Posted on Oct 16, 2017
“Our next individual and squad combat weapon will come in with a 10X improvement over any...
696
8
5
3
3
0
Gen Milley gets blasted, and, IMHO, its deserved ..and that coming from a guy that served with him as G3 SGM...
“Our next individual and squad combat weapon will come in with a 10X improvement over any...
Posted from soldiersystems.netPosted in these groups: 
Small Arms
Small Arms
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 3
LTC (Join to see) Sir thanks for your feedback but the problem is twofold.
The risk already exist it’s not something in the future it’s now and fielding a new rifle even if it’s off the shelf is not something that will happen before our soldiers will be in country and needing it already.
Gen Milley has made a statement that the next rifle will have 10x the lethality.. Thats fantasy land with current or foreseeable near term tech.. So that essentially means he is doing NOTHING to combat the current threat.
What we need is what is available TODAY that is more lethal in relevance to the current threat leve today..l..Fielding a new rifle today is nothing as far as budget goes,, we could end one un workable, non producing social program or Mil contract and pay for it ten times over... And if something better comes along next year, field that weapon, and next year, and next year.
Waiting for some fantasy rifle to be designed, tested and proven to work is putting our troops more at risk today.....all from the safety of a big soft chair in DC, while the troops are in some shit hole trying to take down some guy wearing ebay body armor ..and 5.56 is just thudding on the plates (thats a sound I know and its not a good thing)
The risk already exist it’s not something in the future it’s now and fielding a new rifle even if it’s off the shelf is not something that will happen before our soldiers will be in country and needing it already.
Gen Milley has made a statement that the next rifle will have 10x the lethality.. Thats fantasy land with current or foreseeable near term tech.. So that essentially means he is doing NOTHING to combat the current threat.
What we need is what is available TODAY that is more lethal in relevance to the current threat leve today..l..Fielding a new rifle today is nothing as far as budget goes,, we could end one un workable, non producing social program or Mil contract and pay for it ten times over... And if something better comes along next year, field that weapon, and next year, and next year.
Waiting for some fantasy rifle to be designed, tested and proven to work is putting our troops more at risk today.....all from the safety of a big soft chair in DC, while the troops are in some shit hole trying to take down some guy wearing ebay body armor ..and 5.56 is just thudding on the plates (thats a sound I know and its not a good thing)
(1)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SGM Erik Marquez- Is there a current weapon already in production that you like, a particular caliber? I'm a fan of the 6.5 Creedmoor so I have a bias.
(2)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
LTC (Join to see) - Sir there are rumors a round was developed at the request of the army that has proven ballistic capability to defeat body armor our likely enemies would likely wear . Gen Milley said so in front of congress, put a new upper on the M4/M16A3 if that will work and do it NOW>
If not, find an off the shelf rifle that will chamber this "new" round and do it NOW. We can ask industry to sell us a 40 watt phased plasma rifle in 10 years when it exists.
No matter the round caliber I think its going to take a penetrator of some sort or the bullet itself to made whole from some material other than common steel or copper/lead.
And something larger than 5.56mm
The days of getting off a landing craft and what you have is what you have for the next 30 days in combat are not likely to ever return..at least not in general.. So fighting from a vehicle support, or patrol base, or resupply via airdrop or Helo if the ground fighter is limited in carried spare ammo from basic on body load of 210 now to 180, 150 I dont see it as an issue. Thats what assault packs are for, thats what vehicle resupply is for.
And if there is an operational need for a fighter to walk in to combat with more ammo because they expect to expend it, then thats an exception and you carry more, you preplan more, you plan better
If not, find an off the shelf rifle that will chamber this "new" round and do it NOW. We can ask industry to sell us a 40 watt phased plasma rifle in 10 years when it exists.
No matter the round caliber I think its going to take a penetrator of some sort or the bullet itself to made whole from some material other than common steel or copper/lead.
And something larger than 5.56mm
The days of getting off a landing craft and what you have is what you have for the next 30 days in combat are not likely to ever return..at least not in general.. So fighting from a vehicle support, or patrol base, or resupply via airdrop or Helo if the ground fighter is limited in carried spare ammo from basic on body load of 210 now to 180, 150 I dont see it as an issue. Thats what assault packs are for, thats what vehicle resupply is for.
And if there is an operational need for a fighter to walk in to combat with more ammo because they expect to expend it, then thats an exception and you carry more, you preplan more, you plan better
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SGM- if there is a risk here it will be a short term risk. Attend the SHOT show and you will see a myriad of off the shelf choices that the military can quickly choose from when the threat arises. My personal opinion on weapons and qualifications is the total # rounds allocated per Soldier per year to be 1) proficient and 2) lethal at various distances. As a Log guy we simply did not get enough CL V per our Brigade. For some reason CL V is actually managed by Senior Leaders. If instead CL V was looked at like Cav Stetsons and Stivers prints I think we would have a force that could do some serious damage at the 600m to 1k distances albeit with the right short and long range weapons.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
GEN Milley should be slammed, it is well deserved.
SGM Erik Marquez Your right, the problem is twofold. The two issues are mindset and training. The mindset problem is the most difficult one to deal with because there are a number of issues within that arena alone.
The training problem COULD be solved easily if there was not such a mindset problem. What is sad about this, this part has been proven time and time again.
LTC (Join to see) It is not the current or future fancy doo-dad that will make the individual soldier more lethal or more effective, nor will additional ammunition by itself; learning the basics and practical application of those basics will cause the soldier to be better and more lethal.
SGM Erik Marquez Your right, the problem is twofold. The two issues are mindset and training. The mindset problem is the most difficult one to deal with because there are a number of issues within that arena alone.
The training problem COULD be solved easily if there was not such a mindset problem. What is sad about this, this part has been proven time and time again.
LTC (Join to see) It is not the current or future fancy doo-dad that will make the individual soldier more lethal or more effective, nor will additional ammunition by itself; learning the basics and practical application of those basics will cause the soldier to be better and more lethal.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google