PDWs...and other small arms.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ahillock
    Warrior
    • Jan 2016
    • 339

    #91
    Originally posted by LRRPF52 View Post
    Single point slings are a non-starter for most scenarios, other than plainclothes vehicle-born operations, and the modern hybrid slings that can adapt from single point to 2-point are a better solution.

    LR1955 has been doing this type of work for decades, so I would consider that before taking the position of trying to instruct him on CQM.

    He was in 1st and 10th Special Forces Groups over a career, to include serving as OIC over shoot-specific committees, in addition to being a competitive shooter since the 1970s, not just some officer that got assigned a duty for 2 years who has no passion or experience in the subject matter like the regular Army specializes in.
    I'm not trying to lecture anyone, I am sharing my experience and my personal opinion. What I have learned and experienced myself is that a transition to a sidearm is the fastest reload in a CQC situation. This is supported by those that have been in combat. This is supported by ex-SF guys too and other operators. This isn't just me stating it. So as with most things, SF LR1955 has an opinion and other SF guys have an opinion completely different than him. The point of this is to share our opinions and reasons behind it.

    For me and my training, a transition to a sidearm is a much quicker reload than trying to reload my AR while within handgun combat range.

    Comment

    • LR1955
      Super Moderator
      • Mar 2011
      • 3355

      #92
      Guys:

      To set things a bit more on an even keel here. I am no SME on CQB or SFAUC. I relate things I saw and experienced but understand that they are almost two decades old. And I haven't kept up with it because I am out and honestly that stuff has nothing to do with my life today. It didn't have much to do with it even when in the Infantry or SF. I did see and experience a huge transition in thought, tactics, and equipment from the late 70's to the late 90's in SF as it related to what we called SOT then CQB and finally SFAUC. All was needed and was a huge benefit to SF as a whole in my opinion. Others in SF didn't share my opinion because they thought that SF was heading too far down the DA role and straying from its original intent. And no, pistols aren't issued to SF guys because someone thinks that the are extra insurance that a SF guy will survive a gun fight. They are issued purely as a result of doctrine. There are places and times where a pistol is more effective than a carbine in SF doctrine. So they are issued.

      When working with precision riflemen in units following my career, I also noted that the Combat Arms as a whole had progressed but this was primarily caused by the needs in Iraq. At least SF had the foresight to realize that this type of training would be critical and started implementing training programs well before Iraq. Mostly due to Somalia I think.

      And I am no master of CQB and do not consider myself an expert in it. Just note that I did observe as well as do, and when I observed I was looking to see if the technique or piece of gear worked for most of the guys. Even today if I see some technique or piece of gear that I think may give an edge, I may just try it and see if it works.

      The whole issue about pistols might just as well be about religion. From my first days in the Army through today, I have heard the same arguments ad nausea.

      I don't take any dissenting comments as being lectured to. Some of them are pretty good, too.

      Hell, I thought we were discussion the use of Tomahawks in CQB! A replacement for the pistol perhaps? Don't cost much, no moving parts, inflicts terror into terrorists.

      LR1955

      Comment

      • stanc
        Banned
        • Apr 2011
        • 3430

        #93
        Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
        Hell, I thought we were discussion the use of Tomahawks in CQB! A replacement for the pistol perhaps? Don't cost much, no moving parts, inflicts terror into terrorists.
        Gene, google image search turns up several pics of soldiers posing with tomahawk in hand, for example:





        But, I don't know if tomahawks are typically carried in a manner that would allow a "quick draw." Below are the only photos I could find of a tomahawk being carried, and both look far too slow to deploy in a sudden, face-to-face encounter.

        Comment

        • LR1955
          Super Moderator
          • Mar 2011
          • 3355

          #94
          Originally posted by stanc View Post
          Gene, google image search turns up several pics of soldiers posing with tomahawk in hand, for example:





          But, I don't know if tomahawks are typically carried in a manner that would allow a "quick draw." Below are the only photos I could find of a tomahawk being carried, and both look far too slow to deploy in a sudden, face-to-face encounter.

          Stan:

          Damn, ruined my day. Maybe the dude in the lower right picture was the one who split the Talaban guy from chest to belly, thus causing the other Talaban dudes to "Run away! Run away!"

          Top picture is an old one. Three color desert fatigues I believe. Guy on lower left and upper left look familiar though.

          Am interested in your view of PDW's from a historical perspective. No doubt this has been seriously considered before.

          LR55.

          Comment

          • Texas
            Chieftain
            • Jun 2016
            • 1230

            #95
            This discussion of PDWs certainly has cut a wide swath. There appears to be a lot of passion about slings and knives and tomahawks and pistols, that is for sure -- but the question remains what is a PDW, and what role does it fill, and what will it replace if anything.

            Comment

            • LR1955
              Super Moderator
              • Mar 2011
              • 3355

              #96
              Originally posted by Texas View Post
              This discussion of PDWs certainly has cut a wide swath. There appears to be a lot of passion about slings and knives and tomahawks and pistols, that is for sure -- but the question remains what is a PDW, and what role does it fill, and what will it replace if anything.
              Exactly!

              Comment

              • stanc
                Banned
                • Apr 2011
                • 3430

                #97
                Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
                Top picture is an old one. Three color desert fatigues I believe.
                Right you are. I wasn't paying attention to the uniforms, which in most of the photos were either woodland, 3-color desert, or ACUs.

                Only two pics showed current camo. One can be seen here: http://www.hatchetsandaxes.com/testimonials

                Comment

                • LRRPF52
                  Super Moderator
                  • Sep 2014
                  • 8569

                  #98
                  Originally posted by Texas View Post
                  This discussion of PDWs certainly has cut a wide swath. There appears to be a lot of passion about slings and knives and tomahawks and pistols, that is for sure -- but the question remains what is a PDW, and what role does it fill, and what will it replace if anything.
                  Here are the classifications of PDWs as I see them:

                  Pistols (not a suitable form of PDW in my book, maybe ok in others, but straight-walled pistol cartridges are weak performers, and will be even more so going into the future without generational leaps in propellant and projectile technology for them)

                  SMGs: Generally pistol caliber, suffer the same issues, but are easier to aim with the stock. Outdated 20th Century instrument of war.

                  1990s-era PDWs: This is where several NATO members recognized the failings of pistols and SMGs, and sought to replace them with better cartridges and weapons systems. Belgium developed the 5.7x28 PDW cartridge for the FiveSeven Pistol and P90 PDW, while Germany developed the 4.6x30 PDW for the HK MP7 PDW. Bill Alexander actually worked on several projects with the UK MoD, including .224 Boz in Glocks and MP5s, which spit a 50gr projectile out at 2500fps IIRC. It was never adopted by the UK for some reason. It would be nice to have Bill chime in on it.

                  As we are now well into the 21st Century, I see a lot of old school designs with new packaging on them, often based on the AR15 receiver arrangement, but chambered in uninspiring 9mm, but with some better human interface than the MP5 ever had.

                  We can do much bette than this, starting with the cartridge. Since the military isn't asking for it, I'm not sure how you would get the ball rolling on a 21st Century PDW with funding, but I would like to see 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP relegated to the 20th Century trash bin, to be honest. Very unimpressive fight stoppers most of the time according to statistical analyses covering thousands of different shooting incidents with them on unarmored civilians.

                  I envision a new PDW that has near-rifle performance, in a small package, that is streamlined and compact, that can be worn on a belt without being a snag hazard.
                  NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

                  CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

                  6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

                  www.AR15buildbox.com

                  Comment

                  • wganz
                    Bloodstained
                    • Apr 2015
                    • 32

                    #99
                    MY! how things have changed since I got out in 1984 and we had just done the greens/khakai to BDU conversion. LBE with a buttpack that flopped around madly. Having 9mm ammo and 1911 pistols since Congress got tired of the Army dragging out the conversion to 9mm. Strange days.

                    Back to topic, a mil spec version of the KelTec RDB but with a 12.5" barrel in 5.56 NATO would be have an OAL of about 22".

                    BTW. My LGS told me that as a 'preferred customer', they'd get me a RDB Survival in 6.5 Grendel for under $700.

                    Comment

                    • Klem
                      Chieftain
                      • Aug 2013
                      • 3506

                      Transitioning to handgun in a stoppage.

                      My experience is...Transition to handgun works and is still a practised SOP but only to be used if you are in a close quarter gunfight. If the bad guys are beyond the effective range of the handgun then drop down or move to cover and fix the stoppage on your primary weapon (while communicating to your team, 'stoppage' or 'changing mags'). Bearing in mind a long gun smashes a handgun in accuracy and effectiveness so your primary weapon gets all the love. If you don't practise to make this fast and smooth then probably best not to carry a handgun.

                      Comment

                      • stanc
                        Banned
                        • Apr 2011
                        • 3430

                        Originally posted by LRRPF52 View Post
                        As we are now well into the 21st Century, I see a lot of old school designs with new packaging on them, often based on the AR15 receiver arrangement, but chambered in uninspiring 9mm...
                        IIRC, back around 2005 the Commandant's Notes in Infantry magazine called for use of SBR versions of the M4 carbine (like the Navy's 10-inch barrel Mk18) to be used as a PDW.

                        Comment

                        • stanc
                          Banned
                          • Apr 2011
                          • 3430

                          PDWs - Part 1

                          Originally posted by LR1955 View Post
                          Am interested in your view of PDW's from a historical perspective. No doubt this has been seriously considered before.
                          Yeah, it's not only been considered before, a PDW was actually adopted and fielded: The M1 carbine.

                          But, while the M1 carbine was a good first effort, it was considerably bigger and heavier than would later be desired.

                          In the late-1960s, both the Air Force and Army showed some interest in the concept. Colt developed the SCAMP and IMP machine pistols (https://forums.spacebattles.com/thre...future.366028/).

                          Then in the late-1980s, the PDW concept was revived when the Army published the Small Arms Master Plan. However, they never seemed to know exactly what it was they wanted, so the quest for a PDW didn't go anywhere.

                          Other armies have actually adopted weapons of this class, though. Some examples:

                          Poland fielded the PM63, a compact 9x18 SMG (http://www.forgottenweapons.com/subm...uns/pm-63-rak/).








                          Portugal uses the B&T MP9 as a PDW.

                          Comment

                          • stanc
                            Banned
                            • Apr 2011
                            • 3430

                            PDWs - Part 2

                            Germany adopted the H&K MP7, although they seem to use it in the SMG role, rather than as a PDW. (Note that service pistols are worn, in addition to carrying the MP7.)







                            I have personally done limited testing of a compact 9mm SMG (SWD M11/Nine), to try to determine the validity of the PDW concept for myself.


                            Firing 3-rd bursts @ 25 meters, hit probability was significantly better versus a 9mm service pistol (M9 Beretta), when trying to engage the target as quickly as possible.

                            Is the foregoing what you wanted in asking for my "view of PDW's from a historical perspective"? If not, please clarify.

                            Comment

                            • Klem
                              Chieftain
                              • Aug 2013
                              • 3506

                              Tomahawks in combat.

                              I have seen them used in a combat setting but only by one or two larger-than-life characters. They weigh a fair bit and take space on the carrier so it's not universal. They get more use impressing mates, especially those who don't have one with how they can chop-up car bodies and tree limbs. Good for intimidation value and when you are bored. I'm retired now and got this tomahawk for hunting but it's a field axe with a quick-draw Kydex holster. It weighs 2lb and if you carry it for any distance you realise why they are not more popular. Never heard of any stories of them actually used against people (until this thread...).

                              Comment

                              • LR1955
                                Super Moderator
                                • Mar 2011
                                • 3355

                                Originally posted by stanc View Post
                                Germany adopted the H&K MP7, although they seem to use it in the SMG role, rather than as a PDW. (Note that service pistols are worn, in addition to carrying the MP7.)







                                I have personally done limited testing of a compact 9mm SMG (SWD M11/Nine), to try to determine the validity of the PDW concept for myself.


                                Firing 3-rd bursts @ 25 meters, hit probability was significantly better versus a 9mm service pistol (M9 Beretta), when trying to engage the target as quickly as possible.

                                Is the foregoing what you wanted in asking for my "view of PDW's from a historical perspective"? If not, please clarify.
                                Stan:

                                Exactly. Right at your finger tips, too! Impressive.

                                OK guys -- there you go! PDW's. I recall in the late 80's that the US Mil wanted something for the CS and CSS other than a M-16A2 because of the conditions that the CS and CSS guys operated. TOC's, truck drivers, mechanics. Soldiers whose duty spaces were confined yet needed protection of some sort. Pistols were not a good consideration because of the time needed to make someone proficient with a pistol. Rifles were too big and bulky. Not hard qualifying with a sub gun and you don't need as much training to use one. As I can recall they were looking at that sub gun that had the magazine on top of the receiver. As others here have said -- 5.7 mm. Very short cartridge. I bet they decided against it because it would entail another round of ammo and another firearm with all the costs involved.

                                When I ended my work with units around five years ago, CS and CSS units were still using the M-16A2. In fact, for the conventional side, the only units who had the M-4 were the Infantry and Tankers. The Artillery guys could get them for deployments to Iraq but had to turn them in when they got back. This was fifteen years after the M-4 first made its appearance in SF and Rangers.

                                So some thirty years after the PDW notion, same, same.

                                LR55

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X