Tuesday, July 24, 2018

battle rifle book 4


BATTLE RIFLE BOOK 4
MILITARY V SURVIVALIST
Let me tell you a little story.  Once upon a time, the military got a huge amount of wood thinking about caseless ammunition.  Oy, the wonderfulness that was caseless.  So many problems we can solve!  Aaaannnddd…it’s gone.  Caseless was never feasible, even though God knows how much research money was stuffed down that rat hole.  We spend a trillion a year on the military and paying the central bank interest on the money we borrow for the military, and we get wasted efforts in all kinds of weapons that were complete hunks of crap.  At least caseless assault carbines were a relatively low amount compared to joint service arm aircraft or invisible boats.
*
My point here is that you get to fight with what you have, not with what you want.  Seeking perfection, in a mate or in a weapon, is largely a waste of time.  You simply pick the attributes you desire and try to maximize them whilst also trying to minimize the drawbacks.  It is all about compromise.  Having said that, some things don’t get to be an option.  Like logistics.  You get to use the logistics you have, not those you want.  And guess what, Scooby?  You can want all day to wildly spray and pray, for whatever reason ( zombies!  Mobs! Attacking dog pack! ), but if the logistics of the apocalypse dictate you’ll rapidly run out of ammunition doing that, you need to change your tactics to what you get rather than what you want.
*
Think about ancient dudes tracking down and killing a lion.  With spears.  I can hear the preppers now. “What is their life worth?  They should invent guns”, “They need rapid fire spears, like a crossbow with a magazine”, “a bow would be a much better weapon” and similar wishful thinking claptrap.  Okay, the dudes had spears.  What did they do?  They developed tactics to go along with their realistic weapons.
*
Bringing an assault carbine, or for that matter a battle full thirty rifle without much ammunition, to an apocalypse is NOT optimal.  Like using a spear on a lion.  But that is what you have.  So change your tactics to reflect the fact that all the ammunition ever manufactured up until Day One of the apocalypse is all the ammo that will ever be manufactured ( no, Spanky, I don’t think the collapse will be a militia porn fight subsidized by the Chinese.  They will collapse as well.  And no, you cannot make your own smokeless powder or primers in quantity if at all ).  It would be as retarded as a PC minority CongressCritter trying to vote out reality.
*
The military fights an Oil Age war.  That is essentially the war perfected by the Federalist during the War Of Northern Aggression, and blindly followed ever since ( at first powered by wood and coal and water ).  Tons of factories churn out tons of crap to equip tons of cannon fodder conscripts ( even if the kinder, gentler conscription is voluntary in the sense you create conditions of poverty and then offer exactly one military service remedy to flee that condition ) and through frontal assault waves you overpower the enemy with superior industrial output and population.  For simplicities sake, call it Second Generational Warfare.
*
The personal firearms these troops use reflect that Industrial Oil Age perfectly.  They started out by using a horse killing round and rifle, added a bayonet to it and then fought a war against artillery with anti-cavalry weapons.  It was quickly realized that you need volume of fire, along with more distance than the end of a modern spear.  Submachineguns fit the bill nicely.  The thing was, that was the only option, because metal strength hadn’t caught up to larger powered cartridges.  So you had either a pistol round or an old one thousand yard anti-horse round.  The reason the BAR was 30-06 wasn’t because you needed that power in the trenches, it was because that was what you had on offer besides the too short of range Thompson or 12 gauge ( the BAR was a mobile Maxim ). 
*
In the middle of a war or mobilization once the powers that be panicked and realized their loans were in danger of not being paid back if the borrower lost their war, you fight with what is available.  So in the next war, you STILL had troops using rifles designed to fight cavalry or full auto guns only capable of using pistol ammo ( or semi’s using anti-horse rounds that needed to be bulky and heavy to contain the power of detonation within primitive steel ).  Demonstrated by personal preference from the boots on the ground, the submachinegun won out.  It was a terrible weapon with many issues, but it was the less worst choice.
*
Mass firepower won the fight.  Logistics capable of providing that mass firepower won the war.  Marksmanship didn’t matter in this kind of fight.  Walls of lead did.  The only advancement after this was that a more realistic round was developed.  You no longer needed to stop cavalry.  The full size round was obsolete from inception due to that one issue.  Range was not an obvious advantage because it was just mass volley fire and artillery was superior.  Squad automatic weapons retained that round, and to good effect, but only as used when artillery wasn’t ( obviously it is great for anti-personnel use, but you don’t necessarily need a full powered round for that.  Grenades can penetrate barriers better ).
*
So, for 70 years, we have been fighting the same war.  Mass firepower backed by superior logistics based solely on oil.  And all the preppers want to fight that last war.  I can understand the glacier speed in the military adapting to changing circumstances.  They not only preach about fighting the last war, they defend their tactics to the last man.  I would wish upon a falling star that the individuals tasked with their own defense would be a little smarter and a bit more flexible than  that.  Logistically, you will have ZERO ability to fight the last war, the war of mass industrialization. 
*
You don’t need rifles that will mow down horses and you don’t need carbines that will spew walls of lead.  You need a weapon that will kill your enemy, but while conserving ammunition.  Because I am a swell guy, I tried to help you all out by suggesting a bolt action will intrinsically save the ammunition for you.  I tried to explain how stress and chemicals your brain secretes will null almost anyone’s ability to practice fire discipline.  No one listened.  Fine, so you stuck with semi-auto’s.  You STILL need to change your tactics to conserve ammunition, and BEFORE you start running out.  It is easy peasy lemon squizey to figure out.  You cannot fight the last war.  And war is changing.  You get ahead of the curve or you  go off the cliff.
*
Some folks can stockpile enough ammo that all the above doesn’t matter.  Very few.  If they also can’t buy the equivalent amount of food, they die anyway.  The rest of us of realistic budgetary means need to change tactics, and use the gun we have available regardless how well suited it is.  Tactics trump weapons.  Most prepper choose the weapon they want based on the tactics they want to employ.  Which are inevitable military tactics from the last war.  I advise taking the weapon you can and using it smarter.  Which means conserving a rapidly depleting resource ( ammunition ). 
( .Y. ) 
( today's related link https://amzn.to/2NHBGAh )
Please support Bison by buying through the Amazon ad graphics at the top of the page ( or from www.bisonbulk.blogspot.com ).

*** Unless you are in extreme poverty, spend a buck a month here, by the above donation methods or mail me some cash/check/money order or buy a book. If you don't do Kindle books, send me the money and I'll e-mail it to you in a PDF file.  If you donated, you may request books no charge.   My e-mail is: jimd303@reagan.com  My address is: James M Dakin, 181 W Bullion Rd #12, Elko NV 89801-4184
*** Pay your author-no one works for free.  I’m nice enough to publish for barely above Mere Book Money, so do your part.*** junk land under a grand *  Lord Bison* my bio & biblio*   my web site is www.bisonprepper.com *** Wal-Mart wheat***Amazon Author Page
* By the by, all my writing is copyrighted. For the obtuse out there

20 comments:

  1. "Pray and spray" was the genius of the AK47, not an American weapon. An ill trained Uzbek farmer with a filthy rifle could dump 30 rounds in short order and possibly hit a professional Western soldier. The Motherland had far more Uzbek (and other) farmers than the West had professional soldiers.

    Not to mention, I don't know what Oil Age war you fought in, but nobody has been "praying and spraying" for a very long time (except for a period of time in Iraq and about 36 hours in Somalia). We didn't level Panama City or every village in Afghanistan. You want a quick trip to Leavenworth? "Pray and Spray" on your next patrol.

    Well aimed semi-automatic fire has been doctrine since at least 1989 (I have no experience earlier other than what I've read or was told by NCOs). Sure we had SAWs, M60s and then 240Bs and MK-19s, but the soldier with a rifle was taught to fire well aimed single shots. The other weapons were to gain fire superiority once in contact. As you've pointed out, the collapse won't be militia porn.

    I guess I just don't see where you are coming up with this "pray and spray" stuff? Yuppie preppers with more money than brains? Perhaps, but I'd guess that even the biggest tool on Youtube teaching defensive shooting isn't talking about volume of fire. No. They're copying the guys who know what they're talking about, albeit poorly.

    I think your good points are: go with what you know, you don't need a $1M arsenal, and don't waste ammo. Those are all solid points.

    JeSteR

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cover fire and suppressive fire are volume of fire.

      Delete
    2. Correct. And these days both of those things are achieved with the SAW and 240B, etc. The individual rifleman is still instructed to fire well aimed shots. For example, an infantry squad makes contact with the enemy. They deploy, firing well aimed shots, if they cannot gain fire superiority (i.e. pinned down) the platoon leader brings up a machine gun. If that is not enough a second squad is brought up, etc.

      In individual self-defense I don't think even the biggest douche on Youtube is suggesting you dump a mag as fast as possible. The only time I can see that is with a pistol at 7ft or less. At that point, who cares? You're gonna be in a knife fight or grappling if you miss.

      Even during days gone by, when only a bolt action rifle was available, suppressive fire was a thing. It was achieved with more dudes with bolt action rifles. Not to mention, I've yet to meet a combat vet who said, "Damn, if only I had a bolt action rifle".

      JeSteR

      Delete
    3. Uncle teaches (or does not prohibit) morale improvement through volume fire on contact with enemy. Nothing improves morale like seeing a couple pairs of A-10's over there lining up on the enemy who have been trying to wreck your walk in the park with some long distance rifle fire (vintage .303 or 7.62x54R) from sneaky shady cover. Now, that's A GUN.

      Delete
    4. Jester-suppressive fire is Industrial Age/Oil Age tactics. This will not be supported in the coming Age. Not even with a squad of bolt-action riflemen.
      *
      Uncle likes A-10 straffing runs. Job security for the Generals and the company who puts them on their board after retirement. Swatting flies with a sledgehammer is good profits.

      Delete
    5. Sorry bruh (I say that with the deepest affection), you're wrong. Look aaaaallllll the way back to Agincourt to understand the concept of suppressive fire! I must state, FOR THE RECORD, that I am the one trying to point out that well aimed shots is doctrine!!!

      "Suppressive fire" is one thing and one thing only...it is...gaining an advantage. That's it. Let me illustrate. The collapse is upon us. It is you with a bolt gun vs. 3 others with bolt guns. They want your food! You are all equally proficient, have the same amount of ammo and are equally protected by cover and concealment (to some degree). It does not take a 5th degree black belt in rocket surgery to "suppress" you. It's called "taking turns". We all learned that in Kindergarten. It's the same concept of two machine guns firing 6-9 round bursts alternating.

      Look, you love your bolt. Good. The first rifle I bought, specifically to prep, was a Mosin. I knew I needed something designed to kill a man, at a longer range than a pistol, to protect my family. However, I'm also well aware that Chechen rebels got their rocks off shooting Russian tank commanders in the face, head and neck with a .22 form 50-100m.

      "Then in the 1990s the Russians noted that Chechen snipers were effectively using .22 LR (long rifle, them little bullets kids use to hunt squirrels and rabbits with) weapons. Inside towns and cities, the .22 LR sniper was very effective, especially since the Chechens would improvise a very workable silencer by putting a plastic bottle on the end of the rifle's barrel, with a hole in the bottom of the barrel for the bullet to exit. Using a cheap scope, Chechen snipers were very deadly at ranges of less than a hundred meters. Such ranges were pretty common in built up areas. And since you usually did not hear the shot (to the head or face, of course), you had a hard time finding the shooter."

      I don't care what the caliber or "stopping power", if you shoot me with anything at less than 100m when there is no medical treatment available I am combat ineffective at that moment (minus 7 ft and closer). My new ouchie, thank you very much, has become my number one concern in life...and it'll be short.

      I'm not trying to tank your article. Like I said above, I think you have some very good points. However, I think some of your points are "dated". J/S

      JeSteR

      Delete
    6. Anon 5:51,

      Yes. There are incidences of A-10s vs. goat herder with ancient rifle. There are also incidences of heavily armed "operators" playing "Knock, knock...come out, come out where ever you are" because of rules engagement. I wear a bracelet on my right wrist for a friend lost on such a BS "raid". Volume of fire my ass!

      JeSteR

      Delete
    7. Jester-a point on suppressive fire going back to the longbow. I have actually talked of this before. That was a proto-industrial system, as ours currently is a neo-post-industrial ( does that make sense? Still industrial but on the fraying end ). Even prior to coal there was most of the support system already evolved for industrialism, nothing springing whole cloth. You actually make my point, because without factories supported by the state building munitions on mass scale ( which probably went back to Egypt and etc ), you can't use mass projectile warfare. That would actually be an interesting subject. Was the longbow volley fire new or normal? Was it just the scale that was different? Was the missile production more centralized and hence exponential? Many questions. But what doesn't change is you need an industrial system. Which we won't have. Now, tactically, you still have suppressive/covering fire post-collapse. That is the only tactic known. When the ammunition for that is no longer available-who then wins? The guy that had already evolved past that. Hence, the bolt action rifle. Believe me, I see the downside of that. A period of vulnerability. The upside is, if you survive, a longer period before weapon devolution. Minions have suggested a two tier strategy. Semi's first, then bolts. The SKS is great for this, a 2 for 1 gun. I prefer to try to avoid the conflicts after collapse to the greatest extent possible. My strategy is flawed due to my less than perfect location, granted. Saying all that, I want to thank you for your civil tone discussing this. I really don't feel I'm always right. I welcome new input. If my head is up my ass, tell me. I'd rather be wrong and humble than dead from hubris.

      Delete
  2. Not to take away from your article, but while I am sure we are spending plenty of money on third generation stealth boats, we have had two kinds of them already, going back to the Vietnam era. The only reason I am saying anything is Discovery channel did a show about them a few years ago. The first two types are called the Seafox and the Seabat. And that is all I am going to say about them. It was strongly impressed on me the security level involved and I still don't want to get a tour of Leavenworth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was speaking more on the prototypes that are supposed to be more radar absorbant or whatever the extra billions of dollar talking point is. Are we speaking of the same? I thought they were new-ish.

      Delete
  3. Crap on a crust! I was supposed to have posted this next week. I obviously hit the wrong date on the calendar when I "pre-posted" it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you saying I need to copy my comment and post it next week?

      JeSteR

      Delete
    2. It would look kind of funny on another article :)

      Delete
  4. "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." - Albert Einstein We want to delay the sticks and stones

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Forever Gun is good for that.

      Delete
    2. No such thing as a forever gun. Though , there shall forever be guns. So long as there are minds which can build them.

      Delete
    3. Sure, get technical. And minds aren't enough-you need resources. And they must be scaled. Think how worthless muskets would be without formations of them ( or the nationalization, finance and industry behind them )

      Delete
    4. Musket + bayonet = spear and volley missile weapon even for the single hunter/raider. So muskets are definitely a reasonable weapon for the singleton survivalist after all the cased ammo is gone - I wouldn't go so far as to invest in such unless legalities forced it on me (felony, or being in anti-gun rights states), and I might reference bow or cross bow first.

      Delete
  5. Just post everything now and take the rest of july off. Yes, tactics do trump weapons. Minions should consider their personal histories of never really knowing the future and how or why they ended up here at this point. They may end up elsewhere in a different time and place with only the shirt on their back and have to adapt accordingly all over. Don't be hung up with gear identity politics as the winds of change may find a minion playing second fiddle in a bar band in another dimension of the twighlight zone. Stay light on the feet, dance according to the neighborhood.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought the 'Murican Way Of Adaptability was to spend more money to make the problem go away? :)

      Delete

COMMENTS HAVE BEEN CLOSED