Signup
LoginRecent Posts by chino65
-
-
Was 1991 the first time this happened? Maybe not.
My memory getting fuzzy in my old age but I seem to remember there was at least one other earlier SG National Day in mid 1980s where the bastards pulled a similar stunt in Johore. This was never publicised ever, and I only knew about it cos I was serving in S2 Branch of a certain Brigade HQ. There was silent mob for some units and a one (or two) SIRs under our brigade were put on alert with arms (and perhaps ammo) issued
All very wayang one.
Anyway, doing the paradrop right at our backdoor can be read several ways. Apart from the obvious display of aggression and Malay unity, Malindo can be interpreted as an exercise that is actually DEFENSIVE in nature.
Why?
Because all it truly demonstrated is that MAF and TNI can send airborne rapid reaction forces to.... drum roll.... Johore....
... but NOT to Singapore, as any such attempt would result in very heavy losses ... Wipeout :) ... courtesy of RSAF and ground air defence.
This Malindo Ex can be interpreted that in the event of SAF trying out "Forward Defence", MAF & TNI can immediately regain initiative by putting (or reinforcing) a rapid reaction block force into Johore that can dash, disrupt or at least delay any hopes of a rapid SAF deployment into Johore to create a protective buffer for SG island.
Or it can also show that after we've moved troops into Johore, they can still insert troops and cut us off at the rear, trapping SAF forces already on MY soil
...
In an invasive scenario it would be very silly to drop paratroops into Johore - with all the associated difficulties, danger and limitations - and then move them like ground troops towards SG.
Therefore, though it is right for SAF to adopt an aggressive stance towards such weak displays, I really didn't see it as a direct threat. To me it was a naked display of their insecurity. : )
-
-
-
Originally posted by tankee1981:How about a 7.62mm Ultimax? Best of both worlds! Only obvious problem is the additional weight of carrying the bigger rounds and a larger weapon perhaps?
That's not really possible is it?
7.62mm calibre means everything becomes bigger and heavier.
Even longer receiver to make constant recoil for 7.62 possible.
Plus if you continue to want to put 100rds in a drum magazine, it would be a huge mag and weigh a ton.
Best of both world is not really possible. Otherwise they would've done it.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:Maybe they got issued with dummy rounds...
No really. How does a "trigger" finger cause an M-16 to IA? Assuming that the fine powdery sand ever present in their webbings and weapons didn't cause the stoppages...The M16 didn't IA, the "soldiers" of the 507th Maintenance Coy did.
"Trigger finger jam" i.e. they froze with fear.
Is that so surprising? Is it written anywhere that everyone wearing a uniform is ready to fight and die?
-
-
-
Here is perhaps the most famous story milked to death by the pro-HK media. That it was also the same incident as the Jessica Lynch farce bothered no one.
And bear in mind these are service-side personnel - not combat soldiers - who surrendered to the enemy without putting up much of a fight. Of course they had to blame something. It's a joke.
How many ambushes have the IDF suffered in the past 30 years with the M16? How come they didn't balme the M16?
...
Perhaps the most well-known incident of M16s failing in battle involves the 507th Maintenance Company in 2003 during the opening days of the ground invasion of Iraq.
Enemy forces ambushed 507th soldiers outside Nasiriyah, killing 11 and capturing six, when the unit became separated from a supply convoy.
Several of the 507th soldiers later complained that their M16s, and other weapons, failed them during the March 23 ambush.
The Army responded by revamping Basic Training to make sure soldiers knew how to better maintain their weapons and perform malfunction drills.
Whats not so well known is how then-Pfc. Patrick Miller earned a Silver Star for keeping his M16 from jamming long enough to take out an enemy mortar position.
We were taking fire from everywhere, Sgt. Miller recalled in a recent Army Times interview.
Enemy fire had knocked out his five-ton truck, forcing him to fight on foot.
He dove for cover behind a dirt berm and spotted an Iraqi soldier manning a mortar position across the road.
It looked like he was trying to drop the shell in the tube. That is when I fired the first shot and the guy went down.
When he pulled the trigger again, nothing happened.
After the first shot, the round ejected. When the next round went to go in, it froze up, he said. It didnt feed all the way into the chamber.
Miller pounded on the forward assist, a tiny plunger on the M16s receiver designed to manually push the weapons bolt into the chamber.
He fired his rifle once more, and it jammed again. Miller tried the immediate action drill he learned in Basic Combat Training he slapped the bottom of the magazine to reseat it, pulled the charging handle back to look into the chamber. When he released, the bolt wouldnt chamber the next round.
Changing magazines didnt work either.
After the third magazine I decided it took longer to change mags than to beat on the forward assist, he said.
That worked, but his weapon would only fire a single shot and jam again.
I was beating that thing with the palm of my hand four or five times for each round, he recalled.
Miller managed to fire about eight times using this frantic sequence under enemy fire.
It was a valiant, but futile, effort. His fellow soldiers were trying to fight, but their weapons failed them as well.
Miller turned around and shot at a target behind him.
When I turned there were about 40 Iraqis that had moved up on the road approaching his position, he said. At that time there was not much else I could have done.
Miller put down his rifle and surrendered.
...
Again, notice that they fired one round and it jammed. And in Jessica's case I think she didn't fire at all but still claimed weapon jammed.
So all these jams occurred on previously unfired weapons, where got carbon fouling? And if carbon-fouling is not the cause of the jam, which problem would a piston HK416 solve?
If you ask me, it was the trigger-fingers that jammed. Replace those.
-
-
-
The article can be separated into 2 parts.
Actual quotes from soldiers, and those of the author's own opinions.
Here are the soldiers' quotes:
"We just do not have enough rifles to equip all of our soldiers. So in certain circumstances we allow soldiers to have an AK-47. They have to demonstrate some proficiency with the weapon ... demonstrate an ability to use it," said Lt. Col. Mark Young, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Infantry Division.
"The kind of war we are in now ... you want to be able to stop the enemy quick," said Sgt. 1st Class Tracy S. McCarson of Newport News, Va., an army scout, who carries an AK in his Humvee.
"It's plentiful," said Sgt. Eric Harmon, a tanker who has a full 75-round drum, five 30-round magazines, plus 200-300 rounds in boxes for his AK. He has about 120 rounds for his M16.
"They say you can probably drop this in the water and leave it overnight, pull it out in the morning, put in a magazine and it will work," Perez said.
....
And here are the author's own opinions whom he slotted in among the soldiers's quotes so that they sound like the ssoldiers made them.
The AK is favored by many of the world's fighters, from child soldiers in Africa to rebel movements around the world, because it is light, durable and known to jam less frequently.
Some complain that standard U.S. military M16 and M4 rifles jam too easily in Iraq's dusty environment. Many say the AK has better "knockdown" power and can kill with fewer shots.
...
Notice that none of the soldiers themselves were actually quoted as saying the M16 jammed, or that it jammed because of carbon fouling. Or that they wanted a piston HK416. In fact, many people who claimed to have served did not have bad things to say about the M16/M4's reliability. Or the IDF desert army for that matter.
-
-
-
I am not what you would call an " airsofter ". But I do own one in Shanghai by CA - Classic Army.
Details, finishing etc quite realistic.
The example I have the sights are not aligned meaning the front sight post or the rear sight is not 100% 90 degree angle. This meant I had to stuff paper to tilt the rear sight post at an angle that matches the front sight. Otherwise cannot zero. Rough but works. Quite accurate.
This is all metal construction and heavier than the real thing. Equipped with a China-made aimpoint red dot sight that costs about SGD40 and the thing works like a charm. Can be zeroed.
Accuracy cannot beat the Marui MP5 I used to own in Hong Kong. Although the Marui is more plasticky, the BB hit where you point every time. I once put out a small candle flame with one quick snap shot at 5m distance.
When I left HK I gave my MP5 and 2 x 92F away.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:Eh, paiseh. I checked by my bmt notebook.
Section 2IC is the 2nd M203, also Group 3 IC.
2nd LAW is the sharpshooter, and Group 2 ICExactly, I don't recall there being anyone in the section that had only an M16 and nothing else. More and more, I think I can confirm now there are 3 groups in the section of my unit.
So is this correct?:
GROUP ONE
Sect Cmdr = rifle
M203 grenadier
LAW gunner
GROUP TWO
IC = LAW gunner/sharpshooter
SAW gunner
GROUP THREE
IC = M203 grenadier
SAW gunner
-
-
-
Originally posted by kotay:See if you can recall if there were soldiers carrying M16 and nothing else (other than SecCom). If there were, than it's 9MS. This is dependent on your men carrying all their issued weapons outfield. If someone conveniently "forgot" their LAW tube than it'll screw up the Picture.
Basically, in a 7MS, other than the SecCom, everybody else is carrying a support weapon - be it a M203, SAW or LAW.
In a 9MS, besides the SecCom, there are 2 other rifleman (incl 1 SS) who aren't carrying anything else.Well, it's a bit complicated. The M16 only chaps are definitely LAW gunners. But we also have in those days M16 Sharpshooters or Designated Marksmen. They have a scope on the weapon.
So these days with the SAR21 is there still such a DM vocation?
So we may be operating on 7-men sections after all...
-
-
-
Originally posted by kotay:Military formations, these days, are basically working in multiples of 3's
3 Sect = 1 Plt
3 Plt = 1 Coy
3 Coy = 1 Btn
3 Btn = 1 Bde
3 Bde = 1 Div
To complicate it slightly, you add in the HQ elements and support arms.It seems to be a mix of 3's and 4's for us.
Here's what I can remember of my unit 1?3 SIR, not counting HQ coy etc:
4 combat Coy = 1 Bn (3 rifle "A", "B", "C" Coy, 1 support "D" Coy)
3 Bn = 1 Brigade
I can't remember how many men per Section.
I can't remember how many Sections per Platoon.
I THINK it was 3 Platoons per Coy.
The GPMG/s belonged to the Coy but is attached to the Platoons but I can't remember how many GPMG teams each Coy had.
I was in the Platoon HQ as the runner together with the Medic, Pl Sgt and PC.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:Wah.. thats really history.
You mean the 20-rd mag?
Funny thing is, I never encountered a 20-rd mag till I got posted to 2 PDF during the last 6 of my ICT in the 90's. I left Singapore in '97. And even more funny, most of the 20-rd mag were almost brand new (although there were some ancient ones) probably fresh out of storage. And we got experimented for V200 mounted.
Originally posted by Shotgun:Now each section has 2SAWs, 2LAWs (Matador), 2 M203. Section 2IC is designated marksman i think.Same, that's what we have. LAW was Armbrust, of course. Who is Section 2IC depend more on rank/personality than the weapon carried.
Edited by chino65 16 Jan `08, 3:26PM
-
-
-
Originally posted by kotay:
JC wept ... how old are you dude?
When I enrolled in '88 My [b]formation had already transitioned to 7MS. My reserves stint from 95-07 was also in a 7MS. Did they sneak in a phase of 9MS in between?
A few years before my enrolment, "D" coy was also no more and the whole "D" coy block was left vacant.
I guess 65 must be your year of birth then?
[/b]I elistied in 83. But my reservist was in a PDF unit where most things are different
For a start, we used only 20-rd mags. Our brand new SBO had pouches meant only for 20-rd mags. My unit and other units in our brigade were the same. I don't know if this was for the entire 2PDF or just some brigades etc.
We have uneven number of men in the sections. Some had 9, some 8, some 7.
I was the platoon runner/radio man so I don't know the sections as intimately, to be honest.
Our platoon's size including Offrs & NCOs never exceeded 35 men so it is probably NOT 9-men sections. I must be wrong. Unless we had only 3 sections per platoon? Damn, cobwebs...
The distribution of firepower was also uneven.
Some sections had 2 SAWs.
Some had 2 M203.
So I don't even know what is standard.Edited by chino65 16 Jan `08, 1:10PM
-
