Send comments to:  editorG2mil@Gmail.com   We have space for most, but not all comments.   Let us know if you want us to include your organization and e-mail address.  Some letters may end up as content elsewhere in G2mil.  Avoid political comments, this is a weapons, warfare, and tactics website.

Right on! I spent my time in Okinawa, Thule Greenland, Kunsan Korea, Berlin and Bitburg. That was needed back when the Sovs could have launched a flat-footed attack. Now those instant-reaction bases are not needed under today's climate. And if tomorrow's climate changes, I see no reason why the affected powers would not roll out a red carpet for us to deploy. We can maintain a 'deployable' status right here in the US using our own indigenous 'remote' bases; we certainly have enough of those. Eglin/LeJeune areas make a pretty good hot humid area in the summer; Nellis/Indian Springs/Tonopah and Forts Irwin and Huachuca for desert, Drum, Carson and Richardson/Eielson for arctic - we're all set!  Pull our guys back home. I only wish we could clean out the bases of all the goodies and bring that back too.
On a second train of thougght - how would you feel about setting up a repository for all the 'corporate knowledge' us guys who have been there came up with and yet somehow that has been forgotten or overlooked in the current active force? I told Al Huber about using CBU 24 as a 'shotgun' for CAS - it was new to him. basically it involves a 10-30* angle high speed (500-550) pass with the fuze set to open at about 800 AGL. Threw all 665 bomblets ahead like a giant shotgun. Used it during a heloevac at Dong Hoi (I think) to supress NVN MG fire interfering with the evac. Worked great. Only needed one can per hostile fire incident to keep them silenced. This is an example of a tactic that isn't in the books. I debriefed Intel and that was it. Doubtless in the archives someplace, but where, God only knows. Depending on old NCOS and word of mouth makes us keep re-inventing the wheel.
Walt BJ
--- Bjorneby Walter


By 45 the germans had the tools they wanted for infantry, and considerable
experiance knowing what worked. The best equipped squads would have one or two
MG42s for their main offensive firepower. Most soldiers would have an SMG or
STG for manuver/CQB/Self defence -but, in most photos you'll see there was
always at least one squad member that retained the Kar98 rifle. You see this in
"Cross of iron" in the warehouse scene -while the guys with automatic weapons
keep the russians back the rifleman takes his time and makes them count.
Second historical thing
The idea of intermediate rounds (optimised for 500m or less) was a german
wartime concept. The usual explanation you see is that in most of the world
visibility prevents shooting at more than this range. Since MGs and snipers
routinely shoot at greater ranges, the accepted explanation is obviously wrong!
By 43 the german army was very familar with alpine and desert fighting-and it
is very "un-german" that these would not have been figured into developement of
the intermediate rounds. My theory is this. A 7.92mm or lesser bullet takes
around a second to reach 600m. In that time an <u>aware</u> target can sprint
5-9m -you don't know which direction he will take, and he'll often be darting
between cover. Your chance of hitting him with a single aimed shot is virtually
random. I think most shooting was less than 500m because most german riflemen
knew there was little point shooting beyond this unless the foe didn't know you
were there or you could fill an area of about 10m with bullets.
I used to advocate that mountain units should be issued 7.62mm rifles like the
FAL for "more range" -but now I begin to rethink. If you are not shooting at
1000m, a 20-24" barreled M16 is less of a burden to carry up the mountain. The
7x45mm sabot round would solve performance -more carrying power, better
terminal effects and less effected by cross winds.
On the 5.56mm -best terminal effects are when the round fragments -for both the
M193 and the M855 this is at less than 200m for a M16, 150m for a M4 and does
not occur when fired from barrels under 14.5" -so how much use for defence is
that 10" under the OICW?
A smart fused 40mm grenade for the SACO striker GMG already exists -with a
reduced charge this should work in the M203 etc.
As said, the AR15 is modular -you can change a M4 to a M16 by just drifting out
a pin and changing the barrel and reciver top -no need to provide both M4s and
M16s for every trooper



That's certainly an option, but $3000 per four pound missile is a lot. I'd prefer at least 10 lbs.  They weren't too specific about the guidance.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brent Smith" <brent_smith_va@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 5:04 PM
Subject: MPIM - Modern Infantry Squad

> Instead of MPIM, how about something like the Marine
> Spike missile project? 
> http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/article.cfm?Id=674
> At 20 lbs, the MPIM is too heavy for your dedicated
> Rocker, IMHO.  He can probably only carry two rounds,
> at most.  The 4 lb Spike missile won't kill a tank but
> would be useful against softer targets.  The biggest
> drawback I see is its daytime-only seeker.  I'd ditch
> it and go back to some form of wireless SACLOS or
> MPIM-like inertial.
> Just my 2 cents..
> Thanks for the great site.
> -Brent Smith