Posted on 02/10/2019 12:38:43 AM PST by vannrox
BFL
That’s cool. Thank you for your service to the Corps!
We didn’t have them back in my day. Just the iron sights that came with the rifle. (They’re actually pretty good if you have young eyes.)
Correct, but I might add an old M1 since it can get you to 600-yds and makes a much better club when the ammo runs out...
"Perfect" can change in a trice. SKS to 12 gauge and back. Slugs to OO buckshot. Can't carry a golf bag full of guns, though. They're all compromises.
Travis McGee recommends a 3x Burris for that very reason. For an AR, anyhow.
I will have to look into that.
I have a 3-9 x 40 scope on it and it does fine for when I’m shooting into an area like a meadow. However, when hunting thick brush it can take time to acquire the target in the scope even at 3x.
I’d like something that would allow me faster target acquisition. I’m also considering a reflex sight or a red dot with some magnification.
“...My recollection is the AR was actually designed for the Air Force ...But I still prefer something SKS’ish or M14’ish.” [redfreedom, post 11]
The real timeline was rather different.
The ArmaLite team - led by Eugene Stoner - designed the AR-10, chambered in 7.62 NATO (Stoner, a USMC veteran of WW2, was said to dislike the small calibers). They attempted to enter it in the US Army Ordnance trials seeking to replace the M1 Garand. It arrived to late to be a serious contender; Ordnance was emotionally committed to the T44 (M14 predecessor) anyway. The M14 was selected as the M1’s replacement in 1957.
Stoner left the employ of ArmaLite. His erstwhile colleagues found out about Ordnance’s Small Caliber High Velocity (SCHV) program, which was exploring the potential of 22 caliber cartridges and very light rifles, with strong support from some user communities inside the Army. ArmaLite redesigned the AR-10 into the original AR-15, chambering 22 cal developmental cartridges based on Remington’s 222. The miniaturized arm found favor; field tests by US Secops/advisor teams in Southeast Asia delivered great results and enthusiastic endorsement from operatives.
Army Ordnance proudly declared that the M14 would simplify logistics because it would replace six arms (Garand M1, BAR M1918A2, M1 and M2 Carbine, Submachine Guns M1 and M3/M3A1) in three chamberings (30 Carbine, 45 ACP, 30-06).
The US Air Force took a dim view of developments because it was being ordered to give up its M2 Carbines, which had been issued to Air Police and air base security units; no one was thrilled at the prospect of pulling guard duty while toting an M14 (11 pounds loaded).
The Air Force searched about for alternatives and discovered the AR-15. ArmaLite had no production facilities - it was principally an engineering/development firm - and licensed production rights to Colt’s along with trademark rights to the name “AR-15.” USAF did conclude a contract with Colt’s, but the Army Dept intervened and invalidated it, citing its authority as DoD executive agent for small arms development (a status conferred by War Dept reorganization back in 1903).
So the first deliveries of what became the M16 went to advisor/trainer detachments then in Vietnam. Deliveries to the Air Force were delayed some, and quantities were initially reduced.
The ArmaLite SCHV select-fire AR-15 was developed around IMR chopped-tube propellant, but ammo suppliers changed to a ball propellant for cost and charge variability reduction. This move wasn’t coordinated with Colt’s nor SCHV managers, and boosted the full-auto rate considerably, leading to accelerated wear and reliability issues. Early requirements users suggested chrome-lined barrels, but Army Ordnance held the line against chrome plating, citing accuracy and cost issues; combined with initial issue of M16s without cleaning kits or detailed user-maintenance procedures, this led to corrosion and failures in action. Propellant suppliers also upped the percentage of calcium carbonate used as a drying and pH-balancing agent in ball powder production; this clogged M16 gas tubes and led to additional failures. It took some time to investigate and track down the problems. Blame the rush to field new stuff, which left no room for operational testing.
I do think the miniature ArmaLite platform got a bad rep undeserved, which has since been corrected. But like you, I prefer a 7.62mm platform. Don’t feel inclined to give up my M1A (an early, rough-finished example with early-WW2 rear sight) for anything else. It’s a poor match, though, for modern squad-level tactics.
Bttt.
5.56mm
Excellent info, thanks.
You are referring to “a young VC gal” as “This young lady”, where zero hatred for a former enemy is shown. I feel the same way. Those that actually played those deadly for real war games, regardless of which side, were actually similar people being led to do what they each felt they had to do.
I have no hatred for the Vietnamese.
I do have absolute contempt for the dems for “throwing in the towel” and undercutting the South’s ability to continue the fight. This in effect was like just throwing away all of our KIA’s as being a waste. Not to mention those of us with permanent injuries of various sorts that live to this day.
What’s even more sickening is this defensive war/nation building strategy from Vietnam is exactly what we are doing today in our current endless wars. The difference is the draft. Since there is no draft, our military industrial wing of the swamp can continue to send our best young people off to war and no one really gives a shit.
Sorry for the rant, but it’s how I feel about all of this.
I had no animosity for the young woman. She was out of the war after the firefight was over. I even went to visit her 5 or 6 weeks later, at her request. She kissed me on the cheek and thanked me for getting her the medical treatment to save her life. Once someone is out of the fighting they are just another human being deserving of human rights.
“Excellent info, thanks.” [redfreedom, post 69]
Thanks yourself.
Much of this information has appeared in the print periodicals _American Rifleman_, _Small Arms Review_ or its predecessor periodical _Machine Gun News_, over the past 25 years or so. Some of the data on SCHV came from the most recent article sticking in memory, which appeared in the _Rifleman_ some three years back.
Most of that piece addressed Winchester’s “Lightweight Rifle,” their SCHV candidate which strongly recalled the M1 Carbine, made along very traditional lines out of walnut and steel. Despite solid manufacturing, it failed to meet accuracy/precision criteria and they withdrew from the program, grousing (in internal company communications) that a “new breed” of Ordnance officers had come on the scene, enamored of plastics and light alloys.
Perhaps the most interesting information in the article concerned Soviet research into small-caliber cartridges. Designers and engineers in the USSR began experimenting in the late 1950s, not long after US Army Ordnance initiated SCHV; their work was not in response to field observation of US systems in action in Southeast Asia. It ultimately led to the adoption in the 1970s of 5.45x39mm as the standard Red Army small arms round.
Years ago, a buddy of mine traded a Bersa .380 to his neighbor for an SKS. Showing it to me, he said "Yeah, it's a real mess, isn't it?" It absolutely was - improvised sling made of very worn leather, wooden stock with an amazing amount of dirt ground in and also deeply cracked at the wrist (with a large splinter missing and the crack reinforced by a handmade leather sleeve, laced up tight and shrunken against the wood). The outer metal surfaces were heavily worn and/or rusted, but the bore looked serviceable.
I told my friend that it must've been some Vietnam veteran's battlefield trophy (it looked like it had been dragged through a thousand miles of rice paddies). He never could confirm that, but we did discover that the gas piston was rusted in place. We knocked the piston out with a hammer and punch, ran a bore brush and oiled patch through the gas tube, and it worked just fine thereafter. Tough rifle.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3725985/posts
Travis’ reply #20 on this thread addresses that issue, for his eyes, anyway.
Bump for later
That's a weird SKS ... Did you see more than the one set up like that (full auto, 5rd fixed mag)?
It might have been a 10 round mag. It was 50 years ago and I only had the captured weapon in my possession for about 2 hours. What I am sure of is that the magazine folded down open and had to be hand reloaded.
That’s a the way a normal SKS magazine works. I had never heard of one being full auto before. Learn something new every day. Thanks!
Do you just plain like firearms? Or do you support the American 2nd Amendment in principle? If so, do check out this BOLD new website before they censor it: https://GunDynamics.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.