[X] My Assistant

[nezumi]

The ex-governor of New york, Elliot spitzer, when running for governor years ago had a mind boglgingly stupid idea .He wanted to require every freaking bullet to have a code unmber engraved on it, that could be tracked so when you dug the slug out of someone you could, in theory, track down who bought it. Do I have to list all the ways this was f'ed up? He didn't win then and when running later he'd dropped this pin head idea.

That's called micro-stamping, and I don't believe NY was the only state looking at it. There was a bill put to the floor in MD and I believe CA is also seriously considering it (it was shot down in MD at least).

[Wounded Ronin]

Well if anyone would do it, it would be CA. I heard on the radio this morning that a CA court decided to outlaw home schooling, and that lead to a big backlash from parents.

[Wesley Street]

Given the age of the weapon, the patent has run out in all reasonable jurisdictions meaning that licensing is a non-issue. This is the same reason that 36 companies produce AR-15 and M-16 variants.

Since when are Russians reasonable, comrade? In their minds and according to their laws the Kalashnikov assault rifle is theirs.

[Chrysalis]

The only assault rifle to feature on a national flag. The AK-47 is a robust rifle and luckily human beings do not change in biology just in our sensibilities on fashion.

To get back on topic isn't the HK 227S the FN FAL (also known as the L1A1 Self Loading Rifle or SLR) been mislabeled and jammed with a square magazine with a plastic coverlet?

I would understand that if using 7.62mm rounds a square magazine would jam a lot?

-Chrysalis

[Faelan]

The AK47's reliability is mostly attributable to its robust extractor and 7.62x39mm ammunition. Larger ammo equals more rim on the casing to grab, and the less it will be affected by foreign material on the the ammunition or in the chamber. Additionally it's assembly is somewhat loose, which is the best way I can describe it. Once again this allows for greater reliability, but don't try to shoot anything with any real hope of accuracy past about 200yds. The AK47 was designed with a conscript soldier in mind. Massed automatic fire was the doctrine and one of the most common firing positions was from the hip while assaulting. It is certainly worthy of its reputation, but lets acknowledge it's weaknesses. A professional would almost never use one if he had a choice. (I am referring to Russian made AK47's, don't even bring up Chinese knock offs. And I am not saying anything about any of the newer AK models, they have certainly addressed most accuracy issues.)

The HK227 actually looks like a crossbreed of an HK G3 Assault Rifle and a HK PSG3 Sniper Rifle on steroids.

7.62 in a square magazine will jam no more frequently than a banana clip. The banana clip was designed to maximize magazine load while minimizing the distance the clip stuck out beneath the weapon.

Most weapon malfunctions occur for the following reasons 1) user error (especially with semi automatic handguns), 2) dirt in the chamber or more appropriately in the extractor causing the casing to remain in the chamber while another round is jammed in (your classic jam), 3) overheated weapon which can result in a cook off and a runaway weapon, 4) defective primer (i.e. a dud round), 5) weak charge resulting in a stovepiped barrel, which if not noticed results in, 6) an explosive failure as a round is fired down the barrel with another round stuck in the barrel, and 7) weak charge may also result in not enough force to push the slide, receiver or similar far enough to load the next round. In my experience those are the most common reasons for malfunctions.

[CanRay]

Not to mention the extensive field testing the AK-47 went under before being adopted.

Where did they test the first generations of M-16s? A Lab?

IIRC, the Vickers Heavy Machine Gun was field tested by firing it for days before the team finally decided that if it wasn't going to have a problem after all that. And it proved itself in the fields of France.

Find as many problems as you can before handing it to a soldier, no matter how well trained. He will always find more!

[Faelan]

M16 was tested in Vietnam (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It failed miserably because well the troops expected it to work. The M14, which preceded it was an incredibly accurate beast of a rifle. Seriously though the M16 is a rifle I love and hate. The only thing I hate is the caliber, because it is the root cause of everything wrong with it. So when I got the extra cash I will be buying one of these http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifle_rec7.aspx. All the ergonomics, and accuracy, none of the problems and more punch.

[reepneep]

M16 was tested in Vietnam (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) It failed miserably because well the troops expected it to work. The M14, which preceded it was an incredibly accurate beast of a rifle. Seriously though the M16 is a rifle I love and hate. The only thing I hate is the caliber, because it is the root cause of everything wrong with it. So when I got the extra cash I will be buying one of these http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifle_rec7.aspx. All the ergonomics, and accuracy, none of the problems and more punch.

My impression was that the M16's primary problems were overcomplexity and unreliability. Granted you can actually get through a whole magazine without it jamming, unlike with the early versions, but its still a rather temperamental, fragile weapon. The M16 has developed into a decent gun though: accurate, light weight, good ergonomics. It's other problems seriously hamper it though.

The AK47's reliability is mostly attributable to its robust extractor and 7.62x39mm ammunition. Larger ammo equals more rim on the casing to grab, and the less it will be affected by foreign material on the the ammunition or in the chamber. Additionally it's assembly is somewhat loose, which is the best way I can describe it. Once again this allows for greater reliability, but don't try to shoot anything with any real hope of accuracy past about 200yds. The AK47 was designed with a conscript soldier in mind. Massed automatic fire was the doctrine and one of the most common firing positions was from the hip while assaulting. It is certainly worthy of its reputation, but lets acknowledge it's weaknesses. A professional would almost never use one if he had a choice. (I am referring to Russian made AK47's, don't even bring up Chinese knock offs. And I am not saying anything about any of the newer AK models, they have certainly addressed most accuracy issues.)

I would have thought that a professional would take a gun that would fire every single time he pulls the trigger, and the AK comes closer to that ideal than any other assault rifle. To me at least, that consideration is more important than any other.

'I will be trusting this gun with my life: it damn well better work.'

Also, the gun only becomes genuinely inaccurate at around 300 meters. The vast majority of combat happens inside of that range, so its not as big a deal as most make it out to be.

[Critias]

A professional would almost never use one if he had a choice.

I guess we've got an awful lot of unprofessional soldiers over in the Gulf right now, then.

[Faelan]

My impression was that the M16's primary problems were overcomplexity and unreliability. Granted you can actually get through a whole magazine without it jamming, unlike with the early versions, but its still a rather temperamental, fragile weapon. The M16 has developed into a decent gun though: accurate, light weight, good ergonomics. It's other problems seriously hamper it though.

The M16 is one of the easiest weapons to breakdown, and reassemble. Always has been. The complexity and unreliability issues came about mostly due to lack of training on the new weapon. The M16a2 and later variants are not temperamental at all, though they do require more maintenance (cleaning) than the AK 47 for instance. I had no problem trusting the M16 with my life in the past and would not in the future, though now that I am a civilian there are other options (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) My issue with extractors is ultimately the underlying cause of any rifle or mg problems in 5.56mm. NATO really needs to get away from this round.

I would have thought that a professional would take a gun that would fire every single time he pulls the trigger, and the AK comes closer to that ideal than any other assault rifle. To me at least, that consideration is more important than any other.

'I will be trusting this gun with my life: it damn well better work.'

Also, the gun only becomes genuinely inaccurate at around 300 meters. The vast majority of combat happens inside of that range, so its not as big a deal as most make it out to be.

An M16 will fire everytime if you take care of it. The AK does not come closer, it has merely been mythologized into that position. At the time and for many years your comment was true. My list of Assault Rifles or civilian versions of choice that I would pick over the AK are the FN SCARH (7.62mm), the Barrett Model Rec 7 (there was a military version however the US Army declined this option for a 5.56mm rifle and even that is in the air/ model 7 uses a 6.8mm SPC round), and the HK417 (7.62mm). All of them fit the bill.

I am used to plinking targets at 500yds with iron sights, and though the majority of combat occurs under 300m the ability to reach out and touch someone as a group is incredibly valuable especially when the other guy subscribed to that line of thought. I'll take the cake, and eat it too. I can have the best of both worlds.

[Shiloh]

I guess we've got an awful lot of unprofessional soldiers over in the Gulf right now, then.

One problem with the AK is its long clip making firing from prone more awkward.

My read on use of liberated weapons is that most grunts are happy enough with the current issue of the M-16 and don't feel any need for going off the regimental supply chain for ammo. Even Special Forces only use the AK when they're trying to blend in. They're more likely to choose H&K personal weapons than 'liberate' an AK: they don't need the "fires even when it's not been cleaned for 2000 rounds and 6 months in the jungle" because they maintain their weapons, and have the weapon skills to benefit from tight groupings that "proper" engineering tolerances in manufacture can produce.

[Yoan]

One problem with the AK is its long clip making firing from prone more awkward.

My read on use of liberated weapons is that most grunts are happy enough with the current issue of the M-16 and don't feel any need for going off the regimental supply chain for ammo. Even Special Forces only use the AK when they're trying to blend in. They're more likely to choose H&K personal weapons than 'liberate' an AK: they don't need the "fires even when it's not been cleaned for 2000 rounds and 6 months in the jungle" because they maintain their weapons, and have the weapon skills to benefit from tight groupings that "proper" engineering tolerances in manufacture can produce.

Yes, and I don't want to get all apocalyptic, but when things go from bad to worse, or when you're fighting a low-intensity conflict, or when you're conducting an insurgency campaign: you want something reliable no matter what.

One day, sooner or later, the supply chain and/or logistics of bloated "modern" militaries will break down, and we'll see the average spoiled Western soldier for what he is: a kid who just wanted college money and has 30,000$ of (at that point, non-working or failing) equipment on him.

[Faelan]

Yes, and I don't want to get all apocalyptic, but when things go from bad to worse, or when you're fighting a low-intensity conflict, or when you're conducting an insurgency campaign: you want something reliable no matter what.

One day, sooner or later, the supply chain and/or logistics of bloated "modern" militaries will break down, and we'll see the average spoiled Western soldier for what he is: a kid who just wanted college money and has 30,000$ of (at that point, non-working or failing) equipment on him.

That's just plain offensive. I don't really like being stuffed into a blanket statement like that. I did not serve for the college money, and neither did 90% of the guys I served with (USMC). Even the few who did realized it was not a game. I have trained with at least 25 different countries armed forces both first world and third world, and can say one thing. The quality of manpower is directly related to the degree of training. Of all the armed services I trained with the only ones worth a damn were the UK Royal Marines, the rest of Europe produced essentially lambs waiting to be slaughtered. So I can agree with your point to a degree, except you see every last encounter with the third world fighter indicated to me someone high on motivation (principally being fed) without any real skill, so maybe the Europeans I trained with were not that bad because the level of ability of these third world militaries was absolutely abysmal.

As far as the noble (insert mass sarcasm) guerilla fighter, can only succeed when attacking by surprise, in overwhelming numbers, and with the full support of the civilian population. Individually as warriors they are severely lacking.

No offense to anyone out there who might be serving in a European Service, but my opinions were based on first hand experiences such as, drunk in the field, refusal to perform night patrols or attacks, inability to carry a full combat load, zero security, no light or noise discipline, refusing to perform an amphibious landing (shout out to the Dutch Marines on that one, it still makes me chuckle), essentially if it would get you killed in the zone they did it.

[Yoan]

That's just plain offensive. I don't really like being stuffed into a blanket statement like that. I did not serve for the college money, and neither did 90% of the guys I served with (USMC)

Sorry if I offended you. I'm a member of my respective nation's military as well, and I know there are CLEARLY exceptions. I have American friends serving with the US Army and the USMC in Iraq and elsewhere and, clearly, they aren't there for that, either.

As far as the noble (insert mass sarcasm) guerilla fighter, can only succeed when attacking by surprise, in overwhelming numbers, and with the full support of the civilian population. Individually as warriors they are severely lacking.

And when military or police attack or seize an enemy or suspect, they go in with overwhelming force whenever possible as well. Who wouldn't? That might be the only thing modern military machines and the guerilla force have in common. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

As for civilian support, I hope you're not derisive of it: that's how modern warfare works, and will work in future conflicts. It's dirtier, but that's the point.

I'm no friend of the 'guerillas' we find today, but perhaps one day WE'LL be the guerillas/insurgents/freedom-fighters/whatever, and if that's the case: I'd rather go low-tech and grab an AK. We can't rely on military infrastructure and logistics forever. Scheisse happens.

Also, I heard a rumour (can anyone confirm?) that the Dutch military, or Navy, was unionized. I think that explains a lot. I hope I'm wrong. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[Faelan]

I don't know if they were unionized, but the landing issue was a contractual issue apparently. We never got a really detailed explanation as to why beyond the fact that they refused to get wet, so we chalked it up to the sand in the clit factor.

Overwhelming numbers and overwhelming force are different, but I get where you are coming from, and no I never had the pleasure to play with the Canadians.

Fire a Soviet Era AK and tell me yo really trust it. I'll stick with the three I mentioned in 7.62mm, not bad for shooting game either if the logistics breakdown (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[CanRay]

Just thought of something, when it comes to a rifle that's proven itself in the test of time, nothing beats the Short-Magazine Lee-Enfield.

Canadian Rangers prefer it over anything else, from my understanding.

1895 to Today. Nothing beats that testiment. And it sure will be able to outrange any assault rifle on the market, and, in trained hands, can impersonate a "Machine Gun", as Germans attested in World War I!

[Shiloh]

...one day WE'LL be the guerillas/insurgents/freedom-fighters/whatever, and if that's the case: I'd rather go low-tech and grab an AK. We can't rely on military infrastructure and logistics forever...

Okay, so you're a guerilla defending your home in the continental mainland of America. You don't have a supply train. What calibre of ammunition is going to be easier to scavenge: 5.56mm NATO or 7.62 short Russian? You'll have to kill the Chinese (who else has the personnel to try and hold down the States?) oppressor to get hold of their ammo, but there's bins of 5.56 around.

Even once you're an insurgent, you retain your weapon skills and discipline, so you still don't need the "ruggedness" and associated sloppiness of the AK... It's easier to steal/cadge/scavenge a can or two of gun oil and some pull-throughs than clips of enemy ammo.

[Yoan]

Just thought of something, when it comes to a rifle that's proven itself in the test of time, nothing beats the Short-Magazine Lee-Enfield.

Canadian Rangers prefer it over anything else, from my understanding

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/mp-enfield.htm

To Shiloh:

Points taken, I suppose I missed the obvious points-- I'd still recommend hoarding acquired/'liberated' munitions and slowly integrating it into my force pool, but this is Shadowrun 4th edition and not Advanced Squad Leader meets "Be your own Guerilla Warlord v2010" (or: Guerilla Logistics, v0.4)... unfortunately. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/frown.gif)

[hyzmarca]

Okay, so you're a guerilla defending your home in the continental mainland of America. You don't have a supply train. What calibre of ammunition is going to be easier to scavenge: 5.56mm NATO or 7.62 short Russian? You'll have to kill the Chinese (who else has the personnel to try and hold down the States?) oppressor to get hold of their ammo, but there's bins of 5.56 around.

Even once you're an insurgent, you retain your weapon skills and discipline, so you still don't need the "ruggedness" and associated sloppiness of the AK... It's easier to steal/cadge/scavenge a can or two of gun oil and some pull-throughs than clips of enemy ammo.

Insurgency in the Continental US is far more likely to be by labor unions against corrupt corporations, such as the Battle of Blair Mountain, or concerned citizens against corrupt police officers as in the case of Battle of Athens. Invasion is unlikely, but the usurpation of local government by strong-men is still possible.

[Wounded Ronin]

From playing Operation Flashpoint I learned that Russians forget you were there if you dive behind concealment for 5 seconds. This enables you to carefully crawl back to exactly where you were last time and shoot him when he's looking the other way.

[Ed_209a]

From playing Operation Flashpoint I learned that Russians forget you were there if you dive behind concealment for 5 seconds.

No doubt brain damage from all the vodka and extreme hazing.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[Wounded Ronin]

No doubt brain damage from all the vodka and extreme hazing.
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

"Yevgeny! Stop punching the damn recruits in the head until they black out! Their complete lack of short term memory is losing us this war!"

[Shiloh]

Insurgency in the Continental US is far more likely to be by labor unions against corrupt corporations, such as the Battle of Blair Mountain, or concerned citizens against corrupt police officers as in the case of Battle of Athens. Invasion is unlikely, but the usurpation of local government by strong-men is still possible.

All the more reason to favour a domestic round then... there won't *be* any AKs and 7.62 short to 'liberate'.

[Yoan]

Ok, fine. I hate you all.

*Storms off.*

[Earlydawn]

One day, sooner or later, the supply chain and/or logistics of bloated "modern" militaries will break down, and we'll see the average spoiled Western soldier for what he is: a kid who just wanted college money and has 30,000$ of (at that point, non-working or failing) equipment on him.

Curious (and offensive!) statement at best. Time and time again, U.S. infantry turn down our "fancy toys" like the much-touted Land Warrior system for lighter weight, more reliable equipment. There's a reason they still get trained on map and compass before you get the GPS. The main advances in infantry since the Vietnam era that stick with me are better carrying gear, lighter weight equipment (makes room for more ammo!), and more effective "first strike" weapons like anti-tank equipment, where the situation is usually hit-or-die.