Who the fuck thought this was a good idea?

Former 11B here. OEF 09-10 so none of that pussy peacetime shit. Carried an M4 in country. Loved it so much that I came home and bought one of my own, minus the silly three round burst shit which is basically useless. Take care of the platform and it'll take care of you.

I'd argue that the M14E2 was actually a worse LMG than the BAR was.

But yes, McNamara had to get shit done, which is kind of amazing because the guy is otherwise a retarded beancounter.
One retard had to fuck the other retards to do the not-retard thing, and even then they did it the retarded way and had to unfuck it.

Anyone with good taste.

I seriously don't get it. Why and how are people into that shit?

Mostly people who hate black people and get off on the idea that it's just sooo naughty and wrong.
Also the odd basement dwelling black supremacist.

Attached: average gif poster.png (1126x608, 39K)

t. Army Ordnance

>1959-1963
damn, america will be destroyed if ww3 happened within that timeframe

That's what the nukes are for, dumdum.

Imagine actually and unironically believing that not only a small arm, but a fucking battle rifle has that kind of significance

I disagree. I found it to he a horrible piece of shit that required more maintenance than my first girlfriend. Bang, bang, SPORTS, bang, bang, SPORTS, bang, oh what the fuck!!!

>underpowered

Attached: 5.56mm wound.jpg (960x720, 72K)

If you have to shoot from building to building it is a better choice than 5.56 and the m4.

It isn't, because you quite literally can only carry half or a third of the ammo and the long fucker is useless for CQB.

Were you using those shitty old USGI mags? With pmags my ancient little M4 never gave me any issues.

That is what I said. Nice attempt. Would you like to see what "308" does at twice that range and after it goes through a wall?

I did MOUT with an M16a2. Fuck off with the "it's too long bullshit".

Really? I recall carrying a lot more as a gunner in that same caliber than any regular rifleman did with no problems.

That's just M193 ball, m8, with Mk.262 Mod 1 that'd be about twice as big.

The posted image may well have ended up being lethal, mind you. "Does .308 hurt people more than 5.56" is an argument with no point. Of fucking course it does. The point is that 5.56 is still a fucking lethal round, and guess what? You can carry WAY fucking more of it.

>with no problems
You know that there are people who might actually believe you when you say this, right? Might make your pee pee feel big to bullshit people on the internet, but don't try to pretend that 7.62x51 isn't a fucking bitch to carry

injured not dead

Point is you can easily carry three times as much ammo, and with no recoil, and you can easily inflict dozens of (deadly) wounds like that on a crowd of bogies in CQB with no effort, while you're not doing anything of the sort with a full length battlerifle with more muzzleclimb than most.

A wound that size would instantly incapacitate someone.
So you're basically saying an effective bullet isn't effective because there's a more damaging bullet. I guess by your logic everyone should still be using 30-06 or something bigger.
Personally if I had to use a weapon to defend my life, I would want something that has an effective yet light bullet so that I could carry the most ammunition possible. It seems like 90% of the world's militaries agree with me.

>muh .308 stopping power.
Shut the fuck up you troglodyte. Its retards like you that get people killed.

The point is the lethality of the round is severely limited by range and obstacles. A well known fact the army is finally willing to adress. A 22 long rifle is lethal boy. But I sure wouldn't fucking supply my men with it. You lived through the "let's save a buck good enough" era. You were not given the best equipment. The M4 and 5.56 are a shit round and battle rifle.

Death vs injury is a purely academic subject on a battlefield. It's actually of almost zero consequence to the individual infantryman whether or not the enemy ultimately succumbs to his wounds. What matters in a direct engagement is if he's out of the fight.

I carried a 100lb ruck from day one in Benning. What fucking army were you in?

That guy isn't doing shit, and given the lack of bloodflow he may already be dead.

Attached: DrqnQzVUcAAX0QO.jpg (799x599, 72K)

Dead dont shoot back an hour later.

If your gunners were carrying only 100lbs out on patrol, when did you deploy?

You think that guy is going to be fucking up on his feet and back in combat in an hour? That shoulder is fucking destroyed, assuming he isn't crippled for life (and assuming he didn't bleed out in half an hour) he sure as fuck isn't going back to the battlefield anytime soon.

Reading comprehension issue? Or just a predetermined conclusion you are trying to twist my statements to fit?

>The point is the lethality of the round is severely limited by range and obstacles.
watch me using M855 and not giving a damn about that wall, the only thing at this point that might be problematic is the wind in a valley but that's it

You didn't deploy, did you?

They're aesthetic as fuck.

Attached: CSA-2006-10-17-093634.jpg (2796x2228, 1.16M)

That one guy? Basing your entire argument on that one guy? Ok clown. Call me when you have been pinned down on a building armed with the M4 and 5.56. Reality will settle in quickly. I'm done with this autistic 20yo larp bullshit around here.

>autistic larp
You sure do.

So predetermined conclusion.

99% of engagements happen under 300 meters. 90% happen under 150. 80% under 75.
You're not the highly trained john wicke character you think you are. In a real rifle engagement you will not be able to slowly line up a perfect shot and let off one round and drop the bad guy. When bullets start flying at you and your life is on the line, you will want as much ammunition to mag dump at the enemy as possible.
People have paid in blood for the knowledge and expertise we take advantage of today. Intermediate cartridges are far superior to full power rifle cartridges, and of the intermediate cartridges, fast 22s are king.
So shut the fuck up you retard.

>We want a battle rifle for long ranged engagements
>And we want an SMG for close range
>And a precision rifle for sharpshooters
>And an LMG for suppressing fire
>But we only want to pay for one design

Attached: 1541541229826.jpg (1927x1715, 318K)

>less accurate than an AR10
>heavier than an AR10
>less reliable than an AR10
Just use an AR10 bro.

The army is leaving 5.56 for a 6.8@3200 fps. The main reason is lack of power and range. Lol at the above arguments. It is complaints from the battlefield that led to the change.

Maybe if you had actually aimed and hit your targets, you wouldn't have gotten pinned on the roof.

Nobody who's deployed will attach any significance at all to Benning. Hell, this is probably the first time I've remembered Benning even exists in half a decade. You don't sound like you've deployed because:
>You're being cagey about it, first and foremost
>You're talking about carrying more -- as a gunner -- than any "regular infantryman" when everyone knows that gunners rarely carry more than a starter belt in case you get hit, the AB's carry the rest
There's absolutely no situation where a gunner is gonna be carrying his gat and more rounds in .308 than the riflemen are going to be carrying of 5.56. It just doesn't make sense so on some level you're full of shit.

>The point is the lethality of the round is severely limited by range and obstacles
Do you think you're going to engage at fucking 800yds?

Proof?

That's why we are leaving the cartridge behind.
You are a fucking retard.

>t. Fuddy who's never been in combat, never studied warfare and never even had to do combat drills, or compete or anything involving shooting while stressed.

Your benchrest shooting of a deer rifle and killing animals in a sport way does not equate to knowledge about combat effectiveness.

Attached: 1564174010491.jpg (356x509, 32K)

No we aren't, Overmatch is a gay meme pushed by some dumbshit boomers in the brass, 5.56mm is here to stay.

>The army is leaving 5.56
No they aren't.

Benning is where I drank grog and had my cross rifles pinned into my chest on victory hill after the bayonet. Benning is where I first learned to operate the bravo. Benning is where my drill sargent buttoned my blue cord on me. Benning is where they pinned silver wings into my chest.
Take your pre determined conclusion and fuck off POG.

>oh no someone criticized my waifu
I hate these discussions, all of a sudden 5.56 is recoilless, has twice the wound cavity of full rifle rounds, is accurate to a mile, can carry more of it than pistol ammo.... All of a FUCKING sudden the 5.56 cannot be improved upon and will be used by humanity until the year 40,000 when we finally switch to bolters.

Just... Fuck Jow Forums its full of children nowadays. Kill meeeeeeeeeeeeeee

That's what fudds and boomers were raving about 20 years ago.

The only reality here is that M855 is a dogshit cartridge from a 14.5" barrel or less and beyond 100yds, which is now a solved problem with M855A1.
Overmatch faggotry was because ONE TIME, a squad had some derka derka plinking (without hitting) at some squad from afar with a PKM and for some reason didn't have a designated marksman or M240B in their squad to respond with.

6.8mm is as dead as SPIW.

Yeah, how about your fucking blood rifles you fucking cherry.

Sure they are. You just dont like admitting that the 9mm and 5.56 are remnants of the NATO comprise and do not actually represent the best choices for the US military. Hence the ad hominem instead of intelligent conversation.

Literally name a single instance of any part of the US military replacing 556 for general issue.
>muh 6.8
Wow people with highly specialized jobs get highly specialized guns with specialized ammo.
You must have brain damage if you think the military is going to replace millions of guns and billions of bullets with a meme round.
556 is here to stay, and the only way it will be replaced is if some extremely advanced technology hits the scene and the benefits of that tech outweigh the costs of putting it into service.

And political corruption in the Pentagon. Some guys are lining up new jobs with ammo producers once they get their new "proprietary round" contract fulfilled and become the sole provider to the U.S. military.

Why do you think sig sauer has been getting so many contracts even though their products are Taurus tier in quality. (Dont even get me on their ammo that doesn't even function in their own fucking guns)

>drill sargent buttoned my blue cord on me
In what fucking universe does this happen lmao

>absolutely triggered boomer strawmanning himself retarded
REEEEEEEEEE!!! MUH 7.62MM!!! MUH 6.8MM!!!!!

Attached: strawman.png (760x540, 399K)

I only trained while stationed at Benning. That is what we were talking about right POG? The significance of Benning?

>5.56mm and 9mm bad, gotta have muh 7.62mm and .45!

During graduation you may have a relative or loved one, or in my case when you have a dying family member and you are alone at graduation your drill Sargent steps up.

>OEF 09-10 so none of that pussy peacetime shit
fuck i feel like killing myself, i'm 2 years into my enlistment but know i'm not gonna see shit because i was too young for the war on terror and i'm just gonna get out never having even shot my gun at someone. fuuuck this feel

Attached: 1429825382186.jpg (385x387, 17K)

No, retard. In case you missed the fucking message, I'm trying to talk about deployment. YOU, my absolutely fucking brainlessly LARPing friend, are the one who brought up Benning. I have never fucking once wanted to talk about Benning in any way because it holds precisely zero relevance to infantry. I'm trying to talk about deployment but I've got nothing to say to a cherry.

I believe the general consensus is that a 6.5-7mm @ around 3000fps from the muzzle is the best all around choice.

>Just... Fuck Jow Forums its full of children nowadays. Kill meeeeeeeeeeeeeee
While that would get rid of one kid I don't think it'd help us much in the long run.

If I see someone misspell sergeant again I'm about to pop a fucking vein

>>Benning in any way because it holds precisely zero relevance to infantry.

In my day you could be infantry, airborne or a ranger without having to go to Benning.
Seems to me you are trying to distract from your opinion you are passing off as fact. Your piss poor attempt at ad hominem and claims of authority lead me to believe you are fucking retarded.

>all of a sudden 5.56 is recoilless
Nobody said this. What's said is that the M4 has so little recoil, especially compared to the M14, that it's not even a contest, the M4 has a light recoiling cartridge and an ingenuous fully inline action and stock that makes it easily controllable, while the M14 has a heavy recoiling cartridge and its design is VERY prone to muzzle climb in any sort of rapid fire, due to the nature of the action and the stock.

>has twice the wound cavity of full rifle rounds
Nobody said this, what's said is that 5.56mm is more than deadly enough to matter.

>is accurate to a mile
Nobody said this, and nobody fights to those distance in normal infantry combat.

>can carry more of it than pistol ammo
Nobody said this. It does weigh as much as a 9mm NATO cartridge though, while 7.62mm weighs much more.

'Sarnt.

For Christ's sake, fucking thank you

battleorder.org

But w/r/t OP, seems it's hard to break the habit of dumb ideas

Attached: usmc.png (1046x737, 689K)

*Could not be*

Yeah? When'd you deploy?

6.5 to 7mm rounds are a lot like the m14 rifle. They're designed to fulfill every role but are shit at all of them. 6.5-7 are too powerful for general issue and not powerful enough for harder targets.
Keep 556 for general issue and keep 762 for GPMGs and designated marksman.

>Nobody said this.
>Point is you can easily carry three times as much ammo, and with no recoil,
>no recoil
You might not be retarded but you are surrounded by people who agree with you and are retarded. Rethink your position.

Great ballistics, but more recoil and heavier ammunition, 5.56mm already has good ballistics and is more practical overall, on top of having a massive industrial and logistical base.

If you want improvements, look at better loadings of 5.56mm, like M855A1, or Mk.262 Mod 1.

You want to compare pewter and ribbons? No you don't. You just can not support your claims with fact. You have a nostalgic love for a round and are too brainwashed by nationalism to realize you were not given a tool because it was in your best interest, or even in the armys best interest. The switch to ACUs should have been your first clue.
You are obviously a POG.

You probably think .270 British was a good idea.

The wolf does not go around reminding people it is a wolf.

Don't give a shit about any of that. I've tried making points but you've ignored them. In fact, I deconstructed your entire post but you mistook it for an opportunity to wax bullshit about Benning. Put up or shut up.

276 Peterson I believe was what the garand was supposed to he chambered in. Yes. It would have been a good idea.

>This big bad wolf claims that it carries a 100 pound ruck plus a 240 and by the way carries more rounds of 7.62x51 than the riflemen do of 5.56 and by the way it's actually no problem for a bad ass wolf like me
>By the way wolves don't tell you they're wolves
And nobody would believe you if you did

Ok boomer

.276 Pedersen was an attractive idea for a more controllable and lighter weight *battle rifle* cartridge before WW2, but not an economical choice at the time.
It would not have been a suitable cartridge for an assault rifle later on after the war.

Like with .270 Britsh, they would have found that the impressive load they wanted recoiled too much, and they then settled with the idea for using that load for machineguns, and then making a lighter load for rifles, a lighter load conspicuously similar in performance to... drumroll... 5.56mm!
So for all the effort, you either end up with a rifle cartridge that's too much for infantry combat, or you download it for rifles to make it more suitable and essentially have two different cartridges already, in which case 5.56mm NATO and 7.62mm NATO already looks like a far better solution because each cartridge gets to be better at their individual tasks, rather than having to pretend briefly to be universal.

I understand the IAR being a replacement for a SAW, but Jesus Christ what's with the obsession of universal weapon platform, to save money?

One of hundreds of articles covering how your outdated round and rifle need to be replaced. Your outdated ideas of combat engagement remind me that soldiers (infantry) were still doing jungle training in 2003.
nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/us-army-wants-new-rifle-and-we-have-some-ideas-80151

That is ultimately somewhat more viable than the OP picture.

>national interest

Attached: 1475904591466.png (1587x1600, 1.13M)

Comprehension is not your strong point. Or you are just a clown with zero integrity who will twist anything to fit its narrow minded view of the world. I'm going to go with you have no integrity or sense of decency at all. I have made you chase your tail for the last few minutes. You lost your composure. Never supplied evidence for your position. Just deteriorated into insults and anger.
>>you are a monkey. I can make you get angry and dance at will. You will fling shit on command and think it is your own idea.
Follower.

Attacking the source instead of the evidence and claims. There is no hope for people like you.