m4a1

[slovenianmarine]

how accurate is m4a1 beacause i am airsofter and i can say a1 to m4?

SEMPER FI from Slovenia:flag:

[sparkie]

How accurate are you?

[Echo_Four_Bravo]

It is sub MOA accurate- but it is limited in distance more so than the M-16- which is why the Marine Corps didn't rush to adopt it as the service rifle a few years ago when everyone was talking about it.

[slovenianmarine]

i can shoot you in your head without knowing your are hit (my airsoft rifle )

[sparkie]

Let me have a couple suds first, then I won't care.

"airsoft rifle" Oxymoron?

[slovenianmarine]

that was just joke i am acurate on 50-60meters max

[sparkie]

That's pretty good range for a spitball.But why would you shoot someone if they aint gonna know it? If I shoot someone, I want them to stay shot.

[rvillac2]

Another thread that needs to be deleted.

[slovenianmarine]

sorry for asking:mad:

[Covey_Rider]

1. Read the rules for posting, I'm sick and tired of seeing the same errors over and over. 2. The M4A1 lacks at long range as said before...however I do wish that we had more of them considering they are far better more for clearing houses. That and an airsoft rifle will shoot completely differently then a real rifle. There's a big difference between toys and reality.

[bigdog43701]

wannabe kids...they think they know everything

[slovenianmarine]

i know that

[slovenianmarine]

I know that m4a1 is used in CQB but i wanted to ask because you have experience.I also know diference between real and airsoft

[BR34]

I have an M4A1...well, it's an AR15 in M4 format. I've never shot it past 50 yards due the the suck ass ranges in my hometown. But at 50 yards I group around 1.5" from ironsites and bad eyes.

[thewookie]

I think Sparkie's 1st post said it all. The weapon has the capabilities to shoot sub MOA from 100yds. That's on a bench-rest or with a good shooter behind it. But what you're able to do behind it is a test for the range. Most shooters never realize the weapons ability for accuracy. BTW what is an airsofter?

[thewookie]

Oh, Paintball. Yeah I don't know how much of a big fan of that I am for you on 2 fronts. When I was with CQB we used sim kits (simunition) to train with the sub machine guns (MP-5&M-4) and the M-9. But I think that's entirely different then whatever weapons you're using here. I think it might teach you bad shooting habits or wrong habits/incorrect habits. I also think whatever tactics you're learning are going to require you to be re-trained after you get in. I don't do the paintball thing obviously, I know some of it's pretty intense and well organized but my time running around in the woods is over. So I don't do it, but it's not because it's a bad or not fun thing, don't get me wrong. But for someone thinking about entering the Corps I think it might cause you some problems down the road on those two fronts I mentioned. Have fun but forget whatever you learn as an airsofter, and that's sometimes tough to do.

[rvillac2]

Some of us veteran Marines have often been teased about playing paintball or airsoft and getting our asses handed to us. We often brush off our cammies of the paint and calmly remind you that it isn't real and your attack habits are 'game' tactics and would lead to sure death in the field.

To the poolees who play and are about to go in. Just wait until you see that FPF demonstration. Just wait till you hear the chatter of an M60E3. Just imagine being on the other end of that noise. Then you'll see that people aren't so quick to jump out into the open and rush forward like they do in paintball. When Marines do it right, covering fire from an MG is enough to make the enemy cower and await for death from a rushing Marine.

; )

Sgt "shot up in paintball" V

[slovenianmarine]

i agree with rvillac

[chili77bowl]

I once had a conversation with a guy (roughly 30 years old) where he was bragging that he would desimate me at paintball...I kindly (in my best Sgt Page way) reminded him that he probably still lived with his mother and that his overweight ass was a moron to think that Paintball and combat were simular....he was silent after that.

[slovenianmarine]

i don't like paintball but i enjoy in airsoft.
resons are:
- more realistic then paintball
-weapons look similar to real ones
- some armies use it for training in real combat (japan)

[slovenianmarine]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3817213100467821104&q=irene&total=7364&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

[thewookie]

Excuse me, pellet wars! I did a little research on your sport and it looks fun. Like the wild, wild, west but with rubber pellets. I clicked on the link that you provided and I also did a little more video surfing on the subject, but I can tell you that I stand by my earlier comments. I saw a lot of bad things, complete lack of muzzle discipline, tactics, and other stuff that bothers me but my eyes are going to pick up that stuff more easily then others. But I especially found it interesting that in the wikipedia for airsoft it stated: It is generally accepted that when a player is hit, they will declare it.
Today we live in a more politically correct world, but back in my day we had a similar sport we played in the neighborhood with BB guns, no head shots. But in that sport nobody had to question if you were hit, especially not if they were hit by a powerful BB gun! Have fun!

[slovenianmarine]

I know there is a lot of bad things,so we try to correct them with trainning.

[slovenianmarine]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8190934444339170504&q=airsoft+slovenia&total=48&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

I hope you enjoy in this video as i did

[Ironrider]

You're posting here for something that ain't even a ******* BB gun:mad:

[sparkie]

What's up Iron? you can shoot me with a BB anytime. Caution.... I might slap you back ;]

[rvillac2]

I think it's time to lock this one up. This kid will not ever be a Marine.

[sparkie]

RV.... You can't say that just yet. Give it some time. Let him outgrow his games.

[rvillac2]

Sorry Sparkie, the kid (22?) is not even in the U.S.
Still 3 rungs down below WannaBe.

[slovenianmarine]

RV got right. I'll 23 this month.

[JCam0331]

It is sub MOA accurate- but it is limited in distance more so than the M-16- which is why the Marine Corps didn't rush to adopt it as the service rifle a few years ago when everyone was talking about it.

Point target maximum effective ranger for M-16A2/A4 series is 550 meters right?

please tell me when in the heck will you shoot the M-16 at 550 meters in combat, especially in an urban environment.

While the M4's lighter weight and compactibility would make it a lot easier for Marines and soldiers.

[rvillac2]

Point target maximum effective ranger for M-16A2/A4 series is 550 meters right?

please tell me when in the heck will you shoot the M-16 at 550 meters in combat, especially in an urban environment.

While the M4's lighter weight and compactibility would make it a lot easier for Marines and soldiers.

Outstanding question. The answer is...when you SEE targets at 550 meters.
Read Shooter: The Autobiography of the Top-Ranked Marine Sniper
by Jack Coughlin.

He tells about an incident during OIF where a Marine was on an overpass with a view of the enemy at over 500m. The Marine was doing the best he could with iron sights. Coughlin took over and took out the targets with his long gun.

[JCam0331]

Outstanding question. The answer is...when you SEE targets at 550 meters.
Read Shooter: The Autobiography of the Top-Ranked Marine Sniper
by Jack Coughlin.

He tells about an incident during OIF where a Marine was on an overpass with a view of the enemy at over 500m. The Marine was doing the best he could with iron sights. Coughlin took over and took out the targets with his long gun.

thats the exception more than the rule.

[rvillac2]

thats the exception more than the rule.

No doubt. But in comparison to the questions posed by the dickweed who started this thread, it was an outstanding question.

[thewookie]

Me personally I'd like to see the Marine Corps go back to issuing out service weapons to Marines at boot camp that will stay with that individual Marine for his or her entire career. But instead of just issuing a standard M-16A2, issue out gun kits that have modification or upgrades to the basic system. Maybe in these gun "kits," issue out two extra compact uppers, one with iron sights and a grenade launcher and another one with some type of optics, preferably multitask optics. And also in that "kit" have an additional compact lower receiver to compliment the short uppers. This would give each individual Marine the ability to have a "long gun" for those situations that call for it, and also have a M-4 type of system for those fun little spots we find ourselves in. And by throwing in the M-203, now we're talking about firepower! But more importantly each Marine would keep that weapon system kit until they got out. It's expensive, maybe initially only infantry type Marines are issued these gun kits, but it'll give each individual Marine much more flexibility, and the ability to suit the weapon to the mission. In our current mission, I think I'd chose to carry the M-4 variation w/ iron sights and a grenade launcher 80% of the time, but either way you're using the same ammo and all the same basic parts. Think about it from a squad level, half the squad with long guns (M-16A2's) for your perimeter security and half the guys with the M-4 variations for the door kicking. And most importantly the weapon system and the Marine stay together throughout.

[SkilletsUSMC]

Airsoft is for fake ass ametures... Go Away poseur.

[SkilletsUSMC]

Me personally I'd like to see the Marine Corps go back to issuing out service weapons to Marines at boot camp that will stay with that individual Marine for his or her entire career.

Nice idea, but unrealistic. I shot out the rifleing in my M16. couldnt even be BZOed. They just gave me a new M16 and sent the old upper to the shop. And then you have the pesky SAW to contend with... But if the let us keep our rifles when we get out then Im all for it!!!

[thewookie]

I agree it's probably not realistic but more because I think they have a new system all together that will eventually replace the M-16 series. I saw it on Future Weapons, so this isn't gospel, but it was a nasty system! Rifling out a gun is hard to do, that must have been and awfully old weapon you had!

[SkilletsUSMC]

I agree it's probably not realistic but more because I think they have a new system all together that will eventually replace the M-16 series. I saw it on Future Weapons, so this isn't gospel, but it was a nasty system! Rifling out a gun is hard to do, that must have been and awfully old weapon you had!

I tested a new themal optic and I had to shoot 30 full mags on burst as fast as I could three times for 10 nights. Good times. The point was to see how bad a thermal optic would be obscured by a rediculous rate of fire. I was just the Marine for the job...:D

[SkilletsUSMC]

Point target maximum effective ranger for M-16A2/A4 series is 550 meters right?

please tell me when in the heck will you shoot the M-16 at 550 meters in combat, especially in an urban environment.

While the M4's lighter weight and compactibility would make it a lot easier for Marines and soldiers.

Well... even though there have been plenty of long range kills in iraq... lets imagine another place... two countrys to the east where long range shots are the norm. Or lets take into consideration the NEXT war... who knows what it will look like.

Not every war is in Fallujah.

[JCam0331]

Well... even though there have been plenty of long range kills in iraq... lets imagine another place... two countrys to the east where long range shots are the norm. Or lets take into consideration the NEXT war... who knows what it will look like.

Not every war is in Fallujah.

I highly doubt firing the M-16 series rifles with iron sights at 500+ meters will ever be the norm. If we need long range, precision fire, thats what we have the Scout/Sniper platoon and their M40A3 and Barrett SASR rifles for

[thewookie]

If we ever find ourselves in North Korea or somewhere in Europe, lets say Russia, then I think engaging the enemy at 500 yads or closer with iron sights, isn't entirely out of the question. What's wrong with it? A lot of wars have been fought and won with good ole iron sights. I'd hate to see the Marine Corps forget about that part of marksmanship and become like the Navy SEALs, and other units/organizations that have too much reliance on just the "high speed new weapon technologies."

[JCam0331]

If we ever find ourselves in North Korea or somewhere in Europe, lets say Russia, then I think engaging the enemy at 500 yads or closer with iron sights, isn't entirely out of the question. What's wrong with it? A lot of wars have been fought and won with good ole iron sights. I'd hate to see the Marine Corps forget about that part of marksmanship and become like the Navy SEALs, and other units/organizations that have too much reliance on just the "high speed new weapon technologies."

With the utmost respect Sergeant:

1. We will never find ourselves in North Korea. At least not a ground invasion. North Korea has thousands of artillery pieces and short range ballistic missiles aimed at the South. Any foolish military action against North Korea is essentially signing the death warrant of the citizens of Seoul, Daejeon and Inchon. Negative sir. Not going to happen.

2. Russia? Are you being serious with me? The United States will never invade a country with almost as many strategic nuclear weapons and hydrogen bombs as we do. Unless we intend on destroying the whole world many times over.

3. Is there anything wrong with becoming like the Navy SEALs? If only more Marines can be trained to even 50% of the standard that the SEALs are trained to. This country's 800 or so Navy SEAL operators happen to be some of the toughest and most well trained men in the country, with the exception of 1st SFOD-D (Delta). There is nothing wrong with emulating the Navy SEALs or any other elite unit if the Marine Corps wants to maintain her reputation as an elite organization.

4. I have nothing against the iron sights. They are obviously tried and true and has served our military well through the years, not to mention they teach new recruits basic marksmanship skills and not to overrely on gear such as the ACOG scope.

But you were missing my point. If you read the original post, someone brought up the M-4 has a slightly less max effective range than the M-16, and I simply replied that you would rarely if ever engage someone at 550 meters anyway with your M-16 and I would trade the slight bit of reduced range for the compactability of the M-4 any day of the week.

Semper Fi.

[JCam0331]

If we ever find ourselves in North Korea or somewhere in Europe, lets say Russia, then I think engaging the enemy at 500 yads or closer with iron sights, isn't entirely out of the question. What's wrong with it? A lot of wars have been fought and won with good ole iron sights. I'd hate to see the Marine Corps forget about that part of marksmanship and become like the Navy SEALs, and other units/organizations that have too much reliance on just the "high speed new weapon technologies."

And you don't think the Navy SEAL BUD/S Instructors train their third phase BUD/S students to shoot the M-4 with iron sights before they train with scopes?

[thewookie]

I agree NK and Russia are probably extreme examples but my point is anything can happen. I don't care how many tactical nukes they or we have, nothing is off the table these days. It might not be very likely but it's not impossible. The weapons and tactics that we use today might not have the same effectiveness somewhere else.

And my point with the SEAL's is based on that fact that they don't work as good without all their gizmo's and gadgets. Perhaps if the Corps had their unlimited budget then we would train that way also? But I know that starting very early on is their training that they use all the high speed gadgets you can name. And sometimes that stuff breaks. And I say this from first hand experience. Give a SEAL a lensatic compass and see what kind of look you get. And I respect the SEALs but I'm not as high on them as you are, I saw a so called experienced SEAL team get wiped out by a MCSF team in a force on force operation, on multiple occasions at MCSF training company. In fact it was the same day Dick Marchenko got kicked off our range for acting like he ran the place. Maybe I'm biased but I'll take a Marine Force Recon team over them any day but that subject could be discussed on this site for years.

And finally I understand your main point and I agree with it, but I also think that we need to remember that what happens in IRAQ isn't the only way it happens. If someday in the future we run into a war or conflict where there's some distance between us and the enemy then I hope we still have those fine M-16A2's out there. Not all wars and conflicts are fought from 100 yds in. We might find ourselves in a far different place someday where we need to reach out and touch someone from the squad level.

Good discussion Marine!

[JCam0331]

I agree NK and Russia are probably extreme examples but my point is anything can happen. I don't care how many tactical nukes they or we have, nothing is off the table these days. It might not be very likely but it's not impossible. The weapons and tactics that we use today might not have the same effectiveness somewhere else.

And my point with the SEAL's is based on that fact that they don't work as good without all their gizmo's and gadgets. Perhaps if the Corps had their unlimited budget then we would train that way also? But I know that starting very early on is their training that they use all the high speed gadgets you can name. And sometimes that stuff breaks. And I say this from first hand experience. Give a SEAL a lensatic compass and see what kind of look you get. And I respect the SEALs but I'm not as high on them as you are, I saw a so called experienced SEAL team get wiped out by a MCSF team in a force on force operation, on multiple occasions at MCSF training company. In fact it was the same day Dick Marchenko got kicked off our range for acting like he ran the place. Maybe I'm biased but I'll take a Marine Force Recon team over them any day but that subject could be discussed on this site for years.

And finally I understand your main point and I agree with it, but I also think that we need to remember that what happens in IRAQ isn't the only way it happens. If someday in the future we run into a war or conflict where there's some distance between us and the enemy then I hope we still have those fine M-16A2's out there. Not all wars and conflicts are fought from 100 yds in. We might find ourselves in a far different place someday where we need to reach out and touch someone from the squad level.

Good discussion Marine!

It won't happen. There is a reason why no nuclear weapon has been used on another country since the bombs on Hrisohima and Nagasaki.

I undertstand you saying that what happens in Iraq isn't the only way it happens, but the trend in the 21st century is low intensiry warfare. No established nation-state is foolish enough to go toe-to-toe against the United States in a conventional war.

As for SEALs I can't speak by first hand experience like you, having worked with them or witnessed their live training exercises, but after reading the book "Lone Survivor" by Marcus Luttrell, I've grown to respect the SEALs even more than before.

And I'm pretty sure a SEAL knows how to use a lensatic compass, since basic land navigation is taught to the pog-est Marines at MCT and new Lieutenants at TBS. I don't see how extensive land nav skills would not be a part of BUD/S or at least SQT (SEAL Qualification Training), as, like you said, high tech gadgets have a chance of breaking down, and I can't envision a US SEAL being lost in the wilderness because his GPS broke and he wasn't taught how to shoot an azimuth.

Highly doubtful.

[rvillac2]

And I'm pretty sure a SEAL knows how to use a lensatic compass, since basic land navigation is taught to the pog-est Marines at MCT and new Lieutenants at TBS. I don't see how extensive land nav skills would not be a part of BUD/S or at least SQT (SEAL Qualification Training), as, like you said, high tech gadgets have a chance of breaking down, and I can't envision a US SEAL being lost in the wilderness because his GPS broke and he wasn't taught how to shoot an azimuth.

Highly doubtful.

LOL. JCam, you're a good kid and clearly you've read a bit and are fairly intelligent. However, clearly you haven't been around the fleet. Wait a few years and we'll see if you have the same esteem for our colleagues.

Keep up the spirit, though.

[thewookie]

Let me say this and then I'll get off this post and subject. I don't want to come across as some Jarhead that's mad and bitter, and talks trash about the SEALs or any other unit or organization. My point is based on first hand experience as I've mentioned, and I'll briefly explain what that was. When I was stationed at Dam Neck rifle range the SEAL compound was right next door and we shared the range that we used for DM School, PMI School, and weekly rifle and pistol quals of the Marines from the Atlantic coast area. When we were down from teaching a class or a range detail we used to get out and hammer away at the birm with the DMR. The SEALs next door shared the rifle range with us and so we developed friendly relationships with some of the guys. But most of them were the biggest arrogant, prima donna's I have ever witnessed. Some of them would talk to us occasionally but overall they would look at us like we were trash, this is a range detachment with mostly Sergeants and above, not a bunch of boots. Some of them wouldn't even recognize us when we were right beside them, a total lack of simple courtesy. But any way, they shot next to us and when we were done shooting we'd clear the range and move down range to see our targets. But they didn't like us to see their targets, I'll just put it that way. They had more gear and weapon problems then anything I've ever seen from any other group of "operators." Maybe all these guys were new because they never impressed any of us, speaking about their shooting. And I've seen them perform with their scoped toys, and let me tell you they have many toys, un-freikin-believable. But they never seemed to use much iron sights, or it was very rare that they did.

When I moved down the road to Chesapeake, where MCSF basic school and also CQB school is located. I dealt with them again, but this time it was in a CQB environment. And let me tell you they shoot a lot of rounds and are fairly good at marksmanship, but their tactics inside an enclosure are terrible. Maybe not terrible by most people's standards, and apparently not theirs, but terrible to me and every one of my fellow CQB instructors that I worked with. I mentioned earlier we did some force on force with them, and granted it was our house so we had a better understanding of the layout. But this one day they had trained in it all day, like a bunch of pom-pus arses. And later when it came time for them to make a live entry (w/sim), they came in from the roof after fast roping down off a helo. And we lit their arses up all over the house, run after run. They were all mad and embarrassed at the end. The funny thing was they even asked if they could take the video tape that we run on all our live runs, so we wouldn't have it and then use it to embarrass them by showing it to our students. We told them to pound sand, and promised not to show it. We showed it to our students the very next day and we laughed our arses off.

But overall I'd have to say that I met many a fine SEAL operator in my four years down in Virginia. A lot of former Recon guys make their way there because they get better missions, at least back then. But overall I think they're some of the most dedicated, loyal, hard working, and physically fit organizations around. They're amongst a group that's truly my hero's and I really believe that overall, they're nasty. But I say again, I'll take a platoon from Force over the SEALs any day, actually, I'd rather have air force PJ's over the SEALs but it really depends on the mission. The PJ's are bad ass professionals, and they're very much like Recon in the sense that they're humble.

And that takes me to my final point, JCam you used the word elite to describe the SEAL's, an how the Marines wouldn't be bad off to aspire to this. Marines are not elite, at least not any of the Marines I trained or served with. If I ever heard those words coming out of one of my students mouth I'd wear him out with his gear, and gas mask on. The SEAL's call themselves elite, let them. Marines are just Marines, on any level. We don't need to be called elite, our actions for the past 232 years say enough.

[JCam0331]

Let me say this and then I'll get off this post and subject. I don't want to come across as some Jarhead that's mad and bitter, and talks trash about the SEALs or any other unit or organization. My point is based on first hand experience as I've mentioned, and I'll briefly explain what that was. When I was stationed at Dam Neck rifle range the SEAL compound was right next door and we shared the range that we used for DM School, PMI School, and weekly rifle and pistol quals of the Marines from the Atlantic coast area. When we were down from teaching a class or a range detail we used to get out and hammer away at the birm with the DMR. The SEALs next door shared the rifle range with us and so we developed friendly relationships with some of the guys. But most of them were the biggest arrogant, prima donna's I have ever witnessed. Some of them would talk to us occasionally but overall they would look at us like we were trash, this is a range detachment with mostly Sergeants and above, not a bunch of boots. Some of them wouldn't even recognize us when we were right beside them, a total lack of simple courtesy. But any way, they shot next to us and when we were done shooting we'd clear the range and move down range to see our targets. But they didn't like us to see their targets, I'll just put it that way. They had more gear and weapon problems then anything I've ever seen from any other group of "operators." Maybe all these guys were new because they never impressed any of us, speaking about their shooting. And I've seen them perform with their scoped toys, and let me tell you they have many toys, un-freikin-believable. But they never seemed to use much iron sights, or it was very rare that they did.

When I moved down the road to Chesapeake, where MCSF basic school and also CQB school is located. I dealt with them again, but this time it was in a CQB environment. And let me tell you they shoot a lot of rounds and are fairly good at marksmanship, but their tactics inside an enclosure are terrible. Maybe not terrible by most people's standards, and apparently not theirs, but terrible to me and every one of my fellow CQB instructors that I worked with. I mentioned earlier we did some force on force with them, and granted it was our house so we had a better understanding of the layout. But this one day they had trained in it all day, like a bunch of pom-pus arses. And later when it came time for them to make a live entry (w/sim), they came in from the roof after fast roping down off a helo. And we lit their arses up all over the house, run after run. They were all mad and embarrassed at the end. The funny thing was they even asked if they could take the video tape that we run on all our live runs, so we wouldn't have it and then use it to embarrass them by showing it to our students. We told them to pound sand, and promised not to show it. We showed it to our students the very next day and we laughed our arses off.

But overall I'd have to say that I met many a fine SEAL operator in my four years down in Virginia. A lot of former Recon guys make their way there because they get better missions, at least back then. But overall I think they're some of the most dedicated, loyal, hard working, and physically fit organizations around. They're amongst a group that's truly my hero's and I really believe that overall, they're nasty. But I say again, I'll take a platoon from Force over the SEALs any day, actually, I'd rather have air force PJ's over the SEALs but it really depends on the mission. The PJ's are bad ass professionals, and they're very much like Recon in the sense that they're humble.

And that takes me to my final point, JCam you used the word elite to describe the SEAL's, an how the Marines wouldn't be bad off to aspire to this. Marines are not elite, at least not any of the Marines I trained or served with. If I ever heard those words coming out of one of my students mouth I'd wear him out with his gear, and gas mask on. The SEAL's call themselves elite, let them. Marines are just Marines, on any level. We don't need to be called elite, our actions for the past 232 years say enough.

That was an excellent post and theres nothing there that I will argue with !!

[slovenianmarine]

but you never know what can happen in future.