# Weapon Myths



## CADPAT SOLDIER (20 Sep 2006)

last night I was taught that a C1A1 Could chamber and fire a AK-47 round if hand fed. This was after I recieved the talk about how the Stering was the worlds greatest house clearing weapon.

My question is, is it ever alright to try and dispell these myths if the person whos teaching you it outranks you? 

I mean this wasn't joke the Cpl genuinly believed these to be true and was passing on his knowledge to the new troops.
It is apparent from my limited training that alot of CF reserve membesr know Very little about weapons and weapon laws.
I've heard its legal to buy a AK-47 as long as you buy it in pieces, that the AK-47 is legal if you use a barrel extension. 
these are just a sample, I"m young but I've read enough to know more on these topics then most people. 
Should I just keep my mouth shut and smile everytime I hear one of these?


----------



## Franko (20 Sep 2006)

Future Unknown said:
			
		

> last night I was taught that a C1A1 Could chamber and fire a AK-47 round if hand fed. This was after I recieved the talk about how *the Stering was the worlds greatest house clearing weapon.*
> 
> My question is, is it ever alright to try and dispell these myths if the person whos teaching you it outranks you?
> 
> ...



It is a common joke amongst those of us that actually used it.

Many had a "hair trigger" in that a little bump would set it off and keep firing until all ammo was spent.

Throw it into a room and let it clear for you......       

Regards


----------



## Signalman150 (20 Sep 2006)

Not only that, but the rate of fire was so slow, that you'd sweep the room and only release 5-6 rounds . . . thereby missing all the skinny guys.  I remember my first time on the range with the SMG, my instructor just about had a kitten because (while I felt like I had my finger of the trigger for an eternity), I was only letting off 2 rounds at a time! 

Trying to dispel such myths is difficult if--as you said--the instr outranks you, and is teaching a class. Some (a rare few) would accept such correction as part of the teaching method.  Most will slap you down and thereafter make your life a living hell.  I guess the best thing to do is to get your facts straight, (i.e. get the documentation and words of authority from one who knows) and let yr mates know the truth.  Again, there's a down side: if you're "found-out" then yr Cpl is going to accuse you of undermining his authority.

The other option is to speak to yr Trg NCO, or Chief Instr, (using the chain of command, of course).

Just my thoughts off the cuff.


----------



## paracowboy (20 Sep 2006)

Future Unknown said:
			
		

> My question is, is it ever alright to try and dispell these myths if the person whos teaching you it outranks you?


it is imperative that you do so. However, not in front of a large group, and ONLY if you have the hard data in hand. I'd strongly suggest a diplomatic approach about the entire thing.


----------



## Signalman150 (20 Sep 2006)

What Paracowboy said.


----------



## Franko (20 Sep 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> it is imperative that you do so. However, not in front of a large group, and ONLY if you have the hard data in hand. I'd strongly suggest a diplomatic approach about the entire thing.



A *very* diplomatic approach.

Regards


----------



## CADPAT SOLDIER (20 Sep 2006)

In the mess over a beer?


----------



## pronto (20 Sep 2006)

I find if you poke him in the chest and make menacing gestures, it may ease the tension. 

Crouching and growling also make an effective attention-getter ;D

Seriously, very diplomatically ask him/her for an oppoortunity to pass on some information you have "in an informal" manner

Pronto


----------



## paracowboy (20 Sep 2006)

Wait until you know he's alone in his office, or wherever he works, and walk in with the book in hand. (Yeah, make damn sure you have your facts straight, and the ebst way is to have the source in hand.) Say, "excuse me, Cpl/Sgt/Admiral, but that lesson you gave was so cool, I started looking some of that stuff up, and this book says...."


----------



## Haggis (20 Sep 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> Wait until you know he's alone in his office, or wherever he works, and walk in with the book in hand. (Yeah, make damn sure you have your facts straight, and the ebst way is to have the source in hand.) Say, "excuse me, Cpl/Sgt/Admiral, but that lesson you gave was so cool, I started looking some of that stuff up, and this book says...."



".....yer full of shyte and shouldn't be allowed to handle guns."

Oops.  Damned outside voice again.  :-[


----------



## boondocksaint (20 Sep 2006)

Future Unknown said:
			
		

> This was after I recieved the talk about how the Stering was the worlds greatest house clearing weapon.



the LAVIII is the best room clearing weapon

ever


----------



## paracowboy (20 Sep 2006)

I don't know that I'd go so far as to say "ever", dude.

I'd say the JDAM is probably the best room clearing weapon to date.  ;D


----------



## big bad john (20 Sep 2006)

My personal favorite for room clearing the RPO-A SHMEL, a nice man portable termobaric weapon.


----------



## boondocksaint (20 Sep 2006)

read in 'No True Glory' about them using a couple of those thermobaric thingy's, they quite liked them


----------



## big bad john (20 Sep 2006)

I never used htem, but I saw the results once and it impressed me greatly.


----------



## Shamrock (20 Sep 2006)

Me and a bowl full of chili washed down with some freshly squeezed orange juice.  THAT is the world's most effective room clearing weapon.


----------



## Craig B (20 Sep 2006)

The first year we ( In the Reserves) has the C-7 a MWO told me we couldn't use metal mags " because our rifles were specially modified" ...... I removed my metal mag and inserted a cheap plastic one, then walked away muttering to myself.

Craig


----------



## CADPAT SOLDIER (20 Sep 2006)

Last night When I was handed the C1A1 (I'm in love BTW) he said, "This rifle was specifically designed to take a AK-47 round, Or was it the other way around?"
it was actaully funny.
I also made a "lock stock and two smoking barrels" joke when I got handed the Bren gun


----------



## Devlin (20 Sep 2006)

This instructor needs to be corrected...but as others have said be diplomatic about it for certain. 

Passing along incorrect information especially when it comes to weapons and which rounds will fit into which weapons "if hand fed" can and likely will lead to someone getting injured some day. It's a safety issue as much as it's a instructor competency issue. Whether it's possible or not is irrelevant and mixing ammo like that is a bad habit to get into.

**edited for spelling


----------



## medicineman (20 Sep 2006)

You should ask him if he's actually seen a 7.62 NATO next to a 7.62 short  and actually tried to feed them.  Perhaps show him one of several photos available or articles from people that know what they're talking about.  In a diplomatic manner of course, but it should be done nonetheless.

MM


----------



## Shamrock (21 Sep 2006)

And while you're debunking his statements, try this one.

"I'm pretty sure that if you give an Lt a rifle, he's more than just a danger to himself.  He's a danger to everyone around him."


----------



## BernDawg (22 Sep 2006)

The ignorance of some people never ceases to amaze me. (the instructor in question) 
 I really get a charge out of people assuming that everyone in the CF is an automatic weapons expert just, well, because... you know the job and all... and I, of course, take great joy in correcting them (you know for safety sake).

 :brickwall:


----------



## Centurian1985 (22 Sep 2006)

If I recall correctly, the AK-47 could use NATO 7.62, but the C1A1 could not use Russian/WP/Eastern bloc 7.62.  The Russian designed round is apparently just a smidgen too long for fitting into the chambers of western built weapons; apparently it was designed that way on purpose so that they could use our ammo but we couldnt use theirs. That may be a myth too but its one thats been around since at least 1986 when I first heard it, and Ive read it in a couple of books since then. 

Ref the SMG, ditto, very slow rate of fire, you could sweep almost 45 degrees in arc before the next round gos off.  Youre better off using chili to clear the room... ;D


----------



## COBRA-6 (22 Sep 2006)

the AK47 uses 7.62x39mm, which would not be able to feed the NATO 7.62x51mm round. You may be thinking of the Russian 7.62x54mm (PKM, Dragunov, etc) round being able to feed the NATO round.


----------



## orange.paint (22 Sep 2006)

Personally I think you wait till he is in a large group with his peers and say something to the effect."Hey your that idiot that told me ..."and finish up with "well assneck sort your shit out." His peers will proably laugh at him as if he is shooting this bull at young guys, he proably is known to be an idiot by his peers.Maybe you get charged,maybe not.But hey you'll be remembered as they guy who told Cpl soandso he was a idiot and sorted him out.And then mcpl......anyway.

The army is a really weird highschool,his friends will hate you (later messing with your career...it happens)but the other guys who thinks he is a assneck will love you forever.
Everyone kinda knows myself and being reserved and quiet.....nahhh they dont.


----------



## paracowboy (22 Sep 2006)

rcac_011 said:
			
		

> Personally I think you wait till he is in a large group with his peers and say something to the effect."Hey your that idiot that told me ..."and finish up with "well assneck sort your shit out." His peers will proably laugh at him as if he is shooting this bull at young guys, he proably is known to be an idiot by his peers.Maybe you get charged,maybe not.But hey you'll be remembered as they guy who told Cpl soandso he was a idiot and sorted him out.And then mcpl......anyway.
> 
> The army is a really weird highschool,his friends will hate you (later messing with your career...it happens)but the other guys who thinks he is a assneck will love you forever.
> Everyone kinda knows myself and being reserved and quiet.....nahhh they dont.


 :


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2006)

YOU CANNOT USE 7.62x39 in a 7.62x54R or 7.62x51(NATO)  OR any combination thereof.

Some idiot has been passing that shit on for years.


Thats up there with the TRIAD is good, and a RAS will overheat your weapon (of course that idiot is the LCMM SA  ;D)  

And up there with following advice from RCAC_R011   :-*


----------



## orange.paint (22 Sep 2006)

Do I explain it was in jest....nahhh. :


----------



## Nug (22 Sep 2006)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> Me and a bowl full of chili washed down with some freshly squeezed orange juice.  THAT is the world's most effective room clearing weapon.



Ithought the CF didn't use bio weapons ;D


----------



## Haggis (22 Sep 2006)

I have a Sgt who qualifies as a bio-weapon.  Blew gas in the back of a closed BV 206, with me, the CO and RSM.

"Career moving, career moving, career stops!  Whaddya do, sergeant??"

"New resumé, CSM!"


----------



## TCBF (23 Sep 2006)

"I've heard its legal to buy a AK-47 as long as you buy it in pieces, that the AK-47 is legal if you use a barrel extension."

- In any firearm, there is at least one major piece that the CFC says is the piece you go to jail over.  You are either grandfathered to possess that piece by the numbers on the back of your PAL (Prohibited 12(5) OIC # 13, etc) or you are not.  You will cross the line long before you can assemble anything that can go "Bang."

Don't let anyone talk you into trying.


----------



## COBRA-6 (23 Sep 2006)

however, you can get a VZ-58 legally, because it is not an AK, if you get the long barreled one it's not even restricted!


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Sep 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> the AK47 uses 7.62x39mm, which would not be able to feed the NATO 7.62x51mm round. You may be thinking of the Russian 7.62x54mm (PKM, Dragunov, etc) round being able to feed the NATO round.



To quash any rumours now of this myth, any weapon chambered of 7.62 x54mmR (being rimmed not rimless) vs 7.62 x 39mm vs 7.62 x 51mm cartridge is NOT interchangeable period. I play with capturedAKMs, SVDs and PKMs all the time ( also owned several AKs, SKSs, and original Mosin 'snipers' from 1977 to 1994 when I was in happy gun owning days in Canada - so without sounding like a wanker - I know my shyte!). I wrote many articles in CF papers, instructed, etc), and NOTHING interchanges. Any attempt will put life and limb at risk. 

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## TCBF (23 Sep 2006)

Do you like the PKM?

Tom


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Sep 2006)

Its a stamped POS, but it hammers 'em out. We have some Russian ones with the safety markings in English!


Cheers,

Wes


----------



## COBRA-6 (23 Sep 2006)

I should clarify, I did not mean to suggest you could use the NATO rounds in the Russian guns. I was referring to the myth that a NATO 7.62x51mm round may feed into a Russian 7.62x54mm chamber because of the dimmensions. Kind of the way a 20ga shell will feed into a 12ga chamber, once...  ;D


----------



## COBRA-6 (23 Sep 2006)

also, PKM's are fun to shoot! The one in the pic is Bulgarian.


----------



## boondocksaint (23 Sep 2006)

the multi-cam is SO Canadian, eh


----------



## KevinB (23 Sep 2006)

Put your "cooler uniform" shooting pics on.  The pistol ones  >


----------



## COBRA-6 (23 Sep 2006)

the first rule of the bottle route range is that we don't talk about the bottle route range...


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Sep 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Put your "cooler uniform" shooting pics on.  The pistol ones  >


ONLY IF they involve "side-ways-gangsta" shooting.  Now THOSE are cool

;D


----------



## COBRA-6 (23 Sep 2006)

COBRA-6 is so gangsta, he mounts the sights on the _side_ of his glock yo!


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Sep 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> COBRA-6 is so gangsta, he mounts the sights on the _side_ of his glock yo!


But the real question is: do you push out the bullets when you busta cap?

;D


----------



## COBRA-6 (23 Sep 2006)

it makes them go faster, right?


----------



## Big Red (23 Sep 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> Do you like the PKM?
> 
> Tom



I LOVE the PKM. Currently I'm having a para PKM machined with RAS and railed topcover, 16" barrel... Should be ready in a couple months.


----------



## KevinB (23 Sep 2006)

Big Red said:
			
		

> I LOVE the PKM.


  
But we know your crazy  



> Currently I'm having a para PKM machined with RAS and railed topcover, 16" barrel... Should be ready in a couple months.



I cant wait to see that bad boy


----------



## TCBF (23 Sep 2006)

"COBRA-6 is so gangsta, he mounts the sights on the side of his glock yo!"

- Seen the Sierra Leonean urban firing stance competition PowerPoint?  Includes such classics as the
"Glock Foe-Tay".  Extra points were awarded for blue duct-taped magazines and flourescent orange life jackets worn like body armour.


----------



## Gunnerlove (24 Sep 2006)

I have one.

"The C7 can't use metal mags as it was specially modified to only use plastic mags"


----------



## Mortar guy (25 Sep 2006)

Gee COBRA-6, what's the Bottle Route range?  >

MG


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2006)

Mortar guy said:
			
		

> Gee COBRA-6, what's the Bottle Route range?  >
> 
> MG



I heard it has a pretty large template...  ;D

G2G


----------



## medaid (25 Sep 2006)

Okay..EVERYBODY KNOWS!! That the BEST house clearing weapon is a Cap Trooper in his Marauder Suit!!! ;D :rocket: 

Not to mention we all know never to give a newly commissioned 2Lt or even a senior Lt a rifle   that's what their security detail's for....right?  :blotto:


----------



## KevinB (25 Sep 2006)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> I heard it has a pretty large template...  ;D
> 
> G2G



360 Degree no caliber restriction  ;D


----------



## COBRA-6 (26 Sep 2006)

but watch out for range control...  :-X


----------



## pissedpat (3 Oct 2006)

"If you don't ensure that you have placed the cocking handle fully forward once the C6 is cocked, the cocking handle will be stuck to the bolt moving forward and back when ever it is fired." MCpl
"If you find that you are in a minefield, the first think you do is warn others to stop, then kneel down on the spot, then clear a one metre safety zone." Sgt
"The M67 fragmentation grenade will kill everything within a few metres of it explosion point and has a danger range of 10 metres. If you are within 10 metres you are in danger, beyond that you are safe due to the conical blast pattern of the grenade." Cpl
"The 5.56 mm NATO round is the best person killing round out there." WO
"The accuwedge(little orange rubber chunk) will extend the life of the C7." DND publication

As far as rounds fitting in soviet guns. Obviously you cannot fit a 5.56 mm NATO round in a weapon that chambers 7.62x39 and neither would the 7.62x51. But how about mortars? If wikipedia is of any use at all, it claims is it possible to fire a NATO 81 mm mortar round from a soviet 82 mm mortar (with significant accuracy loss of course).


----------



## boondocksaint (3 Oct 2006)

Are those more myth's? I like the wedge thingy, my weapon doesnt rattle as much ( no idea about it extending its life )

-grenades in general are not like hollywood, and I believe more PenDam's or demonstrations with them need to be done to show the troops just what the do/don't do ( having seen first hand it can take 2-3 to quell a noisy room )--a good friend of mine survived a grenade thrown at him by a TB while we were in Panjawi, was back in action fast
-the 5.56 Nato round is fine, again I think we get 'hollywoodified' about what happens when someone is hit by a bullet, when someone, anyone, is hit when they are keyed up on adrenaline or drugs, they arent going down fast. 
- as an old mortar dog I've seen some things done in the interest of....science, but never mixing ammo, dunno what would happen there.
- minefield, well drills are drills


----------



## Centurian1985 (3 Oct 2006)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> the AK47 uses 7.62x39mm, which would not be able to feed the NATO 7.62x51mm round. You may be thinking of the Russian 7.62x54mm (PKM, Dragunov, etc) round being able to feed the NATO round.



Yes, the PKM round is the one that they must have been refering to.  

Ref, the NATO 81mm and RS/WP 82mm mortar rounds, that is another story that has been around since at the early 1980's.  Apparently, this would allow the Russians to fire our ammo but we would not be able to fire theirs.  Although it sounds practical, a 1 millimeter difference does make an impact on reliability.  The ring around the mortar may not be able to engage the barrel rifling.  This would result in loss of propelling gasses escaping around the mortar (decreasing range) and loss of spin imparted by the rifling (thus loss of accuracy).  Although it technically could be done I wouldnt want to be part of the unit being supported by a mortars det using improper ammunition.


----------



## Old Sweat (3 Oct 2006)

Centurian1985,

Unless things have changed since I retired, 81mm mortars, and presumably 82s as well, are smoothbores. Obturation (the containment of propellant gases) is done by means of a band that expands and seals the bore once the charge is ignited. Think piston rings in an internal combustion engine. Therefore the bomb does not rotate, and is stablized in flight by the fins. 

Hopefully VG or one of the other mortar guys can put their donuts down and confirm or refute my statement. In the meantime, dinner hour nears and I am off for a beer.


----------



## Michael OLeary (3 Oct 2006)

I am not aware of any 81/82 mm mortar with rifling (conventional, muzzle-loading systems).  As for 120 mm systems, the most commonly recognized rifled mortar is the Thomson-Brandt RT-61. Turkey (HY 12 DI) also had one and the US 4.2" (M30) had a rifled bore.  I am working with notes a few years old, so there may have been recent changes.

For obturation in the smooth-bored mortars, the "expanding ring" is usually a plastic ring with a long oblique slice in one side.  This ring rests in a groove, the lower side of which is sloped to the tail of the bomb.  When the round accelerates on firing, the ring slips down the sloped side of the groove and is forced open to the wider diameter, and in contact with, the bore of the barrel.

For the rifled systems, my own familiarity is from reviewing documents on the RT-61, the rifled rounds had a pre-engraved metal driving band that needed to be fed into the bore propoerly aligned.  This mortar, and I suspect other rifled mortars, could also fire smooth bored ammunition, but with less range and a less efficient obturation system.


----------



## CADPAT SOLDIER (3 Oct 2006)

He wasn't refering to a 7.62 X 54mm I was holding a C1A1 when he said it. He said an AK-47 round would feed into it, about a minute eariler he was showing us the AK he was refereing to the 7.62X39mm


----------



## geo (3 Oct 2006)

FU.... he was wrong.
AK round is shorter - it does not fit.


----------



## KevinB (3 Oct 2006)

7.62x51mm (NATO) and 7.62x39mm (Russia)







Wow they aren't the same size  :


----------



## vonGarvin (3 Oct 2006)

Airborne Gunner Reunion?   ;D


----------



## KevinB (3 Oct 2006)

Long Story


----------



## Journeyman (3 Oct 2006)

Now can you show us a pic of mortar barrel rifling? Either 81mm or 82mm.....it's new to me.   ;D


----------



## TN2IC (3 Oct 2006)

Fancy Calpier, I want one.


----------



## KevinB (3 Oct 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Now can you show us a pic of mortar barrel rifling? Either 81mm or 82mm.....it's new to me.   ;D



Thats just mean  ;D

I can show some smoothbores though...


----------



## 1feral1 (3 Oct 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> Yes, the PKM round is the one that they must have been refering to.
> 
> Ref, the NATO 81mm and RS/WP 82mm mortar rounds, that is another story that has been around since at the early 1980's.  Apparently, this would allow the Russians to fire our ammo but we would not be able to fire theirs.  Although it sounds practical, a 1 millimeter difference does make an impact on reliability.  The ring around the mortar may not be able to engage the barrel rifling.  This would result in loss of propelling gasses escaping around the mortar (decreasing range) and loss of spin imparted by the rifling (thus loss of accuracy).  Although it technically could be done I wouldnt want to be part of the unit being supported by a mortars det using improper ammunition.



One more time!!

7.62 x 39mm, and 7.62 x 54mm do NOT, yes do NOT interchange in any NATO calibre rifles, and vice versa. 

End of story! Anyone tells ya different, they're full of shyte.

About 81/82mm mortars, no there is no rifling PERIOD!

I think unless one knows WTF they are talking about, to as they say, stay in your lane. Its you credibility, not ours.


In disbelief yet again,


Wes


----------



## youngstructural (3 Oct 2006)

SO I'll admit to be WHOLLY out of my depth in this conversation....

BUT, I'm really ver curious, and would like someone to correct me (pointing to FACTUAL information from Specifications if at all possible)...

Is it true that often .308 can be chambered and fired by a 7.62 NATO weapon, headspace depending?

Here is the best information I have found:
(This was posted on http://www.fulton-armory.com/308.htm)

Jerry Kuhnhausen, in his classic Shop Manual (available from Fulton Armory; see the M1 Rifle Parts & Accessories or M14 Rifle Parts and Accessories Pages under Books) has published a somewhat controversial recommendation concerning .308 Winchester and 7.62x51mm NATO ammo, headspace & chambers. I broached the subject with him some months ago. He had his plate full, so we decided to chat on this in the future. When we do I'll report the results of our conversation.

I completely agree with Jerry that if you have a chamber with headspace much in excess of 1.636 (say, 1.638, SAAMI field reject), you must use only U.S. or NATO Mil Spec Ammo (always marked 7.62mm & with a cross enclosed by a circle) since the NATO mil spec calls for a far more "robust" brass case than often found in commercial (read .308 Winchester) cartridges. It is precisely why Lake City brass is so highly sought. Lake City brass is Nato spec and reloadable (most NATO is not reloadable, rather it is Berdan primed). Indeed, cheaper commercial ammo can fail at the 1.638 headspace (e.g., UMC) in an M14/M1 Garand. Many military gas guns (e.g., M14 Rifles & M60 Machine guns) run wildly long headspace by commercial (SAAMI) standards (U.S. Military field reject limit for the M60 & M14 is 1.6455, nearly 16 thousandths beyond commercial (SAAMI) GO, & nearly 8 thousandths beyond commercial (SAAMI) field reject limit!).

I also agree that 1.631-1.632 is a near perfect headspace for an M14/M1A or M1 Garand chambered in .308 Winchester. But I think that it also near perfect for 7.62mm NATO!

I have measured many, many types/manufacturers of commercial and NATO ammo via cartridge "headspace" gauges as well as "in rifle" checks. If anything, I have found various Nato ammo to be in much tighter headspace/chamber compliance than commercial ammo. Indeed, sometimes commercial ammo can not be chambered "by hand" in an M14/M1A with, say, 1.631 headspace (bolt will not close completely by gentle hand manipulation on a stripped bolt, although it will close & function when chambered by the force of the rifle's loading inertia), though I have never seen this with NATO spec ammo. I.e., if anything, NATO ammo seems to hold at the minimum SAAMI cartridge headspace of 1.629-1.630, better than some commercial ammo!

So, why set a very long 1.636 headspace in an M14/M1A or M1 Garand? It probably is the conflict mentioned above. Military headspace gauges say one thing, SAAMI headspace gauges say something else, as do the spec's/compliance covering ammo. In a court of law, who will prevail? I think Kuhnhausen gave all those who do this work a safe way out. However, I believe it not in your, or your rifle's, best interest. Whether you have a NATO chambered barrel (M14/M1 Garand G.I. ".308 Win."/7.62mm NATO barrels all have NATO chambers), or a .308 Winchester chamber, keep the headspace within SAAMI limits (1.630 GO, 1.634 NO GO, 1.638 FIELD REJECT). This subject is a bit confusing, and for me difficult to explain in a one way conversation!

Clint McKee

Would greatly appreciate your input,
Regards,

YS
>  Living and Working in NZ, missing my snow covered home...


----------



## KevinB (3 Oct 2006)

I'll post some .308 versus 7.62mm Nato and dimensions later.

I shoot .308 in 7.62mm rifles and vice versa - but I dont have a M14/M1A


----------



## 1feral1 (3 Oct 2006)

There are different HS gauges for 7.62mm rilfes, etc. Different measurements for the PH M82, the L1A1 SLR, the AWF sniper rifle, the MAG 58 and M60 MGs.

As for Garands, although they do exist in 7.62x51mm in a modified format, the prime cartridge used is the 7.62 x 63mm (.30 M2 AKA .30-06, which just had its 100th anniversary of service).

In lay terms, .308Win is a civvy designation of 7.62 x 51mm. Back in Canada, I had a minty Winchester M14, fitted w/selector lock. Before it went restricted, I used to hunt happily with factory .308 ammo. Never a stoppage.

Don't loose any sleep using factory IVI 150gr KKSPs or some surplus Australian F4 Ball in any .308WIN calibre rifle.

I am in Shyteland currently, and I have no data at hand, but Kevin will fill in the blanks required.


Cheers,

Wes


----------



## Shamrock (3 Oct 2006)

Jane's Infantry Weapons 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TDA 120 mm MO 120 RT rifled mortar 
Description 

The TDA 120 mm MO 120 RT rifled mortar is probably the most complex of current mortars and in some aspects approaches very closely to the gun. It is rated by many observers to be the most efficient weapon of its type, and more than 1,000 units have been produced. These serve with 24 armed forces in 22 countries, excluding licence-produced models.
    This mortar can be fired only off its wheels and can be deployed only in areas where the towing vehicle has access. It is a massive piece of equipment which fires a heavy bomb out to 13,000 m at rates of fire of up to 24 rds/min. It has a rifled barrel and is muzzle loading. To overcome the windage problem, the ammunition uses a pre-engraved driving band.
    Main components are the barrel, the cradle, the undercarriage and the baseplate. The barrel is a substantial forging, with the towing eye at the muzzle. The outside is radially finned to increase the surface area for heat dissipation. The interior is rifled and, with the pre-engraved driving band, imparts rotation to the shell.
    The cradle consists of a steel tube connecting the two wheels and carrying the torsion-bar suspension. The traversing gears are totally enclosed to exclude foreign matter. The elevating handwheel rotates a worm-and-gear assembly which transmits motion, through a multiple disc clutch, to a pinion meshing with the rack formed by the barrel finning. The collar sliding along the barrel produces the necessary change of elevation. The cross-levelling shaft, actuated by the upper left handwheel, tilts the traversing assembly together with the collar to which the sight is attached. The baseplate is very heavy, with massive webs on the underside. After a prolonged period of firing, the baseplate can be extricated by using the barrel as a lever and employing the towing vehicle to pull the baseplate up.
    Although the MO 120 RT is a rifled mortar, it will fire smoothbore bombs except those types having spring-loaded tailfin assemblies with straight fins. Smoothbore bombs are frequently used to `bed in' the baseplate (1 round charge 3, 1 charge 5, 1 charge 7) and also to provide cheaper training. Bombs produced specifically for the MO 120 RT are equipped with a tail tube carrying the primary and secondary cartridges. This tube is ejected just after the bomb has left the mortar and falls about 100 m from the muzzle. An anti-armour bomb has also been developed.


----------



## 1feral1 (3 Oct 2006)

Hey Sham, we were talking generic NATO/Com Bloc 81/82mm tubes.


Wes


----------



## Michael OLeary (3 Oct 2006)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> Jane's Infantry Weapons
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> TDA 120 mm MO 120 RT rifled mortar
> Description
> ...



Hmmm, by the power of Google:
:



> TDA Armaments SAS ... Originally formed as the Edgar Brandt Company in 1912, and later Hotchkiss Brandt, *Thomson-Brandt Armaments (TBA)* and finally Thomson- Daimler Armaments (TDA) SAS, this company pioneered all three modern mortar calibers fielded worldwide. Currently, TDA is a joint venture company of Thales (formerly Thomson CSF) and EADS (formerly Daimler-Chrysler Aerospace). Although primarily engaged in mortar guns and ammunition, TDA also produces a wide range of munitronics, payload submunitions and fuzing, and 70mm rocket systems.



http://www.armada.ch/98-5/001d.htm



> Perhaps one of the most well known 120 mm mortar is the TDA (formerly Thomson Brandt) MO120 RT ...



Same company.  Same mortar.

Pics? No thanks, I've seen it.  For everyone else:


----------



## KevinB (4 Oct 2006)

Shamrock - the preceeding twit (Cent1985) very clearly typed 81 and 82mm Mortar - followed by rifling.

Please dont walk thru the beaten zone attempting to drag his wounded ASS out of it...


----------



## big bad john (4 Oct 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Shamrock - the preceeding twit (Cent1985) very clearly typed 81 and 82mm Mortar - followed by rifling.
> 
> Please dont walk thru the beaten zone attempting to drag his wounded ASS out of it...



Thank you for my laugh of the day!


----------



## Shamrock (4 Oct 2006)

Misread Journeyman's post.  

I'll go hang out on the other corner of the Internet now.


----------



## onecat (4 Oct 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> it is imperative that you do so. However, not in front of a large group, and ONLY if you have the hard data in hand. I'd strongly suggest a diplomatic approach about the entire thing.



I would take the burn an dthe hard times later, and raise my hand in the class and point out he should do more research.  And the information he is giving is a myth.  Wrong information is wrong information.. not matter who comes from, and if it wrecks his class.. them its his fault for not researching.  Being out ranks is no reason to let this con't.  If he's one those of people who thinks being corrected in a diplomatic way in the way is wrong.. he's the same person who would make your life hell if pointed it out, outside of class.  Part of being a teacher or an instructor is being open to the input of class.

The only time I would not do this, is durning basic.  Any other time is fair game.  Of course I've not come across a instructor who was so poorly informed on his subject.


----------



## Centurian1985 (4 Oct 2006)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Centurian1985,
> 
> Unless things have changed since I retired, 81mm mortars, and presumably 82s as well, are smoothbores. Obturation (the containment of propellant gases) is done by means of a band that expands and seals the bore once the charge is ignited. Think piston rings in an internal combustion engine. Therefore the bomb does not rotate, and is stablized in flight by the fins.
> 
> Hopefully VG or one of the other mortar guys can put their donuts down and confirm or refute my statement. In the meantime, dinner hour nears and I am off for a beer.



Crap!  I should have checked my text before I posted that.  Huge friggin error, you are right, I should have said smoothbore, not rifling. 

(Edit - many swear words...I cannot believe how I got that mixed up...)


----------



## Michael OLeary (4 Oct 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> crap!  I should have checked my text before I posted that.  Huge friggin error, you are right, I should have said smoothbore, not rifling.



That's odd, only a few days ago you told us that:



			
				Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> I was in mortars in 1988-1990 ....



And you even forgot whether the weapon was smooth-bored or rifled.  Maybe your "gung-ho Airborne WO" should have been more concerned with your knowledge and skills in your primary job during that period.


----------



## Centurian1985 (4 Oct 2006)

Oh, come on, it was sixteen years ago.  It only proves I'm human, can make mistakes, and that some information can get mixed up if not used for a long period of time.


----------



## BernDawg (4 Oct 2006)

Just a quick interjection here about the 7.62 NATO round.  IN Suffield back inthe 80's (  :warstory: ) we ran out of Canadian 7.62 (imagine that!) and had a batch of Brit 7.62 issued to us.  Had the worst time getting the stuff to cycle in our C1's.  Hard extractions, stove pipes, generally piss poor performance.  Im talking every 2nd or 3rd round here too.  I sure as hell wouldn't have wanted to have to use that anywhere for real.
    Now a question for the more knowledgeable on here (I-6, Wes).  Is this poor performance common in a round that is supposed to be universal or do you think we got a bad batch?


----------



## Jay4th (5 Oct 2006)

For a while Cdn 7.62 was forbidden to be used by other NATO units due to the piss poor QC.
 -source "North American FAL's", Collector Grade Publications.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 Oct 2006)

Sometimes cases have bulges or the bullet is not properly seated, adding to the length or shortening it, all can cause feeding issues.


----------



## Jay4th (5 Oct 2006)

Alot depends on how ammo is stored.  More than we usually realize.  Extreme hot storage does weird things to powder inside casings as does cold.  If you store a bunch of sleeves of ammo under a tarp in the sun for a couple weeks and then put it in a cool Sea container or vice versa you will have serious consistency issues even with ammo from a good manufacturer.  Even so much as how much oil is on your weapon has serious effects. ie dangerously high chamber pressures if chamber is oily etc.  Surprisingly well stored ammo can last just about forever. I still use Second World War .303 brit regularly. This topic is well covered in an article in Small Arms Review about four issues ago.


----------



## TCBF (5 Oct 2006)

Not just any propellant will do.  Our ammunition must function to spec over a wide range of temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure.  Not easy. 

There are trap shooters out there who use different ammo for warm and cold weather.  "Status Of Steel" Reloading Pamplet even designates "Good cold weather load" and so on for some of it's shotgun shell recipes.  

The odd benchrest shooter has been known to watch the thermometer as well.

SAAMI (Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturers Institute) specifications for headspace, how to measure headspace for a specific cartridge, dimensions such as OAL, etc, are often 'tighter' than Mil Spec standards due to most civie rifles not being required to operate under grotesque conditions.  Their chamber pressure standards however, are often loaded down for the lowest common denominator of Mil Surp rifles.

For example, .303 British SAAMI specs are based on the concept that no load they mfr should blow up an old Lee Enfield from WW1. Especially considering few people even notice the bolts and rcvrs often have differing serial numbers, and so never get their headspace checked.


----------



## 1feral1 (5 Oct 2006)

NATO approved small arms ammo, has the + and circle on its base. In short this is for use by NATO countries and should be approved for all small arms of that calibre.

Australian ammo does NOT have this, and hence only used in Australian weapons, and NATO approved ammo is not authorised in Australian weapons period.

As for how ammo is stored, all professional armies store it cool and dry. I have fired ammo as old as 1915 and wartime 40s stuff. Never a problem.


Cheers,

Wes


----------



## geo (5 Oct 2006)

Jay4th said:
			
		

> For a while Cdn 7.62 was forbidden to be used by other NATO units due to the piss poor QC.
> -source "North American FAL's", Collector Grade Publications.


Jay,
this point leads into the oposite direction of Berndog's queery.....
in his case, it's someone else's ammo doing bad things to our weapons.

From a personal perspective, I never really had a problem with our 7.62 in the FN BUT, with respect to the C4  C5 GPMG... was it the ammo or the weapon?

(edited to correct Oopsie... C5 VS C4)


----------



## George Wallace (5 Oct 2006)

C-5

C-4 Goes BOOM.  DM 12 gives you head-aches.


----------



## Old Sweat (5 Oct 2006)

Geo,

Reference your observation re the GPMGs converted from .30 to 7.62:

From a personal perspective, I never really had a problem with our 7.62 in the FN BUT, with respect to the C4 GPMG... was it the ammo or the weapon?
[/quote]

From what we were told at the time, the fault lay with the weapon and perhaps specifically with the size and/or shape of the chamber. As I recall it, the gun would often fire a few rounds and then the top cover would pop open and the belt would flop out. This was not a good thing. Fixes were still being worked on in the late 1970's or about ten years after the guns were converted. I am not sure if the C4 was ever fixed.

I will now wander back to my lane, as I am not really comfortable commenting on calibres under 40mm or so.


----------



## a_majoor (5 Oct 2006)

From my experience the GPMG C-5 had dreadful feed problems, mostly due to the mechanics of converting the gun to fire 7.62 X 51. My usual experience was to fire a burst, clear a stoppage, fire a burst, clear a stoppage etc., with the occasional "Bolt Two!" thrown in for good measure.

This happened all the time, and it did not seem to matter if the gun was fired by a slack-a** who simply screwed in the barrel and backed off three clicks or a manaical perfectionist who spent 10 minutes headspacing and timing the gun with his own personal guages. (I fall somewhere in the middle). Considering all the moving parts and convoluted operating system, it is a testament to John Browning that the thing even worked at all.

I very rarely encounter stoppages in a C-6, but the new gas piston is not as user friendly, and is a source of difficulty. Service ammunition, unless improperly stored and degraded or dirty is not a problem in my opinion, and I have fired everything from 9mm to .50 HMG in weather and temperature ranging from -400C to +350C. The condition of the weapon is key.


----------



## Danjanou (5 Oct 2006)

Centurian1985 said:
			
		

> Oh, come on, it was sixteen years ago.  It only proves I'm human, can make mistakes, and that some information can get mixed up if not used for a long period of time.



Funny it's been about 20+ years since I was in a mortar platoon, and I'd lay odds I wouldn't embarrass Mssr O'Leary or Von Garvin on the firing line now. I even remember the difference between smooth and rifled bores. Mind I had a good WO back then. :


----------



## BernDawg (5 Oct 2006)

Lots of good answers guys thanks.  As to the fouling we wouldn't let that happen in our weapons on a regular basis as this was an on-going issue at the time. When in doubt clean it.  Right? As to the odd miss-shaped round or casing IIRC the problem was Coy wide with every one having these problems so it may have been a bad batch or maybe it was the storage issue coming from across the pond and all.  I don't remember how the rounds were marked ref the + and circle so that may have been an issue.
     Now about the C-5.  I felt that the gun had it's moments both maintenance wise and firing wise.  I used to get mine just hummin with nothing but a screwdriver and a can of oil but that was a long time ago and there is no doubt that the C-6 is a far superior weapon with a lineage almost as storied as Mr Maxims original design.

My 2 bits.
BD


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 Oct 2006)

Here is a recurring myth, Russian 7.62 x25 ammo will work nicely in a C96.  :


----------



## Acorn (7 Oct 2006)

The C1 "GPMG" had huge problems with feed due to the conversion from .30 cal. The C5 was actually an improvement. My first MG course (I did 3 - long story) was with the C1. My memory is about 25 years old though. However the 7.62 barrel was definitely rifled.

My mortar memories are a few years more recent. No rifling, but if the obturation ring on the 81mm is missing or f***ed up, the round will exit the tube like a "half-f***ed salmon." Credit for that line goes to an old Patricia mortar sgt who will remain nameless.

And, apologies for not having read all pages of this thread, but the "interchangeable ammo" myth is just that, a myth. It may, however, go back to the days of roundshot and muzzel-loading cannon/muskets when the shot designed for a given weapon had a load of windage to start with, and an adversary with smaller balls (there's a double-entendre) could compensate with extra wadding and use his ammo in opponents' weapons.

Acorn


----------



## geo (10 Oct 2006)

C1 GPMG?... don't remember that designation... C1 was always a FN Rifle in my early training.

GPMG 7.62 Rifled barrels?.... yeah, unless the darned thing was burnt out ... in which case the bullets were going all over the place.

half f***ed Salmon?... love it!


----------



## Danjanou (10 Oct 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> C1 GPMG?... don't remember that designation... C1 was always a FN Rifle in my early training.
> 
> GPMG 7.62 Rifled barrels?.... yeah, unless the darned thing was burnt out ... in which case the bullets were going all over the place.
> 
> half f***ed Salmon?... love it!



Geo lots of stuff had the C1 designation remember including the SMG.

The C1 was the official designation of the original Browning GPMG. Most were rebored from the old .30 cal to 7.62, which was the reason fro fed problems IIRC. The C5 was the newer improved version, basically some of the problems re the feeding were fixed, the barrels were lined with teflon?  And some changes wer made with the head spacing and timing.  I trained on the oplder C1 in the late 1970’s on my TQ1/QL3 infantry and served in the platoon weapons det now and then on FTX. First was the “newer” C5 in Germany in 1980 and later used them on y Machine gun course.

Amazing what random facts I can pull out of addled brain almost 30 years later on a moments notice.


----------



## geo (10 Oct 2006)

SMG C1!... oh yeah!
GPMG C1..... still don't remember but that doesn't mean much, I remember that lousy little cocking handle we had before it was replaced with the big "O" ring & the 30 cal ammo.... with respect to the C5 designation.... never really used that term either


----------



## BernDawg (10 Oct 2006)

WE really didn't use the term very much either.  It was, and always will be, The G-pig to me.  :warstory:


----------



## Danjanou (10 Oct 2006)

BernDawg said:
			
		

> WE really didn't use the term very much either.  It was, and always will be, The G-pig to me.  :warstory:



Agreed, among names we can't use on this forum as it is a family site ;D

Realistically outside of weapon lectures did anyone call the FNC1 anything but FN, or the SMG anything but that. FNC2 was the proverbial exception to thew rule as i can't remember calling it anything but C2.  :warstory:


----------



## geo (10 Oct 2006)

You're right Danjanou, 
C2 & C3 would be the only ones I can think of 

And who can ever forget the old C2 mag bras ::warstory::


----------



## BernDawg (10 Oct 2006)

And , of course, you got to wear 2 of them stacked on top of one another so you had enough ammo!
 :


----------



## Journeyman (10 Oct 2006)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> i can't remember calling it anything but C2.


And because of that, I didn't have a name, I was just "C2 Left!"  "C2 Right!"   :warstory:


----------



## BernDawg (10 Oct 2006)

Or other-wise known as "Reference high feature!..."


----------



## TCBF (10 Oct 2006)

"The C1 was the official designation of the original Browning GPMG."

Browning Machine Gun Cal. .30 U.S.  M1919A4

to 

Machine Gun 7.62mm C1

to

Machine Gun 7.62mm C5


----------



## Old Guy (11 Oct 2006)

I can't swear to this, but back in the bad old days, when I was in Vietnam, several supposedly experienced sorts told me the VC/NVA often fired captured 81mm rounds in their 82mm Soviet/Chinese mortars.  Assuming the round would fire at all, I can believe it, because the dinks were seldom concerned with accuracy.

However, in fairness, I should point out that the bad guys owned a number of American mortars, some rumored to have been captured in Korea by the Chinese.  The VC/NVA could simply have been firing Ami rounds in Ami mortars.

Down in the Delta we seldom got hit by anything bigger than 60mm (until they started using rockets!).  So I can't speak from experience regarding 81/82mm rounds.  I can tell you that while a 40mm mortar round will merely dent your average bit of PSP, a 60mm will blow a hole in it.  Small hole, to be sure.

I'll go back to my corner now.

Jim


----------



## geo (11 Oct 2006)

Jim,
There was also the problem of ARVN mortars finding their way into the hands of the NVA and the Minh


----------



## Old Guy (11 Oct 2006)

Heh.  Yep, there was that, as well.  I imagine the ARVNs had plenty of our 60s and 81s.  Both had been in the arsenal for a long time before VN.  I suppose a small VC unit tasked with harassing a base would have trouble carrying  anything heavier than a 60.  Most of the time it was fire five or six rounds then di-di.

In '68 Dong Tam was a 9th Div artillery base.  They had beau coup 4.2" mortars and 105mm howitzers mounted on rafts in the harbor.  I can't recall seeing any 155mm stuff other than the howitzers mounted in a tank chassis -- can't recall what their official nonclemature was.  We also had a single 8" gun located about a quarter mile off the end of the main runway.  

jim


----------



## geo (12 Oct 2006)

can visualise someone trying to fire a 155 off of a raft, and finding himself at the bottom of the bay............


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Oct 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> Jim,
> There was also the problem of ARVN mortars finding their way into the hands of the NVA and the Minh



As I understand it, quite a number of our 105 C1 howitzers were sold to the ARVN, and our likely still in use over there.


----------



## 3rd Herd (12 Oct 2006)

“Perhaps as many as 150 of the lost 105mm howitzers fell into Chinese hands with little or no damage and were not destroyed by subsequent air strikes. The North Koreans had little interest in the American-made artillery when they overran much of the South the previous summer because their Army was a totally Soviet-equipped and supplied force. However, the mainstays of Chinese field artillery in 1950 were Japanese 75mm field guns and 105mm howitzers and guns, Soviet 76mm guns, and the “made in USA” 105mm. For obvious reasons, the Chinese were more than happy to add the captured weapons to their inventory.

 An even bigger windfall when the U.S.-equipped Nationalist armies were destroyed, scattered, or defected en masse between 1947 and 1949.50 The exact amount of equipment which fell intact into Communist hands is impossible to pin down, but it is worth noting that so many 105s were harvested from the “running-dog lackies of Yankee imperialism” that the Chinese actually went into the export business. For example, the Viet Minh 351st Heavy Division, a formation patterned along the lines of a Soviet artillery division (and which pummeled the French
garrison at Dien Bien Phu), was equipped with 48 105s.”

Source: Giangreco,  D.M. “Korean War Anthology, Artillery in Korea: Massing Fires and Reinventing the Wheel”, United States Army, Command and General Staff College


----------



## Old Guy (12 Oct 2006)

Darn.  So it wasn't a myth after all.

Sounds like an interesting book.  

jim


----------



## 3rd Herd (13 Jan 2007)

From Hell In A Very Small Place, Fall Bernard, Da Capo Press, 1960, 

"The 351st had come a long way since it's humble beginning in 1945, when the Viet Minh was equipped with some antiquated french and Japanese mountain guns. one by one its battalions had gone through the Communist Chinese training camps at Ching-Hsi and Long chow. At first equipped with mostly American 75-mm. howitzers captured from the Chinese Nationalists, the division received fourty-eight American 105-mm. howitzers in 1953, mostly from captured Korean stocks."(p.126)

Order of Battle: 351st Heavy Division(reinforced):Vu Hien
151st Engineer regiment
237th Heavy Weapons Regiment (40 82-mm. mortars)
45th Artillery Regiment (24 105-mm. howitzers)
675th Artillery Regiment (15 75-mm. pack howitzers and 20 120-mm. mortars)
367th Antiaircraft Regiment ( 20 37-mm. AA guns and 50 .50 caliber AA's)
Field Rocket Unit (12-16 Katyusha rocket launchers)
p.486

Further in various actions through primarily the break in morale of ethnic troops fighting on the French side significant amounts of heavy weapons were captured by the Viet Minh and used against their former owners. This included both light and heavy mortars, .50 machine guns and 75.-mm recoiless rifles( again captured in either Korea and Nationalist China). Missed ariel supply enhanced the available ammunition supply of the Viet Minh. Lastly, captured M-24 "General Chaffe" tanks were discovered still in operating condition complete with ammunition as late as 1972 by American Aero Scouts.

If anyone is tired of the demise of the CAR, Hell In A Very Small Place  is an excellent chronicle of the destruction of the French Airborne Organization and the costly mistakes of higher command.


----------

