tactics have changed, so should - me thinks - our weapons. We need the ability to prevent a suicide bomber from pressing the trigger with as few shots as possible.
(Geeze this word verification kills me. Get this one: fcjdjwcq - the second j is smashed up against the d.... I know it's a necessary evil. But I can't stop bitching about it.... :) ) -
1/15/06, 11:53 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Rog, I shall follow the dictum taught in my youth, and shoot the closest indian. He is not yet in need of $6k worth of body armor since he still has to finish The Basic School, and an MOS follow-on school, then we'll need to consider exactly how much his sorry ass is worth. Just kidding, I'd spend it on him, but I doubt that I'd drop that kind of cash on myself. Besides, it's not good form for officers to be wearing that sort of gear when the snuffies don't have it.
Casca -
1/16/06, 1:32 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)