StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Preface: I am a US Marine and its been about 4 months since I last posted. I qualified on the M16A2 service rifle and am currently a student in the School of Infantry. I will begin traing with all sorts of weapons, rocket launchers (SMAW), grenades, machinguns, etc.


Off the top of my head the M16A2 fires a 5.56mm round. And is accurate enough to hit a man in the head at 500m, in the torso at 800m. Its rounds include the HEDP which is used to destroy light armored vehicles (2inches steel IIRC)

The E-11 has a Maximum range of 350m IIRC. Its blast is a lot more damaging though.

I will bring the stats of the M203 issued to us and describe its blast when I log on next. Since that seems to be the weapon that comes closest to the E-11.

Where'd you get 350m, if I can ask? If it's the RPG, it's pretty resoundingly inaccurate there.

Weapons and Techonolgy

Kartr_Kana wrote:The E-11 has a Maximum range of 350m IIRC. Its blast is a lot more damaging though.

The E-11 strikes me as a close quarters only weapon, not equivilant to the M-16. I think a better comparison would be the big guns used by the Clone troopers in AOTC.

Last check, SW military vehicles do not use 20th century steel. So, where exactly do you think you're going with this?

what is their range? I never saw, but I was out of the loop for awhile

Kartr_Kana wrote:

Off the top of my head the M16A2 fires a 5.56mm round. And is accurate enough to hit a man in the head at 500m, in the torso at 800m. Its rounds include the HEDP which is used to destroy light armored vehicles (2inches steel IIRC)

Bullshit, the maximum effective range of the M16 series is 300m for individual fire and 600m for "group fire". Head shots at 500m? What the fuck are you smoking? Apperently they've neglected to tell you at the Infantry School that you aim for the center of your targets mass, as that gives you the best chance of scoring a hit.

Frankly your post reeks of "poser". Either that or the quality of the US Marines has gone drastically down hill.

It can be used to find the energy of the round

the best equilevant for the M-16 is the DC-15 rifle not the E-11 (which is carbine/SMG)

No "CPL" the always tell us to aim center mass, and the ranges are 500 and 800. Remember I am a Marine not in the Army. What do you mean by individual and group fire? Are you talking about semi-auto and burst?

I will bring the stats as laid down in our manual.

Why do you put cpl in quotes, do you doubt he was a corporal or are you saying you're an officer cadet and know more than an enlisted man? .

Brian

I don't know any numbers for M-16, but I was long enough in regular service (before I switched to Unarmed service) to know the RK-62 (which is based of (or clone of) the AK-47) had effective range of 300 m (the longest range it was used during range firing (I was told this but I never did it)).

Kartr_Kana wrote:No "CPL" the always tell us to aim center mass, and the ranges are 500 and 800. Remember I am a Marine not in the Army. What do you mean by individual and group fire? Are you talking about semi-auto and burst?

I will bring the stats as laid down in our manual.

Thats funny, you see the ranges that the Canadian Forces use for their standards are 300m maximum for individual fire (ie: one rifle) and 600m maximum for group fire (ie: squad or platoon massed fire at a single target or group of targets). And we use the C7 (basically the M16 with the Elcan scope and capable of full auto).

I fail to see why the Marines would have one standard and the Army would have a different standard. And what do you know, worldguns.ru states 550m as the maximum effective range of the M16A2. So you are full of shit as I initially suspected.

Kartr_Kana wrote:No "CPL" the always tell us to aim center mass, and the ranges are 500 and 800. Remember I am a Marine not in the Army. What do you mean by individual and group fire? Are you talking about semi-auto and burst?

I will bring the stats as laid down in our manual.

If they always tell you to aim center-mass, why does the headshot range even matter? Isn't providing it just going to result in cocky jarheads trying for headshots, missing, and getting their damned fool asses killed along with the people next to them?

Just because the weapon is theoretically effective out to that range doesn't mean that the average, even trained user can hit anything reliably. And if you need to engage someone consistently at eight hundred meters, the M16's the wrong weapon to begin with.

Why is this thread in SW vs ST?

If your training manual gives M16A2 an effective range of 500m, then the author of said manual was smoking some serious shit and I want some of that. Group fire I do believe means the entire squad concentrates all it's fire into a target area suppressing the enemy. Individual fire is a single trooper firing at a target.

A 5.56mm bullet can kill a man at 800m but hitting a guy at that range requires a) l33t skillz b) Optics c)luck. Not a single source I've seen to date support this headshots at 500m, and personally I think it's complete bullshit.

-Gunhead

Cpl Kendall wrote:

I fail to see why the Marines would have one standard and the Army would have a different standard. And what do you know, worldguns.ru states 550m as the maximum effective range of the M16A2. So you are full of shit as I initially suspected.

Actually, the Marines do tend to have more exacting marksmanship standards than the Army. But eight hundred meters is usually given for engaging big honking targets like trucks and buildings indiscriminately. Unless I'm misremembering, and that's one of the ranges associated with the SAW.

Franky I doubt the M16 is accurate enough for an 800 metre headshot, that's hard enough already with 7.62 (there's a reason they tell you to go for center of mass).
Not that that's important, as others mentioned K_K is comparing a full-grown assault rifle with the SW equivalent of a SMG.
The proper equivalent would be, as mentioned by Revan, the Clone Troopers' DC-15, which had multi-km ranges with no notiecable deviation. Good luck achieving that with any modern day projectile weapon.

This has nothing to do with Star Trek, so it gets moved. And 500 meters is the maximum effective range you'd expect for a M-16 period, not for hitting the head (and actual combat occurs at closer ranges).

In comparison, the DC-15 rifle the Clone Troopers have is stated to have a maximum range of 10 kilometers. However that is probably only the theoretical maxium because it requires a tripod and problems like the horizon start to get in the way,

Batman wrote:Franky I doubt the M16 is accurate enough for an 500 metre headshot, that's hard enough already with 7.62 (there's a reason they tell you to go for center of mass).

Corrected oopsie WRT headshot range.
800m IS given as maximum effective range for the M16 by various sources.
'Maximum effective range' meaning that if you aim for the right spot (which already requires a scope at that range) the rifle is accurate enough that there's a reasonable chance the bullet will actually land there.

consequences wrote:
Actually, the Marines do tend to have more exacting marksmanship standards than the Army. But eight hundred meters is usually given for engaging big honking targets like trucks and buildings indiscriminately. Unless I'm misremembering, and that's one of the ranges associated with the SAW.

Well I stand corrected on the marksmenship differences then. However 800m is beyond the effective range of the 5.56 round. We pretty much used the C6 (FN MAG) for long range work, and unfortunatly the M2's are few and far between.

7.62NATO caliber sniper rifles can reach out and touch somebody out to 800m. Doing this requires solid skill and equipment. GPMGs and (some) LMGs can be used against targets at 800m, but even those are considered effective at 600m or less. .50 cal sniper rifles are the way to go when going against stuff at 800m.

-Gunhead

I sort of like how he tried comparing the E-11 to a full-sized long assault rifle, even though the E-11 is a very compact "close quarters" weapon, like a submachine gun. Particularil y when we have SEEN longer arms in canon (ANH on Tattooine and AOTC/ROTS.)

Edit: or rather, he was comparing it to a grenade launcher as far as I can tell (Which is even more absurd!), though he certtainly seems to be implying that its comparable to a long arm too (the bit stating the ranges.)

Incidentally, the maximum range on the E-11 is like 300 meters, not 350.

Kartr_Kana wrote:Preface: I am a US Marine and its been about 4 months since I last posted. I qualified on the M16A2 service rifle and am currently a student in the School of Infantry.

Hahahah, you're a boot. Pendleton or Lejune? I take it your in your leave period between bootcamp and SOI, then?

I will begin traing with all sorts of weapons, rocket launchers (SMAW), grenades, machinguns, etc.

No you won't. Depending on your MOS, you'll study the specific weapons from the TO&E of that MOS. If you're an 0331 (for example) you'll learn the machineguns but not the SMAW. If you're a 41, you will learn the motars, 51 gets to learn the SMAW/Dragon.

If you're just an 0311 butplate, the best you're going to get is the AT-4 and if you're lucky, fam-fire on a 240G.

Off the top of my head the M16A2 fires a 5.56mm round. And is accurate enough to hit a man in the head at 500m, in the torso at 800m.

Which bullshit DI told you head shots at 500m? I some how doubt they did. Center mass shots on a KD range? Yes, fucking super sniper bull shit head shots? No.

Its rounds include the HEDP which is used to destroy light armored vehicles (2inches steel IIRC)

Do you even know what HEDP means kid?

The E-11 has a Maximum range of 350m IIRC. Its blast is a lot more damaging though.

The E-11 is a carbine analog, not so much an assualt rifle. Notice, though, that stormtroopers do have heavier weapons.

I will bring the stats of the M203 issued to us and describe its blast when I log on next. Since that seems to be the weapon that comes closest to the E-11.

Hate to burst your bubble kid, but there are various members (both current and former) of the military who post here regualarly. Shitting out the stats on a M203 would take the sum total of me walking five feet to my closet and pulling out the MCI or even Division Schools manual I keep handy and spitting them out.

As for visual effect, you'll find that the 40mm round is not up to hollywood standards.

Cpl Kendall wrote:

consequences wrote:
Actually, the Marines do tend to have more exacting marksmanship standards than the Army. But eight hundred meters is usually given for engaging big honking targets like trucks and buildings indiscriminately. Unless I'm misremembering, and that's one of the ranges associated with the SAW.

Well I stand corrected on the marksmenship differences then. However 800m is beyond the effective range of the 5.56 round. We pretty much used the C6 (FN MAG) for long range work, and unfortunatly the M2's are few and far between.

He's kind of right, though I think he's wanking it a bit.

Rifle quals for the USMC on a KD course go from the 200m line (sitting, kneeling, standing) to the 300m line (sitting and a rapid fire), to the 500 meter line where you get 10 shots in the prone position.

Knife wrote:
He's kind of right, though I think he's wanking it a bit.

Rifle quals for the USMC on a KD course go from the 200m line (sitting, kneeling, standing) to the 300m line (sitting and a rapid fire), to the 500 meter line where you get 10 shots in the prone position.

Well then, my apologies Kartr_Kana, at least on the 500m point. 800m is still out to lunch though.