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

To: Kenny Bunk
I have fired the .45 (11.4 MM in Euro-talk) from a variety of platforms

Or 11.25mm, in Norwegian Model M/1914 .45 Auto talk.


76 posted on 04/09/2008 7:57:07 AM PDT by archy (Et Thybrim multo spumantem sanguine cerno. [from Virgil's *Aeneid*.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: archy; cyberaxe; Travis McGee; Manly Warrior; ExSoldier; mamelukesabre
So, is it safe to say that the M4 is a very good weapon that needs a bit more work to make it "goof-proof" in combat in muddy or fine-dusty regions? Is it worth fixing?

If the answer is "Yes," the fixes suggested, namely changing from open gas operation to piston actuation, don't seem all that daunting. How do we go for it?

If the answer is "No," should we replace with the HK416? How do we get that done? Some changes are obviously in the wind, but we are also obviously in the "confusion" stage. As far as the caliber change goes, both of the weapons in question are adaptable ... I think.

The M9 issue is perhaps more complicated. IMO, this would be a fine weapon, if fed with the right ammo, which is forbidden to us by NATO and the Geneva Convention. Can we change that? If not, then what? If not, with what do we replace the M9?

We need specific people in Congress who can help sort this out. Do we have 5 people we can trust?

78 posted on 04/09/2008 8:20:47 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk (GOP Plank: Double Domestic Crude Production. Increase refining capacity 50 percent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | 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