Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sola Veritas
Does any military in the world buy assault rifles speced to fire only in semi-auto mode?

I understand the differences. My question is whether the limitation of only firing semi-auto would disqualify it from consideration as an acceptable assault rifle for military use in actual practice. Does any army in the world send their soldiers out into the field armed with these rifles as their main battle weapon?

127 posted on 07/26/2012 8:50:10 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic

Yes, some countries did, and they actually lasted into the 1990s in some countries.

Many countries that issued 7.62 NATO battle rifles (the FAL, L1A1 etc.) issued them in semiauto-only mode, both to fit with their existing fire discipline tactics, and because a 7.62 NATO rifle in “burp” mode proved to be less than desirable. Granted, there were often unofficial tricks among the troops to put them in “go-fast mode”, but they were still issued and deployed as semiauto rifles.


129 posted on 07/26/2012 8:57:23 AM PDT by M1903A1 ("We shed all that is good and virtuous for that which is shoddy and sleazy... and call it progress")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

To: tacticalogic

“My question is whether the limitation of only firing semi-auto would disqualify it from consideration as an acceptable assault rifle for military use in actual practice.”

My, non-expert, answer would be no. Being semi-auto only would not render a weapon useless for military use. It fact, it may actually make it more effective for the common soldier. The M16A2 is not trully a “full-auto.” In that mode the weapon will only fire a three round burst. The Army did this because “full auto” causes a lot of ammunition to be waisted. Plus, the weapon rapidly overheats on true full auto. When I originally was trained by the Army on the M16A1 (Vietnam era version), we had true “full auto.” I have been on a range and attempted to use the M16A1 in full auto. Didn’t work well, and the weapon overheated on me. I decided then, I would only use semi-auto if the situation called for me to bear military arms. Never happened during my time, and the Army has since gone to the M16A2 and other variants like the M4. I just checked with some Active Army folks and they tell me even the M4 is only “three round burst” on “full-auto.” I have heard the Marines have a version of the M16 that is a true full-auto.

I am NOT an expert on this.

I don’t understand why you are asking the question? What is your point?


141 posted on 07/26/2012 10:45:00 AM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson