Diving through windows is an expression.
Jesus, nitpicking has driven all the fun out of the thread. Color me gone.
I worked @ a priv sec firm in CA from 06-'09…Full auto was used by former US SOF plenty. Two former USASOC/JSOC (retired Unit members) said it was more than just “once in a while”…
On Takur Ghar, almost everyone except those who had the SR-25 (semi-auto sniper rifle similar to the AR-10) used this feature during most of the battle, regardless if when they made their egress they were nearly black on ammo.
I’ve watched more than two dozen incidents where it was a GODSEND. The whole “full auto is just for Hollywood SEAL movies and that’s it…no one does that” is total crap. Yes, our 11 Bravo ground pounders don’t use it like SOF will with the same ease and precision (after all, they don’t “spray”, they use the same 3-5—or in sometimes 10-rnd bursts) to break contact, clear a bunker (like at Roberts Ridge or when Michael Monsoor was killed and the Delta operators nearby (two men, one you can find online who has been secretly considered a war hero and awarded as such) used full auto the entire time…not one needing to return to SA and try to send double taps downrange at targets in dark windows when a burst of 8-15 rounds ended the affair quickly…
I’m not a SME, but I can tell you what I know from those I grew up with now in the SOF community…thats all
- There are Israeli TAVOR Assault Rifles used that have the bullpup design also…not to mention the Belgian F2000 Gen 3 series…They both see military service…just fyi.
Oh and the Tomcat would’ve whupped the Sukoy any day…Period. The handlin on the 33’s were renowned for locking up during fights when other proxy nations used them and it had nothing to do with bad ground crews…Just bad design.
In Hollywood, yes full auto is used a bit too much. I, unfortunately, know differently. I know frogs, STS controllers, etc who I grew up with in San Diego/La Jolla who joined the USN’s NAVSPECWARCOM and the Air Force (the friend who later became a JTAC etc and even then later became a pilot for 160th during OIF/2) and ALL of them have used FULL AUTO ON MORE THAN SEVERAL DOZEN OCCASIONS AND NOT JUST TO BREAK CONTACT AND BOUND BACK.
I’ve seen helmet cam footage of a friend in an ODA who was online with ten ANA and two more ODA and two Delta RECCE snipers and as they got hit with an EFP (IED with a copper tip to punch thru our best armor), the guys got out, and cleared several blocks with nothing but full auto in NOT the obvious 3-5 round bursts, but in many cases would expend 8-15 rnds in a hallway or at a rooftop covered in ACM shooting back. Those same ACM were Chechens who were NOT using full auto on their AKs, they even were trained well and fired from supported postions or on a knew…
Point is, they lost because our SOF knew that FA is a feature all M4A1 (or A3 or whatever they have coming out soon) should have if the operator manipulating the weapon system is proficient and able to keep the groupings of each longer burst closer than the last.
You can also use pelvic sprucening for this.
Full auto is useful in a close-range target-rich environment. Say you’re at a security checkpoint. When a big scary truck or herd of zombies crashes the gate, you want to empty a mag into the target (and at that range you probably won’t miss). Since you’re in a fortified area, there’ll be plenty of ammo available, and there’ll be a fixed position MG position further away to add emphasis to your message.
Full-auto is less popular in infantry weapons because they need accurate engagement at longer distances, and ammo conservation is an important consideration.
You can easily see in video of combatants in the Middle East a lot of them firing full auto with muzzles climbing till they wouldn’t hit anything unless randomly many 100’s of meters down range from what they’re probably ‘aiming’ at. They aren’t the cream of world soldiery…but same thing is sometimes seen in video of US troops firing M16A1’s full auto in Vietnam.
On the one hand that’s ‘arm chair analysis’, on the other there’s huge room for perception errors in those who’ve been there between how effective they believe their fire to have been and how effective it actually was. The US Army judged full auto fire of M2 carbines in Korea to be of negligible effectiveness, mainly because it didn’t hit enemy soldiers, as opposed to the belief of many US soldiers at the time that the relatively low power carbine rounds hit but couldn’t stop enemy soldiers.
But the long debate about burst mode on US rifles seems to be evolving back away from it. The US Army has lately been converting M4 (burst) carbines to M4A1 (full auto) for general service, whereas previously the full auto’s were mainly for special forces (and the USN purchased semi/full auto M16A3’s). Many other countries were never sold on burst, even for M16 types (Canada’s C7/C8 M16 type is semi/full). Some export M16 type have even had semi, full and burst settings (Greek Army M4’s for example). It basically comes down to agreement that full auto fire from rifles* is a waste of ammunition in most cases, but can be an advantage in some particular cases. The trade off is whether you count on training to prevent use of full auto outside the few situations where it makes sense, or you accept a limitation on the weapon to prevent it. Front line trainers tend to believe they can train adequately for full auto capability to be preferable, operational analysis types have more mixed opinions.
*or carbines, you can see video also of how relatively easy it was to control the heavy slow cyclic rate M3 submachine on auto, compared to the faster firing German MP40.
**As it was said before, if you have any friends (family friends etc) in the SOF community, you will find out these ten paragraph BULLSH-T answers are completely inaccurate. There are MORE than enough examples of full auto being used by US SOF and reg “big Army” and/or USMC units putting FA to good use in CQC/CQB situations AND NOT JUST FOR SUPPRESSION BUT FOR THE ULTIMATELY MOST CRITICAL REASON **
For the record, most of those I’ve known inside the US SOF communities from NAVSPECWAR community operators (retired and active**) to those that serve the other masters at JSOC, like the some of those from USASOC who I speak with regularly and tell me they’ve used nearly 3 quarters of a magazine on a single individual in two long bursts to finally put them down in the corner of a stairwell entrance back when Yusifiyah was the central focus of OIF/1 and 2.
It is not meant only for suppression and never really has been the sole reason for using it…If you ask your average rangemaster-type (usually a total wannabe and not really a shooter, let alone a gunfighter in the general sense that most of us understand and know from those around us who live in that world, or if you served, the world you served in yourself) you will always get the same answers… “full auto is Hollywood BS and not used for anything EVER except maybe temp suppression to keep heads down etc etc etc etc”
Without breaking the trust of these longtime friends from as far back as high school (which means I won’t be getting specific for obvious reasons of PERSEC), I can tell you that tactically (their TTPs in certain situations) actually DO call for burst/FA fire on “onesies and twosies”, meaning if you think they won’t go down without injuring yourself or others in your stack on the way in with just the simple double/triple tap to the upper torso etc.
People think headshots actually happen often in fast-moving DFEs (deadly force encounters, more of a LE term actually…sorry lol), but what I mean is in against ANY combatant.
If you watch real tactical training by those recently returned from Inherent Resolve in any way, you’ll see the same drugged up crazy-types are inside certain groups like ASL (Ansar Al Sharia), Al Shabaab (khat and other drugs), etc are harder than 99% of the world thinks to put down with a 62-grain round.
I, myself, believe the Black Hills 77 grain round (especially if you customize the setup a bit) is enough to do a triple tap (or sometimes even once is enough) to put an adrenaline-filled, terrified (and/or crazed) bandit down immediately…THOUGH, if I had my choice, I would keep the full auto feature on any AR-type weapon system I own. Same with suppressors. A short full auto burst, suppressed with a short can on the end of an AR, won’t attract too much attention in a loud-as-hell, knife fight in a phone booth shootout.
Personally, I’d just buy a relatively** cheap Battle Rifle like the SR-25/Mk 12 Mod 0-type platforms, with a compact setup (meaning an extended mag, a 12" barrel if possible, and use a lower that had the FA feature (much like what I had heard Chris Kyle did when he took a Mk 12 and put a full auto lower on it in case he needed it). Personally, I would do the same, except I would have an off-set optic, a 4x primary optic on the rail with the most compact setup I could put together OR I would just do this same custom setup with a short barrel and most compact furniture I could get into a .308 platform like the SR-25 or a MK 17 (again, with an extended magazine…not a ten or twenty round magazine).
Sorry to rant…Bottom line is full auto is used by frogs, Delta (whether many admit to having ever used it or not), ODA dudes who I have, along w/ local MARSOC MSOT operators right near my home in SC/GA border region, spoken to and asked about this…and the answer is the same. "Of course we have!! We’ll use it the minute we breach a structure if we have 110% certainty that there are only bad guys on the other side of that breach point and there are drugs/adrenaline/etc involved…If we use the tactically traditional approach when clearing your corners, and it works with just a few pops to the front of a dude right there in your face and/or within 5-10m from your pos, then good on ya and great! But full auto? Yeah, we use it plenty…Not so much in the mountains as much as when we did in Iraq’s early days OR when we recently hit places in Somalia etc (again, OPSEC on any other Areas of Operations) where we are clearing rooms the size of a closet…then yeah."
From the horses mouth, I feel. I think if a member of an ODA that’s on it’s 6 or 7th deployment to these regions and when there is nearly a 99% chance of a TIC (contact with enemy forces) up close while they are all fired up, then I believe what I’m told.
Not to mention, working in priv security contracting myself, I have seen dudes walk away from being hit numerous times without a plate in front or back and yet, they today are at the top of their game and their health is fine…Some even after being hit a half dozen times, and all because they, at once upon a time, as they breached a sh-thole in Tikrit w/ a Special Mission Unit, STILL continued fighting until the entire obj was cleared/secure.
FULL AUTO IS NOT JUST USED FOR SUPPRESSION, AND IT IS USED NOW MORE THAN EVER THAT REG ARMY/USMC AND ALSO US SOF UNITS ARE ABLE TO HAVE THESE NEW RE-ISSUED SAWs AND UPGRADED M4A1s & AMMO THAT ARE MODIFIED APPARENTLY (OR FROM WHAT I HAD HEARD…THE MK 46 IS BEING SURPASSED BY THE OLD SAW WITH NEW FEATURES (MAYBE THATS WHY?) AND SAME WITH THE M4A1.
Faulty memory and a lot of time makes me less than confident but maybe someone will adjust/clarify.
Tactically, there is (used to be) a concept of “final protective fire”, for when your position is close to being over run. In that case each person would have a designated line of fire, interlacing with the rest of the unit. Full automatic might be appropriate then. Almost by definition all other good ideas will have been tried.
…the hell was THAT all about??
Someone held the trigger down.
Final protective fire is defensive combat, not offensive combat as related by our overwrought friend above. FPF uses the concept of interlocking fire to lay down a hailstorm of fire, and yet the aggressing force may still manage to penetrate the line. The notion of burst fire for automatic weapons was for a variety of reasons, including ammo conservation and to control weapon climb. In an enclosed area and in close encounters such as described above, firing on full auto would be advised, IMO, as you want the other guy to go down and stay down. All that said, the military isn’t what it was when I served and tactics have clearly changed.
“Now get off my parade ground.” 
The MP5 (usually around 2.5 to 3.1kg) is lighter than the Uzi (3.5kg) Uzi - Wikipedia so while the weight of the weapon matters, it likely has to do with the fact that the MP5 uses a closed bolt, rolled-delayed blowback mechanism rather than an open bolt mechanism.
Has someone found a simple, reliable way to prevent bullpups from ejecting spent cases in the user’s face while firing from either side? The FAMAS has a reliable way but it’s not simple enough to be done on the fly during a battle since it involves opening the weapon and switching internal parts. I’ve also seen a tube that channels spent cases forward but I wonder about the risk of cases getting stuck in there. Perhaps a small “porch roof” over the ejecting port to reflect cases downward?
As for the utility of full auto: 1) either the target or shooter is moving 2) the shooter has a platform which can easily handle the recoil (assets which help include bipods, tripods, muzzle brakes, silencers, some operating mechanisms) 3) the negative effect on accuracy is less than the positive effect of higher rate of fire (e.g.: if automatic fire makes you 100 MOA less accurate while firing at personnel 500 yards away, that may be unacceptable but if you’re firing at 50 yards, that might be just fine)
TF Green, no need to rant. You are discussing different combat units than most of the other people in this thread.
The fact is that the vast majority of US soldiers don’t have regular access to full-auto weaponry, and those that do are in the Weapons platoon and have different responsibilities.
I don’t think anyone in this thread was suggesting that Spec Ops rarely use full-auto, so you’re screaming about nothing.
Again, speaking from 25 years ago, every fire team (usually four men) had an automatic rifleman (AR), who often had his fire directed by the fire team leader. All the weapons in a squad (usually 13 men, 3 fire teams) are (or were) full-auto capable by selector switch. Each squad also had a grenadier. How much has that changed?
Weapons platoons had the heavy guns and mortars.
When the zombies attack, apparently.
Chefguy you are describing the Marine Corps infantry squad organization since 1944. But besides the pre-M16 era, since the adoption of the M16A2 from the mid 1980’s the weapons of the riflemen were not capable of full auto, but rather semi, and 3 shot burst. AFAIK the USMC unlike the US Army has not yet decided to reverse that decision for general infantry units and still uses 3 shot burst individual weapons, M16A4 and M4. The ‘automatic rifle’ is generally the M249, ie the Belgian FN Minimi 5.56mm light machinegun*. Weapons platoons of companies have7.62mm (M240, the Belgian FN MAG) machine guns.
The US Army in contrast has begun converting M4 (semi/burst) carbines to the M4A1 standard (semi/auto) for general use in infantry units, reversing the adoption of 3 shot burst, which was the USMC’s concept the Army got sort of roped into and was never as enthusiastic about. The Army has had a number of squad organizations over the long period the USMC has had the 3 fire team 13 man squad. But in general since late in the Korean War Army squads have had two fire teams, now also built around an M249 machine gun, and unlike USMC there is a typically a weapons squad in the platoon equipped with a pair of 7.62mm machine guns.
As another poster noted the burst/full issue isn’t about SOF’s but regular infantry.
*now being partly replaced by the German HK416 aka M27 which is more of a true ‘automatic rifle’.
Thanks. By the 1980s I was not in a battalion rotation any longer, so missed out on the “burst” option (and Seabees were always last to get new weapons). The grenadier carried the M204. The weapons platoons had the M-60 and the 81mm mortar, and H company had the recoiless rifle.
The automatic rifleman got the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon. That was the intitial transition point before they started switching M16a1s out for M16A2s with their three round burst point. It was literally that simple initially.
Lemme get this straight.
There’s a bunch of us here with real infantry combat experience. In wars over the last 50 years. For nations all over the planet. In places all over the planet. Against adversaries of many flags, both regulars and irregulars.
And now a security guard from California who claims no military experience is lecturing us on how it’s done. According to what he supposedly heard from guys he supposedly works with who were supposedly SOF?
Is that what I heard whizzing by overhead? Color me impressed. Deeply impressed.