Buy the new US military rifle before the troops get them

[Anomalocaris]

At work.

Not my country, not my space/area.

 My thoughts/reactions to previous comments are kind of clouded by my Granfather's experiance/treatment (Probably not the right words) in WW II.

 He was of the right stuff to be 'Professional Army' here in  Aus in the late 1930's.

 This had him training up recruits as out guys were moved to help Queen and country in North Africa.

 Needless to say.  The kick off in the Pacific seems to have been a rather 'Brown pants' day for folks here at the time.

 The short end of the tale hence is my Grandfather ending up in New Guinea with fek all much of anything (Effectivly but I paraphrase) being asked to do the heroic impossible.

 To read people arguing about the 'Price' of something that would seem fundamental to a Soldier's life?

 Harkens back to Astronaut John Glenn's comment of "As I hurtled through space... my thought was 'Every part of this vehicle was procured by the lowest bidder'."

 I get/understand there's a 'Price' to/for everything but.... I mean really? Are we back to thinking maybe the Sten is how to equip with a weapon? "Good, cheap, simple. You can only pick two."

 I hyperbole, I'm sorry in my ramblings. It's not maybe the best of times for me atm.

 Cheers.

war is about achieving objectives with limited resources, resources in men and in material.   A man may like to think he is all important abs deserve to be valued accordingly,    But to treat him that way is to forget why he is fighting in the first place.

[Jehanne]

In iraq and Afghanistan,  it has been estimated the US forces fired approximately 300,000 bullets for each person it hit.    At this rate, if the US were to fight a land war in China using $3 bullets, it would require 1,500 years’ worth of total current annual defense spending just to procure the necessary bullets!


To put it another way, at $3 per bullet and 300,000 bullets per hit, the three billion dollars of US aid to Ukraine so far will not pay for enough bullets to inflict the casualties the Ukrainians alledgedly inflicted on the Russians even if it all went to paying for bullets.

One must likewise wonder the cost of a Javalin missile versus the cost of a Russian tank? The Russians appear to be in no hurry, perhaps having done the math themselves here.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

Not my country, not my space/area.

 My thoughts/reactions to previous comments are kind of clouded by my Granfather's experiance/treatment (Probably not the right words) in WW II.

 He was of the right stuff to be 'Professional Army' here in  Aus in the late 1930's.

 This had him training up recruits as out guys were moved to help Queen and country in North Africa.

 Needless to say.  The kick off in the Pacific seems to have been a rather 'Brown pants' day for folks here at the time.

 The short end of the tale hence is my Grandfather ending up in New Guinea with fek all much of anything (Effectivly but I paraphrase) being asked to do the heroic impossible.

 To read people arguing about the 'Price' of something that would seem fundamental to a Soldier's life?

 Harkens back to Astronaut John Glenn's comment of "As I hurtled through space... my thought was 'Every part of this vehicle was procured by the lowest bidder'."

 I get/understand there's a 'Price' to/for everything but.... I mean really? Are we back to thinking maybe the Sten is how to equip with a weapon? "Good, cheap, simple. You can only pick two."

 I hyperbole, I'm sorry in my ramblings. It's not maybe the best of times for me atm.

 Cheers.

war is about achieving objectives with limited resources, resources in men and in material.   A man may like to think he is all important abs deserve to be valued accordingly,    But to treat him that way is to forget why he is fighting in the first place.

Having never served I can but vicariously relate to the conversation through my interactions and conversions I've had with folks over the years who have and my arm chair perspective of history.

Every conflict to date has been unique. Every conflict's end results have been different.

Hence my focus on the perspective from the individual's point of view. Which is about the level a rifle seems to be.

I would also hazzard a guess that a force which sees its basic units simply as such might have bigger doctrinal issues to resolve. Such ideas seem to be a thing of certain past conflicts. The lessons of which were learned at a harrowing price.

I agree/note Onlinebiker's clarification about pricing and 'Procuring in bulk' etc.

Cheers.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

In iraq and Afghanistan,  it has been estimated the US forces fired approximately 300,000 bullets for each person it hit.    At this rate, if the US were to fight a land war in China using $3 bullets, it would require 1,500 years’ worth of total current annual defense spending just to procure the necessary bullets!


To put it another way, at $3 per bullet and 300,000 bullets per hit, the three billion dollars of US aid to Ukraine so far will not pay for enough bullets to inflict the casualties the Ukrainians alledgedly inflicted on the Russians even if it all went to paying for bullets.

One must likewise wonder the cost of a Javalin missile versus the cost of a Russian tank?  The Russians appear to be in no hurry, perhaps having done the math themselves here.

A Javelin anti-tank missile costs $78 000. The most widely used Russian battle tank - the T-72 - costs over $1 million. If the tank is hit by a Javelin missile, it costs $1 million + up to 3 human lives.

Boru

[Jehanne]

They appear to be adapting:

Russian Tanks Surviving Hits from U.S.-made Javelin Missiles: Russian MoD Posted by Linda Kay on Mar 3rd,

[Anomalocaris]

They appear to be adapting:

Russian Tanks Surviving Hits from U.S.-made Javelin Missiles: Russian MoD Posted by Linda Kay on Mar 3rd,

explosives based anti-tank weapons mostly replies on the principle of using explosives to form a hypersonic jet of gas and metal which forces its way through the armor of tank, while using the wall of the hole the jet created to help confined the jet and concentrate its force at the bottom of the hole.    Any thin screen that causes the warhead to detonate prematurely instead of against the armor causes the jet to become unfocused before hitting the armor, whicg greatly reduces the ability of the warhead to penetrate the armor.  This thin screen is called spaced armor.

The Russians appears to have improvised spaced armor for the roofs of their tanks.   Once this practice becomes widespread we should expect to see success rate of javelins and other light man portable anti-tank weapon in Ukraine hands fall drastically.

In Afghanistan and iraq, the islamists used similar warheads on Russian missiles as well as RPGs against US and NATO tanks such as the M-1, challenger 2 and Leopard 2.   It is seldomly mentioned in western press, but a sizable number of each of these best western tanks were also destroyed by these missiles, and these tanks cost $5-8 million each.     The russian kornet missiles used against them were not sophisticated enough to focus on the tank’s thin roof, but they were nonetheless able to penetrate the sides and rear of NATO tanks.   As a result, NATO forces also added improvised space armor for their sides and rears.   This eventually made these tanks sufficiently resistant to these weapons to restore their freedom of operation.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

They appear to be adapting:

Russian Tanks Surviving Hits from U.S.-made Javelin Missiles: Russian MoD Posted by Linda Kay on Mar 3rd,

explosives based anti-tank weapons mostly replies on the principle of using explosives to form a hypersonic jet of gas and metal which forces its way through the armor of tank, while using the wall of the hole the jet created to help confined the jet and concentrate its force at the bottom of the hole.    Any thin screen that causes the warhead to detonate prematurely instead of against the armor causes the jet to become unfocused before hitting the armor, whicg greatly reduces the ability of the warhead to penetrate the armor.  This thin screen is called spaced armor.

The Russians appears to have improvised spaced armor for the roofs of their tanks.   Once this practice becomes widespread we should expect to see success rate of javelins and other light man portable anti-tank weapon in Ukraine hands fall drastically.

In Afghanistan and iraq, the islamists used similar warheads on Russian missiles as well as RPGs against US and NATO tanks such as the M-1, challenger 2 and Leopard 2.   It is seldomly mentioned in western press, but a sizable number of each of these best western tanks were also destroyed by these missiles, and these tanks cost $5-8 million each.     The russian kornet missiles used against them were not sophisticated enough to focus on the tank’s thin roof, but they were nonetheless able to penetrate the sides and rear of NATO tanks.   As a result, NATO forces also added improvised space armor for their sides and rears.   This eventually made these tanks sufficiently resistant to these weapons to restore their freedom of operation.

That’s to be expected - improvements in offensive capabilities lead to improvements in defensive ones. In this case, better tank armour leads to better anti-tank weapons, which leads to better tank armour and so on.

This sort of thing has been going on since Ogg found a sharper rock which lead Ugg to wear an extra bearskin.

Boru

[HappySkeptic]

I thought tanks had gone to adding ceramic armor, then reactive armor. Both have been partly circumvented. Without either, tanks are just easy targets.

[tackattack]

Why buy the newest when there's bound to now be a flood of M-16s coming to market? Gotta' get them military crates at wholesale you know.

[onlinebiker]

Why buy the newest when there's bound to now be a flood of M-16s coming to market? Gotta' get them military crates at wholesale you know.

I wonder if the CMP will be getting them?


To those not in the know CMP = Civilian Marksmanship Program. 

From CMP website -

The CMP traces its direct lineage to 1903 when Congress and President Theodore Roosevelt established the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice (NBPRP) and the National Matches. From then until 1996, first the Department of War and later the Department of the Army managed the program that became known as the “civilian marksmanship program. 

Obsolete military weaponry is sold at very reasonable prices.

M1 Garands and M1 carbines were available at cut rate prices for those who shot the rifle course under CMP direction.

It would be logical to do the same with m16' s that are rebuilt as semi auto only - or AR15s that were issued. I know we had several AR15s at my first unit. We did shipboard boardings and full auto is frowned on in a steel drum where ricochets are a reality....