Wednesday, June 17, 2015

storm rifle 3


The Germans have always been very good about realizing their twin weaknesses of exposed flanks and a deficit of resources.  They think smarter militarily ( if you are in the American military, I hope you realize that we have NEVER stopped using the human wave assault as our primary tactic, from Washington’s disapproval of Indian fighting and favoring the marching line facing off and firing close, to the meat grinder of the Civil War to the gruesome death toll in such a short time in WWI and even to Vietnam where casualties were the location finder for heavy weaponry ).  They were the ones that came up with the assault rifle, which over came the limitations of the submachinegun and mobilized the machinegun by changing its ammunition ( there was still the squad automatic weapon, but that required a crew.  The assault rifle had the advantage of being An Army Of One, so to speak ).  The Kalashnikov was a rip off of the German gun ( the chief designer was a prisoner of war ) in concept, but the Russians took it from an over-engineered overly expensive weapon and made it so crude it was much more effective and so cheap the entire world came close to being armed with them.  Now, remember that an assault rifle is a compromise.  It can’t compete directly with a machinegun, but it had enough of its characteristics that it prevailed over riflemen. 


Right there is the key.  It was enough of an evolutionary advance that it changed tactics ( logistics had long ago changed with the need to provide all other weapons systems, so the ammunition usage was no longer an issue ).  But the American military was for some bizarre reason still insisting that riflemen ruled the roost, rather than machine gunners.  At the individual level, soldiers were already using massed fire rather than aimed shots, but the military, the same one that used the myth of the heroic skilled frontiersman marksman to mask their idiocy of pushing flesh into flying lead, still issued marksmen’s rifles.  The M16 was partially designed and sold as a 500 yard rifle, not a shorter range machinegun substitute.  Of course the M16 always performed terribly as an assault rifle, as it was really always just a light weight repeating rifle ( the early problems were the Army‘s bad choice in ammunition, but mostly the criminally poor quality in Colt‘s manufacture [ next time you think about buying Colt, ask yourself if they killed one of your relatives in the Vietnam War ].  The problems after that and currently are the poor design which fouls the action.  If you use the thing as a rifle, this is usually not a problem.  If you try to use it as an assault weapon, it most emphatically is ).  A rifle is for aimed shots, an assault rifle which is actually more like an assault carbine is for massed fire.

More next article.

Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page. You can purchase anything, not just the linked item. Enter Amazon through my item link and then go to whatever other item you desire. As long as you don’t leave Amazon until after the order is placed, I get credit for your purchase.  For those that can’t get the ads because they are blocked by your software, just PayPal me occasionally or buy me something from my Amazon Wish List once a year. *The Old Bison Blog on CD: Over five years of work and nearly two million words of pure brilliance. Here is the link to order:                         Also as a free e-book, but not cleaned up or organized, at Lulu
*Contact Information*  Links To OthersTop 20 Survivalist Fiction*  Land In Elko*  Lord Bison* my bio & biblio
*My books:
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there



  1. What the heck happened to your comments section Jim? I told you that you shouldn't have moved back on grid! :D

    Colt has always been a very high priced item. I was wanting an 1873 Peacemaker a few years back, and they were around $1K. The Italian models were around $400.00.

    In other news, I hear tell that Colt has lost its contract with the government, and has filed chapter 11. I don't actually know the real reason behind this, but one wonders if it were quality control, or that Colt didn't “grease the right palms?” Purely speculation on my part, but when I read through the voting pamphlet a few elections back, I was surprised to notice that many of the major corporations had made donations to many of the leftist causes. This of course was in the people's republic of Commiefornia, so this must have played a part

  2. Colts CEO had made comments disparaging private ownership of guns a while back.
    Recently Colt has had to file for bankruptcy protection. (duh! 30+ million private firearm owners vs 3 million armed government employees choose your market).
    Colt - as the company is now - sucks.
    Buy anything else new firearm wise, but skip anything new from Colt.

  3. The Colts and Harrington & Richardson M16's were not that bad. It was McNamara and his auto industry cronies at Hydramatic Corp that produced the dogs of the M16 family. I was issued a brand new rifle that had parts that did not fit properly.

    The M16 is a good design, but Stoner was not a gun guy and the Army was hostile to the gun and did it's best to screw it up. Simply chrome lining the chamber would have stopped most of the problems in the early Vietnam guns.

    Every Russian and com bloc gun has chrome in the chamber, their ammo is crappy and they know that the chrome helps in extraction. Even guns made in huts in Pakistan have chrome linings, but the US army and McNamara's whiz kids left it off the M16 to save money. Downright criminal and cost lives.


    1. The Army wanted a wooden 30 cal, then decades later they love the M16 so much they won't get rid of it? Stupid bastards. Keep the hunk of crap 16, get rid of the 45.

  4. The problem with the M-16 and the AR-15 is that of marketing. As the Great Haired One mentioned, it was marketed as a miniature and light weight M-14 for the short ranges of SE Asia (the M-14 was sold as a lightweight portable medium MG!). As a self-loader used as a more-convenient lever-action (not a compact MG or smg!) carbine for taking small animals 80# or smaller, the AR-15 is just fine. Kills coyotes great! When scaling up for 150# North American deer, the hunter must be careful to be pretty close for both power and ability to make a near-perfect shot so that the animal won't run for hours. It helps to load a bullet other than FMJ for hunting critters.

    The reason to have a rifle that uses 5.56NATO and the standard AR-15 magazine is that they are super-common and a very good value. At very least, a person MUST familiarize themselves with the operation of these weapons, even if they don't actually own one. How about the Mossberg Boltie rifle that shoots .223 and uses AR-15 magazines (ships with a 10-round magazine)? How about ultra-light carbines that self-load, but have a piston system and use 5.56NATO, like plastic-fantastic Kel-Tec SU-16?

    I want an MG34, because it's full of German mechanical goodness and can fire single shots. It's a real machine gun that can spoof the enemy into hearing a K98. They just aren't that common in W. Oregon, nor inexpensive in Vernonia.


  5. thats what Americans do, they use human as their shield to fight.