Comments on: Lighter Loads for Afghan-Bound http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/ Online Defense and Acquisition Journal Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:33:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: clayhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-8699 clay Mon, 01 Jun 2009 11:32:05 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-8699 Rick- The .50 cal round has a much greater range, power and PENETRATIOn. It is commonly used against structures such as mudbrick houses that easily stop 7.62 and 5.56 ammo especially at range. It is an unbelievably heavy rig to 'Jump in' or hump into position. The tripod is over a 100 lbs I believe and the barrel is 50 lbs (?) add in the mass of the receiver and you are dealing with one heavy machine gun. The Ma Deuce has needed a diet for far too long. Rick– The .50 cal round has a much greater range, power and PENETRATIOn. It is commonly used against structures such as mudbrick houses that easily stop 7.62 and 5.56 ammo especially at range. It is an unbelievably heavy rig to ‘Jump in’ or hump into position. The tripod is over a 100 lbs I believe and the barrel is 50 lbs (?) add in the mass of the receiver and you are dealing with one heavy machine gun. The Ma Deuce has needed a diet for far too long.

]]> By: Rick#2http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-8222 Rick#2 Sat, 16 May 2009 01:59:25 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-8222 Im pretty sure NavyBratt was referring to the M4A1 not the M1A1 Abrams Tank lol but as someone who is enlisting at the end of the year, in an infantry or Special Forces manner i think its ideal that we all have the best that is out there, if the Special Forces are using the SCAR, or the HK416 then why the fuck are not all of our soldiers equipped with the most elite weapons, we might be the most advanced and best military in the world but we dont always make sense and its annoying Im pretty sure NavyBratt was referring to the M4A1 not the M1A1 Abrams Tank lol but as someone who is enlisting at the end of the year, in an infantry or Special Forces manner i think its ideal that we all have the best that is out there, if the Special Forces are using the SCAR, or the HK416 then why the fuck are not all of our soldiers equipped with the most elite weapons, we might be the most advanced and best military in the world but we dont always make sense and its annoying

]]> By: paulhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-8030 paul Sat, 09 May 2009 16:25:00 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-8030 Light weight is:More energy and better breathing for high altitude warfare!Good luck guys/gals... Shalom Light weight is:More energy and better breathing
for high altitude warfare!Good luck guys/gals…
Shalom

]]> By: Rickhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-8014 Rick Fri, 08 May 2009 19:55:14 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-8014 I have to wonder do they actually need a .50 cal MG at all. I can certainly see the troops using .50 cal sniper rifles for those targets that are too far away for a 7.62mm to reach, but what are they going to fight that actually needs to be hosed down with a stream of bullets?To me it seems that fielding the XM307 25mm grenade launcher would be a better choice for the weight. I have to wonder do they actually need a .50 cal MG at all. I can certainly see the troops using .50 cal sniper rifles for those targets that are too far away for a 7.62mm to reach, but what are they going to fight that actually needs to be hosed down with a stream of bullets?

To me it seems that fielding the XM307 25mm grenade launcher would be a better choice for the weight.

]]> By: FormerDirtDarthttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-8001 FormerDirtDart Fri, 08 May 2009 14:07:04 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-8001 Navybrat111, you seem confused, or are simply lacking in reading comprehension. The XM806 is a heavy machinegun being tested as a possible replacement for some M2 .50 cal HMGs, an M1A1 is a Tank Navybrat111, you seem confused, or are simply lacking in reading comprehension. The XM806 is a heavy machinegun being tested as a possible replacement for some M2 .50 cal HMGs, an M1A1 is a Tank

]]> By: Navybrat111http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-7976 Navybrat111 Thu, 07 May 2009 18:46:06 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-7976 The XM806 - it will never make the field. Like every weapon tested to replace the M1A1 it won't have enough political support, revenue sources or enough desire for change. So, call me a pessimist. The XM806 — it will never make the field. Like every weapon tested to replace the M1A1 it won’t have enough political support, revenue sources or enough desire for change. So, call me a pessimist.

]]> By: paulhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-7969 paul Thu, 07 May 2009 17:21:43 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-7969 Exact knowledge of war,exposes the electrons on e net!I saw it today....@youtube! Exact knowledge of war,exposes the electrons on
e net!I saw it today.…@youtube!

]]> By: paulhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-7968 paul Thu, 07 May 2009 17:20:11 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-7968 The more you know the actual enemy,a sweet gap of freedom appears!Matrix exposure.... The more you know the actual enemy,a sweet gap of freedom appears!Matrix exposure.…

]]> By: Nick (atacms)http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-7960 Nick (atacms) Thu, 07 May 2009 15:45:58 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-7960 With the rapid acquisition of MRAPS, at what point are we not going to see something similar for troop in regards to carrying heavier loads and increasing troops' mobility?I am thinking of the work Sarcos/Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are doing with exoskeletons.We should be pouring more money in small high density and quiet generators so that our troops can get true exoskeletons that can improve greatly their mobiity AND protection. Neither criteria should be sacrificed. With the rapid acquisition of MRAPS, at what point are we not going to see something similar for troop in regards to carrying heavier loads and increasing troops’ mobility?

I am thinking of the work Sarcos/Raytheon and Lockheed Martin are doing with exoskeletons.

We should be pouring more money in small high density and quiet generators so that our troops can get true exoskeletons that can improve greatly their mobiity AND protection. Neither criteria should be sacrificed.

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/05/07/lighter-loads-for-afghan-bound/#comment-7959 DensityDuck Thu, 07 May 2009 15:41:29 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=6254#comment-7959 Plastic modelers are thinking, "freakin' awesome! So now I can do an 'Iraq Deployment' and an 'Afghanistan Deployment' version of US troops!" Plastic modelers are thinking, “freakin’ awesome! So now I can do an ‘Iraq Deployment’ and an ‘Afghanistan Deployment’ version of US troops!”

]]>