Ask a Soldier

[GoodGame]

I should point out that the 'light' physical fitness test, for the Parachute Regiment, is a mile-and-a-half in 9:18 followed by 44 press ups and 50 sit-ups - depends how 'sedentary' your lifestyle is I suppose.

Mine was a single 9 minute mile, about 13 pushups, and I think 20 sit-ups. By the time I was done with basic I was doing about 2x 7 minute miles, over 50 pushup and similar sit-ups. I guess I should have then entered Para?

I'll leave you to speak for the US Army, but in the British Army it's very difficult for anything but a very, very good NCO to reach officer status without going through the Late Entry Officer programme as a Warrant Officer.

US army is heavily promote from within, I guess so the officers start day 1 with the correct culture, or similar to the 4-year academies. I bet the Marines are the same. Not sure about Navy/Air Force.



I didn't mean to sound like a anti-BA snob, just that I read that ROTC is geared towards non-science/non-engineering/non-tech degrees. I'm pretty sure the 4 year military academies promote a diverse education, to keep competitive with their civilian counterparts. And I have no beef about philosophy or classics, as that would definitely complement a military science degree.

And the SEAL that Cav Scout mentioned already had his PhD in Poli Sci and other degrees with honors, before going into the service, so I think he definitely would be considered officer material from day one.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Can someone please tell me whether this

replacing this

actually makes any bloody sense? At all?

 

[Cutlass]

Your link includes the statements:

Many of the M249s in U.S. Army and Marine Corps service have been worn down by continuous use and are becoming increasingly unreliable. A refurbishment program intended to extend the service lives of these M249s has been carried out, though the weapons are still deteriorating from heavy use. In particular, warping of the receiver rails is a nearly ubiquitous defect in heavily used first-generation M249s.

A report entitled Lessons Learned in Afghanistan was released by Lieutenant Colonel Charlie Dean and SFC Sam Newland of the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Center in 2002. They found that 54% of SAW gunners had problems maintaining their weapons, and 30% reported the gun rusted easily. Soldiers reported ammunition boxes rattling and falling off. 80% percent of soldiers surveyed were pleased with the weapon's accuracy and lethality, yet only 64% claimed they were "confident in their weapon". Weapons clogging up with sand in the desert seems to be the main complaint.[44]

There were many complaints about the weapons clogging up with sand after prolonged use in the desert environment.[43]

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

But how is a 30-round magazine suitable for suppressive fire?

 

[Cutlass]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_C-Mag

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

A test in 2003 by US Army soldiers in Afghanistan found the C-Mag unreliable in simulated combat conditions, with frequent failures to feed among the issues.[4]

So, same problem as the M249s then?

 

[GamezRule]

But how is a 30-round magazine suitable for suppressive fire?

3 round burst and quick reload?

 

[Cutlass]

Could be. But is the rest of the gun more reliable under sandy conditions? You've got to replace a lot of worn out equipment in any case. Why not evaluate something else to see if works better?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

3 round burst and quick reload?

That's not suppressive fire, that sounds like accurate shooting.

Why not evaluate something else to see if works better?

Yes, but why replace a light machine gun with an assault rifle?

 

[GoodGame]

3 round burst and quick reload?

They would use auto fire for suppressive fire mostly.


The M27 is kind of interesting. The wiki article makes me think that they may try to base a suppressive fire variant on the M27. Sounds like maybe the overall goal is to be more like the BAR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1918_Browning_Automatic_Rifle, to make the auto fire easier to control with accurate fire. The M27 seems to have a slower rate of fire than the M4 carbine, so maybe they are trying to emulate the BAR.

 

[Flying Pig]

Can someone please tell me whether this

replacing this

actually makes any bloody sense? At all?

The M249 is an atrocious machine-gun because of its small calibre; replacing it with a weapon actually designed for accurate fire - which is what it ended up being anyway, or a large rifle - means that the replacement now has a role that it can do properly. To suppress the enemy you really need a hail of 7.62 mm death, which is why the Parachute Regiment never swapped its GPMGs for the above when it was offered to other regiments of the line: now those other regiments are queuing up to get their GPMGs back!

But how is a 30-round magazine suitable for suppressive fire?

It isn't. Neither is 5.56mm ammunition. That rifle is an LSW, meaning that its real use is to bring down automatic, accurate fire on teh enemy at just beyond rifle range, covering the guys to advance a short distance and return rifle fire in force. We used to have the Bren Gun and later the LSW roled as suppressive weapons, but once every rifleman was issued with a semi-automatic and later automatic weapon they became marksmens' tools regardless of what the doctrine book said - except in CQB, in the case of the Bren, which was absolutely lovely for tearing apart some drugged-up communist in the jungles of Malaya. Bear in mind that the USMC uses sections of 13 and therefore does not need the gunner to make up as much weight of fire as the army does with its 9-man sections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_C-Mag

...I have so many issues with that thing I'm just going to leave it.

That's not suppressive fire, that sounds like accurate shooting.

Indeed

Yes, but why replace a light machine gun with an assault rifle?

Because practically that's all that the LMG was, a bigger, heavier assault rifle. Lovely little thing up close, like the Bren, for tearing apart your enemy with a metal hail without worrying about having to reload, but useless for getting his head down from miles away.

The M27 is kind of interesting. The wiki article makes me think that they may try to base a suppressive fire variant on the M27. Sounds like maybe the overall goal is to be more like the BAR http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1918_Browning_Automatic_Rifle, to make the auto fire easier to control with accurate fire. The M27 seems to have a slower rate of fire than the M4 carbine, so maybe they are trying to emulate the BAR.

The BAR was only a suppressive weapon because nobody else was throwing automatic fire around. Nowadays it would be a marksman's rifle if it were even used, or it would have to be belt-fed to make it useful as a suppressive fire weapon - exactly as was the case with teh Bren and the LSW.

 

[IglooDame]

US army is heavily promote from within, I guess so the officers start day 1 with the correct culture, or similar to the 4-year academies. I bet the Marines are the same. Not sure about Navy/Air Force.



I didn't mean to sound like a anti-BA snob, just that I read that ROTC is geared towards non-science/non-engineering/non-tech degrees. I'm pretty sure the 4 year military academies promote a diverse education, to keep competitive with their civilian counterparts. And I have no beef about philosophy or classics, as that would definitely complement a military science degree.

And the SEAL that Cav Scout mentioned already had his PhD in Poli Sci and other degrees with honors, before going into the service, so I think he definitely would be considered officer material from day one.

In the Navy prior-enlisted (non-warrant) officers are called Mustangs. I'm not sure what you mean about promoting from within - there's not much differentiation between USNA and ROTC O-1s.

And USNA offers bachelor of science degrees in science, engineering, and four liberal arts specialties (English, History, Economics, and Political Science). It was generally felt that one's major had no bearing on one's service/specialty selection - an aeronautical engineer could go Navy Air, or Marine Corps Ground, and a Supply Corps type could have a degree in Economics or Physics. Though it was said "you can't go Aero and go Air" because doing well in Aero would require studying that would hurt one's eyesight enough to keep them from passing the pilot's eye exam. And in any case, even an English or History major had to pass Calculus, Chemistry, Physics, Mechanical and Electrical Engineering (to say nothing of Naval Leadership&Law, Navigation, and Seamanship), so not your typical liberal arts college B of Arts courseload.

 

[Eat_Up_Martha]

I was reading an article on NATO's involvement in Libya (operation Unified Protector... really?) and I found this little quote:

NATO aircraft, including those supplied by the U.S., totaled 26,089 sorties and 9,618 strike sorties through Wednesday.

Why is it that only about 1 in 3 air sorties actually involved dropping ordnance? What are the rest of these doing? Is it all surveillance, and if so, why can't they accomplish that with satellites or something?

 

[kochman]

I was reading an article on NATO's involvement in Libya (operation Unified Protector... really?) and I found this little quote:



Why is it that only about 1 in 3 air sorties actually involved dropping ordnance? What are the rest of these doing? Is it all surveillance, and if so, why can't they accomplish that with satellites or something?

Escorting ground troops, dropping humanitarian supplies, reconnaissance, show of force missions... to name a few options.

 

[Hygro]

Just theoretically if a college graduate wanted to enter active duty as an officer, are those 12 week OCS programs really the way to go? I feel like such officer candidates would be at a huge disadvantage compared to their fellow 2nd lieutenants from West Point or even those who did ROTC for 3 or 4 years.

 

[kochman]

Just theoretically if a college graduate wanted to enter active duty as an officer, are those 12 week OCS programs really the way to go? I feel like such officer candidates would be at a huge disadvantage compared to their fellow 2nd lieutenants from West Point or even those who did ROTC for 3 or 4 years.

As an OCS grad... not at all disadvantaged!

In fact, OCS is full of NCO and enlisted, and you can learn more from them in the 18 weeks (when I went) than any school... Plus, then you do your officer branch training, during which you are still with the same NCOs...
PICK THEIR BRAINS!
They are a gold mine of experience...

What branch of the service? What specialty?

 

[Hygro]

Thanks for letting me know! If my country ever comes under real attack and I've philosophically renounced pacifism I know what to do...

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

Are American soldiers forced to go abroad or can you join and never go abroad.

 

[Flying Pig]

As an OCS grad... not at all disadvantaged!

In fact, OCS is full of NCO and enlisted, and you can learn more from them in the 18 weeks (when I went) than any school... Plus, then you do your officer branch training, during which you are still with the same NCOs...
PICK THEIR BRAINS!
They are a gold mine of experience...

What branch of the service? What specialty?

That's normally a really, really good peice of advice that I've passed on to all of my little darlings with aspirations of command. When it comes to learning how to live in the field, how to clean your weapon, and how to keep your kit in order, someone with experience of doing that will be invaluable and making friends with them will make your life a lot easier. However, when I was DS at Sandhurst many moons ago, I was sergeant (actually a Colour Sergeant) of a platoon including a former corporal of the Royal Green Jackets, and he thought he was the fount of all knowledge on all things military and was quite overbearing towards some of his younger, less experienced mates. However, the man wasn't as fit as most of the fresh-from-university officer cadets, his light infantry background meant that he was atrocious at drill, and he had exactly the wrong attitude to being taught just about anything. Eventually the Company Commander had a 'word' with him and I had a 'word' about him with the rest of his platoon, and he packed his bags not long afterwards.

Are American soldiers forced to go abroad or can you join and never go abroad.

Theoretically you could have a trade which is rarely deployed and just be [un?]lucky enough never to be posted to a warzone, but tours of Germany, for Americans Hawaii and for the British Cyprus are pretty routine and I'd be surprised if you could go any length of time in the forces without leaving the mainland USA. If you're deployed, you are 'forced' to go - what the hell is the point of a soldier who won't go to war?

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

Theoretically you could have a trade which is rarely deployed and just be [un?]lucky enough never to be posted to a warzone, but tours of Germany, for Americans Hawaii and for the British Cyprus are pretty routine and I'd be surprised if you could go any length of time in the forces without leaving the mainland USA. If you're deployed, you are 'forced' to go - what the hell is the point of a soldier who won't go to war?

I was a soldier but quit when they wanted me to go to Afghanistan. I didn't quit in a nice way and they don't like me at all anymore.

I love the army life, the training and the exercises. I want to defend my country. However I don't want to participate in stupid imperialist wars that I don't support at all.