Infantry Discussion Thread, Mk. 8 Mod. 0 [No Kaiju]

[Roski]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

[Taihei Tengoku]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

Build around the crew-served weapons. A machine gun is a must, preferably more than one of them.

[Roski]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

Build around the crew-served weapons. A machine gun is a must, preferably more than one of them.

yes

i need men with guns

could you be a bit more specific?

[Aqizithiuda]

So if you wanted to mess around/tinker, 5.8x42 would be the best one to use as a base?

Yep, that's my opinion.

[Immoren]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

8 men
Squad leader
Machine gunner
Machine gunners assistant
Vehicle driver
Squad second in command
Rifleman with underbarrle grenade launcher
Rifleman with not!m72s
Rifleman with not!m72s

[EsToVnIa]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

depends on desired platoon composition

[Greater Carloso]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

8 men
Squad leader
Machine gunner
Machine gunners assistant
Vehicle driver
Squad second in command
Rifleman with underbarrle grenade launcher
Rifleman with not!m72s
Rifleman with not!m72s

I think that would be more of an infantry section rather then a squad. It could then be split into two four-man fireteams.

[EsToVnIa]

that would also make it a squad

[Taihei Tengoku]

Build around the crew-served weapons. A machine gun is a must, preferably more than one of them.

yes

i need men with guns

could you be a bit more specific?

Do you want a symmetrical or asymmetrical squad (fireteams of equal size/composition or not), and do you want two fireteams or three? Is your line infantry in vehicles? If so, how many people can it hold?

[Husseinarti]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

I like the US squad layout the best.

Squad Leader: M4 rifle
Alpha Team Leader: M4 rifle
Rifleman: M4 rifle, M136
Grenadier: M4 rifle, M203A1/M320
Automatic Rifleman: M249 LMG
Bravo Team Leader: M4 rifle
Rifleman: M4 rifle, M136
Grenadier: M4 rifle, M203A1/M320
Automatic Rifleman: M249 LMG

The Squad Leader, at his discretion or by a set SOP, can instead give the grenade launchers to the team leaders as they can then see and shoot at things that need to be dealt with without the TL having to direct them. Also, each platoon has three Javelin Command Launch Units with a bunch of the men in the platoon knowing how to operate and fire them. Three men in each platoon, one per squad, is a designated Anti-Armor Specialist. There is an issue with this since if you have all 9 of your CLUs issued out to set people, then you can't have massed ATGM defense, which may not be an issue with the HBCT squad since the company has 14 IFVs, but the IBCT or the SBCT is going to be seriously impacted with the fact that you can't mass your ATGMs unless you change up your squads.

There are also 18 12-gauge shotguns allocated to the company HQ. Which are lessons of OEF/OIF probably.

Also the US, before they transitioned to the M240/M249 would issue a single M60 to each squad, with an additional number of M60s given to the Platoon HQ to be issued where needed.

While I can't say for certain that it was common, but Colonel Hal Moore and the 1st Battalion, 7th Cav changed out their rifle companies' AT squads for additional M60s. I think one company kept their LAWs due to the lack of time in requesting and getting the equipment, but they came in handy none-the-less. That happened during his involvement in the Ia Drang, I don't remember how 2/7 or 2/5 fared, but they were laid out in a similar way.

I can be useful c:

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

Are carbines slowly replacing rifles? It seems over the past century everything has been getting smaller. First it was full-sized bolt action rifles for WWI, they cut-down bolt action rifles(like Kar98k), then intermediate cartridges in semi or fully automatic rifles, now it's carbines for everyone. What's next? PDWs being the next big thing?

[Immoren]

Are carbines slowly replacing rifles? It seems over the past century everything has been getting smaller. First it was full-sized bolt action rifles for WWI, they cut-down bolt action rifles(like Kar98k), then intermediate cartridges in semi or fully automatic rifles, now it's carbines for everyone. What's next? PDWs being the next big thing?

Someone once argued that carbines have already replaced rifles. Because he opined that all modern service assault rifles are too short to be called rifles.

[EsToVnIa]

I mean the M4 with its stock extended fully is roughly the same size as the vz. 58 and AKM (tho i'm p sure AKM is like 3 cm longer but oh well) so really it's just America trying to lose some weight with their 1 m long M16s

[Puzikas]

(Puz, want to share any light on that?)

As the DoD and DoJ have not given me a contract to work with 5.8x42 (though they had a RQFI in summer of 2012, but nothing has come of that yet) I have not been able to do anything in a controlled or lab setting, so everything I know of it is based on internet sources, my own (experienced) conclusions and conjecture.

Air cavities tend to cause the projectile to smush down in impact (Ah yes, the first time I have ever done the scientific use of the word "smush") and increase surface area upon contact, reducing penetration of material. In soft material its generally not significant, but it is for metallic plates or similar hardened materials (I.e; Body armor).

The Chineese claims of better penetration are unsubstantiated as there is no independent testing; the numbers are there though for DBP10.

I really don't like it because [China] but its interesting none the less.

[Husseinarti]

Are carbines slowly replacing rifles? It seems over the past century everything has been getting smaller. First it was full-sized bolt action rifles for WWI, they cut-down bolt action rifles(like Kar98k), then intermediate cartridges in semi or fully automatic rifles, now it's carbines for everyone. What's next? PDWs being the next big thing?

Things have been getting smaller since guns were a thing, its literally nothing new.

The Model 1861 Rifle-Musket was 1.4 meters long, with the barrel being one meter itself which was contemporary for its time, over time thanks to advancements in cartridges and the advent of the metallic cartridge, you didn't need 20 miles of barrel for the round to shoot. The Model 1888 was 1.3 meters long, with the barrel being nearly 200mm shorter than the Model 1861. The following Springfield Model 1892 was roughly 50mm shorter, with most of the length being taken out of the, you guessed it, the barrel. Thanks again to the improvement in cartridge design and improved powder loading technology.

The Springfield, which was a near direct copy of a Karabiner 98a (A shortened G98 which became the basis for the WW2 Karabiner 98k) with a buttstock that a US infantryman would be more accustomed too, was a little less than 1.1 meters long. Again, the length was shorter because they shortened the barrel. The M1903 rifle's barrel was 610mm, the M1982 was around 760mm long.

The following M1 Garand rifle was really the only rifle that didn't change the length of the weapon overall. In fact while most of these rifles remained in the 9lbs range, the M1 Garand was heavier than the previous rifles being 9.5lbs. From what I understand, the fact that the M1 Garand was instead changed in .30-06 instead of its original .276 cartridge and some good old "If it ain't broken, don't fix it" mentality, the barrel remained the same length.

The M14, following the end of WW2, was adopted but still roughly the same length and even heavier. This was because while rifle manufacturing didn't really evolve from 1903 to 1959 to really warrant a massive drop in weight. The M14's barrel was a bit shorter, but it had a longer action so they stayed roughly the same.

A bunch of studies were done by NATO after WW2 and found that the 20-ish inch barrel was pretty much "it just works" field for rifles, as it allowed good ballistics, velocity, all that good stuff. Which is why rifle lengths didn't really change from the early 20th century until the late 1950s when the first AR platform prototypes were produced. The M16s "20 inch barrel" start was something that was it grew into as it had started as a 7.62 rifle and changed into a 5.56 rifle.

The advent of the intermediate cartridge and highly reliable automatic rifle actions that could be carried by the rifleman were the biggest change in rifle design along with the proliferation of 'space-age' materials which allowed rifles to be built lighter, cheaper and to be more reliable than older 'wood and steel' rifles.

Over time the US began to realize that the '20 inch barrel' was a bit much when the Russians had been doing just fine training to 400 meters with the 16.2 inch barrel of the AK-series. The US knew that the AR could be effectively made into a carbine since Vietnam, with the CAR-15 and such. In the early-1980s, the US Army had the XM4 developed, which would become the M4 in the 1990s. The biggest issue with the M4 is some issues with the regular 5.56 ammo, which was designed with 20 inch barrels in mind.

With modern cartridges (5.45x39mm and 5.56x45mm), barrel lengths under 20 inches are normal with the average from 16-14.5 inches. This is because of the improvement in ammunition not needing such long barrels for the rifles to burn all their powder and achieve a good twist rate before leaving which was why older muskets and rifle-muskets needed like 40 inches of barrel.

Maybe with CTA and such we'll seen another drop in barrel length.

[EsToVnIa]

san stahp ur not supposed to be helpful :C

[Kazarogkai]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

Depends on what their specialty is. If your talking about a run of the mill Rifle squad anywhere between 8-14 troops in total. You should have at the minimum 1 GPMG/MMG a couple grenadiers or DMR's for support, and finally 1-2 LMG/SAW for individual fire team support. At the minimum your squad should be able to be able to be broken down into 2 fire teams that shall be between 3-6 troops that are able to maneuver and support one another in combat, one suppress while the other moves and vice versa. If these are light infantry you can make use of either a Truck or maybe a few LUV(Hummer, Jeep) for transport atleast in the back lines. But if these are meant as front line heavy infantry an APC or if your able an IFV is essential.

[Aqizithiuda]

(Puz, want to share any light on that?)

As the DoD and DoJ have not given me a contract to work with 5.8x42 (though they had a RQFI in summer of 2012, but nothing has come of that yet) I have not been able to do anything in a controlled or lab setting, so everything I know of it is based on internet sources, my own (experienced) conclusions and conjecture.

Air cavities tend to cause the projectile to smush down in impact (Ah yes, the first time I have ever done the scientific use of the word "smush") and increase surface area upon contact, reducing penetration of material. In soft material its generally not significant, but it is for metallic plates or similar hardened materials (I.e; Body armor).

The Chineese claims of better penetration are unsubstantiated as there is no independent testing; the numbers are there though for DBP10.

I really don't like it because [China] but its interesting none the less.

Huh, I figured it would be the opposite: the increase surface area would decrease barrier penetration, while the air gap would allow the core to separate and penetrate hard targets better.

[Husseinarti]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

Depends on what their specialty is. If your talking about a run of the mill Rifle squad anywhere between 8-14 troops in total. You should have at the minimum 1 GPMG/MMG a couple grenadiers or DMR's for support, and finally 1-2 LMG/SAW for individual fire team support. At the minimum your squad should be able to be able to be broken down into 2 fire teams that shall be between 3-6 troops that are able to maneuver and support one another in combat, one suppress while the other moves and vice versa. If these are light infantry you can make use of either a Truck or maybe a few LUV(Hummer, Jeep) for transport atleast in the back lines. But if these are meant as front line heavy infantry an APC or if your able an IFV is essential.

14 guys jesus

I guess if its like 1945 that'd be cool.

[Puzikas]

The following M1 Garand rifle was really the only rifle that didn't change the length of the weapon overall. In fact while most of these rifles remained in the 9lbs range, the M1 Garand was heavier than the previous rifles being 9.5 From what I understand, the fact that the M1 Garand was instead changed in .30-06 instead of its original .276 cartridge and some good old "If it ain't broken, don't fix it" mentality, the barrel remained the same length.

Holy shit San being helpful.


It's actually because the .30-06s optimal barrel length is between 20 and 26 inches/500-650mm. Ideally its 24/600; this has been an industry standard for what will be 100 years in October IIRC.

.30-06 strong.

Huh, I figured it would be the opposite: the increase surface area would decrease barrier penetration, while the air gap would allow the core to separate and penetrate hard targets better.

It depends on the core too tbh.
Penetration with air gaps is strange.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

yes

i need men with guns

could you be a bit more specific?

Do you want a symmetrical or asymmetrical squad (fireteams of equal size/composition or not), and do you want two fireteams or three? Is your line infantry in vehicles? If so, how many people can it hold?

I think that "research" has shown that separating the support and maneuver elements of a squad was more effective than having a symmetric structure, IIRC, for what it's worth.

[Kazarogkai]

Depends on what their specialty is. If your talking about a run of the mill Rifle squad anywhere between 8-14 troops in total. You should have at the minimum 1 GPMG/MMG a couple grenadiers or DMR's for support, and finally 1-2 LMG/SAW for individual fire team support. At the minimum your squad should be able to be able to be broken down into 2 fire teams that shall be between 3-6 troops that are able to maneuver and support one another in combat, one suppress while the other moves and vice versa. If these are light infantry you can make use of either a Truck or maybe a few LUV(Hummer, Jeep) for transport atleast in the back lines. But if these are meant as front line heavy infantry an APC or if your able an IFV is essential.

14 guys jesus

I guess if its like 1945 that'd be cool.

That would probably be including support elements(driver, squad leader, APC crew, etc).

"The squad, 班, or section was the basic unit of the National Revolutionary Army (the Republic of China), and would usually be 14 men strong. An infantry squad from an elite German-trained division would ideally have one light machine gun and 10 rifles, but only one of the three squads in a non-elite Central Army division would have a light machine gun. Furthermore, the regular provincial army divisions had no machine guns at all.[5]"
Source

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

so when you are assembling a squad, in practical terms, for regular run of the mill cannon fodder infantry, what should this sqaud composition be?

Build around the crew-served weapons. A machine gun is a must, preferably more than one of them.

I don't think that many nations use crew-served weapons in a true sense at squad level. A GPMG or LMG gunner can, depending mainly on the weight of the weapon and ammunition, operate (semi-)independently. Also, the ammo bearer, if he even exists and the ammo isn't just spread among the squad, is usually not just an ammo bearer but also a rifleman.

[Husseinarti]

14 guys jesus

I guess if its like 1945 that'd be cool.

That would probably be including support elements(driver, squad leader, APC crew, etc).

"The squad, 班, or section was the basic unit of the National Revolutionary Army (the Republic of China), and would usually be 14 men strong. An infantry squad from an elite German-trained division would ideally have one light machine gun and 10 rifles, but only one of the three squads in a non-elite Central Army division would have a light machine gun. Furthermore, the regular provincial army divisions had no machine guns at all.[5]"
Source

I guess if its like 1945 that'd be cool.

Also even at most allot of squads tend to be just 11 people if you include the 'support elements' such as the vehicle crew. I fail to see how a SL is a 'support element' but okay.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

Are carbines slowly replacing rifles? It seems over the past century everything has been getting smaller. First it was full-sized bolt action rifles for WWI, they cut-down bolt action rifles(like Kar98k), then intermediate cartridges in semi or fully automatic rifles, now it's carbines for everyone. What's next? PDWs being the next big thing?

Someone once argued that carbines have already replaced rifles. Because he opined that all modern service assault rifles are too short to be called rifles.

The M16 is still 20"..

I'd reckon if GPC will be a thing someday you will see a stop to this miniaturization if not longer barrels..