Could a Bolt Action Really be combat weapon compared with any semi-auto?

[woodybrighton]

The Argument was 50 snipers against 1000 men with semis.
silly argument but here goes
a semi automatic rifle so thats an m1 m14 fn fal SKS squad effective fire is 600metres at a target.
you can pick up a ghillied sniper at 600metres good luck with that.

 

[Todd1700]

you can pick up a ghillied sniper at 600metres good luck with that.

Well if your 1000 men were to remain 600 meters away standing bolt upright scanning with binos as their means of engaging the snipers then yeah you would have a bad afternoon. But it would only take a few shots to tell what general direction the snipers were shooting from and then while 500 men hid behind cover and poured a wall of lead into their general area the other 500 could close pretty rapidly to a much closer range.

Snipers are great used for their specific purposes (Recon, forward spotters, taking out specific targets, harassing and delaying enemy troop movements). But they were never intended to engage massive walls of enemy troops. And with good reason. It would be very stupid to waste such highly trained soldiers by letting them be overrun by enemy grunts.

 

[Reid73]

Vern, how many men have you personally killed in hand-to-hand combat?

I generally don't like to get into people's personal experiences, but since you're making it an issue ...

 

[Reid73]

Vern, don't please bother to respond to my post ^^^. The question being debated has no real practical application to either of us, and there is no point in a silly argument.

You have apparently seen at least some level of combat and I have not. Neither one of us was involved in WW1 trench warfare and is in any position to judge what happened then. Why don't we just leave it there.

Thanks.

 

[Maverick223]

Well if your 1000 men were to remain 600 meters away standing bolt upright scanning with binos as their means of engaging the snipers then yeah you would have a bad afternoon.

And if they all had sniper rifles it would be even worse...come on this argument is going nowhere. :banghead:

 

[P.B.Walsh]

They could have silencers??

 

[deerhunter61]

It all depends on when and how you engage the enemy...

In the right situation absolutely it will serve as a combat weapon! Rural or Urban...in the wrong way...well you probably won't make it using it.

 

[06]

Cain used a stone, David a sling, and Geronomo what ever he could get his hands on. Wonder what Gen. Custer was thinking when his position was being overrun?? I know all those examples are ancient but the point is-use what you have to the best of your ability. I hit a deer three times late one evening with a bolt(1903 Springfield) and my son said it sounded like an auto loader. Semis certainly have an advantage over bolts but I usually hunt with bolts-just my preference. I keep an M1-A in my truck, an "M" SKS, and a 22 LR Ruger Bolt. Can a bolt be an effective combat weapon--has for centuries and will continue to be. wc

 

[toivo]

I just passed off the Mosin as some archaic collectable thing, but much to my surprise it was and it's still, highly regarded in serious insurrectionary movements in modern times.

​

On the subject of Winchester lever battle rifles, I have always heard that one major drawback is the difficulty of operating a lever action from the prone position. As a cavalry weapon, no problem.

These discussions are lots of fun, but in fact modern wars aren't just duels between riflemen. The Garand is a great rifle, but it didn't defeat the Axis. Air power did.

 

[LAK]

King Ghidora

The idea that "our skillful troops" with bolt actions could overcome masses of marginally skilled opponents is based on several false assumptions. One is that all peacetime time troops get enough trigger time to learn shooting skills.
Another is that there is enough time in a war to train people to a high shooting skill level.

While not exactly, the British experienced this against the Boers at the turn of the twentieth century. Not only were they completely unprepared for the Boer riflemen in the beginning, they did adjust both tactics and skills during the actual course of the war. Numbers did the rest for them.

The Swiss are perhaps a good example relative to the original post, albeit an untested model.
They did maintain a relatively high level of marksmanship, and snipers as well. I think it is significant given they lasted two world wars with the potential hostiles on their borders unmolested.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Our forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan were both badly outnumbered by the enemy. Were we not more skilled, we would have lost in both countries.

 

[Maverick223]

Were we not more skilled, we would have lost in both countries.

I fully agree, skill (in tactics, training, and communication) is key to victory...often more than equipment for numbers.

 

[Harve Curry]

saturno_v ,
About the1877-1878 Russian Turkish War. I have very little knowledge of, but didn't the Turks also buy Evans 32 shot repeaters?
They were 44 cal, made in MechanicsFalls Maine. There was a production shortage of Winchesters (sounds familar) and Mr. Evans used that to sell his rifle to the Turks.
I have a sporting model 44 long that holds 28 cartridges.They are slow to load.