• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Military Assault Weapons

Bull Frog

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
216
Location
Sunnyvale, California, USA
imported post

Quick question? Why do soldiers hold these high tech weapons with the but stock practically on top of their shoulders? It looks so weird, ergonomically speaking.

I see this all the time, in movies and authentic film clips. Why design an assault weapon with a stock, when it is held above one's shoulder?

Looks weird, that's all I'm saying. Resting the rifle but on top of your shoulder?
 

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
imported post

They are using a quick aim position that requires you to look down the side of the barrel instead of through the sights. Not quiteas accurate but one heck of a lot quicker. Good for veryclose encounters only. 10-15 feet or so.
 

Bull Frog

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
216
Location
Sunnyvale, California, USA
imported post

rodbender wrote:
They are using a quick aim position that requires you to look down the side of the barrel instead of through the sights. Not quite as accurate but one heck of a lot quicker. Good for very close encounters only. 10-15 feet or so.

Thank you very much for your perspective. Now I know.

Lead Lobber
 

ABNinfantryman

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
204
Location
Columbus, Georgia, United States
imported post

rodbender wrote:
They are using a quick aim position that requires you to look down the side of the barrel instead of through the sights. Not quiteas accurate but one heck of a lot quicker. Good for veryclose encounters only. 10-15 feet or so.
Actually it's because of our body armor, it has little to do with quick aiming. Depending on the size of your plates their edges can get in the way of putting the stock in your shoulder. CAA has a butt stock where the bottom lip of the stock curves to the form of a person's shoulder for soldiers with this issue. I have a CAA collapsible stock with adjustable cheek rest andbutt pad (which I have sitting higher because of my armor).
 

Bull Frog

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
216
Location
Sunnyvale, California, USA
imported post

I'm more at a loss - I heard that our government has failed miserably providing the troops with body armer. That would be state of the art combat protection. Body Armer.

What do you say, Mr. President?
 

Bull Frog

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
216
Location
Sunnyvale, California, USA
imported post

Lead Lobber wrote:
I'm more at a loss - I heard that our government has failed miserably providing the troops with body armer. That would be state of the art combat protection. Body Armer.

What do you say, Mr. President?

Mr. President, let me repeat myself. How long will you let all our boys to be killed overseas? Could improvements in body armour be helpful? I have heard for decades that our troops are being sent to die, because of defective body armour. Could this be true? Can corporate profits possibly push people to destruction?

What do you say? Get out, or just keep burning flesh? Or, turn over a new leaf?

Yes sir, I believe corporate profits will forever override everything. It is time to put a rope on corporations. Let them know who's boss. Snap them up from the nearest tree and hang them, until they breath no more.

Here's the top of my list: Drug Companies, Insurance Companies, Banks, Federally Managed Agencies that suck our monies, and the Federal Government, the biggest robber of them all. Congress strips us on an on going basis, with pork fat.

To date, no president has had the balls to stop this robbery. Your objective, Mr.President, is to stop this robbery, and you will be expected to do so immediately.
 

grumpycoconut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Messages
221
Location
The Left Coast, , USA
imported post

rodbender wrote:
They are using a quick aim position that requires you to look down the side of the barrel instead of through the sights. Not quiteas accurate but one heck of a lot quicker. Good for veryclose encounters only. 10-15 feet or so.


Close but not quite.

Its partly about speed, more about armor and when done right alot more about control.

Sighting is no different than normal.You use the sights just like you do any other time. Unsighted rifle fire is for Russian infantry and African militias.

Indexing the rifle high on your shoulder with or without armor allows you to stay more heads up when you bring the rifle to your eye instead of trying to turtle your headdown to a low indexed rifle.

It alsomakes it easier to keep your rifle in a quick deployable low readyposition for longer periods of time. Even the lightest carbine gets mighty heavy after a surprisingly short strech of time. Keeping thetoe of the stock indexedinto the pocket of your shoulder just below your collar boneis constent and repeatable. Ask a bird shooter how many snap shots they miss because they fail to get the butt into the right spot. Now strap on some armor and a metric butt load of gear and try getting the butt stock into the right part of your shoulder under combat stress without it hanging up on something. Next try getting your helmeted head down to the sights without getting your helmet in the way. Much better to have the toe of the stockpreindexed and thenjust pivot the rifle up to your face and into position when you need it.

So how about that claim of better control? Ifyou index the rifle high on your shoulder and thenhunch your torso well forward you are in a much stronger and more supple position for absorbing fullauto recoil.Your upper body is essentially bent into a curved spring that directs the recoil impulsethrough your torso, intoyour pelvis, through yourlegs and into the ground. Low indexing generally forces a more upright upper body position that dose little to absorb recoil impulse and actually provides a real nice pivot point that helps magnify muzzle climb. Think about shooting a revolver vs shooting a pistol with a low bore axis. The high bore axis of the revolver gives the recoil impulse better leverage which lets the revolverrotate up and back better inyour paw. Recoil in a lowbore axis pistolis directed more straight back rather than up.
 

ABNinfantryman

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
204
Location
Columbus, Georgia, United States
imported post

Lead Lobber wrote:
I'm more at a loss - I heard that our government has failed miserably providing the troops with body armer. That would be state of the art combat protection. Body Armer.

What do you say, Mr. President?
When the wars first started yeah, but now everyone has body armor or they at least have armor in theatre that they can swap. Personally, all I care to wear is a plate carrier with two SAPI plates. I much prefer being able to move than wearing an extra hundred pounds of armor.
 

r6-rider

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
684
Location
az, ,
imported post

ABNinfantryman wrote:
Personally, all I care to wear is a plate carrier with two SAPI plates. I much prefer being able to move than wearing an extra hundred pounds of armor.
same here. i would never wear the IBA if it were up to me. plate carriers are much better but id still rather go slicks.

but even with the IBA iv never had to put the stock above my shoulder, you just have to find that comfortable pocket and develop muscle memory to get it to that spot. putting it over your shoulder like that takes away your zero so getting a good shot is practically impossible at more than 100m
 

r6-rider

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
684
Location
az, ,
imported post

yea our state doesnt have the money to transition to the new body armor. besides, we never go to the range anyways so we'll probly just get f***ed on this one until (and if) we deploy
 

ABNinfantryman

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
204
Location
Columbus, Georgia, United States
imported post

r6-rider wrote:
ABNinfantryman wrote:
Personally, all I care to wear is a plate carrier with two SAPI plates. I much prefer being able to move than wearing an extra hundred pounds of armor.
same here. i would never wear the IBA if it were up to me. plate carriers are much better but id still rather go slicks.

but even with the IBA iv never had to put the stock above my shoulder, you just have to find that comfortable pocket and develop muscle memory to get it to that spot. putting it over your shoulder like that takes away your zero so getting a good shot is practically impossible at more than 100m

I use an EOtech so my zero's never off. Where-ever that red dot points is where that round is going, we tested it and passed it around to see if was true. Even the M68 works like that. ACOG not so much and I would agree with you there. I've never had an issue with putting it in my shoulder, I'm not one of those dudes who likes to bulk up in the gym though so my pecs aren't the size of my wife's D tits like my buddy who can't get a good shoulder position.

And believe me, the IBA is way better than the POS IOTV they issue now. I was pissed when my unit said we had to wear the new IOTV. Supposedly we're getting issued plate carriers though so that'll be interesting. They're not as small as my Tactical Tailor rig, but it's better than the IOTV. The IOTV was supposed to be cooler and lighter than the IBA, it's neither. It's actually hotter because of the cumberbun, and the way the arms are cut doesn't allow heat to escape out the side like the IBA does. If you're a saw gunner or carry a lot of stuff on it you'll need a buddy to help you put it on, they even suggest it without anything on it.
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

ABNinfantryman wrote:
r6-rider wrote:
ABNinfantryman wrote:
Personally, all I care to wear is a plate carrier with two SAPI plates. I much prefer being able to move than wearing an extra hundred pounds of armor.
same here. i would never wear the IBA if it were up to me. plate carriers are much better but id still rather go slicks.

but even with the IBA iv never had to put the stock above my shoulder, you just have to find that comfortable pocket and develop muscle memory to get it to that spot. putting it over your shoulder like that takes away your zero so getting a good shot is practically impossible at more than 100m

I use an EOtech so my zero's never off. Where-ever that red dot points is where that round is going, we tested it and passed it around to see if was true. Even the M68 works like that. ACOG not so much and I would agree with you there. I've never had an issue with putting it in my shoulder, I'm not one of those dudes who likes to bulk up in the gym though so my pecs aren't the size of my wife's D tits like my buddy who can't get a good shoulder position.

And believe me, the IBA is way better than the POS IOTV they issue now. I was pissed when my unit said we had to wear the new IOTV. Supposedly we're getting issued plate carriers though so that'll be interesting. They're not as small as my Tactical Tailor rig, but it's better than the IOTV. The IOTV was supposed to be cooler and lighter than the IBA, it's neither. It's actually hotter because of the cumberbun, and the way the arms are cut doesn't allow heat to escape out the side like the IBA does. If you're a saw gunner or carry a lot of stuff on it you'll need a buddy to help you put it on, they even suggest it without anything on it.
I like my Aimpoint red dot & Aimpoint 3x magnifier... clothes pins at 75 yards , one after the other...
 

ABNinfantryman

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
204
Location
Columbus, Georgia, United States
imported post

Glock34 wrote:
I like my Aimpoint red dot & Aimpoint 3x magnifier... clothes pins at 75 yards , one after the other...
Yeah the Aimpoint is what we know as the M68 (don't know if you're military, I'm not trying to question your knowledge).I don't like it simply because I've had a couple come loose in their rings which throws off the zero and is why I like EOTechs.
 

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

ABNinfantryman wrote:
Glock34 wrote:
I like my Aimpoint red dot & Aimpoint 3x magnifier... clothes pins at 75 yards , one after the other...
Yeah the Aimpoint is what we know as the M68 (don't know if you're military, I'm not trying to question your knowledge).I don't like it simply because I've had a couple come loose in their rings which throws off the zero and is why I like EOTechs.
a few drops of lock tite would fix that........my military career was short lived , Army Basic training, most of AIT, then I fell & broken the elbow......that was that. Honorable Discharge, that's what it says on my DD214:)
 

r6-rider

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
684
Location
az, ,
imported post

ABNinfantryman wrote:
And believe me, the IBA is way better than the POS IOTV they issue now. I was pissed when my unit said we had to wear the new IOTV. Supposedly we're getting issued plate carriers though so that'll be interesting. They're not as small as my Tactical Tailor rig, but it's better than the IOTV. The IOTV was supposed to be cooler and lighter than the IBA, it's neither. It's actually hotter because of the cumberbun, and the way the arms are cut doesn't allow heat to escape out the side like the IBA does. If you're a saw gunner or carry a lot of stuff on it you'll need a buddy to help you put it on, they even suggest it without anything on it.
thats what i always thought just from looking it at. looks like it has way more junk to carry but everyone swore it was lighter. go figure. thank god im not a saw gunner either haha

airborne huh, you at bragg?
 

ABNinfantryman

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
204
Location
Columbus, Georgia, United States
imported post

r6-rider wrote:

thats what i always thought just from looking it at. looks like it has way more junk to carry but everyone swore it was lighter. go figure. thank god im not a saw gunner either haha

airborne huh, you at bragg?

We weighed it and if you break both down to just the vest the IOTV weighs like a pound lighter, but they break even if you put the entire system together, the collar, kidney pad, DAPS, side plates, etc. The main thing that makes them feel lighter is the cumberbun which redistributes the weight from your shoulders to your midsection.

Yeah my home station is at Bragg, right now I'm in Afghanistan. I was in Germany before with the 173D Airborne.
 
Top