Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: kgbsquirrel on December 04, 2011, 04:18:02 AM
-
So, I'm starting a new thread for this question since it seemed a sufficient deviation from that of cameras and night vision goggles...
http://www.popphoto.com/how-to/2011/11/front-lines-life-us-military-photographer
Photo: Laurence Chen
Navy Combat Camera’s standard-issue Nikon D700 and Nightstalker II night vision system by Tactical Solutions LLC.
Was flipping through the pics linked by H.T. and came across this one...
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.popphoto.com%2Ffiles%2Fimagecache%2Fgallery_image_626x__white%2F_images%2F201111%2Ffrontlines02.jpg&hash=b2178d01db6d5dab589d612183905eae46d11368)
I'm curious when the military started using (or even testing) mid-length gas system M4's. Anyone have any info on this? Or am I just blind as a post as that's a carbine length gas system with an extra-short barrel, in that instance, same question as before.
Edit: Thanks to Dogmush for identifying these as Navy Mk18 rifles with carbine length gas systems and 10.3" barrels.
-
Not sure when the came on scene. But they aren't standard issue. More than likely issued by Spec Ops. Hell there are active units walking around with M16's.
-
Any standard designation for them? (Also are those mid length gas systems and forends? I think they are but pictures can be deceptive sometimes.)
-
Mid length handguards are longer than the upper receiver, those are shorter. Most likely a 10-11" barrel with a carbine gas system,
http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/Daniel-Defense-10-3-Carbine-Gas-Barrel-p/dd%2010117.htm (http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/Daniel-Defense-10-3-Carbine-Gas-Barrel-p/dd%2010117.htm)
-
Mid length handguards are longer than the upper receiver, those are shorter. Most likely a 10-11" barrel with a carbine gas system,
http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/Daniel-Defense-10-3-Carbine-Gas-Barrel-p/dd%2010117.htm (http://www.bravocompanyusa.com/Daniel-Defense-10-3-Carbine-Gas-Barrel-p/dd%2010117.htm)
Thanks, I was so busy staring at the hanguards and barrel stub that I was missing the obvious.
-
Definitly short barrels with carbine length gas.
-
The navy has an approx 10" M4 upper they use on ship and in boarding parties, I have an ex-squid buddy that carried one on cargo ship inspections. It is called (navy style) the Mk something or other. those being Marines, my monies on that rifle.
ETA: Navy Mk18Mod0 10.3" barrel on a carbine gas system. Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Close_Quarters_Battle_Receiver
-
The EOTechs in use are from the Mk18 Mod 1, whose main differences include the Daniel Defense RIS II, aforementioned holosight, and low-profile gas block under the rail with a KAC front sight coupled with the MaTech rear, both folding sights. The Mk18 Mod 0 uses a standard front sight tower with a fixed LMT rear.
So, I guess what is pictured is an odd hybrid, with the fixed front sight, a KAC rear, EOTech, original KAC M4 RAS, and PEQ-15. ???
-
Thats an odd photograph. Mixmatch of uniforms. SBR M4's. Those are certainly not standard issue M4's. Like William said, there are many units with M16's still.
-
... there are many units with M16's still.
I was issued an 80's vintage M16A2 out of a Kansas City NG armory when I did my IA in '06, we had M16A3's in the Iwo's armory, and as far as I knew the USMC was sticking to the M16A4 or 5 as it's standard issue. I wasn't aware there was an attempt to do a universal switch to the M4 platform. Am I just this out of touch with what the services are doing rifle wise? ???
-
After taking another look at the pic, as dogmush stated, at least a couple of those guys are Marines and so it is possible there is a Squid or two besides the Corpman running around there.
-
I was issued an 80's vintage M16A2 out of a Kansas City NG armory when I did my IA in '06, we had M16A3's in the Iwo's armory, and as far as I knew the USMC was sticking to the M16A4 or 5 as it's standard issue. I wasn't aware there was an attempt to do a universal switch to the M4 platform. Am I just this out of touch with what the services are doing rifle wise? ???
No not a push to the M4 platform as much as completely overhauling the basic issued rifle.
Myself, it has taken a little while to get used to the M4 and now that I have I don't ever want to go back to a M16. But at the sametime I would rather have a M1 or M14.
-
Thanks for the link to the Mk18 Dogmush. Looks like I inadvertently built a Mk-12 when I assembled my personal AR. :cool:
To wmenorr67, hell yeah on the M14. Saw a few of those DMR's while in the sandbox. My experience with the M14 is sort of the reason I have an M1A sitting next to previously mentioned AR. The '14 was the first weapon I ever qualified with, and to the bewilderment of the GM2 pulling watch I always choose that over the M16A3 I was also qual'd with. (Flight deck rover, watching the pier and water from 60 feet up.)
ETA: Die typo, die!!
-
Actually they have taken M14's and rebuilt them and issued them out to the squad designated marksmen. Using them as just a notch below snipers.
-
Ah....upon doing a little google research I think they are Force Recon and probably navy boarding party people mixed in.
-
It's amazing that they don't need magazines. Must be tube fed from the stock. ;)
I thought the military just used ACOG's because EOTech's were junk. That's what everyone on THR says.
-
It's amazing that they don't need magazines. Must be tube fed from the stock. ;)
I thought the military just used ACOG's because EOTech's were junk. That's what everyone on THR says.
They are the new laser weapons we are testing.
-
They are the new laser weapons we are testing.
40 watt range?
-
40 watt range?
Classified :laugh:
-
It is an odd photo, but it is explained by the fact that those are all USN/USMC journalists. "Combat Camera" as they call themselves these days. I can never get past that phrase without thinking of the line from FMJ. That it is a bunch of cmaera jockeys playing soldier would explain the asshattery going on with the uniforms.
Most of the normal Marines still carry M-16s, at least that service is not so screwed up that they can still realize a longer barrel and sight radius are good things. Too much of our weapons procurement seems to run on the CDI factor.
-
French a lot also has to go along with the types of missions a group is expected to do.
-
Thats an odd photograph. Mixmatch of uniforms. SBR M4's. Those are certainly not standard issue M4's. Like William said, there are many units with M16's still.
I prefer the A2. Better velocity, longer range. Most importantly, stock doesn't snap after whacking something a couple times
-
It is an odd photo, but it is explained by the fact that those are all USN/USMC journalists. "Combat Camera" as they call themselves these days. I can never get past that phrase without thinking of the line from FMJ. That it is a bunch of cmaera jockeys playing soldier would explain the asshattery going on with the uniforms.
Most of the normal Marines still carry M-16s, at least that service is not so screwed up that they can still realize a longer barrel and sight radius are good things. Too much of our weapons procurement seems to run on the CDI factor.
I really doubt the shooters are photographers. Force Recon and navy boarding crew types mixed together is my money. Small raid exercise for training and photo ops.
-
No, go through the rest of the gallery, same guns, same outfits, semi-annual training exercise.
-
No, go through the rest of the gallery, same guns, same outfits, semi-annual training exercise.
For the photogs? Actually the idea of 10" M4's for them makes sense, as they need a weapon but would primarily be using cameras.
-
Yep, for the photogs. I'm a little worn down by it, yes they go out on missions however the specwar guys know how to run a camera too for the dicier stuff. I figure 10% of the combat camera types end up in serious *expletive deleted*it, the rest have cool pics of them playing soldier. It's obvious by the look and fit of the gear/uniforms that they don't do this everyday. I guess it's me being a jerk, I know how alot of these kind of trainings look in person vs. how they look later in print.
-
I still don't understand the draw of the shorter-than-a-M4 carbines.....with the dramatic loss in ballistic energy, why not go to a FN P90 or a submachine gun?..... =|
-
I still don't understand the draw of the shorter-than-a-M4 carbines.....with the dramatic loss in ballistic energy, why not go to a FN P90 or a submachine gun?..... =|
It is the military, quit trying to understand it.
-
I still don't understand the draw of the shorter-than-a-M4 carbines.....with the dramatic loss in ballistic energy, why not go to a FN P90 or a submachine gun?..... =|
It's a cheap SMG that doesn't need new ammo, mags or training. In the very close quarters it was designed for it has plenty of energy.
-
It's a cheap SMG that doesn't need new ammo, mags or training. In the very close quarters it was designed for it has plenty of energy.
Oh sure, give him the educated answer. :laugh:
-
It is the military, quit trying to understand it.
Oh yeah sure, where were you in 1994? You coulda saved me a lot of trouble figuring that out alone.
-
Just been booted off active duty. Looking for a job or a better job. :laugh:
-
It's a cheap SMG that doesn't need new ammo, mags or training. In the very close quarters it was designed for it has plenty of energy.
Yep.
Hell, the average Marine grunt PFC could give a full class on the platform. The average non combat MOS Marine could get any layman up and running on one and achieving combat accurate hits.
I'm actually disappointed there aren't more of the 10" M4's in service. My BIL is Air Farce public affairs. When he deployed last, he was issued a sidearm and standard M16A2 (carry handle, no optics, full butstock), which he had to lug around along with all of his other gear in the field. My advice to him before he left was to never forgo the rifle, because if he needed it he'd really *expletive deleted*ing need it. Luckily he never did.