hey marines

[gunsmithcats]

The IAR idea is f**kin retarded.

The whole concept is to switch the SAWs out with the IAR at the squad/fireteam level and keep the M16s/M4s. The SAWs will still be retained in the armory and issued on demand.

What I can see happening as the most likely result of this ill planned idea is that the SAW gunners will still retain his SAWs and the rifleman will opt to drop the 16s and M4s and pick up the IAR for perceived additional firepower. What you will end up with is a whole sh*tload of rounds going downrange and not much being hit.

What needs to happen is to replace the aging SAW inventory with the FN Mk46 or Mk48 which is basically the SAW lightened and improved, but the Marine Corps in its infinite wisdom has chosen to go it alone and spend untold amounts of money on an unproven weapon system. Just like how we are still using the old M2 instead of the updated M2 that the Belgians have had for nearly 20 years which doesn't require complex headspacing and timing procedures.

Jesus,
Thank you Pryde.

There are better versions of the 5.56 beltfed platform. Theres no need for a freaking IAR. Once again it's *******s sitting in front of the desk all day thinking of stupid ways to improve the Marine Corps.

Anyone whose never humped a beltfed for days in the hot hadji sun needs to really stfu. Yea, it'd be great if we had beltfed bigger caliber everything, but lets be realistic here. We already carry enough crap as it is with the overweight flaks. 7.62 is HEAVY, 240g's are HEAVY. I am by no means a grunt but have had to carry the SAW a few times. I was lucky and only had to carry 400 rounds. I have pity for the bubbas that carry much more.

In an ideal world, we'd all have pulse rifles with 100 round magazines of 10mm caseless explosive tipped ammunition.

[nick]

Don't you guys spread the load among the entire squad??

[dwa]

Don't you guys spread the load among the entire squad??

on saws we didnt 240s we did i like the stoner lmg http://www.knightarmco.com/lmg.html

[RRangel]

have you ever put a mag in a saw it makes sure you do 3 rd bursts

Peanut butter jam, peanut butter jam...

[dwa]

Peanut butter jam, peanut butter jam...

haha yep

[striker3]

We tried magazine fed squad automatic weapons in both WW2 and Korea. We went to belt-fed for a reason. Some idiot with shiny stuff on his collar is glory hunting. That is all there is to this idea.

[BeirutMarine83]

5.56 is OK considering "we settled" for this round back at the end of Vietnam...and it's all our current troops "know" - 7.62 would be a much better round. Same with losing the .45 ACP round to the much lighter-in-the-*** 9mm round. Just an opinion...

[UncleSamsMisguidedChild]

You can argue back and forth till your blue in the face, simple fact of the matter is the MC has used beltfed weapons for as long as they have been around. And unless they make a drastic change in the SOP for infantry assaults(I HIGHLY doubt that). Then the Corps will always have a need and use of a beltfed weapon, be it the 249,240,M2,or MK19, it would be nice to update the SAW with a MK46 or 48. Now with that said, since the MC is the smallest branch they probably wont see anything to replace the saw until 2015 if they actually decide to do so, and even then I doubt it wont be anything but a beltfed weapon replacing a beltfed weapon!!

[Manong0369]

You can argue back and forth till your blue in the face, simple fact of the matter is the MC has used beltfed weapons for as long as they have been around. And unless they make a drastic change in the SOP for infantry assaults(I HIGHLY doubt that). Then the Corps will always have a need and use of a beltfed weapon, be it the 249,240,M2,or MK19, it would be nice to update the SAW with a MK46 or 48. Now with that said, since the MC is the smallest branch they probably wont see anything to replace the saw until 2015 if they actually decide to do so, and even then I doubt it wont be anything but a beltfed weapon replacing a beltfed weapon!!

The tactics used for an assault does not really have to be drastically changed. The principle is that the automatic rifleman (usually the assistant team leader) is to be armed with a magazine fed automatic rifle to make accurate fire and more mobility. As the assisatant team leader, he will have to take over if/when the TL goes down. This would be more difficult if he is handling the SAW. Lugging around the SAW doing individual rushes is an arse kicker making it harder to get accurate fire on target. Suppresive fire will be provided by the support element, usually Weapons Platoon's machine gunners, so having a SAW with the assualt element is really not necessary. The belt fed weapon will be around for a long time to come. Here are some links that talk about the SAW and the IAR.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=118&t=441034&page=1

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2009/02/marine_newsaw_020109w/

[scr83jp]

I still don't understand why anyone wants a beltfed 5.56 to start with.

Has anyone been using www.rwhart.com tactical rifles? A friend of ours told us the rifles are really accurate.

[UncleSamsMisguidedChild]

The tactics used for an assault does not really have to be drastically changed. The principle is that the automatic rifleman (usually the assistant team leader) is to be armed with a magazine fed automatic rifle to make accurate fire and more mobility. As the assisatant team leader, he will have to take over if/when the TL goes down. This would be more difficult if he is handling the SAW. Lugging around the SAW doing individual rushes is an arse kicker making it harder to get accurate fire on target. Suppresive fire will be provided by the support element, usually Weapons Platoon's machine gunners, so having a SAW with the assualt element is really not necessary. The belt fed weapon will be around for a long time to come.

I wouldnt expect the ATL to lug around the SAW if his TL went down. Its like that infamous quote "chit rolls downhill" and so would that SAW if the TL went down and the ATL took over his roll. The next guy in line would become the new ATL and eventually one guy would be lugging around 2 M16's. I understand that the situation in Iraq is not ideal for Fire Teams to lug around a SAW through all those close quarters, but I wouldnt want to rely on just 30 round mags if things get hairy and you need to put lots of rounds down range to get into cover or perform a tactical retreat. I agree that you may not need the SAW for all missions and could use weapons platoon for suppressive fire if needed. But not all battlefields are the same and this is why the Corps will not get rid of the beltfed weapons from its aresenal or infantry squads

[Manong0369]

I wouldnt expect the ATL to lug around the SAW if his TL went down. Its like that infamous quote "chit rolls downhill" and so would that SAW if the TL went down and the ATL took over his roll. The next guy in line would become the new ATL and eventually one guy would be lugging around 2 M16's. I understand that the situation in Iraq is not ideal for Fire Teams to lug around a SAW through all those close quarters, but I wouldnt want to rely on just 30 round mags if things get hairy and you need to put lots of rounds down range to get into cover or perform a tactical retreat. I agree that you may not need the SAW for all missions and could use weapons platoon for suppressive fire if needed. But not all battlefields are the same and this is why the Corps will not get rid of the beltfed weapons from its aresenal or infantry squads

From my experience as an infantryman, we had the Team Leader armed with an M16A2/M203, the Assistant Team Leader with the automatic weapon, the assistant automatic rifleman and rifleman using M16A4's. This was done when I was a LCpl (SAW gunner), a CPL (team leader), a Sgt (squad leader) and SSgt (platoon Sgt). This is how I was brought up in the infantry community. There are probably Marines that were not taught to do this. I know that the battlefield is dynamic, so we have to be able to adapt to any situation. I believe that the Corps doesn't plan on taking the M249 completely out of the infantry squad. How they're going to do this, I couldn't tell ya. In fact, in the recent Marine Corps Times, they are looking for optics for the SAW. I agree with you in that belt fed weapons will be in the Marine Corps for a very long time, but the Corps is trying to make this change. Marines, young and old, will adapt and overcome as they have done for so long. Semper!

[mcclungmh]

I agree from my time in the Marines I beleive a belt fed weapon is the way to go. I remember before we got the SAW in the mid 80s the automatice rifleman in the fire teams had nothing more than a M16A1 with extra mags and a sloppy bi-pod. Keeping the enemies heads down when establishing a base of was severly lacking until the M249 was introduces. There were less malfunctions with the belt fed weapon vise the magazine ones. I will admit using the saw with mags leaves a little to be desired.

[UncleSamsMisguidedChild]

From my experience as an infantryman, we had the Team Leader armed with an M16A2/M203, the Assistant Team Leader with the automatic weapon, the assistant automatic rifleman and rifleman using M16A4's. This was done when I was a LCpl (SAW gunner), a CPL (team leader), a Sgt (squad leader) and SSgt (platoon Sgt). This is how I was brought up in the infantry community. There are probably Marines that were not taught to do this. I know that the battlefield is dynamic, so we have to be able to adapt to any situation. I believe that the Corps doesn't plan on taking the M249 completely out of the infantry squad. How they're going to do this, I couldn't tell ya. In fact, in the recent Marine Corps Times, they are looking for optics for the SAW. I agree with you in that belt fed weapons will be in the Marine Corps for a very long time, but the Corps is trying to make this change. Marines, young and old, will adapt and overcome as they have done for so long. Semper!

Thats how I was instructed in MCT how you described the infantry squad would operate. I would observe the tactics used of the infantry guys we worked with while training on Pendleton and deployments, and it was very similar but they would change things up a little depending on the mission or scenario they were doing. I'm very interested in how the Corps will implement this new weapon into a squad and see if it lasts or the guys want to lug that SAW around again. I'd put my money on the SAW!! It might be great at first with the reduced weight, but the first few firefights without the SAW and yelling over the COMM to get suppressive fire would probably put an end to that real quick(In my opinion). But then again, like you said the Corps has adapted and overcome for many many years and this could be the case with the new IAR. Semper Fi