FutureWeapons on Discovery Chan


PDA






-C4-
April 26, 2006, 11:55 PM
The show is okay, but horribly inaccurate as per usual on the discovery channel. The host just said that the .308 was the standard round for the AK-47. Anyone else see the show?

-C4-

If you enjoyed reading about "FutureWeapons on Discovery Chan" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Nathaniel Firethorn
April 27, 2006, 12:12 AM
Yup. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=197328)

- NF

redloki
April 27, 2006, 12:30 AM
Yes, I saw it and I noticed that as well. That whole episode to me seems as if the Discovery Channel was trying to put creedence to California banning the .50BMG and the fact that many feel that such a round/weapon should not be in the hands of civilians. They painted the Barrett M82 series as evil incarnate with a will of its own. They acted as if it was easy as pie to engage a target out to 2000yds just by pulling the trigger and never touching the dials on their optic by dialing the correct dope. It seems this was completely done off camera. Not to mention emblishing the time it takes to load a bolt action rifle, refering to normal military .308 bolt guns. If I remember this correctly he said that it took 20 seconds to chamber a round. I just did not like the "feel" of the entire episode.

Low-Sci
April 27, 2006, 12:43 AM
Yeah I know that's a load of ponyloaf, but as a simple technicality...

The 7.62x39 round, while it has a different chamber than a .308 Nato, has the same land and groove dimensions in the barrel because the bullet itself is of the same diameter. Maybe they just got confused and thought that bullet diameter was the whole story. I wouldn't put that past them.

Cosmoline
April 27, 2006, 02:11 AM
Well then I've been wasting my money on .311" bullets. And there are about a billion 7.62x39 rounds that have been mistakenly loaded with .311" rounds :neener: The 7.62x39 uses the same diameter round as the soviet's 7.62x54R ball, which is also right at .311". This corresponds with the archaic "Three Line" measurement used with the Czarist round.

He just put his foot in his mouth, pure and simple. The .308 is not the round fired by the AK-47. Some AK-pattern Saigas, yes. But not the AK-47. Like a lot of shooters with a strictly military background, his knowledge is deep but narrow. He gets tripped up the second he strays from arms in the current US arsenal. The producers should have caught it. Heck, Jamie from Mythbusters would have caught it in a second.

I don't think it's as anti in motivation as some others here. They interview Barrett himself, who's a staunch advocate of the RKBA. The tests were well within the rifle's parameters. It really is an amazing invention.

robert garner
April 27, 2006, 02:25 AM
Excuse but I was under the impression he was refering to earlier .50 bmg weapons bolt system, showing the Barret auto loading as vastly superior.
I would imagine that a demonstration of British musketry with the SMLE
would leave them rather wide eyed!

Low-Sci
April 27, 2006, 02:30 AM
I can fairly well admit when I'm wrong, so you've got me. I didn't know that about 7.62x39.

Cosmoline
April 27, 2006, 02:40 AM
Well it does say it's 7.62, so it's not unreasonable to conclude that it would be the same as other rounds calling themselves "7.62." But as is often the case in the world of small arms, what's reasonable isn't always what's correct.

Combat-wombat
April 27, 2006, 03:48 AM
I didn't have time to watch it, but I saw the commercial... showed the Barrett M82 and said how it could destroy an enemy target from 2 miles away.:rolleyes:

MTMilitiaman
April 27, 2006, 04:27 AM
Even Counterstrike gets it more accurately than that.

I can fairly well admit when I'm wrong, so you've got me. I didn't know that about 7.62x39.

To your credit, some domestically produced 7.62x39 weapons, such as the Ruger Mini-30, and ammunition are true .308 caliber, but the ComBlock weapons and most foreign ammunition is .310-.311 caliber. Wolf, last time I measured it, miked out to .310 caliber, for example.

doubleaes2
April 27, 2006, 07:27 AM
I was really looking forward to that show, but I shut it off about a third of the way through. I smacked myself in the forehead when he stated that the .308 round was standard for the AK. :banghead: I did not like the show at all. (The parts I watched.) The host seemed to be trying to make the .50 sound like some big, scary, evil rifle. I may be assuming incorrectly, but I would think that after ten years in the SEALS, he would be more familiar with weapons and their terminology.

silicon wolverine
April 27, 2006, 07:36 AM
he must be one of these kind of SEALS
Stupid
Egotistical
Arrogant
Loser
Socailists

SW

Knob Creeker
April 27, 2006, 08:05 AM
There is no way that guy was a SEAL. The AK-47 is the most used combat firearm on the planet. SEALs are trained to use a wide variety of weapons from all corners of the world and I would think that the AK would be the first one they would learn about. SEALs also use the M60 and its variants, which fire .308. Any one who has even handled both shells could clearly see that they were not dimensionally the same and if they have fired both an AK and a gun chambered in .308, they would notice a dramatic difference in ballistics and recoil. I have trouble believing he was in the military at all.

I also got the feeling they were trying to make the Barrett 50 as scary as possible. I don’t think it was done as a political anti-gun/50 cal message, the rifle was on loan personally from Ronnie Barrett himself and was fired on his range and we all know how he feels about the anti-gun folks. The scary, deadly, military play-up on the Barrett fell in line with the whole theme of the show; seemed innocent enough to me.

redloki
April 27, 2006, 08:18 AM
Robert, It's been 12 hours since the show aired and I cannot remember too well now. For all I know you could be right. I was a bit eirked at the way they potrayed the rifle as having a mind of it's own. It's a tool, no more no less. Granted, it's a big one, but still a tool.

Owen
April 27, 2006, 08:36 AM
Knob,

Why would a SEAL care about esoteric info like bullet diameter (.308 vs .311), when they are going to be issued the correct ammo?

HankB
April 27, 2006, 08:42 AM
I got a chuckle out of Ronnie Barrett saying words to the effect of "Only four men have ever designed guns and had them adapted by the US Military - Browning, Stoner, Garand, and Me."

I guess he forgot about Sam Colt, John T. Thompson, David "Carbine" Williams, and a host of others. :rolleyes:

The sub part of the show was interesting, but the German sub is quieter than the latest US subs? I was under the impression that US nuke subs, if moving at slow speeds, didn't need to have the reactor pumps running, making them dead quiet, too . . . but I really don't have credible info, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

As for the host, the guy came off more like a mall ninja poser than like a genuine Navy SEAL. I got a real chuckle about how he was "captured" by the unarmed tubby guy in sunglasses after the drone managed the challenging task of zooming in on the only moving object in an empty section of desert . . .

dfaugh
April 27, 2006, 09:36 AM
Yeah, I watched it..and couldn't belive what he said about the "308" round...Especially if he was really a SEAL..

However, I didn't think the portion on the .50 was biased, in fact they never even mentioned that .50s are available to the public(except a mention that AP ammo wasn't available to the public-I forgot that part). And, it was kinda neat to see one in action..

I've watched it a couple times now, and overall its kinda interesting, even if they don't always get their facts absolutely straight.

belton-deer-hunter
April 27, 2006, 09:59 AM
i watched this and the sad part is i noticed the ak ammo part and even told my GF she now thinks i spend to much time on here thanks guys.......:evil:

Nathaniel Firethorn
April 27, 2006, 10:00 AM
I got a chuckle out of Ronnie Barrett saying words to the effect of "Only four men have ever designed guns and had them adapted by the US Military - Browning, Stoner, Garand, and Me."

I guess he forgot about Sam Colt, John T. Thompson, David "Carbine" Williams, and a host of others.I think he did qualify it enough so it might have been accurate as stated. IIRC, he said "in the last century" and he might have said "rifle" as well.

He'd have had to say it so that it omitted Williams, though.

Yup, he's got an ego. Maybe he has the right to it.

- NF

Mizzle187
April 27, 2006, 10:50 AM
The only thing that show did for me is push me over the edge to buy a Barrett 50 . I have a shop here that has one in stock. Im tempted to go put it on layaway once I get the configuration. Does anyone have any experience with these?

Knob Creeker
April 27, 2006, 10:56 AM
Owen
Why would a SEAL care about esoteric info like bullet diameter (.308 vs .311), when they are going to be issued the correct ammo?

I’m not so sure bullet diameter itself is the problem, but rather knowing which ammo goes with which firearm. When they are going to be issued the correct ammo, no problem.

When they are involved in a situation that takes longer than expected, the issued ammo might run slim and they would have to re-supply from enemy soldiers. If the pick-up weapon is an AK or any thing else, they better know what type of ammunition to feed it because the quartermaster won’t be around to help them out. Another instance is during ‘deniable operations’, when the government is acting discreetly and would not like being traced to the soldiers if something goes wrong. In these cases they would be issued ‘clean’ weapons more common to the indigenous forces rather than typical US equipment, and again, they better know whether it takes 7.62x39 or 7.62x51 (.308)

jlbraun
April 27, 2006, 11:11 AM
What's the guy's name? There are sites out there that check people out, simply because there are enough people out there claiming things like "Oh, I was in SEAL Team 6 but you can't see my records because they were all destroyed in a fire..." and getting jobs because of it.

Claiming a .308Win is the round in the AK, and claiming that it takes 20 seconds to reload a bolt-action rifle make me suspicious of his background.

Crosshair
April 27, 2006, 12:19 PM
The sub part of the show was interesting, but the German sub is quieter than the latest US subs? I was under the impression that US nuke subs, if moving at slow speeds, didn't need to have the reactor pumps running, making them dead quiet, too . . . but I really don't have credible info, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

As a general rule, Modern Diesels running on electric motors are MUCH quieter than a nuke could hope to be. Even running on Diesel power, they are not much nosier than a modern nuke sub. There have been several instances of Diesels getting within firing distance of a US carrier during war games. Here is an article taking a serious look at our navy. It is a very good read.

Is the US Navy Overrated? (http://www.g2mil.com/thompson.htm)

From the article:
Marcinko’s team had little difficulty infiltrating the base, and it made a mockery of the militasters of the base security forces. In his own words: “I rented a small plane, and Horseface flew us under the I-95 bridge, wetting our wheels in the Thames as we swooped low. We buzzed the sub pens. No one waved us off. We rented a boat and flew the Soviet flag on its stern, then chugged past the base while we openly taped video of the subs in their dry docks, capturing classified details of their construction elements. The dry docks were exposed and unprotected – if we’d decided to ram one of the subs, nothing stood in our way.”

seeker_two
April 27, 2006, 12:37 PM
May all our enemies use .308 Winchester ammo in their AK's... :evil:

Crosshair
April 27, 2006, 12:43 PM
seeker_two

May all our enemies use .308 Winchester ammo in their AK's... :evil:

Sweet, when did our enemies start using .308 Saigas. That explains where they all went.

Cosmoline
April 27, 2006, 02:41 PM
He's supposed to be a SEAL? I must have missed that. I thought he was from the Army for some reason. That does make me wonder. If they're not being trained to use battlefield pickup weapons then they ought to be. I can't find a website for the show with his name, but next time it airs we should note it and check him out.

seeker_two
April 27, 2006, 02:47 PM
Sweet, when did our enemies start using .308 Saigas. That explains where they all went.

(...hands Crosshair a box of .338 Lapua Mag...)

...and just for that, you get to use these in your SKS... :neener:

Carl N. Brown
April 27, 2006, 03:24 PM
Apparently the SEAL or exSEAL is like most most military and police
personnel: clueless outside their current issue weapons.
Kari the Vegan from Mythbusters probably know more about guns
than the average military or police.

Remember the big flap when a Dallas policeman identified the
JFK assassination weapon as a 7.65 Mauser insread of 6.5 Carcano?
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=33160&d=1135798460
That is as damaging to credibility as equating 7.62 NATO with 7.62x39mm;
falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, as they like to say.

Cosmoline
April 27, 2006, 03:56 PM
In fairness, the Carcano/1891 carbine confusion was an easy mistake to make from only a quick look at the rifle. They are similar size and have similar external box single stack magazines. There's really nothing in common betwee the .308 and the 7.62x39 other than the "7.62" designation. So if you've ever SEEN THEM SIDE BY SIDE or FIRED them, you'll instantly know the difference. In the case of the Dallas PD we can conclude whoever made the mistake had seen some of the recent surplus imports but didn't have detailed knowledge of various types. In the case of this fellow, we can conclude he's never actually fired an AK-47, which is disturbing.

Carl N. Brown
April 27, 2006, 04:25 PM
A SEAL unfamiliar with his enemies' weapon is disturbing.

But most military and police do not know much about guns
beyond their issue weapons.

Which is why WE (THR) should be hired to vet Discovery
channel on gun issues, and be paid handsome bonuses.

(Back in the late 1960's I walked into J&M Wholesale, saw
a rack of 7.65 Mauser 1891s, and thought to myself, where
did they dig up those Carcanos? until I got a closer look.)

TMM
April 27, 2006, 05:29 PM
I watched it too and it rather bothered me...

if a guy who was in the SEALS for 10 years, i'd certainly hope he could discern between a 7.62 Kommie and 7.62 NATO...

He also dosn't seem very knowledgeable in other areas, like other posters mentioned - 20 seconds to reload a single-shot bolt action? i think not.

~tmm

Carl N. Brown
April 28, 2006, 02:55 PM
I had that taped. Looking back at the tape this morning, I
began to feel (as I noted on another thread) that Mr. SEAL
is on TV, reading from a script, and probably has no
authority to edit or re-write. At least he has a paying job.

Kevlarman
April 28, 2006, 05:48 PM
You'd think that as a SEAL, he'd have enough clout to tell the producers, "look, your script is inaccurate and will make me look like a fool on national television, especially to all my other fellow SEAL buddies."
:confused:

saspic
April 29, 2006, 01:56 AM
I got the impression that since the .223 and .50 calibers are both in inches, he wanted to give the AK caliber in inches as well for comparative purposes.
Admit it, how many of you can convert millimeters out to the hundredths place into inches to the thousandth? So maybe he was off by .003 inches or so, SEALS aren't mathmeticians.

Sactown
April 29, 2006, 02:43 AM
I thought he said .308 bullet and not .308 round. 7.62 would be .308 BULLET, but if he said round, then he's got no business hosting a weapons show.

Kevlarman
April 29, 2006, 02:54 AM
Yes indeed, he said "this is the .308, it is the standard round for the AK-47."

When people say .223, I take it to mean 5.56x45.
When people say .308, I take it to mean 7.62x51, not 7.62x39.
(Yeah yeah, they're not exactly the same..) :neener:

Carl N. Brown
May 1, 2006, 12:36 PM
Suffice to say, this tape gets recyled (like "House of the Dead").

Cosmoline
May 1, 2006, 02:50 PM
The host is Richard J. Machowicz, who wrote "Unleashing the Warrior Within."

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786865695/104-8814091-8705535?v=glance&n=283155

Provided, of course, that the warrior within doesn't have to use the AK-47 within.

He also founded the "Bukido Institute:

http://www.bukido.com/

His bio is here:

http://www.bukido.com/RickMack.html

The picture is pretty clear to me. You can draw your own conclusions.

seeker_two
May 1, 2006, 06:54 PM
I thought he said .308 bullet and not .308 round. 7.62 would be .308 BULLET, but if he said round, then he's got no business hosting a weapons show.

Then he'd STILL be wrong...the AK/SKS uses .311-.312" bullets...same diameter as the .303 British or the 7.56 Argentine Mauser. :banghead:

I know. I make reduced loads for my SMLE sporter using AK bullets (123gr.) :D

murphy54
May 2, 2006, 09:47 AM
I have not seen it...but that person was as stupid as it gets ...an AK 47 with that ammo...

Carl N. Brown
May 5, 2006, 12:13 PM
Ok, I have not taped over this show I said I did not like,
and I did rewatch it.

On the Barret comment "Only four men have ever designed guns and had them adapted by the US Military - Browning, Stoner, Garand, and Me."

I got the gut feeling that on the cutting room floor was the explanation
that Ronny Barret--like Browning, Stoner and Garand--conceived an
idea, designed and developed the rifle himself, marketed it, got it
adopted by the military and continued to control its development
and manufacture after adoption by the military, which is what makes
Barret one of a few in the history of arms design. There is a hint
of that in the introduction to that quote.

starfuryzeta
May 25, 2006, 06:46 AM
Last night they did a bit on the Tavor (http://www.defense-update.com/directory/tavor.htm). Looks like a nice lil bullpup.

fletcher
May 25, 2006, 09:11 AM
Agreed, the Tavor looks to be a very good weapon. I love the part when he said "It's as accurate as a sniper rifle."

hksw
May 25, 2006, 12:22 PM
Dude, he was a Navy SEAL SNIPER for 10 years! He should know. You should know too, he says it every dramatic episode. :rolleyes:

(Note : I am skeptical of, at least, his knowledge.)

What I can't get over is his calling anything weapon system that can be delivered by remote or without a first hand human witness as "sinister".

Creeping Incrementalism
May 25, 2006, 01:45 PM
http://www.bukido.com/RickMack.html
He was a certified instructor in Naval Special Warfare Combat Fighting Instructor Course, a Naval Special Warfare Scout/Sniper

A sniper instructor, and he thinks a bolt action rifle takes 20 seconds to reload?

From taking a look at this guy's website, it looks like he's in love with his own manly image.

carterbeauford
August 24, 2006, 09:32 PM
The episode in question is being rerun as I post this, which prompted me to search and find this thread.

Richard "Mack" Machowicz is quite the tacticool badass.

He claimed the Barrett has cut a man in two? :scrutiny:

The .308 AK quote, along with the quote in my sig, is depressing. It is time these networks found people with a little credibility.

A .48ACP AK would be pretty sweet, on the other hand :neener:

SolaScriptura139
August 24, 2006, 10:34 PM
You'd think that as a SEAL, he'd have enough clout to tell the producers, "look, your script is inaccurate and will make me look like a fool on national television, especially to all my other fellow SEAL buddies."


Yeah, then they flash the paycheck in his face...:neener:

loki.fish
August 25, 2006, 01:41 AM
As mentioned before, not only is he an ex SEAL, he's an ex SEAL sniper. The only episode I have seen with a Barrett .50bmg rifle, he didn't use the M82, he used the M107...same episode as the "worlds quietest sub" from Germany and the UAV that tracked the black moving SUV through a desert. Every episode I have seen, I've been disgusted about some of his remarks. Just makes me sick.

RangerHAAF
August 25, 2006, 07:04 AM
Does anyone know or remember the website that is kept up by SOCOM operators? I'm registered there because I was with the first Ranger Battalion between 86 and 90 and I know at least one of the moderators.

They have sections for all of the members of the SOCOM family; Rangers, SEALS, SF, Marine Recon, Air Force PJ's, etc. If this guy was truly a SEAL someone on that board will know him.

They've probably already started talking among themselves because of the show last night, no SEAL or SOCOM family member makes that kind of mistake.

Okay,

I've found the link, if anyone should care to check it out.

http://www.socnetcentral.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=42

Wes Janson
August 25, 2006, 05:55 PM
I didn't see the Barrett episode, but I did see the first part of the Tavor/Sensor Fused Weapon episode. Several things struck me about both:

I got a bad feeling about the Tavor, and the way they presented it. First off, no iron back-up sights at all? And the claim that the optic was an integral part of the barrel had to be incorrect. They made a big deal out of it being more compact, which is true, being a bullpup, but the size difference seems irrelevent. An M4 is nominally 33 inches long, extended; the Tavor is 28 inches. 5 inches is a difference, but you can drop that down to 2 inches by collapsing the stock. There are no provisions for an M203, or much of anything else (although some will undoubtedly argue that to be a good thing).

And did anyone else notice the firearms instructor walking in FRONT of a line of soldiers, in prone position with rifles pointed downrange?!


One thing struck me about the Sensor Fused Weapon CBU-97B/BLU-108B munition: they never gave any information on the combat efficacy of the weapon. Of all the munitions that actually hit their target, what percentage successfully disable/destroy the enemy vehicle? And what about the crew? They spent some time talking about the lone combat test of the SFW in Iraq, and how it supposedly hit a number of Iraqi vehicles, causing the rest of the formation to surrender...but they never say how badly damaged the vehicles really were. Those omissions seem somewhat suspicious to me, and I'd love to know how effective it really is at disabling/destroying enemy armor.

default
August 25, 2006, 10:26 PM
Whether the host (or the writers) meant to indicate the round, or rather the nominal bullet diameter, it's wrong. And it's not a simple technicality regarding tiny fractions of inches, since to claim that the standard round fired by the AK was the ".311" would be equally misleading.

The real issue is that the term ".308", at least when written or spoken aloud without any further clarification, has pretty much one meaning to anyone even casually familiar with rifles - it's shorthand for the caliber known as .308 Winchester and its NATO-spec sibling 7.62x51, which as I understand it has somewhat different chamber dimensions and pressure, etc.

It's a fairly gross error for a show with a technical theme. How seriously would you take a documentary on the weapons of the Wehrmacht that claimed that the Walther P38 was chambered in .357? Which is actually closer to the truth, by one thousandth of an inch, if one is referring to cartridges strictly by counting out to the third decimal place. :rolleyes:

Green Lantern
December 31, 2006, 07:26 PM
I first saw the promos for the show today, during a mini "Man vs. Wild" marathon. (MAN, Discovery loves to promote itself!)

While I generally don't think about such things too often, my first impressions were, in order:
1) Man, it bites that I'll probably never get to even handle any of the stuff on there as a "civvie" :(
2) Man...us civvies are getting more and more behind every day in the "effective weapons" department when compared to the Gov....:uhoh:

If you enjoyed reading about "FutureWeapons on Discovery Chan" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!