Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ I spoke to an old vet about M14 versus M16A1

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 3 2007, 01:43 AM

Yesterday I sat at a bar getting drunk with this skinny elderly fellow who used to be in the Army in 1962. He knows that I like history so he started telling me about the P38 can opener. Then, I had a flash of inspiration and asked him about M14s. Apparently he'd had the chance to operate M1s, M14s, and M16A1s.

"Everything I've read on the internet says that the M14 had excessive muzzle climb when fired in full auto. Was that true in your experience?"

He replied, "No, it was very easy to control in full auto! The M16, that was hard to control in full auto! You'd fire it and it would jerk upwards much harder than the M14. They they did something with it and instead of jerking upwards it would jerk to the right. Then they did something more and it was jerking to the left!"

This was interesting because, well, everything on the internet tells you the M14 was fiercely difficult to control on full auto. Also, the old M16A1s must have been really terrible if they were harder to control in 5.56 than M14s in 7.62. This tidbit was particularly interesting to me because someone who was in the Army more recently said that you could hold a M16A2 against your testicles and fire it and get nothing more than a pleasant vibration. The A2 must be a lot better behaved than the old A1s.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 3 2007, 02:03 AM

The testicle comment is a slight exaggeration. M16A2s are different than A1s in that they only fire burst fire(3 round burst per trigger pull), not full auto. They also implemented a brass deflector to prevent ejected shell casings from flinging themselves down your collar in the prone quite so much. They also use circular hand guards, as opposed to triangular hand guards. There may have been some internal reworkings, but I'm not aware of what precisely those changes may have been.

He may have just felt that M14s were more controllable due to more familiarity with the weapon. Regardless, all of my training on any automatic firearm has been to use short controlled bursts. The only point of laying on the trigger is to convince folks to keep there head down.

Posted by: Austere Emancipator Mar 3 2007, 02:05 AM

Fuck. Mozilla ate my reply. Another run minus all the hard numbers.

Far bigger bullets and more propellant together with a stock well below the barrel, instead of being in line with it like on the M16 rifles, mean the M14 recoils more and force is directed more upwards, ceteris paribus. This person was most likely more comfortable with the M14 to such a degree that he felt more in control of the M14 anyway.

[Edit]The M16A2 is meant to fire 62gr bullets at 3025fps (M855) as opposed to 56gr bullets at 3250fps (M193), and the weapon is 1.4lbs heavier. This makes for about 20% less recoil energy, although the recoil impulse remains roughly the same. That might be too small an effect to be noticed by most shooters, but if (and I have no particular reason to think this is so) there is a trend towards thinking the M16A2 has less recoil than the M16A1, this might be part of the explanation.

The 3-round burst limiter mentioned by Crakkerjakk above would of course also play a role in people's perceptions of the recoil.[/Edit]

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 3 2007, 11:36 AM

The M16 also has a spring inside the stock that the bolt retracts against after firing, when it chambers the next round, after being driven backwards by the expanding gas from the powder. This is the main reason for the light recoil of a M16. It really doesn't have a lot more kick than a 22. A little bit more, but not much. Most folks I know could shoot one all day, unlike my 30-06 which I have trouble putting more than two boxes(40 rounds) of ammo through in a day. I've personally gone through...250 rounds on a m16 in one day. At least. I think we did more at coach's course, but it was a while back. I don't think the M14 has this, given it's wood stock and older tech.

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 3 2007, 05:41 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

The M16 also has a spring inside the stock that the bolt retracts against after firing, when it chambers the next round, after being driven backwards by the expanding gas from the powder.

First time I fired one, I heard the spring go back inside the stock (which is right next to your ear if you have proper cheek weld) and got this weird look on my face. The coach sitting next to me rolls his eyes and says:

"Yeah its supposed to do that. Dumb ass recruits"

Here I thought I had broken my rifle LOL

Posted by: Large Mike Mar 3 2007, 06:39 PM

I use the Canadian C7A2, which is essentially an M16 with a retractable stock and the ability to fire full auto, rather than in bursts, and I gotta tell you, after about 4 shots, it actually does get pretty hard to control.

Although that's not my problem. Machine gunners do it defilade.

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 3 2007, 08:10 PM

QUOTE (Large Mike)

I use the Canadian C7A2,

Do they still issue out those sweet Elcan scopes for those? I did a joint op with some Canadians on one occaision and we has some optics lust for those things.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 3 2007, 08:42 PM

Wierdest thing about firing the M16 is the slight "sproing" noise you can hear when you have your cheek against the butstock. Can actually hear the spring inside, so it's like, "Bam-sproing, Bam-sproing."

Posted by: Butterblume Mar 3 2007, 10:10 PM

I know several people who have a permanent hearing impairment from firing the G3 without earplugs.

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 3 2007, 11:57 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

"Bam-sproing, Bam-sproing."

Ahh the memories that noise brings up!

Posted by: Thane36425 Mar 4 2007, 12:38 AM

QUOTE (Large Mike)

That was the German WWII philosophy too. The rifle squad was a machine gun with infantry support. The MG would lay down volume fire while the riflemen took precise shots. The US moved away from that during Vietnam partly due to the infantry having many conscripts and not so much money for training. So, the M16 came along with its light ammo so the troops could just spray and pray. There's more to it than just that, of course, some politicans and BS.

We do seem to be going back more toward the German ideal though. Troops are better trained marksmen and have far better sighting systems. This has led to the renewal of the argument about a more powerful bullet since the troops can shoot more accurately.

A few years ago, I read a story about a new, 7.62 x 51 rifle like the M14 that was balanced to produce very little muzzle climb. It was supposed to be very controllable and reasonably light. That info is bound to be on the net somewhere.

Posted by: mfb Mar 4 2007, 06:30 AM

QUOTE (Butterblume @ Mar 3 2007, 05:10 PM)

I know several people who have a permanent hearing impairment from firing the G3 without earplugs.

most professional soldiers have greater or lesser amounts of hearing loss. almost all of my drill sergeants had a medical profile for it (basically in order to collect disability when they got out). i went to the range without earplugs--once. i like working ears.

QUOTE (Thane36425)

We do seem to be going back more toward the German ideal though. Troops are better trained marksmen and have far better sighting systems. This has led to the renewal of the argument about a more powerful bullet since the troops can shoot more accurately.

the model that's popping up more and more in irregular armies is 3-4 riflemen protecting one guy with an anti-armor weapon. they all pop out of their spider-holes when a convoy goes by, lay down some suppressive fire with the rifles, and loose the anti-armor weapons to blow up the vehicles. then they all scatter. works really well, apparently.

Posted by: warrior_allanon Mar 4 2007, 09:32 AM

i can give explanation on why the A1 your friend was talking about would go one way and then the other after it was fiddled with. The Original A1's the muzzle break was screwed on and though it wasnt supposed to be adjustable, was. Thus, if the break had its center opening pointing to the left the rifle would jerk right and vice versa as well as up for down and so on. The M14 on the other hand its muzzle break was made with the barrel so it didnt turn giving the same problem

Posted by: Butterblume Mar 4 2007, 09:33 AM

The War Nerd agrees (http://www.exile.ru/2004-April-29/war_nerd.html)

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 5 2007, 12:36 AM

QUOTE (Large Mike)

It's comical how Jagged Alliance 2 decided to make the C7 mysteriously a lot better than the Colt Commando, thus displaying the hideous ravages of that savage and militaristic Canadian nationalist jingoism.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 6 2007, 07:37 AM

@ Thane

The M16 is an accurate rifle. It may not have as much stopping power as heavier rounds, but most people trained to do so(including myself, and I'm guessing Hullbreach and SgtShellback. Semper Fi guys.) can hit a man sized target at 500 yards with iron sights at least 80-90% of the time. Which is a hell of a lot farther than most folks ever engage a target(outside of "designated marksman" aka snipers.)

Posted by: Thane36425 Mar 6 2007, 07:53 AM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

I didn't say it wasn't accurate, just that it is a little light on stopping power.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 6 2007, 10:19 AM

Sorry, misread your post.

Posted by: Thane36425 Mar 6 2007, 10:40 AM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

Sorry, misread your post.

No problem.

Posted by: Kagetenshi Mar 6 2007, 12:44 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

(outside of "designated marksman" aka snipers.)

Not the same thing, though what you say applies to both.

~J

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 6 2007, 11:50 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

Oh, I have a cultural question. What is the difference between "semper fi" and "oorah"? What are the circumstances in which one thing would be said versus the other? I think I've been confused by popular culture representations.

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 7 2007, 12:13 AM

'Semper fi' is short for 'Semper Fidelis' which is latin for "Always Faithful"

It is representative of our undying loyalty to our nation, and our brother and sister Marines.

Ooh-Rah is somthing we like to grunt and yell at each other. Im not entirely sure why, but like most Marine traditions Im sure its origin involves large amounts of drinking and at least one barfight.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 7 2007, 12:30 AM

QUOTE (HullBreach)

So it sounds like "semper fi" is more of a formal or ceremonial phrase, whereas "ooh-rah" is more like typing "pwned!".

Posted by: Butterblume Mar 7 2007, 12:43 AM

QUOTE (HullBreach)

Ooh-Rah is somthing we like to grunt and yell at each other. Im not entirely sure why, but like most Marine traditions Im sure its origin involves large amounts of drinking and at least one barfight.

Sounds reasonable

. I find that particular expression amusing, everytime I see it on TV.

Haven't encountered a marine yet, only belgian, french, russian, italian, spanish, swedish troops. My cousin is married to an ex-82nd airborne.

The formal motto of my first battalion was 'semper talis', which translates to the lame 'always the same', but it probably looses somewhat ripped out of context

.

My company had it's own battlecry, but it just doesn't translate into english

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 7 2007, 12:56 AM

QUOTE (Butterblume)

QUOTE (HullBreach)

Ooh-Rah is somthing we like to grunt and yell at each other. Im not entirely sure why, but like most Marine traditions Im sure its origin involves large amounts of drinking and at least one barfight.

Sounds reasonable

.

My company had it's own battlecry, but it just doesn't translate into english

Well my old unit's official slogan was 'Tairngreacht Bas' which is galic I think. Means 'Death Foretold'.

The unofficial slogan was: "VMAQ-1: We make dead people!"

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 7 2007, 05:03 AM

Lets see, unit mottos... 3rd TSB(Transportation Support Battalion) "First in, last out"
8th Comm, Charlie Co, "First to go, Last to know"(unofficial)
Don't know if the 26th MEU had an official motto. Since I'm at liberty to make one up, I'll choose one from the speech the CO gave us before we went in country, "You can have libbo after we kill everyone."(Libbo=Liberty, aka time off, and the best part of being on a Mediterranean float.)

Also, a quick word on the difference between Hooah and Oorah. Hooah is what the army says. It's long, drawn out, and sounds like someone is sodomizing a drugged up pig. Who-ah. Oorah is what the Marines say. It's short, sharp, and vicious, unless we're being ironic or sarcastic when we say it. Oo-rah. Hoorah is something the navy says, I think just because they felt left out. Heavy emphasis on the H. Who-rah.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 7 2007, 05:05 AM

*Edited to remove multiple posts*

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 7 2007, 05:06 AM

*Edited to remove multiple posts*

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 7 2007, 07:40 AM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

Also, a quick word on the difference between Hooah and Oorah. Hooah is what the army says. It's long, drawn out, and sounds like someone is sodomizing a drugged up pig.

Yes, I learned that from the most excellent Army propaganda game from www.americasarmy.com. It's fun because they let you say Hooah over the radio while you play and there's a voice clip with the correct pronounciation.

Posted by: Angelone Mar 7 2007, 12:09 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk @ Mar 6 2007, 10:03 PM)

Also, a quick word on the difference between Hooah and Oorah. Hooah is what the army says. It's long, drawn out, and sounds like someone is sodomizing a drugged up pig. Who-ah. Oorah is what the Marines say. It's short, sharp, and vicious, unless we're being ironic or sarcastic when we say it. Oo-rah. Hoorah is something the navy says, I think just because they felt left out. Heavy emphasis on the H. Who-rah.

In my experience it's the opposite the Marines drag it out and the Army is short and sweet as they say.

Back to the original topic the M16A2 and A4's have very little kick to them. If you hold it in the right spot you will feel nothing at all. The 203's (M16's with a grenade launcher) have virtually no kick, but they are alot heavier than the regular M16's. The grenade launcher itself has a noticible kick, some compare it to a shotgun but in my experience it's not as bad.

"Locked, cocked, ready to rock."

As a side note in my military career I've lost roughy 60% of my hearing.

EDIT- The M4's on the other hand have more a kick than the M16's and are harder to control. They are of course smaller and lighter.

Posted by: Inu Mar 7 2007, 12:18 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

Llso, a quick word on the difference between Hooah and Oorah. Hooah is what the army says. It's long, drawn out, and sounds like someone is sodomizing a drugged up pig. Who-ah. Oorah is what the Marines say. It's short, sharp, and vicious, unless we're being ironic or sarcastic when we say it. Oo-rah. Hoorah is something the navy says, I think just because they felt left out. Heavy emphasis on the H. Who-rah.

According to GURPS Special Ops (I know, RPG books aren't the best sources, but the GURPS ones are at least well-researched on the whole), The army's Hooah comes from HUA -- Heard, Understood, Acknowledged. Might be one of those urban myth-type origins, or a backronym, but it's one story, at least!

Thanks for the details on what the different services say. I never did quite get why sometimes it had an 'r' in it and other times it didn't.

Posted by: eidolon Mar 7 2007, 02:32 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk @ Mar 6 2007, 11:03 PM)

Also, a quick word on the difference between Hooah and Oorah. Hooah is what the army says. It's long, drawn out, and sounds like someone is sodomizing a drugged up pig.

Spoken like a true Marine.

In actual practice, the only jackasses that draw hooah out (well, and use it at all in anything but a cynical, mocking manner) are infantry privates and hardcores that can't break out of the basic training mindset. I say that with a heavy dose of cynicism, in case it's not apparent. Hooah can pretty much be used to replace any word. You agree? You hooah. You disagree, but can't do anything about it? Hooah. You wish to make the hardcore you're talking to think you agree, whilst all the time you're just trying to get him out of your AO? Hooah. You're actually trying to communicate in an intelligent manner? You speak English with a healthy smattering of acronyms and jargon. Yes, I'm generalizing. My contact with CA and CS guys was fairly limited. For all I know, everyone in those areas hooahs their little hearts out with pride and abandon.

I will say that every time a Marine kid walked by me and oorah'd at me I asked if he had an undiagnosed medical condition or if he was just unable to speak English. Lots of different answers.

Posted by: -Nyx- Mar 7 2007, 03:30 PM

In boot camp/basic training my standard firearm was a G3 (the 7.62mm assault rifle the German Army used before the 5.56mm G36 was introduced), later I was issued a G36.

In basic training, we rarely fired full-auto (basically its a waste of ammo and - as it was mentioned earlier in this thread - the job of the guy with the machine gun in your group), single-shots and an occasional 2-4 shot salvo usually were sufficient.
While these short salvos were quite good to control and hit a reasonable small target area, the 5th or 6th shot and everything thereafter didn't (at least with me).

The G36 on the other hand was much more easy to control (perhaps due to the fact that I'd to learn to control the much more brutal recoil of the G3 before I shot the G36), and while the shots went of target in full-auto, too, the first ones stayed almost at the very same spot and you could "keep them together" much more easy.

Unit slogans/callings:
Panzergrenadier-Truppe (German Mechanized Infantry):
Officer/NCO: "Panzergrenadiere!"
Unit: "Dran, drauf, drüber!" (difficult to translate... "Approach, upon, beyond!" maybe...)
[both to be repeated three times]

4th Company, 12th Mechanized Infantry Battalion:
"Klagt nicht, kämpft!" ("Don't moan, fight!")

Greetings,
Nyx

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 7 2007, 03:33 PM

Honestly I think I used 'Oo-rah' like four times when I was in. It just struck me as.... well dumb. Im all for motivation and esprit de corps, but personally I'd rather not feel obliged to act the fool for said purposes.

On the other hand, there are some incriminating pictures of me drunk, wearing a pirate hat, and sitting atop an Air Force missile-on-a-stick. Needless to say the Air Force SF's didn't see the humor in that.

Posted by: eidolon Mar 7 2007, 08:01 PM

QUOTE (HullBreach)

Im all for motivation and esprit de corps, but personally I'd rather not feel obliged to act the fool for said purposes.

Well said.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 7 2007, 08:52 PM

Yeah, I didn't use Oorah too much while I was in in the non-ironical manner. Had to deal with a lot of assholes who outranked me, so there was lots of "Oorah"s that meant "You're a jackass." There were exceptions, though, notably when given the "You can have libbo after we kill everyone" speech. It was also a handy word for when people asked how you were. Instead of telling them "Outstanding, Sir!" or some crap like that, you just throw out a "Oorah, Sir" and even if there's not a whole lot of oomph behind it, they figure you must be moto.(Motivated) But I figured I'd point out the difference between the different services, since most people here probably don't know, and while doing so couldn't resist taking a dig at our brothers-in-arms that all Marines love to hate.(Thats you, army doggies )

But yeah, I'm with Hull on this. Most of the people who were the most vocal about how motivated they were were the pretty boys who spent hours pressing their cammies and spit shining their boots, then looked like you just killed their mother if you told em to crawl underneath a hummer or sling some gear. Not to mention about half of em spent so much time looking pretty that they didn't even know their damn jobs, which is an unforgivable offense in my eyes.

Posted by: HullBreach Mar 8 2007, 03:26 PM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

But yeah, I'm with Hull on this. Most of the people who were the most vocal about how motivated they were were the pretty boys who spent hours pressing their cammies and spit shining their boots, then looked like you just killed their mother if you told em to crawl underneath a hummer or sling some gear. Not to mention about half of em spent so much time looking pretty that they didn't even know their damn jobs, which is an unforgivable offense in my eyes.

Couldn't have said it better myself. If it weren't for their having earned the Title, I'd almost be tempted to call them poseurs.

I was pretty fortunate while I was in, and wound up in a unit that was almost contiuosly deployed, so job proficeincy was king. This caused some issues in the rear when the prissy garrison types didn't like how we did things, but we won a slew of unit awards for our effectiveness.

Oh and to go back on subject, Kel-Tec (Not the greatest rep, but a decent manufacturer) is putting out a bullpup 7.62x51 carbine in the near future that looks like it'll be a fun one. Worth looking at if your a budget shooter.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 8 2007, 11:19 PM

QUOTE (HullBreach)

I was pretty fortunate while I was in, and wound up in a unit that was almost contiuosly deployed, so job proficeincy was king. This caused some issues in the rear when the prissy garrison types didn't like how we did things, but we won a slew of unit awards for our effectiveness.

Whenver I read Vietnam War memoirs I always end up reading stories about horrifically terrible officers who ride all over the effective way that the men who have been in the field have figured out doing things and have a huge ego trip going on. For example, I remember about one newly-arrived officer who was berating his subordinates because there was rat poop in their living arrangements in the context of a unit which was out in the field, seeing combat, and had no effective ways to control the rat population. How common is this in the military really?

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 9 2007, 02:23 AM

Those kinds of officers are quickly corralled by senior enlisted, and taught the error of their ways. Occasionally, one of em gets high enough in rank that he can be as much of a dipshit as he wants to, but this is somewhat rare. I am speaking only for Marine officers, as I don't have the experience to comment on any other service, really.

That being said, officers sometimes have a skewed idea of what's important. Most of the units I was in, the enlisted ran most of the day to day stuff, the officers just pointed us in the right direction. Most of em seemed to spend most of their time in meetings up at battalion or checking their e-mail. I always got the feeling that officers were kinda like high priests of some obscure god. Seemingly useless, but without em warding off danger from the almighty, some big nasty would swoop down from above and swallow us normal folks whole.

Near as I could tell their main function was convincing higher ranking officers to let us have a mission. Unfortunately, although the unit I was probably in the top five in the US at what we did, our officers sucked at convincing someone to let us go do our jobs, so we spent so much time training that we started to forget what we were training for and it just slipped into mindless fuck-fuck games.

I miss being on float... that was the best part of the Marine Corps. Training your ass off, deploying to far off distant lands, and getting home to stacks of cash saved up.

Sorry, got sidetracked. Ronin: Not that common in the Corps, though it exists. The less a unit deploys, the more stupid crap they make their Marines wade through.

Posted by: eidolon Mar 9 2007, 04:04 AM

Echo Crakkerjakk for Army officers. As usual, caveat that with my having spent all of my time in intel.

In the Army, you generally get 2 kinds of officers. The good ones, who were enlisted before going officer, and the ones that learned it all in school.

Posted by: Marmot Mar 9 2007, 04:16 AM

Holy crap I showed up late for the military pow-wow again.

Posted by: mfb Mar 9 2007, 05:09 AM

you hear stories about bad officers because the bad ones are the ones you notice. the good officers, in my experience, you don't remember much because they weren't ever really around--they made sure you had what you needed to accomplish your mission, and other than that they left you alone. i didn't meet many bad officers, in my twenty-year-long career in the Army (2000-2004). there were a lot of mediocre ones, and a few good ones.

Posted by: hyzmarca Mar 9 2007, 06:32 AM

One thing about BMT is that they shove every little mistake up your ass. If your towels aren't folded right, you end up paying for it. OSC, from what I understand, is worse. Total control environments, such as BMT and OCS are a type of brainwashing. When a person is repeatedly punished for minor things like improperly ironed slacks in basic training, it isn't too surprising when that person becomes terribly uptight about such things.
At least, that's my take on absurdly uptight officers.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 9 2007, 08:47 AM

Take an E-1, fresh outa boot, stretch boot out to over a year long, and when he's done tell him that he can tell about 90% of the people he meets what to do. Thats how you get a dipshit officer.

The smart ones keep their traps shut for at least their first year in the fleet, and just watch how the upper enlisted run the shop. The dumb ones try to tell my old MSgt what to do, and he tears the boot louie a new asshole, then sends him crying to Battalion about how the mean enlisted man with 25+ years of experience just crawled up his asshole and out his throat. Then the battalion commander tells him to suck it up and stop pissing off the enlisted.

Reminds me of the old joke. Know the difference between a PFC and a 2nd lieutenant? The PFC's already been promoted once.

But yeah, officers may be stupid fresh out the gate, but most of em wise up quick. It's easy to spot the exceptionally good ones and the exceptionally bad ones, but the vast majority of them are somewhere in between, and since the majority of my career was peacetime, it's hard to gauge the mediocre ones without a high stress situation to sift the wheat from the chaff.

Posted by: Smiley Mar 9 2007, 06:21 PM

[Bah-leted]

Posted by: Warmaster Lah Mar 9 2007, 09:36 PM

Well this turned into a far more interesting thread than I first believed! Wow.

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 9 2007, 11:42 PM

QUOTE (Warmaster Lah)

Well this turned into a far more interesting thread than I first believed! Wow.

Whaddayamean? M14s are inherently interesting.

Posted by: Smiley Mar 10 2007, 01:35 AM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk @ Mar 9 2007, 03:47 AM)

There was an officer program at the MOS school I went to in Athens, and the O-1's that came through (even the non-prior ones) were pretty good. Since, y'know, OCS is taught by the ENLISTED...

To tell the truth, most of the dipshit officers I encountered were prior enlisted trying to flex their new butter-bar nutz. The dipshit Marine officers, anyway. The boot 2nd Lieutenants seemed to know enough to stay pretty much out of the way of us E-somethings unless they really did know what they were doing.

My MOS school was on the same base as a training command for Navy O-1's, though... That's a whoooooole 'nother story.

Posted by: Angelone Mar 10 2007, 02:11 AM

Our officers are pretty good.

EDIT- Aired to much dirty laundry. Officers aren't the only ones to powertrip though. People who make corporeal and Staff Sergant tend to be worse than officers in my experience.

Posted by: Smiley Mar 10 2007, 04:45 AM

QUOTE (Angelone)

Oh yeah, definitely. Give certain people an extra stripe and they lose their minds. You know what they say about authoritah corrupting. Officers are supposed to be at the helm, though, and a lot of them are just college kids who went through a double-long boot camp. Hell, there was one Navy Ensign making waves that had graduated with a degree in the culinary arts. But it was a diploma, so he had a bar. He was largely ignored by me and the rest of the Marines, but I can only imagine what it was like being in his chain of command.

Ok, I was going somewhere with this... Ermm... Hell. I'll edit when it comes back to me.

Posted by: Fix-it Mar 10 2007, 05:30 AM

One would think they'd only take usefull degrees for officers, like history, military science (obvious), engineering, math...

Posted by: Thanee Mar 10 2007, 07:05 AM

QUOTE (Crakkerjakk)

Reminds me of the old joke. Know the difference between a PFC and a 2nd lieutenant? The PFC's already been promoted once.

But yeah, officers may be stupid fresh out the gate, but most of em wise up quick. It's easy to spot the exceptionally good ones and the exceptionally bad ones, but the vast majority of them are somewhere in between, and since the majority of my career was peacetime, it's hard to gauge the mediocre ones without a high stress situation to sift the wheat from the chaff.

Ripley: How many drops is this for you, Lieutenant?
Gorman: Thirty eight... simulated.
Vasquez: How many *combat* drops?
Gorman: Uh, two. Including this one.
Drake: Shit.
Hudson: Oh, man...

Bye
Thanee

Posted by: Wounded Ronin Mar 10 2007, 07:43 AM

QUOTE (Smiley)

Hell, there was one Navy Ensign making waves that had graduated with a degree in the culinary arts. But it was a diploma, so he had a bar.

Well, if Under Seige is any indication, he just killed an entire platoon of terrorists with his bare hands after they managed to take over the ship he was aboard.

Posted by: Crakkerjakk Mar 10 2007, 09:07 AM

I know a lot of people who got big heads after picking up Cpl or SSgt, but I also had to deal with a few of my friends when I picked up Cpl. They figured that they could blow me off when I told them to do something, since I was their buddy and all. Never thought about what would happen when whatever job SSgt told me to get done didn't get done. Lost a couple "friends" that way, unfortunately, but thems the cards.

My philosophy as a leader was always never ask your marines to do shit that you aren't willing to do, and that means if they're all doing it and the job still isn't done, you chip in. Always pissed me off when I saw some Cpl sitting watching his guys mop or unload a quadcon with his hands on his hips yelling for his marines to go faster. Never understood unnecessary yelling either. I didn't go to drill instructor school. Wasn't my job to turn recruits into marines. My job was to make sure marines got a job done, and to to watch out for their welfare. Hell, half my job was politely telling Radio Platoon's SSgts that they couldn't have my guys to do their dirty work, that Wire Platoon wasn't doing anything because we took care of our shit ahead of time instead of putting it off till the last minute and then freaking out when it was 1530 and nothing was done. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But way I see it, you treat your platoon like your own personal feifdom, and then you tell them to put themselves in the way of bodily harm down the road, they're gonna tell you to go eff yourself.

I always found that I got better results when I treated my guys like adults instead of children. Had one problem Marine. Was brilliant at his job, but was lazy, barely pressed his cammies or shone his boots, and was frequently late to formation. The op after I got promioted I put him in charge of the wire plan, coralling all the gear, and sent him to a secondary site with three guys as the boss. Not one problem with him the entire op, comm ran smooth as hell, and he started taking an interest in his appearance(or at least not throwing his cammies in his wall locker at the end of the day and then just throwing them back on the next morning.)

The guys who always pissed me off were the fuckers who got meritoriously promoted after three seconds in the fleet. Usually didn't know dick about their jobs, but they could PT and look pretty, and they thought that was the most important thing, since thats how they got promoted. Plus they didn't spend enough time as a Lance to understand exactly how shitty being a peon can be, so they usually treated them like shit, like they saw all the super moto hard charging cpls and sgts who were constantly screaming at the nonrates. Bleah.

/rant

sorry, big part of why I got out was how my unit started to crumble(especially the upper ranks) the less we deployed. It was sad watching C Co go from the best comm unit on the east coast(and the Marine Corps, if you ask me, at least at providing highly mobile comm for a Bn size element) to a bunch of bored NCOs playing games with frustrated marines who never got a chance to use their training.

Posted by: otomik Mar 10 2007, 11:35 AM

QUOTE (HullBreach)

Oh and to go back on subject, Kel-Tec (Not the greatest rep, but a decent manufacturer) is putting out a bullpup 7.62x51 carbine in the near future that looks like it'll be a fun one. Worth looking at if your a budget shooter.

.308 isn't that cheap in my neck of the woods, whose your fixer?

if you like to shoot a lot the only real choices are .22lr 9mm .223 plus a few combloc rounds with limited platforms to chose from.

unless you mean budget collectors who have guns they can't afford to shoot.