.50 cal BS I heard....


PDA






Tinker
April 10, 2012, 08:58 PM
I know this young man (in the Army) .
You told me that he will be manning a vehicle mounted .50 caliber gun.
I was very interested so I asked him about his training.

All was well until he told me how effective and ferocious the .50 caliber round is......

"A Round out of that gun will take a man's arm off...
even if it passes within 3 inches...."

I always thought a projectile had to actually hit a target to do damage. :)

Is this crap actually taught to our young servicemen?

If you enjoyed reading about ".50 cal BS I heard...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
mnrivrat
April 10, 2012, 09:01 PM
Times have changed - if BS was a quarter I would be a Trillionaire.

Naw, I don't think military training is that ignorant.

Devonai
April 10, 2012, 09:05 PM
Mythbusters busted this one, and no, they don't teach this to soldiers.

303tom
April 10, 2012, 09:05 PM
There is one in every crowd....................

allaroundhunter
April 10, 2012, 09:06 PM
If it hits a wall within 3" of the targets arm the shrapnel could do some good damage...

Hacker15E
April 10, 2012, 09:08 PM
The military has no shortage of <deleted>-talkers, regardless of training.

Jim K
April 10, 2012, 09:08 PM
Well, yes, and it is not recent, either. My unit was told in basic training by the range sergeant that the ammunition we were issued (.30 Caliber Ball M2) was for training, that "real" ammunition with black tips (armor piercing) would be issued in combat. True enough; AP was generally issued in combat because it could penetrate vehicles and light armor.

But then the sergeant went on to inform us that bullets from our "training" ammo would penetrate the target paper and drop on the other side. Being a lowly private E-1, I didn't ask him to volunteer to stand behind the target and check on that.

Jim

jbr
April 10, 2012, 09:09 PM
What he meant to say was "if it passes within 3" it wll make you <deleted> your pants"

allaroundhunter
April 10, 2012, 09:12 PM
But then the sergeant went on to inform us that bullets from our "training" ammo would penetrate the target paper and drop on the other side

You mean to tell me that it....*gulp*....kept going?.....I am shocked that your training ammo was even capable of penetrating the paper :neener:

tryshoot
April 10, 2012, 09:41 PM
If one comes by me at 3in, My arm might fall of because I spun aroud so quick and run.

The-Reaver
April 10, 2012, 09:50 PM
lol

FAIL

I would pretty much disregard everything that dude says from now on.

NavyLCDR
April 10, 2012, 09:50 PM
I used to be in a 155mm Howitzer company in the Army National Guard. We were shooting illumination rounds one night when a newb asked me about them, specifically what lit them. I had him convinced that there was a monkey in the round that would light them and come down on a parachute. Since training monkeys was kind of difficult and expensive we had special companies what would retrieve them called Special Monkey Recovery Forces..... yep, SMURFS for short! :evil:

After joining the Navy when we did field day (deep cleaning) on the submarine we would shut down one side of the engine room to allow the steam pipes to cool so we could clean behind/around them and not get burned. A guy from up forward asked me why we shut down half the engine room for field day. I told him it was an old tradition from the days of the Vikings. The Viking ships had rowers, so in order to have slaves do the cleaning, one half of them would have to stop rowing to clean, thus shutting down half of their "engine room". We did the same in honor of that.

And....since one half of the rowers would stop, the other half would keep going, so the Viking ship would start going in a circle. To honor that, during field day we would cock the rudder to one side and go in a circle too.

Yeah, there are lots of <deleted> in the military. :evil:

allaroundhunter
April 10, 2012, 09:55 PM
Navy, I don't think you helped the BSing.... ;)

parsimonious_instead
April 10, 2012, 09:59 PM
Kaj Larsen, a reporter for current.tv who supposedly was a Navy Seal, did two pieces on the Knob Creek machinegunshoot.
In his first segment, he claims that a .50 BMG can kill people just by whizzing past them, if they're close enough. This first piece on Knob Creek was actually balanced, reflective and respectful of its subject matter.
Approx a year later he did another, more strongly anti-gun piece that mixed different "takes" from his Knob Creek video essay and somehow tied it into gang/street violence.

Joe_m107
April 10, 2012, 10:11 PM
I was told on multiple occasions by numerous people that a 50BMG will kill without touching the target during my time in the Army. I even believed it when I was in basic training. I believed everything my Drill Sergeants told me.

wiringlunatic
April 10, 2012, 10:26 PM
I remember hearing of someone shooting next to a squirrel with a muzzleloader and taking it out with the concussion of the bullet. Maybe someone could be killed or at least seriously hurt by a shell going past their head. Not going to take an arm off though.

allaroundhunter
April 10, 2012, 10:49 PM
Maybe someone could be killed or at least seriously hurt by a shell going past their head.

A shell? Meaning artillery shell? Maybe, but I wouldn't know as I have no experience there. I still would doubt it though.

But not a .50 BMG round. A miss with a .50 is just as lethal as a miss with a .22 LR....

crazy-mp
April 10, 2012, 11:10 PM
https://encrypted-tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTGMGlGo5WwS7xGs_AHIbBT-8SbpkUcOkWQi-uEyrzwUzrx0T1j

The also said artificial sweeteners were safe, WMD's were in Iraq and Ann Nicole married for love!




Don't believe everything you hear, especially when it comes to guns

firesky101
April 10, 2012, 11:13 PM
Ha... I just watched shooter yesterday.

allaroundhunter
April 10, 2012, 11:18 PM
Shooter.....a great movie....but the quote goes:
The also said artificial sweeteners were safe, WMD's were in Iraq and Anna Nicole married for love!

MrDig
April 10, 2012, 11:20 PM
I remember being told that it was against the Geneva Convention to shoot personnel with the 50 Caliber, but it perfectly ok to "shoot them in the canteen"...............

allaroundhunter
April 10, 2012, 11:23 PM
I remember being told that it was against the Geneva Convention to shoot personnel with the 50 Caliber, but it perfectly ok to "shoot them in the canteen"...............

Well, dum-dum rounds in other calibers cause excessive and unnecessary suffering....
As far as the .50 BMG...an FMJ, dum-dum, API, they will all leave a dead combatant.

DoubleTapDrew
April 10, 2012, 11:23 PM
Maybe he read that piece of drivel by the anti-gunner reporting that the BMG will pierce tanks, knock a railcar off the tracks, shoot down aircraft, and vaporize deer.
When emotions get involved physics go out the window.

Jorg Nysgerrig
April 10, 2012, 11:28 PM
I remember being told that it was against the Geneva Convention to shoot personnel with the 50 Caliber, but it perfectly ok to "shoot them in the canteen"...............
One of the oldest ones out there and still a complete myth.

MachIVshooter
April 11, 2012, 12:42 AM
I remember hearing of someone shooting next to a squirrel with a muzzleloader and taking it out with the concussion of the bullet. Maybe someone could be killed or at least seriously hurt by a shell going past their head. Not going to take an arm off though.

Nope.

Unless the projectile actually hits someone, they will be uninjured. Doesn't matter if it's a 5.56mm or a 120mm shell. Yeah, you'll feel more disruption of the air from a larger projectile passing, but it will not hurt you.

I remember being told that it was against the Geneva Convention to shoot personnel with the 50 Caliber,

Yeah, that load of malarky is almost as old as the .50 BMG round itself. First off, Geneva convention deals with the treatment of POWs; Hague convention is the one regulating ammunition. Secondly, we (the USA) never signed it.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 11, 2012, 02:53 AM
I remember hearing of someone shooting next to a squirrel with a muzzleloader and taking it out with the concussion of the bullet. Maybe someone could be killed or at least seriously hurt by a shell going past their head. Not going to take an arm off though.

Actually you are partially correct on the squirrel thing. It's called "barking" a squirrel. But it's not from the bullet just "passing by". You aim at the tree just beside the squirrels head. The bark from the tree explodes right beside the head and will knock them out. You have to remember, muzzle loader balls from way back when where pretty healthy in size and would obliterate a squirrel. "Barking" them saved the meat. My Great Grandfather taught me that little trick when I was a weeee little fella. He liked using his old Kentucky rifle for squirrels. I preferred my .22LR with head shots :D

45bthompson
April 11, 2012, 03:34 AM
Ha ha I remember being told about the .50bmg miss/kill in BCT also! The same DS informed us that route-step march keeps bridges from falling down. He was brilliant in many ways and truly beleived the things he told us. There were a few of us that knew better but the majority just accepted it as fact. I wouldn't blame that young friend of yours. Hopefully he will never have to be in the situation to experience the scenario first hand.

justin 561
April 11, 2012, 04:27 AM
Kaj Larsen, a reporter for current.tv who supposedly was a Navy Seal, did two pieces on the Knob Creek machinegunshoot.
In his first segment, he claims that a .50 BMG can kill people just by whizzing past them, if they're close enough. This first piece on Knob Creek was actually balanced, reflective and respectful of its subject matter.
Approx a year later he did another, more strongly anti-gun piece that mixed different "takes" from his Knob Creek video essay and somehow tied it into gang/street violence.

This is from the a show on Current.Tv on one of their many "objective" documentaries. The show is called "Vanguard: Guns in America". I have watched the whole thing a few times and when I first seen it I thought it was going to be a good thing..Til it got to the end and you see his true Anti-2a colors show bright.

ultradoc
April 11, 2012, 07:12 AM
MrDig, I too was told the same. You can shoot the canteen,helmet,webgear but not the person.

parsimonious_instead
April 11, 2012, 07:24 AM
One of the oldest ones out there and still a complete myth.


Isn't there an actual reg. about not using anti-aircraft weapons against ground troops? Perhaps that's where the myth started?

scythefwd
April 11, 2012, 07:41 AM
Mach IV - we aren't signatories, but we do follow both the Hauge and Geneva conventions.

Jeremiah10:23
April 11, 2012, 11:27 AM
NAVYLCDR,
My favorite was when we gave a reservist an oil sample bottle and told him to get "air samples" from air compressors. We ran him all over the place right up until we sent him to the XO and he shut down our little game.

The best part was we had a guy with when he was taking the "samples" and he kept telling the reservist to close the lid quicker because all the air was escaping.

Drail
April 11, 2012, 11:30 AM
Crazy-mp, that was priceless. You made my day. God, I love Levon Helm.

Driftertank
April 11, 2012, 12:00 PM
On the subject of "messin' with newbies" my stepfather was AF Groundcrew for many years. When they got a new guy, he said one of their favorite pranks was to send him to get some "Prop wash." Of course, since everyone on base was in on it, they'd run the poor kid all over the base looking for it.

(For those who don't know, "prop-wash" is the term for the wind generated by a propeller on an aircraft. Back then, the airforce still used piston-engined planes.)

As for the use of Anti-materiel weapons against personnel, i was ALSO under the impression that it was against the Hague Convention.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 11, 2012, 12:15 PM
Guys, if the .50cal was against the Hague, do you think the M82 or M107 Barrett 50cal record book kills would have been so well documented? The U.S. only signed Hague IV in 1907 stating that they wouldn't use ammo or equipment that would cause undue suffering.

allaroundhunter
April 11, 2012, 12:35 PM
Guys, if the .50cal was against the Hague, do you think the M82 or M107 Barrett 50cal record book kills would have been so well documented? The U.S. only signed Hague IV in 1907 stating that they wouldn't use ammo or equipment that would cause undue suffering.

In the conflict with Iraq and Afghanistan we are not bound by the laws governing the use of certain bullets. The laws only apply when both sides have signed and agreed to the terms.

Ragnar Danneskjold
April 11, 2012, 01:04 PM
Huh. When I got my 5 all I did was try to tell my team accurate information and treat them like adults so that we would all have a better chance of not getting killed, and so they would actually respect me and not just pretend like it to my face.

Then again, I've seen plenty of NCOs who see their 3 stripes as a limitless "get out of real work free" card, so I can understand that some of those same people would get a kick out of lying to those who they're supposed to be leading.

Tinker
April 11, 2012, 01:43 PM
I remember hearing of someone shooting next to a squirrel with a muzzleloader and taking it out with the concussion of the bullet. Maybe someone could be killed or at least seriously hurt by a shell going past their head. Not going to take an arm off though.

I believe that is called "barking" a squirrel when using a larger bore ML. You aim for the patch of bark where the squirrel is attached. The bark blungeons the critter. A .50 cal ball would do more damage.

NavyLCDR
April 11, 2012, 01:48 PM
Maybe he read that piece of drivel by the anti-gunner reporting that the BMG will pierce tanks, knock a railcar off the tracks, shoot down aircraft, and vaporize deer.
When emotions get involved physics go out the window.

You can shoot down an aircraft in flight with a .22. It's all about shot placement.

Oh, and don't forget to send out the new guy to retrieve the keys to the jet and/or 5-ton truck.

CAR-AR
April 11, 2012, 05:12 PM
I lost my sense of humor early in my enlistment, too many green tables and such. 2292 days was enough for me, I didn't smile till I cleared the dry docks, I wanted to make sure I was actually out, then I could smile.

MistWolf
April 11, 2012, 05:56 PM
...After joining the Navy when we did field day (deep cleaning) on the submarine we would shut down one side of the engine room to allow the steam pipes to cool so we could clean behind/around them and not get burned. A guy from up forward asked me why we shut down half the engine room for field day. I told him it was an old tradition from the days of the Vikings. The Viking ships had rowers, so in order to have slaves do the cleaning, one half of them would have to stop rowing to clean, thus shutting down half of their "engine room". We did the same in honor of that.

And....since one half of the rowers would stop, the other half would keep going, so the Viking ship would start going in a circle. To honor that, during field day we would cock the rudder to one side and go in a circle too.

Yeah, there are lots of <deleted> in the military. :evil:

Did you explain that the Viking Longships were usually were V-16 powered and when one bank was shut down for cleaning, the loss of 8 Viking rowers cut the boat's Norsepower in half?

Kaeto
April 11, 2012, 06:11 PM
When I was a raw newbe in the Navy they sent me out for some 'Prop Wash' and some 'Chow Line'. I came back with a pressure bottle labeled 'Prop Wash' and a length of mooring line with a tag on it that read 'Chow Line'. I about died laughing at their faces as their fun evaporated.

Fishslayer
April 11, 2012, 06:51 PM
Navy, I don't think you helped the BSing.... ;)

Hey now! I'll have you know that there are NO BSers in the Navy.

...and that's a no *******! :D

Buck Kramer
April 11, 2012, 08:00 PM
My friend was a cannon crewmember, but they were going in as an infantry team (ended up teaching Afghan military) anyway he told he was going to be a .50 gunner and he said that they were told the .50 was not to be used on soft targets.

That being said I think this makes the most sense

Guys, if the .50cal was against the Hague, do you think the M82 or M107 Barrett 50cal record book kills would have been so well documented? The U.S. only signed Hague IV in 1907 stating that they wouldn't use ammo or equipment that would cause undue suffering.

Jorg Nysgerrig
April 11, 2012, 08:36 PM
I suppose it is time to break this out. It's from a postI made here about 6 years ago on the subject using .50 caliber weapons (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2661591&postcount=71) (combined with another post). The original thread is here (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=217552). I've edited it slight for this post to flow a bit better. Some of the links are broken since .mil sites have been substantially reorganized over the last 6 year, but I think it will clear up most questions around it.


The .50 caliber thing is a recurring myth.

From https://www.tbs.usmc.mil/Pages/Training%20Corner/sho's/J/BOJ4704%20Law%20of%20War%20-%20Code%20of%20Conduct.doc
Small Arms Projectiles. Small arms projectiles, those weighing less than 400 grams (14 ounces) must not be exploding or expanding projectiles. An example of an expanding projectile is hollow point ammunition that is designed to expand dramatically upon impact. Much “mythology” exists about the lawfulness of sniper rifles, .50 caliber machine guns, and shotguns. Bottom line: They are lawful weapons although rules of engagement, commander’s guidance, and tactics may limit their use.

From page 6-79 of TRADOC PAMPHLET 600-4:
CALIBER .50 M2 MACHINE GUN
DESCRIPTION
This weapon provides automatic weapon suppression fire for offensive and defensive purposes. This weapon can be used effectively against personnel, light armored vehicles, and low flying/slow flying aircraft. (emphasis mine)

Sniper rifles, .50 caliber machine guns, and shotguns. Much “mythology” exists about the lawfulness of these weapon systems. Bottom line: they are lawful weapons, although rules of engagement (policy and tactics) may limit their use. (US Army Operational Law Handbook, 1 Jan 2000.)

For example r[sic] many people erroneously believed that the use of a .50 caliber machine gun against individual enemy combatants was a violation of the Law of War. (INTERNATIONAL AND OPERATIONAL LAW DEPARTMENT THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S SCHOOL, U.S. ARMY CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA LAW OF WAR WORKSHOP
DESKBOOK)

The use of the .50 caliber machine-gun is perfectly lawful under treaty law and the customary practice of states. (ibid)

Use of .50 caliber weapons against individual enemy combatants does not constitute a violation of this proscription against unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury. (Navy Warfare Publication (NWP) 1-14M, 9.1.1)

50 Caliber legal to use against personnel.(Col. Robert Maguire USMC , Laws of War presentation (http://www.tecom.usmc.mil/cce/references/pme/Law%20of%20War%20-%20McGuire,%2029%20Aug%2002.PPT))

For example, many of our soldiers have been taught that the law of war prohibits firing a .50-caliber machine gun at personnel. That is wrong. The law of war does not prohibit the use of .50-caliber or other large caliber weapons against personnel. It is true that many soldiers have been taught otherwise, and because a supposed rule like that does not make sense, it has left these soldiers with a bad feeling about the law of war in general, with a feeling that it ties our hands behind our backs and gets in the way of mission accomplishment. The Office of The Judge Advocate General of the Army recently attempted to discover how this misconception about large caliber weapons made its way into law of war instruction. It appears that the confusion arose from application of the principle of war, economy of force, to the employment of large caliber weapons. Application of the economy of force principle to the use of the .50-caliber machine gun results in the conclusion that it is usually wasteful to employ such weapons against people. This is a weapon intended for bigger targets. Additionally, such wasteful use of the weapon can give away its position in our deployment. Thus, we can see that rules of tactics, not rules of law, dictate the use of the .50-caliber machine gun. (LAW OF WAR (https://atiam.train.army.mil/soldierPortal/atia/adlsc/view/public/7777-1/accp/mp1023/lesson.htm#partb), Subcourse Number MP1023, EDITION B, United States Army Military Police School, Fort McClellan, Alabama, June 1994) (emphasis mine)


_____________________________________________________________

Here is the pièce de résistance (or the coup de grâce, depending on how you look at it). This is from "The Army Laywer", Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-50-172, April 1987, pp. 36-37, http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/04-1987.pdf. It is a scan and as such, doesn't cut and paste properly. I fixed it as best as I could for the time I was willing to invest. However, for the most accurate version, use the preceeding link. All emphasis is mine.


International Law Note
Use of the .50-Caliber Machinegun

One of the recurring myths surrounding the law of war involves a supposed prohibition against the use of the .50 caliber machinegun against enemy personnel. The following opinion, DAJA-IA 1986/8044,21 Nov. 1986, issued by the International Law Division, Office of The Judge Advocate General, dispels this myth, definitively demonstrating that use of the weapon against personnel in the field is consistent with both customary and codified international law:

There is a long history of employment of infantry weapons up to .70 caliber against enemy personnel. The first U.S.musket, made in 1795, was .70 caliber. The first U.S. percussion musket, the Model 1842, was calibber .69, as was an 1847 musketoon developed for use by cavalry, artillery, and sappers. In 1855 the U.S.Army standardized the Caliber 58; the Navy chose to retain the larger caliber .69. Larger wall pieces-up to caliber .75-were manufactured as long range sniper rifles for defense of frontier posts. Muskets and rifles used by other nations during this time also ranged up to .70 caliber.

With the introduction of better grade steel, the breech lock system, rifling, and more powerful propellants, calibers decreased. By 1900, projectiles ranging from calibers .236 to .3 15 had been adopted by the major nations of the world. In contrast with the issue at hand, some argued that this decrease in caliber (and a commensurate increase in muzzle velocity) caused greater suffering than previous larger-caliber weapons, an argument similar to that proffered by Sweden in the 1970s against the 5.56mm (.223 caliber) M-16 rifle. This argument was not supported by medical evidence on either occasion, and was rejected at the Hague Peace Conferences of 1899 and 1907 and the 1978-1980 United Nations Conference on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects [hereinafter UNCCWJ].

Larger-caliber weapons have remained in the inventories of virtually every nation. For example, the Soviet Union mounts the NSV .50 caliber machinegun on its tanks; it can be removed and employed on a tripod in a ground mode. Nations generally employ 50-caliber machineguns 8s antiaircraft, antimateriel, -and antipersonnel weapons. On occasion, they have been employed specifically as longrange sniper weapons. The Soviet PTRD was a 14.5mm (.58 caliber) bolt-action, single-shot antitank weapon employed during World War II; because of its long-range accuracy, it was frequently employed as a sniper weapon against German troops. Similarly, the Browning Machinegun Caliber .50 HB, M2 currently in use by U.S. forces, was employed as a single-shot sniper rifle during the Vietnam War.

Doctrine for the Browning Machinegun Caliber .50 HB, M2, is contained in U.S.Army Field Manual 23-65 (May 1972). Paragraph 80 provides in part:
Types of targets. Targets presented to the machinegunners during combat will in most cases consist of enemy soldiers in various formations which require distribution and concentration of fire .
a. Point targets are targets which require the use of a single aiming-point. Enemy bunkers, weapons emplacements, vehicles, small groups of soldiers, and aerial targets such as helicopters or descending paratroopers are examples of point targets. . . .

During the 1978 to 1980 UNCCW, as well as at separate conferences of government experts held at Lucerne and Lugano in 1974 and 1976, respectively, discussions of small-caliber weapons included all weapons up to .50 caliber. There were no proposals to restrict the use of the larger small-caliber weapons against personnel. In addition to their universal employment as antipersonnel weapons, there was the practical realization that in firing .50caliber projectiles at other legitimate targets (for example, enemy vehicles), some rounds inevitably would strike exposed enemy personnel. Hence it would have been impossible 'to attempt to limit the intentional attack of enemy personnel with .50 caliber weapons when those personnel could be struck by the same projectiles as the result of the lawful attack of materiel targets.

Employment of the .50 caliber machinegun or other .50 caliberweapons against enemy personnel does not violate the law of war. There remains the question of how the misperception arose as to its purported illegality. There appears one plausible explanation.

During the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, the U.S. Army and Marine Corps had in their inventories the M40 106mm recoilless die. Designed primarily for antiarmor use,the M40 was equipped with the M8C .50 caliber spotting gun. The M8C was used to assist the gunner in determining range and leads to the target. It fired a spotter-tracer round containing a tracer element and an incendiary filler. On impact, the incendiary filler produced a puff of white smoke intended to aid in adjusting fire. The spotter-tracer round was designed so that its trajectory matched the trajectory of the 106mm recoilless rifle service ammunition. The spotter-tracer round was designed to be used in the spotting gun only.

Although the M40 could be utilized against enemy personnel (using the flechette-loaded M581 APERS-T round), the M40 essentially was a single shot antitank weapon that relied on concealment and surprise in order to attack enemy armor and survive on the battlefield. Utilization of the M8C .50 caliber spotting gun against an individual soldier would have compromised the position of the M40,making it and its crew vulnerable to attack. Hence tactical, not legal, limitations were placed on the employment of the M8C .50 caliber spotting gun against enemy personnel. It appears that this practical limitation on the use of the M8C somehow was transferred to all 50 caliber weapons, and that in time it was assumed that the restriction was based on some aspect of the law of war. Such transfer of this tactical limitation and the assumption of a law of war basis are incorrect.

Current Army doctrine providing for the use of the .50 caliber machinegun as an antipersonnel weapon is consistent with the law of war obligations of the United States. No treaty language exists (either generally or specifically) to support a limitation on its use against personnel, and its widespread, long-standing use in this role suggests that such antipersonnel employment is the customary practice of nations.


Hope that helps.

marksman13
April 11, 2012, 08:46 PM
Most infantry men have heard the oft repeated myth that just the wind from a .50 BMG round will break a man's neck if it passes within a foot of him. Those who never actually used an M2 in combat might be naive enough to believe it. It's a freaking impressive looking and sounding round.

northark147
April 11, 2012, 09:54 PM
MrDig, I too was told the same. You can shoot the canteen,helmet,webgear but not the person.

We were always aiming for thier dogtags... you know we assumed since we had dogtags so did they and dogtags is equipment. :D



As far as pranks... K9P (Canine Pee) De-greaser and F15H (Fish) fuses were popular items. They tried a Can of Compression on me when I first showed up, I went to supply and asked for a trash can, a set of head gaskets, piston rings and a Dremel... Last prank I remember of that sort being pulled on me.

PT92
April 11, 2012, 09:57 PM
I know this young man (in the Army) .
You told me that he will be manning a vehicle mounted .50 caliber gun.
I was very interested so I asked him about his training.

All was well until he told me how effective and ferocious the .50 caliber round is......

"A Round out of that gun will take a man's arm off...
even if it passes within 3 inches...."

I always thought a projectile had to actually hit a target to do damage. :)

Is this crap actually taught to our young servicemen?
Happy Hour BS'ing if you will.

-Cheers

shep854
April 11, 2012, 10:14 PM
One of the best pranks I remember came from Vietnam, and made it into a book.
A certain lady correspondent visited Da Nang and was regaled by pilots about the "DOOM *Kitty*" (that 'other' word actually used) scratching on their canopies during night missions--supposedly a harbinger of impending death. She put this story into her book.

'DOOM' actually referred to the Da Nang Officers' Open Mess...:p

Grmlin
April 11, 2012, 11:05 PM
I had to give classes as we prepared to leave for the Gulf War. One was on the use of weapons. In my prep for the class, I found no restrictions on the use of the .50 cal. When I gave my class a young Lt tried to tell me I obviously hadn't done my research, didn't know what I was teaching and the .50 could not be used on people. I held up my references and asked him for his the CO weighed in on that. In prep for the Iraq war the same Issue came up and again put to rest.

I guess now it would be called hazing. Ax qual, sending people for flight line, truck line, can of beep, ID10T forms, remove the winter air and replace with summer air(tires), and it goes on. But giving false information in training or allowing someone to think false information is correct is not acceptable.

Double Naught Spy
April 11, 2012, 11:25 PM
But giving false information in training or allowing someone to think false information is correct is not acceptable.

My pop and my wife were in the Army. I am amazed at some of the things they were taught that were flat out wrong. Why folks would hamstring their fellow troops with incorrect information that could result in them being less combat effective isn't just unacceptable, but downright stupid.

Driftertank
April 11, 2012, 11:41 PM
Hey jorg, thank you for the concise, well worded and well referenced explanation to dispel the myth. I don't mind having my misinformation corrected, especially when the correction is presented with good references.

Grmlin
April 11, 2012, 11:47 PM
Why folks would hamstring their fellow troops with incorrect information that could result in them being less combat effective isn't just unacceptable, but downright stupid.

You got that right. Alot of times people just don't know, that's the way they were taught and they just pass it on and some just don't care or figure they get rid of the competition. When ever I was doing trianing I always went to the sources the same with updateing orders, manuels, ect. The term "thats how we always did" never went over well with me, but thats how I was trained. I had a lot of good people before me and hopefully effected others in a positive way. It did get me into trouble sometimes because I would say no to things that violated the orders, I guess I didn't know how to say no correctly.

Ditchtiger
April 11, 2012, 11:57 PM
NAVYLCDR,
My favorite was when we gave a reservist an oil sample bottle and told him to get "air samples" from air compressors. We ran him all over the place right up until we sent him to the XO and he shut down our little game.

The best part was we had a guy with when he was taking the "samples" and he kept telling the reservist to close the lid quicker because all the air was escaping.
My son tells me about sending newbs after batteries for the chem. lights

marksman13
April 12, 2012, 12:48 AM
In artillery units we always sent green privates out for chem light batteries, grid squares and fried chicken. The first two of course were fun and games. That last one though, that one was serious.

exavid
April 12, 2012, 12:52 AM
Man, it's a wonder we all didn't get killed by shock in basic training when low crawling up the infiltration course with .50 water cooled MGs firing three feet over our heads. :eek: Admittedly it was three feet overhead but even then the shock should have knocked us out for the count. It was interesting to hear the pop of he bullet passing overhead dragging it's little sonic boom along. It was pretty at the night run through the course watching all those tracers floating away downrange.

Captaingyro
April 12, 2012, 01:07 PM
As an ex-Air Force pilot, it's hard for me to believe that soldiers would consider .50 cal illegal to use against troops. Any troops in contact who have called in air support have to know that they're directing much larger weapons...20mm, 25mm, 30mm, and sometimes larger, against the enemy. A strafe pass with a Vulcan or GAU-8 is serious rock-n-roll, and makes .50 cal look like spit wads. Get a gun ship in the neighborhood, and you're looking at a steel thunderstorm. Hell, the shrapnel will be bigger than .50 cal...

allaroundhunter
April 12, 2012, 01:12 PM
As an ex-Air Force pilot, it's hard for me to believe that soldiers would consider .50 cal illegal to use against troops. Any troops in contact who have called in air support have to know that they're directing much larger weapons...20mm, 25mm, 30mm, and sometimes larger, against the enemy. A strafe pass with a Vulcan or GAU-8 is serious rock-n-roll, and makes .50 cal look like spit wads. Get a gun ship in the neighborhood, and you're looking at a steel thunderstorm. Hell, the shrapnel will be bigger than .50 cal...

I showed my grandfather this thread and he laughed (being a former pilot himself). Of course, he flew before the GAU-8 came into play, but he does get a kick out of seeing the videos showing it do its thing. :D

SimplyChad
April 12, 2012, 01:30 PM
Being the Doc i never got the stupid games. But we did give the Lt a few. We had him get exhaust samples, get us some flight line. But the best was check his Humvee for weak spots. My sgt had him hitting it with a hammer and the circling his "weak spots" with pink chalk. or sending him to my SFC to get his prick E-7 report.

essayons21
April 12, 2012, 05:50 PM
I did a tour as a .50 gunner. The BS about Geneva/Hague prohibiting shooting personnel is a well known myth, and is not being taught. Actually I remember a mandatory "Law of War" class in which that myth was specifically dispelled.

I am also an Army Small Arms Instructor. The army considers the .50 cal (and Mk19) small arms. The 3 inches myth is also specifically dispelled in Master Gunner school, but yet I still hear it from old farts.

Some of my favorite pranks

Chem light batteries

A box of grid squares

Humvee exhaust sample (the best example of this is when an enterprising young E5 didn't take kindly to the supply sgt messing with one of his PV2s and took a crap in a plastic bag, tied it up, labelled it exhaust sample, and left it on the supply sgt's desk)

3 inch board stretcher - One time we sent a private looking for one of these (because a board was cut too short of course) and he ended up asking the XO, who then spent the next 30 mins asking everyone in the unit where we kept the board stretchers before we finally let him in on the joke.

Freedom_fighter_in_IL
April 12, 2012, 06:27 PM
Sending the rooks out for 20 yards of "gig line" was always a popular prank. Saw a MC send a 3rd class out for a bucket of steam. Then of course the always popular hit "go pull me some brightwork" :D

Husker1911
April 12, 2012, 10:38 PM
What, not a single "belt-stretcher" or "sky-hook" in the bunch?

Cesiumsponge
April 13, 2012, 11:39 AM
Being naive and being ignorant are two different things. One is willfully ignoring facts and the other is simply not knowing better. Rumors, old wive's tales, and incorrect info exists everywhere. A friend who was a SAW gunner in the 75th Ranger Rgt repeated that a 50BMG passing near the head would suck out your brains. I'm not sure why there is such a mystique about the .50.

mljdeckard
April 13, 2012, 01:04 PM
esayons, I WAS taught in 19k school that it was against the Geneva convention. This was echoed in a JAG brief I got.

I saw when I zeroed .50s on the short range on paper targets, it's just a hole.

However, I was also told, and I am more likely to believe, that projecting from the muzzle on the 120 on the M-1, there is a cone, which if you were within it when the gun was fired, it could rip your skin off or worse. But this is an order of magnitude more energy than small arms. I could see that the story would have started here.

scythefwd
April 13, 2012, 01:35 PM
I have seen someone sent to get a box of grid squares. He came back at the end of the day.. looking like he just woke up with a map, cut on the grid lines, in a box. Told the SSG it took him all day to find them. He won that one.

Grinding sparks.

mljdeckard
April 13, 2012, 01:45 PM
Don't forget to send them to the medics for a set of fillopian tubes.

zdc1775
April 13, 2012, 01:58 PM
I was actually told that if a .50 passed within 3" of your head it would give you a concussion while I was in infantry training.

I have also sent my fireteam's know-it-all new guy to the comm shack to tell our SGT that we were just waiting on a PRC-E5 (prick E-5) and if he wouldn't mind bringing one with him when he came. That was kinda funny

Jeremiah10:23
April 13, 2012, 01:59 PM
My son tells me about sending newbs after batteries for the chem. lights

We sometimes asked for batteries for the sound-powered phones.

Just One Shot
April 13, 2012, 04:31 PM
While stationed in a Persian missle unit in Gemany our unit was split up with 1/2 of the batteries up the hill and the other 1/2 at the bottom. We once sent a newb for a fallopian tube tester. He went to all the batteries on the hill and they told him it was him down the hill. He was gone for quite awhile as he had to walk a couple miles to reach the rest of the unit. He came back red faced after someone down the hill clued him in.

If you enjoyed reading about ".50 cal BS I heard...." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!