The Accurate Reloading Forums
Scopes on US marine's rifles??
04 April 2003, 04:07
<SkiBumplus3>Scopes on US marine's rifles??
Guys, I keep seeing pictures of our guys with scopes and holosite scopes on their battle rifles. What's up? How come some guys have em and some don't. Heck, even some of the SAW's have scopes.
Thanks,
Ski+3
04 April 2003, 04:33
HobieIt really depends on which units you are looking at. I know that some units are issued the opticals. So many of the new rifles have the Picatinny rail, that soldiers have purchased their own opticals and use them. I had a Colt 3x scope that I would zero for my issue rifle. Since I am color deficient, it really helped me pick out targets from background.
I think it is interesting that the Brits use a lot of personal kit and US soldiers don't but that US soldiers are using their own sights but the Brits don't seem to be in any way modifying their weapons. Big cultural difference there and it existed prior to the war.
[ 04-03-2003, 19:36: Message edited by: Hobie ]04 April 2003, 04:40
<SkiBumplus3>So it's OK for a US soldier to modify a military weapon sighting system? What other personal items can they change?
Thanks,
Ski+3
04 April 2003, 15:21
HobieAnything that doesn't "damage" the weapon. In short, scope sight and sling. Maybe they can get the armorer to install night sights (a tritium insert front post). However, those have been hard to get where I've been.
However, I should add:
1. This is really relaxed in combat zones.
2. It always depends on the commander. Some are knowledgeable and realistic, some, well, some aren't.
[ 04-04-2003, 06:30: Message edited by: Hobie ]05 April 2003, 18:28
<SkiBumplus3>Do they still have to qualify with open, standard sights?
Ski+3
16 April 2003, 13:07
SEALDOGGYWhat you are seeing on most of the weapons is the aimpoint scope. Most are 4x red dot, Personaly in a battle zone I would much rather rely on the old iron sites, no batteries to go dead or me in the case they do. The accuisition time on the aim point is very good but not worth a damn in brite sun light, In subdued lighting situations they are very apealing. Everything has it's place and time and those that like them well good luck to them,hope those batteries don't die,if ya know what I mean.
16 April 2003, 16:27
Dark Paladinthe one on the brit rifles, and some american M-16s are the new trilux sight, no batterys and it has a radioactive iceitope oh how ever you spell that, that produces light longer than you or I will be on the field or battle.
17 April 2003, 09:06
Pete EThe Britsih sight really is excellent. It is the one decent aspect of the SA80 system and is normally issued to infantry units and such like. Support and Armour units use iron sights. I was in when the SA80 was issued and it had (and still does) lots of problems. Having said that, the standard of markmanship shot up in many cases which the introduction of the 5.56 round and the Trilux sight. On the old SLR, optic sights could be fitted, but were usually mounted on a modified replacement top cover; that system sucked with many such top covers having 1/16" slop backwards and forwards when fitted.
The current highly modified SA80 is a lot better than the original and during recent trials performed extremely well. I would guess once the current conflict is over, we will know how it performs on the battle field, which of course is the true test of a battle rifle.
Historically, we did buy, beg, borrow or steal personal kit to suppliment what was on issue. Now things seem much better, but I suspect some of the more character building aspects have been lost!
17 April 2003, 03:58
<Eric>While I don't know the nonenclature, there are several issue optical sights available in the U.S. system. Most go to the SOG guys, the Airborne, and the Rangers. However I understand that they are becoming standard issue to the line units.
That being said, the point was made that many soldiers are self-purchasing their own scope. You bet! When I was a Platoon Sergeant of Cavalry Scouts, about half of my guys bought scopes ranging from 3X to 3x9's. I had a 4x carry handle mount which I sold later to get a rail mounted scope when we went to the M-4 carbines. For the Scouts though, I think a 3x9 with a 50mm objective is best for observing things.
It depends on the commander really. Some get real "Type A" about it, some think it's swell to improve their soldiers marksmanship. However, you can not qualify with it. Iron sights only. Have to demonstrate you can shoot with the basic equipment.
Regards,
Eric
26 April 2003, 17:25
threefeathersEric, you were a 19 Delta? Scouts Out.
30 April 2003, 10:48
<JOHAN>quote:
Originally posted by SEALDOGGY:
What you are seeing on most of the weapons is the aimpoint scope. Most are 4x red dot, Personaly in a battle zone I would much rather rely on the old iron sites, no batteries to go dead or me in the case they do..
When the Swedish company aimpoint got the order from the US one of the conditions was that the battery would last for a very long time. I think a year or longer with the power on.
The swedish costal rangers uses them and has helped aimpoint to develop the scope, so it reliable and can take o lot of beating.
/ JOHAN
08 May 2003, 02:48
Northern WhitetailsThere have been alot of great pictures come out recently of U.S. and global special operations troops, both in Iraq and Afghanistan. Almost to a man, they have optics mounted on their M-4's.
I posted these 2 pictures on another thread about the M-16/M-4.
54-year old green beret in Afghanistan with modified M-4
U.S. Navy SEALS operator on Karzai detail in Afghanistan
There are many others showing optics and other interesting kit at
www.militaryphotos.net.
[ 05-07-2003, 17:49: Message edited by: Northern Whitetails ]