full auto v.s. semi auto

[Stupid]

Do you guys really see the use of full auto on infantry rifles? A regular foot soldier can probably carry around 500rd (my stupid guess). When he's in full-auto mode, it wouldn't last more than a few minutes. It's cool when he blasting away - not sure if it hits anything, but it's NOT cool when he's out of ammo.

[DoubleJ]

burst fire seems more appropriate to me, for most uses.
course, if you're laying suppressive fire, you might want that full auto.

[htxred]

soldiers carry 3rnd burst rifles, trucks and tanks got the full autos.

and its not like they are shooting all day, there are times the mission doesnt even call for fire.

and i just learned today ( might have happend a long time ago) wolff now has a contract.

[Stupid]

exactly my point.

I carried a full-auto AK - only ever fired it in semi during the contacts we had. Full-auto is for suppressive-fire by belt-feds.

[Paladin]

The "assault rifle" was a German development during WWII. Having an individual soldier with a full-auto rifle (as opposed to a bolt-action rifle or submachinegun) was a noticeable advantage during the war against the Russians. The Russians took notice and developed the AK.

Besides the assault rifle's fundamental advantages over bolt-action and submachineguns...part of the WWII effectiveness was probably due to the fact that most Germans and Russians weren't known for their marksmanship abilities.

On average Americans shot more accurately then and now.

I was told about how after surrendering in WWII, one high ranking German officer asked a high ranking American officer... "How do you get your soldiers to aim? Ours just fire off burst in the enemy's general direction."

Not to say that there isn't a time for automatic fire, but "spray and pray" has some known deficiencies.

[jimlongley]

When the M14 was first developed/issued, it was selective fire, but it was quickly determined that using full auto with a light battle rifle was not very accurate, and soldiers had a tendency to spray and pray.

When the M16 came along the military apparantly forgot the lessons of the M14 and issued them in selective fire also. I have seen many movies taken by my contemporaries who were there, as well as historical stuff, that show GIs holding the little rifles over the tops of walls and such and spraying with great abandon. The M16 is much lighter and has less recoil than the M14, which enables this sort of activity.

Full auto is an ammo waster except in skilled hands.

Sgt. Alvin York managed to defeat multiple machine guns with a bolt action rifle.

[dukalmighty]

The problem with full auto is recoil,that is why you need to shoot in short controlled bursts,I have a disability from a spinal cord injury with loss of strength in my right hand and can still shoot an m-16 full auto, but I will start off shooting at center mass area and after 3 to 4 rounds will end up around left side shoulder area of target, Full auto is used for defense against an infantry attack by an enemy force to stop an attack and suppress fire.They did away with the 3 shot burst in the military due to the fact if you let off the trigger after only geting off 2 rounds the next trigger pull wil result in only one round being fired before letting off the trigger and pulling again.they focused more on teaching controlled short bursts.With the invention of muzzle brakes it helps control muzzle climb somewhat,but for accurate shots and ammo conservation semi auto is the way to go.The m-14 is .308 and is almost impossible to control in full auto.At fifeen yards if you can keep a 30 rund mag of .223 in a B-27 silouette your doing great.On the other hand the Uzis and HK mp5 series sub machine guns are very controllable in full auto due to calibre and they are made for close up contact .Even though it's fun to rip a magazine off on full auto every now and then, I personally prefer putting rounds on target 1 at a time.

[Jungle Work]

Semi Auto vs Full Auto

By Stephen Weaver


During the latter stages of the Rhodesian Bush war, in the late 1970's a
particularly salient tactical point was demonstrated to those with eyes to
see. Embattled Rhodesia, fighting for its very life and ostracized by
virtually the entire world, quietly adopted a policy change for its armed
forces. As a result, the selector switches on thousands of FN-FAL rifles
were deliberately switched from the full-auto mode to semi-automatic as a
matter of standard procedure. The reason was the shortage of ammunition
brought about by international sanction efforts. The effects were
startling in that nothing changed as far as battle outcome in spite of a
better-armed and equipped enemy in increasingly superior numbers
penetrating Rhodesia from three fronts. The communist-trained and
supplied terrorist maintained the full auto mode with their AK-47s right
up until the end. When the final battles came the outnumbered and
outgunned Rhodesians had never lost a single encounter; rather, their
demise came at the negotiation table-which is a point for deep reflection.


What this proves is that semi-auto fire is a match for full-auto in the
hands of determined and committed personnel fighting for home and
hearth. As we stand today with the threat of legislation banning the
possession and/or manufacture of semiautomatic weapons, we had best pause
and consider this carefully. And a ban of so called assault rifles today
will become a ban on your Remington 1100 tomorrow -- bet on it. The Second
Amendment has been dealt numerous and severe infractions in multiple,
localized instances over the past half-century. But never before has it
faced the broad onslaught we now see. The avowed goal of those in our
very government is to strip us of our rights under the Second Amendment.
Should this occur, however, it will ultimately be our fault, not theirs.
The reason for this is the Second Amendment. As an American in the middle
of my fourth decade in this life I, like many others, look around in
utter shock and dismay at the rapid unraveling of our culture. I've
managed to get to this point in life without running afoul of our laws
even once. I am not associated with or an adherent to any group
espousing supremacist views, Nor do I advocate the violent overthrow of
the government... at this point in time. I will confess to holding
numerous politically incorrect attitudes, however.
***********************************************

Jungle Work

[Stupid]

I have never been able to grasp the idea of "full auto." In actuality, full auto is just a way to waste ammo. when one bullet that you send out hits nothing, it's one bullet less you have against your adversaries.

[TX Rancher]

I have never been able to grasp the idea of "full auto." In actuality, full auto is just a way to waste ammo. when one bullet that you send out hits nothing, it's one bullet less you have against your adversaries.

Ok, I’ll be the weenie and take the opposing side…

There are times when full auto and area fire is the right thing to do, such as gaining fire superiority when you’re in the kill zone of an ambush. You have to gain fire superiority and charge into the ambush if you want to survive, and full auto can help you gain superiority.

Lots of rounds cracking by over your head is a good inducement to keeping your head down…if your heads down, then you aren’t returning accurate fire, and I stand a better chance of surviving the ambush. This is a time when spray and pray works to your advantage, even if you’re not hitting anything.

There are other times when the manual calls for full auto…

Yes, un-aimed full auto fire is probably just a waste of ammunition. But aimed area fire has real tactical advantages. Take for instance your team is taking incoming fire from a tree line but you can’t pinpoint the exact location, under certain circumstances the manual calls for full auto area fire to pin down the opposing force so you can maneuver.

Full auto can also be used to deny the enemy the use of an approach…few troops will willingly walk into full auto fire.

The majority of the time I was in SE Asia I used semi-auto or controlled 3-4 round bursts out of my CAR, but there were times when I did use full auto and was very glad I had it. There were also times I used it to slow down the other side while I made my getaway.

Infantry combat is not the same as an engagement with a robber or a gangbanger. What works on the battlefield doesn’t necessarily work in the civilian world and visa versa.

[Stupid]

Good point, TX Rancher!

[jimlongley]

I have never been able to grasp the idea of "full auto." In actuality, full auto is just a way to waste ammo. when one bullet that you send out hits nothing, it's one bullet less you have against your adversaries.

Ok, I’ll be the weenie and take the opposing side…

There are times when full auto and area fire is the right thing to do, such as gaining fire superiority when you’re in the kill zone of an ambush.
Full auto can also be used to deny the enemy the use of an approach…few troops will willingly walk into full auto fire.

Infantry combat is not the same as an engagement with a robber or a gangbanger. What works on the battlefield doesn’t necessarily work in the civilian world and visa versa.

Amen, it does have its place. I chewed up a few sharks, yes the fish kind, with full auto from a BAR and a Thompson back in my Navy days - of course semi-auto from a Garand worked almost as well, it just didn't produce the spectacular display.

[Fosforos]

When I did my military service in Finland, we were trained to turn the variant of AK that they use to full auto only when going into a very close quarters assault. Makes sense for close quarters combat, like clearing trenches. One soldier throws a grenade, the one in front follow up with bursts of full auto fire. I did manage to shoot full auto by mistake on the range once, and only the first bullet hit the target (at 150 yards).

[dukalmighty]

I agree with Tx Rancher ,to repel an assault,ambush,break contact ,and assaulting an enemy position full auto has it's uses,also in low light or darkness short bursts can hit a target a single shot might miss.If i remember correctly, and if i'm wrong let me know but i believe the ARVN army in Vietnam were issued semi auto ar15's due to the fact during contact they tended to spray and pray and most rounds were going skyward,and for ammo conservation.Nothing worse than having a select fire stick at a gun fight