Ask a Soldier

[Flying Pig]

I've heard it said that some guns like the AK, while not great in a number of respects, have high tolerances for dirt and poor conditions. Now I know any proper soldier is supposed to keep his weapon clean enough to use at all times. However it seems to me that there are any number of conditions soldiers get into that make keeping a gun properly clean is a really hard thing to do. What's your take on that? Should guns be designed a bit more fault tolerant because conditions are often harsh? Or should the soldiers be more aggressively drilled in keeping their weapons clean? And if so, how do you handle extended periods of combat in hostile conditions like desert or mud?

You're right that your first action upon being given 'stand down' is to clean your rifle, but in general any policy fundamentally grounded upon 'our soldiers aren't fit enough/clever enough/self-motivated enough' is doomed to failure - not to mention that you might have an entire day stuck in a firefight, so it needs to be robust enough that the carbon from maybe hundreds of rounds isn't going to trouble it. The old SA80 allegedly had issues with this (because it had more moving parts than most rifles), but I can't say I ever encountered one.

 

[Cutlass]

I would put it 'our soldiers aren't fit enough/clever enough/self-motivated enough', but rather that if you've been exchanging fire for a day or 2 straight, then you might be hesitant to strip down your rifle until after the shooting has stopped. Which in some conditions may be just too late to do you any good. I recall that in Vietnam the early M-16 had a reputation for jamming just when you needed it most.

 

[Flying Pig]

Yes - I think that was a matter of not cleaning it enough, because I've taken it to war and found it perfect. Of course, we were deliberately fighting on our own terms in Borneo, and if the Americans were in contact for solid weeks then I can well imagine that they might have had a difficult time of keeping it clean - but it ultimately boils down to discipline. If nothing else, post half the troop in ARD and have the other half pull through and scrape the crystals off their gas parts, then switch over, and you're ready to leave in half an hour at the most. However, it's a bit unfair - I apologise for the condescending tone - to expect the line infantry, particularly drafted American troops, to be able to maintain the same standards as British special forces, particularly as several of our war-horse SNCOs had been there and helped write the book on jungle warfare in Malaya.

 

[MobBoss]

I would put it 'our soldiers aren't fit enough/clever enough/self-motivated enough', but rather that if you've been exchanging fire for a day or 2 straight, then you might be hesitant to strip down your rifle until after the shooting has stopped. Which in some conditions may be just too late to do you any good. I recall that in Vietnam the early M-16 had a reputation for jamming just when you needed it most.

That was because the troops werent told that the M16 needed to be kept clean and maintained better than the previous rifle they had.

I shot M16s for a really long time, and found them light, and easy to aim and use. I rarely saw a jam that couldnt be cleared within a few minutes, but if you didnt clean the weapon after several hundred rounds, it would jam up on ya. Only once in my entire career did a see a jam so bad that it had to be cleared by our weaponsmith...so at least for me, that would mean thousands upon thousands of rounds fired, with only a single real show stopper to be had.

 

[r16]

and ı hear to maintain the reputation of certain people who talked of the no cleaning needs for the M-16 the rifle was issued with a plastic bag to be carried clean in the jungle . What ı wonder is what happened when people had to fire from the plastic bag .

 

[r16]

if we were absolutely forced to fight an enemy in the City of London the brass would probably say 'screw it' and get on the line to the RAF.

there was some book published before the end of the Cold War where it showed Warsaw Pact types fighting Brits in some city where there are double deck buses . A copy found its way to Afganistan at about the time the Mujahideen were to lay siege to Celalabad . You know as a a kinda primer , you wouldn't trust the Pakistanis even then . Years passed by and Robert Fisk had lots of fun at the Afghans who thought the Russkies had occupied London as well .

 

[Flying Pig]

That was because the troops werent told that the M16 needed to be kept clean and maintained better than the previous rifle they had.

Aye, that's what I would have expected - we were told back when I was a cadet using the SMLE that you clean your rifle on an almost-constant basis, but back then doctrine was written by officers who had spent too long at Bisley - which impacted on us in other ways, because they seemed to want to turn us into an entire army of snipers, often at the expense of weight of fire and aggression.

Only once in my entire career did a see a jam so bad that it had to be cleared by our weaponsmith...so at least for me, that would mean thousands upon thousands of rounds fired, with only a single real show stopper to be had.

BLR? That's quite serious during normal firing - wouldn't want to go into combat thinking that could happen to me, however rare it was!

and ı hear to maintain the reputation of certain people who talked of the no cleaning needs for the M-16 the rifle was issued with a plastic bag to be carried clean in the jungle . What ı wonder is what happened when people had to fire from the plastic bag .

Probably to keep it dry and therefore free from rust in transit - never heard of anyone using one in combat. Mobby?

 

[cav scout]

That was because the troops werent told that the M16 needed to be kept clean and maintained better than the previous rifle they had.

The first production M16s were also not chrome-lined so they were much more prone to fouling and stoppages.

 

[kochman]

and ı hear to maintain the reputation of certain people who talked of the no cleaning needs for the M-16 the rifle was issued with a plastic bag to be carried clean in the jungle . What ı wonder is what happened when people had to fire from the plastic bag .

Wow, your sources, as you've proven many times in these threads here, about the US military... completely wacked.
Maybe look into some of these things yourself instead of trusting what the guy at the local coffee shop told you over a smoke.

 

[Princeps]

from my experience in the army,i think i could pop open an ak and clean all the relevant parts in 30 secs or less no matter how foul the weapon might be. you'd just need some hole in the woods and small break the fighting.

 

[Flying Pig]

And a damn good solvent, surely? I suppose it depends on your standard of 'clean'.

 

[kochman]

The AK is the weapon of the people... simple, reliable... you could bury it in mud for five years, come back and it would work...
Very simple machine (based off the German assault rifle)... doesn't need to be clean... it just works.
Cheap too...

Downside, not nearly as accurate...

 

[Princeps]

I suppose it depends on your standard of 'clean'.

yes, by clean I mean enough uncluttered to work perfectly.

Very simple machine (based off the German assault rifle)

No it isn't. Internally the Ak is completely different. Its main similarities are in concept and development, not mechanical functions.

 

[kochman]

No it isn't. Internally the Ak is completely different. Its main similarities are in concept and development, not mechanical functions.

It isn't completely different.
The StG.44 SturmGewehr...

The AK-47

I know Kalashnikov denies influence, but... it seems pretty clear.
He made the machinery inside simpler...
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...ak-47-questions-about-most-important-gun-ever

The Soviet military had faced the world's first mass-produced assault rifle—the German sturmgewehr, or storm rifle—in battles on the Eastern Front in World War II. It was impressed and wanted its own version. The AK-47 was fundamentally a conceptual copy of the German weapon. The Soviet Union was exceptionally skilled at copying its enemies' ideas and was proud of its espionage and intelligence successes in obtaining enemy equipment and grasping the significance and utility of its opponents' gear.

Read more: History of AK-47 Gun - The Gun Book Review - Popular Mechanics

 

[Flying Pig]

It seems to me that your post just confirms what Princeps said - they took an idea and changed the execution of it completely.

 

[kochman]

It seems to me that your post just confirms what Princeps said - they took an idea and changed the execution of it completely.

They refined an existing product... that's not a complete change.

 

[r16]

ı guess this is the moment one should look up in the bunch of Ospreys , probably written by anti-American Englishmen that talked of the plastic bag the troops could fire through if in dire emergency . Say , do ı really have to prove stuff to save a reputation ...

 

[kochman]

ı guess this is the moment one should look up in the bunch of Ospreys , probably written by anti-American Englishmen that talked of the plastic bag the troops could fire through if in dire emergency . Say , do ı really have to prove stuff to save a reputation ...

Soldiers had the option of carrying their weapon in a plastic bag... so what?
What is your point?

The bag was breakable, and not often used... it was used when they were sure they would be going through swamps and get wet.

I used the M4 for years, the carbine of the M-16. I took it through swamp training repeatedly, and it was in way too many rainstorms... ALWAYS worked fine.
You do need to clean it, sure, is that abnormal? No.

So, I just don't see your point, other than another aimless jab at everything about the US Military... "scorning" us "into oblivion"

 

[r16]

my post , as far as ı am aware , said the bag could be fired through only in emergency , the black magic , or Mattel's toy rifle - period nicknames ı believe - was not supposed to be treated that gently . Am perfectly capable of believing ı will be dead when ı get shot by one , as much as ı would be dead by any Kalashnikov round .

and re-reading the post ı see it is not what ı remembered . At least the second was closer to what ı should have said in the first place . In any case the improvements were probably applied even before the American fighting in Vietnam ended .

ı was a soldier for 26 days , carried a G-3 for 10 days or so ı cleaned it once or twice and wasn't exactly happy with the result , certainly would take some other rifle to any combat . The brand being unimportant , as long as it was maintaned by somebody else . Not that ı would ever be in combat .

the line mentioned , by the way , might well be the only thing ı might ever need to prove . That the US will be leveled by orbital bombardment with anti-matter warheads . One of these days .

if not , everybody knows am an idiot in anycase .

 

[kochman]

Well, since this is the Ask a Soldier thread... maybe a little more of that, asking SOLDIERS, and a little less pontificating about the US Military in Vietnam, etc?