- Thread starter
- #461
Probably...
Military Members post pics of you in your uniforms.
- Thread starter DerAdlerIstGelandet
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
In fact, just to cheer you up, choppers are about the only form of battlefield transport and support (those words are not demeaning - anyone who gets in harm's way can be proud of the job he's doing, whatever it is) capable of operating successfully in some of the situations I evoked.
- Thread starter
- #463
I think I just see the situation from a more modern point of view, based off of my combat experiences.
Infantry are not all that is fighting this war right now and it goes down to the smallest of jobs supporting each other. Without each other no one could do there job.
Infantry needs to occupy the land but infantry can not win the war alone.
Infantry are not all that is fighting this war right now and it goes down to the smallest of jobs supporting each other. Without each other no one could do there job.
Infantry needs to occupy the land but infantry can not win the war alone.
mkloby
Master Sergeant
You can walk on ground too...
So if I follow your logic... if an armored bn attacks and drives infantry reg off a piece of ground - they don't control that area because they're not grunts? Can mech inf occupy land - or is it only leg grunts? Of course there's more than one way to occupy a piece of ground. Infantry might be better suited to controlling ground in mountains or jungles, but in wide open terrain mech, mot inf or armor may work better, especially with large distances.
If infantry stands and stays - he's irrelevant. He'll be outmaneuvered by a more mobile force and destroyed. W/o mobility - infantry will be destroyed.
I think we all agree on everything each other are saying, and we're just grumbling. Our USMC culture is all about supporting the infantry - but the importance and value of that support cannot be understated.
- Thread starter
- #465
To Mkloby, really:
All depends which war; in Iraq, you have lots of nice open space with bags and bags of nothing in it - ideal for mech war. Now go to some other places, and your MICVs will not survive ten minutes against well-equipped and trained leg infantry. You're quite right.
As you say, it's a mistake to think that this war (Iraq) is the only sort.
Also, remember what happened to the Israeli Armoured Forces in 1973, when the Egyptians deployed tank hunters with (for the period) sophisticated AT weapons...
We must not make the mistake of thinking that because Allied Forces steamrollered right over the (ill-equipped, demoralized, poorly-trained and badly-motivated) Iraqi Army, that ALL armies will roll over and die as easily.(I do not consider the present terrorist/resistance movement as the same thing as the old Iraqi Army, for obvious reasons.)
And you can not devastate all before you with prophylactic fire, so if you are facing seriously trained, equipped and motivated infantry, I'm afraid that they could very possibly make these armoured forces pay a very high price for the terrain. As you said, heavy woodland, swamps, hilly or mountainous areas, and so on, are not recommended for armoured warfare, while infantry can exploit them to death. And you can't always go round as easily as you might hope, since that still leaves active enemy forces behind you.
In my ancient days, in Germany, it was assumed we would be over-run on day one - our APCs were rubbish, and we'd be on our own. The idea was to hold as thoroughly as possible, and when over-run, to keep up pressure on the enemy's tail. Never got to test the idea thank goodness, but it sounds just the sort of sneaky stuff I "enjoy" (wrong word, but you know what I mean) !
But if you can imagine what it might be to have British troops ranging round your rear, making a nuisance of themselves, it isn't quite the same thing!
And yes, I'm grumbling, and when all is said and done, I think we agree on the basics - the rest is application and interpretation.
But what K9kiwi means, I think, is that you have to have people there to control it.
All depends which war; in Iraq, you have lots of nice open space with bags and bags of nothing in it - ideal for mech war. Now go to some other places, and your MICVs will not survive ten minutes against well-equipped and trained leg infantry. You're quite right.
As you say, it's a mistake to think that this war (Iraq) is the only sort.
Also, remember what happened to the Israeli Armoured Forces in 1973, when the Egyptians deployed tank hunters with (for the period) sophisticated AT weapons...
We must not make the mistake of thinking that because Allied Forces steamrollered right over the (ill-equipped, demoralized, poorly-trained and badly-motivated) Iraqi Army, that ALL armies will roll over and die as easily.(I do not consider the present terrorist/resistance movement as the same thing as the old Iraqi Army, for obvious reasons.)
And you can not devastate all before you with prophylactic fire, so if you are facing seriously trained, equipped and motivated infantry, I'm afraid that they could very possibly make these armoured forces pay a very high price for the terrain. As you said, heavy woodland, swamps, hilly or mountainous areas, and so on, are not recommended for armoured warfare, while infantry can exploit them to death. And you can't always go round as easily as you might hope, since that still leaves active enemy forces behind you.
In my ancient days, in Germany, it was assumed we would be over-run on day one - our APCs were rubbish, and we'd be on our own. The idea was to hold as thoroughly as possible, and when over-run, to keep up pressure on the enemy's tail. Never got to test the idea thank goodness, but it sounds just the sort of sneaky stuff I "enjoy" (wrong word, but you know what I mean) !
But if you can imagine what it might be to have British troops ranging round your rear, making a nuisance of themselves, it isn't quite the same thing!
And yes, I'm grumbling, and when all is said and done, I think we agree on the basics - the rest is application and interpretation.
But what K9kiwi means, I think, is that you have to have people there to control it.
- Thread starter
- #467
Yes you have to people there but they can be from all sorts of units and types of soldiers.
mkloby
Master Sergeant
Kinda back to the original topic of the thread... Hey ndicki and k9 - do you guys have any cool pics from when you guys were in? I believe k9 had the pics w/ german sheps... if I remember correctly? Got any others? This is for anyone out there!
mkloby
Master Sergeant
I posted this pic once i think a while back - anyway this is why love grunts. And this ain't even all the gear - someone's gotta carry the spare barrel bag and tripod for the damn M240G. I think I had close to 150lbs of gear. Six months of training as infantry does give a unique insight to ops as grunts. But I'll still take my aircraft!
Attachments
mkloby
Master Sergeant
What's the obvious question?? I like the pics.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
If u go back to the beginnings of this thread u'll see alot of the more senior members pics, mine included.... What with being in the Teams, we didnt exactly run around with a camera in our web gear...
The Cadets are a fantastic thing - I was one from 14 to 18, although we weren't anything like so well equipped - we had 1937 Pattern webbing, .303 No.IV MkI Lee-Enfields, and .303 Bren Guns! Just like WW2! (Hear me complaining?)
Did you enjoy playing with what has to be the civilized world's worst service rifle?
Never used it myself, thank goodness, but apparently:
A:if you hit the ground hard, as one does, the pistol grip falls off.
B: the issue bugjuice eats the furniture.
C: the mag release catch is on the left, just where your thumb falls when you grasp the mag - and rubs on your webbing so the mag falls out at interesting moments.
D: the optical sight takes you longer to acquire a target.
And so on. I expect these faults have all been addressed by now, but it doesn't give you much confidence.
I liked my old SLR. You could shoot through all sorts of things with it, walls, trees, etc.
This pic was not taken while in service - just having fun! But the rifle, an FN FAL/R1, is nice!
Did you enjoy playing with what has to be the civilized world's worst service rifle?
Never used it myself, thank goodness, but apparently:
A:if you hit the ground hard, as one does, the pistol grip falls off.
B: the issue bugjuice eats the furniture.
C: the mag release catch is on the left, just where your thumb falls when you grasp the mag - and rubs on your webbing so the mag falls out at interesting moments.
D: the optical sight takes you longer to acquire a target.
And so on. I expect these faults have all been addressed by now, but it doesn't give you much confidence.
I liked my old SLR. You could shoot through all sorts of things with it, walls, trees, etc.
This pic was not taken while in service - just having fun! But the rifle, an FN FAL/R1, is nice!
Attachments
Nonskimmer
Captain
Good stuff everyone. 
The cadet version was introduced a bit after the service version, and may have benefitted from some of the teething troubles of it's parent!
It is slightly "dumbed down" compared to the original - it has only single-shot capacity (which I don't see as a problem; the FN FAL in its British L1A1 SLR version was also modified to single-shot only), and no optical sight - again, IMHO, a better idea!
Edit: The cadet version has to be manually reloaded by pulling the breech-block back, and is not semi-automatic. Needless to say, the SLR is.
The thing I don't like about rifles which have a full auto capacity is that people tend to use them on full auto rather than doing aimed shooting. Call me old fashioned, but I value marksmanship for a number of obvious reasons!
Had my Crossed Rifles when I was in the Cadets...
It is slightly "dumbed down" compared to the original - it has only single-shot capacity (which I don't see as a problem; the FN FAL in its British L1A1 SLR version was also modified to single-shot only), and no optical sight - again, IMHO, a better idea!
Edit: The cadet version has to be manually reloaded by pulling the breech-block back, and is not semi-automatic. Needless to say, the SLR is.
The thing I don't like about rifles which have a full auto capacity is that people tend to use them on full auto rather than doing aimed shooting. Call me old fashioned, but I value marksmanship for a number of obvious reasons!
Had my Crossed Rifles when I was in the Cadets...
- Thread starter
- #477
We had SUSAT sights on the quad light machine gun (I cant remember what kind of gun we were using).
Anyhow I got to play with the real guns anyhow when I joined the real army.
Anyhow I got to play with the real guns anyhow when I joined the real army.
Light Support Weapon, basically an SA80/L85 with a heavier barrel and a bipod; sort of the British Army's answer to the RPK.
I liked the old L4 Bren Gun, as it fired 7.62mm ammo from a 30rd mag which fitted the SLR too - made for good interchangeability. That died the death when they took our Brens away and replaced them with FN MAG GPMGs, which accepted only disintegrating link ammo - OK for some purposes, but rubbish for leg infantry. Spend hours camming up, and then wrap yourself up in shiny belts of gun ammo! Not to mention the stuff catching in bushes, falling off, and so on. Very good gun, but it needed some sort of ammo box fitted, like they finally did with the Minimi.
I liked the old L4 Bren Gun, as it fired 7.62mm ammo from a 30rd mag which fitted the SLR too - made for good interchangeability. That died the death when they took our Brens away and replaced them with FN MAG GPMGs, which accepted only disintegrating link ammo - OK for some purposes, but rubbish for leg infantry. Spend hours camming up, and then wrap yourself up in shiny belts of gun ammo! Not to mention the stuff catching in bushes, falling off, and so on. Very good gun, but it needed some sort of ammo box fitted, like they finally did with the Minimi.
- Thread starter
- #479
Yeah that was deffinatly a fun time. The British Cadre were all great too, really tought us some great stuff and we all had a good time. My favorite was on the Bivvy we went out and played war games with Artillary simulators.
Man I thought it was the coolest thing in the world to be in a war until I actually went to war and then I realized how scary it really is and how much hell it really is.
Man I thought it was the coolest thing in the world to be in a war until I actually went to war and then I realized how scary it really is and how much hell it really is.
