Why .30 caliber historically for military?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vern, you've mentioned the incident with your M2 before, but not elaborated to my knowledge. If you don't mind telling the story, just how did it get wrapped around a tree?
A VC popped a claymore on the lead elements of my ARVN battalion, then jumped up and ran. I hit him several times, but no body.

I found that if you hold an M2 by the muzzle and swing it against a teak tree, you can turn it in as "combat damaged."
 
Has anyone here actually used the .30-06 Garand in combat?

I was one of the last infantrymen trained on the Garand, and in 1966 was an adviser with 4/48 ARVN infantry. My issue weapon was the M2 Carbine, which got wrapped around a tree. I bummed an M1 Garand from the ARVN and used that for the rest of my tour.

My second tour, I bullied my battalion commander into getting me two M14 sniper rifles (pre-M 21) and since I had only one school-trained sniper in the company, I carried the other one.

Let me assure you, keeping the .30-06 (and the later 7.62X51mm NATO) was not a mistake! Those two rifles, the M1 and M14 are head and shoulders above any competing smaller caliber weapon in real combat.

MacArthur was right when he said, "Infantrymen have to shoot through things."

I remember my Jr ROTC Sargent from high school. He had been in country back in 65 - 66 and said they were given the M 16 when it was having all the jamming issues.. He said nobody carried one if they could avoid it. They carried M14 AK47 or M3 Grease guns not just because of the jamming but they were in dense jungle and they 223 would not penetrate the foliage. Now they are using some M14s in our current conflicts because they can penetrate doors and walls better than the M4.
 
The M16A1 issued in those early days was pretty poor. And initially it was issued without cleaning gear -- supposedly it wasn't supposed to need cleaning (and I consider this on a par with the British failure to issue wire cutters, because the artillery was supposed to cut the German wire -- they didn't actually test that either.)

As for penetration, it sucked! It was the worst possible "brush cartridge" in a theater what was all brush!
 
TrueTexan:
If any of our troops in Afghanistan -whether snipers or not- can be issued the M-14, isn't it partly because some of the older Taliban have experience with guns such as Enfields or Mausers which have a longer effective range than the M-4?
 
Look, the military does a lot of stupid things that some general who doesn't really know anything thinks is smart. Just take the M16. We adopted the thing and then decided to use a different powder and that led to a lot of the problems in Vietnam.

Then we have the thing working pretty well and decide to make it into a battle rifle. So we change a few things to the rifle including a slightly longer barrel and the twist rate. At the same time we change 5.56 into a heavier bullet with more pressure and it works pretty well. About the time we get this fielded to everyone we introduce the M4. And guess what? The new heavier bullet doesn't work well with a short barrel, remember we just went to a different barrel to make the ammo more effective. Your losing a few hundred feet per second and no longer getting the kind of velocity needed at any kind of range to be an effective stopping round.

This is not just true of us. A general officer in a key position can screw up things. He doesn't need a real reason, just a desire to put his command imprint on things and demonstrate he is on top of things to everyone. This is not just true of weapon projects. A lot of bizarre things happen because a guy with no clue and a lot of authority wish to demonstrate they are on top of things. There is even a term for this "active stupid" Officers tend to run to certain types. Smart and lazy, smart and active, stupid and lazy. Smart and active is the best. Smart and lazy can be even better if he has a good staff. Stupid and lazy often works well if he has a good staff. Active stupid is the worst. There is nothing that can save you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top