Posted on Oct 27, 2015
US + NATO forces unprepared to face Russia in small arms conflict?
7.64K
32
26
2
2
0
From Sputnik News:
Few countries on the planet could hope to dominate the US in tank, air or naval warfare but US soldiers would be easily outgunned in a fire fight, military analyst Jim Schatz wrote in his article for National Defense.
"Yet every bad actor with an AK-47 takes on US and NATO ground forces in a small arms fight. We are no longer suitably armed to prevent it," he wrote. "The current US Army small arms development and acquisition system is dysfunctional and virtually unworkable, even for those within the system."
The problem became visible after the Battle of Wanat in 2008 at Combat Outpost Kahler in Afghanistan. Nine soldiers of the 173rd Brigade Combat Team were killed and 27 others were injured. Their weapons, including M249 machine guns, Mk 19 grenade launchers and M4 carbines, stopped firing due to overheating.
The flaws of the M4 carbine have been well known to military analysts. For example, tests in 1990 and a report by US Special Operations Command in 2001 proved its numerous shortcomings. However, that was ignored by lawmakers as well as by military command.
Billions of dollars are spent to develop high-tech weapons that are never used in modern warfare while the issue of small arms has never been tackled, according to the author.
Small arms are the most deployed weapon systems in the arsenal of the US military, but the eight most numerous conventional weapons in the army were developed over 35 years ago, and have never been upgraded.
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20151026/ [login to see] /us-army-capability-ak-47.html#ixzz3pmU4RdxL
Few countries on the planet could hope to dominate the US in tank, air or naval warfare but US soldiers would be easily outgunned in a fire fight, military analyst Jim Schatz wrote in his article for National Defense.
"Yet every bad actor with an AK-47 takes on US and NATO ground forces in a small arms fight. We are no longer suitably armed to prevent it," he wrote. "The current US Army small arms development and acquisition system is dysfunctional and virtually unworkable, even for those within the system."
The problem became visible after the Battle of Wanat in 2008 at Combat Outpost Kahler in Afghanistan. Nine soldiers of the 173rd Brigade Combat Team were killed and 27 others were injured. Their weapons, including M249 machine guns, Mk 19 grenade launchers and M4 carbines, stopped firing due to overheating.
The flaws of the M4 carbine have been well known to military analysts. For example, tests in 1990 and a report by US Special Operations Command in 2001 proved its numerous shortcomings. However, that was ignored by lawmakers as well as by military command.
Billions of dollars are spent to develop high-tech weapons that are never used in modern warfare while the issue of small arms has never been tackled, according to the author.
Small arms are the most deployed weapon systems in the arsenal of the US military, but the eight most numerous conventional weapons in the army were developed over 35 years ago, and have never been upgraded.
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20151026/ [login to see] /us-army-capability-ak-47.html#ixzz3pmU4RdxL
Russia
Small Arms
Conflict
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 8
8
8
0
Give me 10 men, M4s, 210 rounds per Soldier and a competent position and I will decisively defeat any enemy element with 3x the men and armed with AKs.
We would put effective aimed shots on them at 3-400 meters, while they would be expending ammunition uselessly until they were at least within 150 meters.
It is more than a gun that determines the winner of a small-arms fight. It is volume and accuracy of fire, the steel will and training of the rifleman, and the use of terrain to gain positional advantage. I like my chances with the equipment and men we have.
Ask the Taliban that were at Wanat how many men they lost, despite positional advantage and surprise. It was a hell of lot more than nine, mostly because the men at COP Kahler had some big brass ones.
The M4/16 family of weapons could be better, to be sure. But they are accurate and plenty lethal. Our crew served weapons are the equal of any.
We would put effective aimed shots on them at 3-400 meters, while they would be expending ammunition uselessly until they were at least within 150 meters.
It is more than a gun that determines the winner of a small-arms fight. It is volume and accuracy of fire, the steel will and training of the rifleman, and the use of terrain to gain positional advantage. I like my chances with the equipment and men we have.
Ask the Taliban that were at Wanat how many men they lost, despite positional advantage and surprise. It was a hell of lot more than nine, mostly because the men at COP Kahler had some big brass ones.
The M4/16 family of weapons could be better, to be sure. But they are accurate and plenty lethal. Our crew served weapons are the equal of any.
(8)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Well 1st Sgt, unfortunately for us "pawns" I was lucky to have M4/203 and 240B, plus 3 magazines of 9mm (yep just magazines, no sidearm) given to me by other Russian in US Army (he was combat medic from the National Guard unit we relieved in Ramadi. He also gave me several mini bottles of Russian Standard, but lets say they disappeared in unfortunate boating accident and no I did not get to drink any of them.) Obviously a lot of soldiers unfortunately do not get side arms as they should. Practice hadn't changed of giving 9 mills to officers and medics first.
Jozef Morávek
i disagree becouse in modern combat you usualli fight at 100-200 meters (snipers not mentioned) and with ak74 you can hit soldier with no problem at 350 meters and i try to watch some videos from warleaks you will see that real combat is not cod you will shot bushes and grass most of time becouse you think that there is enemy and next thing dont compare m16 with ak47 compare m16 to ak74 they are much closer with age
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
Jozef Morávek - You may disagree, that's fine.
I was just at the range this week, and I am pleased to report that I've still got it. Didn't miss a target on the 240B (and turned in 80ish rounds I didn't need to do so) and shot 35 with the M16.
I realize pop-ups aren't men on the approach, but if the damn Russians come over the berm, my troops and I will seriously jack them up. Men on the move can't produce accurate fire until they are damn close, regardless of weapons systems.
The friggin' Russians can't even beat the Ukrainians for Christ's sake.
Good luck Ivan. You better hope you are outside my range stakes.
I was just at the range this week, and I am pleased to report that I've still got it. Didn't miss a target on the 240B (and turned in 80ish rounds I didn't need to do so) and shot 35 with the M16.
I realize pop-ups aren't men on the approach, but if the damn Russians come over the berm, my troops and I will seriously jack them up. Men on the move can't produce accurate fire until they are damn close, regardless of weapons systems.
The friggin' Russians can't even beat the Ukrainians for Christ's sake.
Good luck Ivan. You better hope you are outside my range stakes.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Does this mean we're finally going to be issued laser rifles?
All kidding aside, yeah. Anyone who's ever had to deal with a double-feed or a jam in their M16 at a critical moment will heartily agree that there could be some changes. Although I do love those perpetually dirty bastards. Even got a tattoo of one.
All kidding aside, yeah. Anyone who's ever had to deal with a double-feed or a jam in their M16 at a critical moment will heartily agree that there could be some changes. Although I do love those perpetually dirty bastards. Even got a tattoo of one.
(4)
(0)
2
2
0
I think we would dominate them as our weapons are better than thiers. Granted the AK-74M is a very good weapon that is very effective in the close in flight, the current versions of the M16 family are just as good. Our all volunteer force is more leadership centric than the current Russian Army and we are better trained and have current operation experience that the Russians are lacking.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google