User Panel
Posted: 5/11/2024 10:28:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Diz]
What are your thoughts as to the current value/usefulness of IR point/illum in today's potential battlespace, as armed civilians in an uncertain world.
Just to get the ball rolling. As we discuss what are useful stds for a LAM, for armed civilians, how about it's place in your current T,T,P's. Active IR pointers and illum have been used extensively in modern times, yet with the current proliferation of NV, is their value down-graded somewhat, and how does that effect what LAM you choose (and is "good enough") for your use. I would also add that I am of the opinion that passive NV use is preferable to active, in the same way passive red dot sight use, is preferable to active white light, if at all possible. But granted, in some instances additional illum may be required. With this in mind, would using your RDS, in both spectrums, be the best technique, and using supplemental illum as required, again in either spectrum. Not to say shit-can the lasers entirely, but is their usefulness down-graded in this day and age. Could we get by with a RDS, "NV" height, and dual spectrum illum, of your choice. I know all the "experts" will say we slimy civilians are way out of our depth here, and this is all "derp" to them. I am not listening to all that any more. I think we are perfectly capable of figuring out things for ourselves. As long as we are seriously training and developing our own T,T,P's. Of course there is much overlap; of course they still have good advice to give. But we aren't idiots and have to mindlessly copy them either. As we have seen, many of them have ulterior motives for what they're pushing. And of course many of them are preaching what they truly believe. But that might not be exactly what you need. I think how useful it might be needs to be discussed, right along side of how durable it needs to be. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
I still feel the "you need both" answer is the correct one. Most people overestimate their shooting/weapons handling skills.
Using a laser tends to be "quicker" for many folks (just my observation). Which one is the correct one? The answer is probably "yes." Doing some dry work draw and move drills one time, a very analytical student asked me "Robert, do we draw first or move first?" My answer was "yes." He blue screened for a minute, but he ended up getting it. If it were me, I would ALWAYS assume you are fighting peer to peer, even if you know Bubba the meth head or some banger from the block. Never underestimate the BGs. With that regard, I would make sure everyone doesn't "glow" under NV as part of your pre-checks. I'd make sure all the cool daddy IR reflective patches, etc. are removed, etc. Kinda like making sure people have magazines in their pouches instead of ham sandwiches... True story, couldn't make it up... AD/ND issues regarding IR lasers/lights, etc. should be fixed in training. In an ad hoc situation with varying levels of training, etc. keeping it simple may be the best option- IR only lasers that don't even have a green visible, etc. At the start of the night phase of class, despite the admonitions to check your gear, make sure your on the right setting, etc. at the first drill of the night, it's almost always a Pink Floyd laser lightshow.... What do I mean by that? In a group of 12 students there will be 1-2 visible lasers, sometimes even a white light going on during that first drill. People fidget around and eff around with gear, thinking they are more familiar with it than they are. Again, in a MIXED group (some experienced, some not so much) you should EXPECT this. As far as SOPs on how to avoid that? Perhaps after a pre-check you could do a quick piece of tape over the switch position on the IR laser (depending on unit). Sounds parochial but might save a lesser experienced person from turning to visible accidentally. As far as a lesser experienced person touching the switch ahead of time... this is a training issue just like leaving your booger hook on the bang switch when it's not supposed to be there. You could plan to go active only when your near an objective, or when things go hot. Kinda like using hand and arm signals when creeping in, but using your big boy voice for commands once things go loud. In that regard, if everyone had both passive and IR capabilities, you could wait till the ambush is set, or the raid is ready, before even turning on IR lasers if you think that could be a problem. A piece of tape might mark the limit of movement on a laser switch for ones with both laser and vis (depends on models, etc.) or easier would be to check switch setting to IR only before patrol leaves and make sure everyone puts the cover on the IR laser output- remove at ORP. Beacons- are heavily over used IMO. You could switch them on immediately before (if you had time) but assuming peer to peer this would become immediately evident. For civilians in Minecraft and airsoft and what not... we are talking about controlling SMALL groups of people. Highly unlikely you will have to de-conflict with the next company on your flank.... Simple things like always staying with your buddy, always knowing where your buddy is, etc. will be more important for small groups. Accountability is everyone's burden, not just the TL or ATL. Some random thoughts on lunch break :) |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
I think it is equally important to train both ways, because you are absolutely correct - active IR illum and lasers can be seen by everyone with nods and it can become a major liability. Most of my builds have some form of passive NV aiming option, and I probably need to up the training time for passive, but NV is still fairly uncommon here in Michigan, unlike a lot of you guys down south.
|
|
|
Originally Posted By Diz:Active IR pointers and illum have been used extensively in modern times, yet with the current proliferation of NV, is their value down-graded somewhat, and how does that effect what LAM you choose (and is "good enough") for your use. I would also add that I am of the opinion that passive NV use is preferable to active, in the same way passive red dot sight use, is preferable to active white light, if at all possible. But granted, in some instances additional illum may be required. With this in mind, would using your RDS, in both spectrums, be the best technique, and using supplemental illum as required, again in either spectrum. Not to say shit-can the lasers entirely, but is their usefulness down-graded in this day and age. Could we get by with a RDS, "NV" height, and dual spectrum illum, of your choice. View Quote I think one thing you are missing from your analysis is that you can't be completely passive. Firing your gun is going to be visually active under nods pretty much no matter what you do. Even this video of a guy shooting suppressed .22 shows there is going to be some pretty substantial muzzle flash picked up by pretty much any NV. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HmAQp5MQwg What has changed since the old days is videos of guys running around Fallujah with their PEQ's on pretty much 24-7 since the other side didn't have any NV. With NV everywhere, yeah you can't do that anymore, but a laser is always going to be faster and quicker than trying to get your 14 behind that red dot. A lot of discussion on whether lasers and passive and what not comes down to a lot of one way range theory - or even two way Airsoft range use where it is actually possible to be 100% completely passive at all times and that kind of leaks into the broader discussions - but at the end of the day when you pull that trigger there is going to be some sort of light coming off that rifle. When you keep that in mind it might change how you weight the downsides of having that laser on your rail. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Deltastone: I think one thing you are missing from your analysis is that you can't be completely passive. Firing your gun is going to be visually active under nods pretty much no matter what you do. Even this video of a guy shooting suppressed .22 shows there is going to be muzzle some pretty substantial flash picked up by pretty much any NV. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HmAQp5MQwg What has changed since the old days is videos of guys running around Fallujah with their PEQ's on pretty much 24-7 since the other side didn't have any NV. With NV everywhere, yeah you can't do that anymore, but a laser is always going to be faster and quicker than trying to get your 14 behind that red dot. A lot of discussion on whether lasers and passive and what not comes down to a lot of one way range theory - or even two way Airsoft range use where it is actually possible to be 100% completely passive at all times and that kind of leaks into the broader discussions - but at the end of the day when you pull that trigger there is going to be some sort of light coming off that rifle. When you keep that in mind it might change how you weight the downsides of having that laser on your rail. View Quote Yep. The older Vietnam vet SF guys that trained us waaay back taught us to shoot at night without anything. Back then we had no nods, electronic sights, etc. We learned to shoot brown silhouette targets in the brush that had one of those tiny 1 inch "fishing" cyalume lightsticks on them. One of the guys asked "what the lightstick was for?" One of the old vets said "at night in the jungle, that's sometimes all you can see of the enemy." It was there to mimic muzzle flash. Suppressors help to a point, but your never invisible. |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
Great discussion. Yes there is a legit debate about which is faster, RDS or laser. The other side of that is how much NV capability do you expect. Illum is illum, and no matter what, it is sometimes required. Much like Lowdown 6, I was trained by Vietnam vets, and when white lights came into play, it was like WTF!. So now it becomes a discussion about urban vs rural warfare, or free-fire zones vs positive target ID. So your ROE's come into play.
As far as muzzle flash, granted it is a factor. However this was the primary reason I wanted cans; flash suppression vs noise suppression. Even there it is signature reduction, not elimination, so I get that point. But if nothing else, it keeps the flash out of your NODs. And this is perhaps a training scar for me. The vast majority of my training time active duty was with blank firing devices, so I was not keying on muzzle flashes. So much the same now with milsim/airsoft. In addition, I did see an interesting vid the other day from Grunt Proof, where he was demonstrating his technique for laser use, as a machine gunner, where he wasn't shouldering his weapon but firing from the hip. Now we all remember how the all the experts told us that only hollywood shot from the hip, however, with night vision and lasers, this is a viable technique, especially with heavier weapons. And for you real old timers, you remember this was the "final assault" position we were all taught when we all got on line and assaulted through the enemy position. So for sure two schools of thought, and two techniques to be used, vs all one way, or the other. Final thought, and this may be anathema to the current mantra of precision aiming, but, anyone whose been through any kind of infantry training was taught some form of area fire (aka "Drake" fire), where you have a certain zone or sector of fire to cover. For example, in a night ambush, I would fire to my left limit, right limit, and then one up the middle. Rinse and repeat. Therefore, I was covering my sector of fire, even though no actual target was visible. But the idea was your team was providing a wall of overlapping fires that would cover the area in front of you. Yes, many of you today would think holy shit but that was how it was done. Now you could argue, with today's lasers and illum, you can do better than that, but I would also argue that peer to peer, you might be right back where we started. Which is true of many T,T,P's these days. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
And for you real old timers, you remember this was the "final assault" position we were all taught when we all got on line and assaulted through the enemy position. View Quote The old clamp your arm/elbow over the stock bit! We were shown where you could time single shots to the steps also and that somehow helped accuracy a bit. But yes it was all in the context of assaulting through an ambush, rushing through a position, etc. Fast'ish type movement. "Point" firing a rifle at closer ranges like that allows you to move a little quicker, which is the whole context of the idea. Close range/under stress. We just finished up a 3 day pistol class a couple weekends back down here. 2 days and a night on the square range, 1 day in the 2 story house working FOT and FOF against live role players. On the square range after the basics were covered, we did a lot of compression/extension drills (managing space) as well as one handed shooting right and left hand, etc. Day 3 was all the FOT and FOF. The role players did great, several deserved an Emmy... a lot of the scenarios in the 2 story house involved managing a contact, managing space and time. And we threw in all kinds of light stressors. In the AAR I asked- "when you were engaging the role players, how many of you looked at your sights under that stress?" Not a hand was raised. |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
Lotsa truth leaking out into the open here ha ha.
|
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
never underestimate the stupidity of other people
GA, USA
|
interesting discussion, and I am under the "good enough" camp with my amazon IR laser/illum. I have real IR illumination and a way to shoot passively, too.
as a civilian outside hunting, I honestly can't imagine a situation where I would be justified shooting something/someone with either passive or active as the only option. It would have to be white light to ID friend or foe. In home defense, post-hurricane neighborhood watch, etc, there would still be a need to answer why you did what you did and likely a trial (potentially) around it. Shooting a dude from the dark in the dark cause he seemed like a bad guy wouldn't play in court anywhere I've ever lived. That said, I want to know what's going on with the options so if there's really SHTF or something of that magnitude I'm more ready. I doubt it for my time. I doubt it will come to peer on peer where "anyone between here and that hill is bad so fire away" is going to happen. For high speed, front line guys with different ROE? sure spend a fortune, train on it, go nuts. For a chubby dude in his 40s in the suburbs? Good to know but not a high priority need. If SHTF that bad I would likely end up a cook or medic instead because I have those skills and I'm not as fast on my feet as most elderly dogs. That said, I have a single PVS-14 and I am better equipped for night work than 95% of the "gun people" I have ever met. Many don't even have real lights on their rifles or CCW regularly. So I think we see more people into NV/Thermal here cause we're all kinda into it, so it skews farther. Plus with IR security cameras literally everywhere and in people's pockets, shy of a complete grid down situation, the suburbs aren't as dark as you'd think. |
"every exercise is a low back exercise if you do it wrong enough"
@MacManus |
Originally Posted By steviesterno16: interesting discussion, and I am under the "good enough" camp with my amazon IR laser/illum. I have real IR illumination and a way to shoot passively, too. as a civilian outside hunting, I honestly can't imagine a situation where I would be justified shooting something/someone with either passive or active as the only option. It would have to be white light to ID friend or foe. In home defense, post-hurricane neighborhood watch, etc, there would still be a need to answer why you did what you did and likely a trial (potentially) around it. Shooting a dude from the dark in the dark cause he seemed like a bad guy wouldn't play in court anywhere I've ever lived. That said, I want to know what's going on with the options so if there's really SHTF or something of that magnitude I'm more ready. I doubt it for my time. I doubt it will come to peer on peer where "anyone between here and that hill is bad so fire away" is going to happen. For high speed, front line guys with different ROE? sure spend a fortune, train on it, go nuts. For a chubby dude in his 40s in the suburbs? Good to know but not a high priority need. If SHTF that bad I would likely end up a cook or medic instead because I have those skills and I'm not as fast on my feet as most elderly dogs. That said, I have a single PVS-14 and I am better equipped for night work than 95% of the "gun people" I have ever met. Many don't even have real lights on their rifles or CCW regularly. So I think we see more people into NV/Thermal here cause we're all kinda into it, so it skews farther. Plus with IR security cameras literally everywhere and in people's pockets, shy of a complete grid down situation, the suburbs aren't as dark as you'd think. View Quote Lots of truff here! Don't count yourself out my friend! Lots of "elderly dogs" have a helluva bite Caleb was in his 80's when he went off on his own to climb mountains and kill giants, and this is AFTER helping Joshua (another "elderly" by that time) slay hundreds of thousands and gain the land. Probably close to 40 years of campaigning and then went and climbed mountains to fight giants! Hell yes, I want that kind of vitality. |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
"In the AAR I asked- "when you were engaging the role players, how many of you looked at your sights under that stress?" Not a hand was raised."
In my informal force on force training, I narrowed this down to two separate scenarios ... Reactive - when I suddenly and unexpectedly came into engagement at close range, I never used my sights. I instinctively knew the fastest person to put rounds on target won. Sights slow you down. I was also doing this on the move. If you stand still you die more often. Proactive - when I engaged an unaware target, I always used my sights. Time and surprise was on my side. |
|
|
Wow. You know threads like these make up for the GD.
On sights, do any of you (other than Robert) remember Seven Trees "Guttersnipe" sights? Before, in the Stone Age, these guys cut down old S&W semi-autos into spiffy carry guns. The sights were replaced with a slanted, grooved channel, or gutter if you will. It was for close up encounters, where sighting, if any, consisted of lining up the "gutter" with your opponent. It was a pure, up close, gunfighting tool. Rumored to also have been used by USSS, among others. This literally dragged S&W, kicking and screaming, into the compact gun market. On your estimate of the situation. Yes, this is a thorny issue. That's why I mentioned what your ROE's might be at the time. That's a balancing act for sure. In a perfect world, your local Sheriff might declare a temporary curfew and warn people not to go creeping around unnecessarily. If someone is shot under these circumstances, the scales might tip in your favor. But I know, wish in one hand, and shit in the other... |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
never underestimate the stupidity of other people
GA, USA
|
Originally Posted By Diz: Wow. You know threads like these make up for the GD. On sights, do any of you (other than Robert) remember Seven Trees "Guttersnipe" sights? Before, in the Stone Age, these guys cut down old S&W semi-autos into spiffy carry guns. The sights were replaced with a slanted, grooved channel, or gutter if you will. It was for close up encounters, where sighting, if any, consisted of lining up the "gutter" with your opponent. It was a pure, up close, gunfighting tool. Rumored to also have been used by USSS, among others. This literally dragged S&W, kicking and screaming, into the compact gun market. On your estimate of the situation. Yes, this is a thorny issue. That's why I mentioned what your ROE's might be at the time. That's a balancing act for sure. In a perfect world, your local Sheriff might declare a temporary curfew and warn people not to go creeping around unnecessarily. If someone is shot under these circumstances, the scales might tip in your favor. But I know, wish in one hand, and shit in the other... View Quote I remember guttersnipe and trench sights, and they still do a sig 365 with a version today. Truthfully sights and optics add options. If you actually train and practice you can shoot "well enough" without any sights at all and very quickly. I can run my AR to ~25+ yards on a paper plate sized target with no optics at all very quickly.10 yards or so with a pistol. If I have an extra split second a flash sight picture makes it even better by sighting down the slide or a glimpse of front sight post. If I have an extra from that, rudimentary irons get me better and out to farther distance. Same improvement while you add a dot, then an LPVO, then an IR laser, then a whatever the hell gizmo. More time and more options increase what I can do. If you don't have those gizmos and training then you don't have those options. I'm in the camp that it's good to have options, but we should be training super low use cases minimally compared to everything else. Which is more likely, I need to draw my concealed carry gun on a dude at a gas station or I need to quitely snipe enemy combatants under NODs. I can tell you how many times i've done either of those.... guess which comes up more? |
"every exercise is a low back exercise if you do it wrong enough"
@MacManus |
In terms of signature reduction, something I have not ever seen discussed is the amount of glint or reflection that pops off a nvg when a laser or illuminator is aimed nearby form “downrange”.
It’s like spotlighting a damn deer at times I’ve not seen a decent solution, but I wonder if killflash type devices could work. |
|
|
Originally Posted By na1lb0hm: In terms of signature reduction, something I have not ever seen discussed is the amount of glint or reflection that pops off a nvg when a laser or illuminator is aimed nearby form “downrange”. It’s like spotlighting a damn deer at times I’ve not seen a decent solution, but I wonder if killflash type devices could work. View Quote A lot of people told me they bought Luna ELIR3s for that reason. |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
Passive aiming is the King in rural terrain. Anything outdoors and with space, for the most part, is going to be passive aiming now. Now, there are always exceptions like trenches and so forth, but I personally would be very conservative about my use of IR light and lasers outdoors. It's basically something you would treat like visible white light now. The days of doing IR lassos and just dozens of guys running around with their IR lasers on steady are long gone. China's digital night vision has changed the game and soon their analogy night vision (see Jerry 31s) are going to filter down to even the sandle wearing insurgents in third world shit holes.
For MOUT (urban landscapes) and CQB (inside buildings) though active aiming and IR illumination is still King. It's the King of speed and it's the King of nonverbal communication/signaling. You still need a high power unit for that stuff even though the distances are closer, because in MOUT or CQB you could be dealing with some pretty strong photonic barriers that you need to be able to punch through to see what lies within the darkness beyond or to aim. The ability to difuse and focus is also still really important. MOUT can still present some long expanses of distance. So, I don't think that MFALs are now these entirely secondary things we can just live with or without. In terms of the need for them to be rugged, yeah they have to be rugged. God forbid anything ever did really go down that U.S. civilians needed this stuff for community defense they're not going to have any logistical support or at least very little. Anything goes down and that's it for it, there is no repair or replacement. True, it's highly unlikely a civilian is going to need to parachute, fast rope, or combat dive, but smacking into the concrete, having branches wack things hard, falling off an ATV or motorcylce, or banging something into a car dozens of times in a day is definitely the type of abuse that can mess up electronic components that aren't rugged enough. |
|
|
I think a lot of folks are operating on a somewhat outdated understanding of TTPs, and no, I'm not talking about "learning from Vietnam vets," but rather, "2004 Fallujah" was twenty years ago.
No serious organization, whether domestic LE / SWAT or military unit preparing for potential LSCO is advocating for the use of IR lasers and illuminators in the way being described here, and the current "frontline" infantry equipment that is being fielded / filtering down through the Army's CCF is an AN/PSQ-42 or -44 ENVG-B linked to an AN/PAS-35 FWS-I providing both passive and even defilade-fire capabilities, the AN/PEQ-15s are considered a "legacy" system, though they are still fielded because, as they say, "they have their uses." Going a step further, I've heard and relayed here (or, at least in some iteration of the night vision forums) the VAS and Lethality PMs and PEOs complain that despite all of the cool gear they're fielding to the infantry soldier, they still insist upon and refuse to give up their ATPIALs. Moreover, much of what most folks were doing in GWOT didn't necessarily "fit" normal doctrine for conventional operations, even discounting enemy night vision capabilities, what's the point of a "presence patrol" or "stability operations" where you're sneaking around being all "passive" and no one knows you're there? When and where it was called for (like reconnaissance, LP/OPs, etc.) IR light discipline has long been a thing. Beyond that, not only is passive aiming a component of TNVC's POI, but I have personally been talking about and advocating for passive aiming and taking into account the fact that the enemy may have night vision capabilities since 2007, when an AN/PVS-14 went missing from a sister platoon in Afghanistan and was never recovered and have spoken about it all over ARFCOM for many years, often being told by many self-proclaimed experts that I was full of shit and that passive aiming was stupid, etc., it has only been in the last 4-5 years that others have jumped on that train, and now preaching "old news" as revolutionary ideas and hot takes, like... thermal being more effective against dug-in enemies in an established defensive position. That being said where IR aiming lasers / MFALs "shine," pardon the pun, at least in an LSCO / P2P / near peer situation is offensive, maneuver operations, blind squirrels and nuts and all that, but once you "go loud" passive doesn't really mean all that much, especially considering it's usually going to be initiated by something belt fed if not explosive--hell, we used to (and sometimes still do) "light up the night" with illumination flares, and if you're Beyond that, why do they show up so much in "training," from which derives a lot of social media, etc., and seem to get so much emphasis and discussion? Sure, there's the aspirational factor that many guys base their equipment choices off of what Special Operations folks are using--in many cases in a direct-action, or as some have referred to it "hyper-conventional," offensive, maneuver role. It should come as no surprise that the guys whose primary job is to storm buildings and kill everyone inside have their rifles set up for that. There's also the fact that much of the available night vision "training" out there is either adapted from LE-based POIs or "SOF Fantasy Camp" (see above). In terms of LE based training, remember that 1) RUF / ROE for domestic LE are much different than expeditionary military operations, and 2) much of it is based around what could be considered a similar "offensive" type scenario, whether it's hostage rescue, pursuit, criminal apprehension, or even active shooter. Meanwhile, for "non-SHTF," non-insurgency / irregular warfare based training, "mainstream" civilian training scenarios and situations tend to be based more around urban and suburban contexts because--that's where most people live and where you're most likely to encounter conflict with others. So, let's take it that last fantastical step. No reason to discuss why it might happen, let's just say for whatever reason, we're in the situation where small, organized groups of American civilians are having to roll around conducting paramilitary operations CONUS. Well, going back to the top, I'd say for the most part, they'd be operating more or less like conventional infantry as best they can within their equipment and circumstances. In a defensive posture or against a dug-in enemy in a prepared defense, passive sighting, and in particular, thermal, has long since been acknowledged as "king," even prior to the ENVG-B / IVAS / FWS-I the AN/PAS-13 family has been standard in infantry MTOEs for at least fifteen years and generally preferred for defensive / static positions, as well as for most casualty producing weapons (machine guns). So, as a civilian in a primarily defensive posture, a person might not have access to an M240L or M249, and maybe doesn't have or doesn't want to roll with thermal, yes, passive aiming with NV is probably going to be the next-best-thing. Okay, but say they want to do something more offensive, not just taking and holding ground, but even harassment, supply line disruption, hit-and-run ambushes, etc., sure, when they're alone or maybe in a small, two-person team, passive-only might be better, but as soon as that element starts getting any larger than a fireteam, that coordination and communication piece becomes way more important than just the firing solution / control, which sure can be done without as we all did before lasers were super common, but the laser sure makes it a lot easier, and I daresay almost necessary for the speed and pace of modern combat, where help (for the enemy) is not a radio call and crashing through the woods away, but a single press of a button can have a loitering autonomous suicide drone honed in on your precise location while you're trying to figure out how to tell B-Team where that one asshole who found himself some decent cover is that could fuck them up, rather than just walking them on with a laser dot. How you want to crack any of these particular nuts and what piece of equipment is adequate for the task is of course entirely up to you, some folks will want a "military grade" MFAL to go with their "military grade" rifle and "military grade" helmet and "military grade" optic and "military grade" night vision. Others may not feel they "need" that level of equipment. A TOR-MINI IR and Inforce WML Gen. 3 WH/IR will accomplish pretty much everything that's been talked about in this thread for under $300, it just won't happen to look like a much more expensive DoD issued laser while doing it. ~Augee |
|
Tactical Night Vision Corporation - TNVC, INC.
http://www.tnvc.com [email protected] (909) 796-7000 Ex. 201 |
Appreciate the discussion! especially nuggets from JRE and TNVC
|
|
|
Since I'm pretty sure I'm the one he is addressing, I'd like to respond to Auggie's comments. On learning from Vietnam vets vs Fallujah vets. Yes, that is a point I have been trying make. I have an SF buddy who has been my beta tester for gear for some 20+ years now. It was he who started me thinking down this path. He was one of the first guys I know who pivoted from what he was doing T,T,P-wise and started interviewing me on what we were taught during the cold war for peer to peer conflict. This was his idea that he brought to me, not me "chest-thumping" trying to be relevant again. He would be the first to admit that for most G-WOT vets, after SF selection, or Ranger School, or whatever, they did not have as much time in jungles or thick woodlands patrolling and looking for enemy spoor. Their experience was much more kinetic, offensive in nature.
I respectfully disagree that if the Boog does happen, that folks will be imitating what straight line infantry has been doing for decades; that is an institutional approach that merely assumes we would be mimicking line infantry, or even law enforcement in our activities. That assumption means you have to listen to the subject matter experts in the military-industrial complex. Judging from what I've seen from our military as of late, they are the last persons I would be wanting advice from. In fact, to turn that argument on it's head, they could well be the enemy trying to herd you into FEMA camps. Yes, I have my tin-foil hat on firmly in place. But fuck it, I don't care how that looks anymore. I am war-gaming various scenarios and coming up with tactics to defeat them. In certain scenarios, we could well be the guerillas, not the line infantry sent by the regime to quell the unrest. So why would we train as line infantry doing "presence patrols" and the like? You would be training in raids and ambushes to disrupt the regime, not support it. And yes, I know how crazy that sounds. But based on what's happen, especially in the last four years, I don' t think anything is off the table. And no, I don't claim to have a crystal ball, and say for certain that scenario may happen. It is but one of many. But serves to illustrate why I don't think you can just blindly follow what the mainstream military or LE T,T,P's are teaching. Case in point, I plan on being as far away from large urban centers as possible. I will be operating in a very rural environment, with very different T,T,P's. We will be lucky to have small 4-man teams. If we are lucky, we will be operating as long range patrol and surveillance assets for our local town. Looking for something wicked coming our way. At least this would be one initial phase that would be likely. Going back to my SF bud, our discussions centered on how we operated differently during the cold war. Things such as comms windows, and reporting procedures, when you could expect a rocket battery down your ass if DF'd. Things such as operating independently for days at a time, without re-supply. Things like walking around with your load out instead of being vehicle-centric. Lots of that old Vietnam vet shit that we learned. On top of that, we learned that you can't keep fighting the last war; many forward-thinking individuals had already pivoted to what we would be doing in a Northern NATO scenario. And again, many individuals today are stuck in the G-WOT and not looking at what future conflicts may look like. I think talking in terms of peer to peer is somewhat of a misnomer, in that nothing we might be doing, as slimy civilians, is going to approach any kind of parity with whatever group or opponents we may be facing. So talking in terms of what conventional line infantry would be doing is miles away from what we might be doing. At least initially. Granted, and hopefully, we could be organized into company-sized units, or dare I dream, BN-sized units, that would then mimic what Auggie envisions. The trick is to get from here to there. So I wouldn't entirely discount what he is saying, merely to point out that POV doesn't entirely cover the range of options available. So in closing I would merely suggest, that what we are trying to say isn't just chest-thumping, or old vets talking shit; it is taking a hard look at what we might be up against and selecting the best T,T,T's, both old and new, to meet the challenges ahead. That may or may not be what the mainstream community is teaching right now. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
Since I'm pretty sure I'm the one he is addressing, I'd like to respond to Auggie's comments. On learning from Vietnam vets vs Fallujah vets. Yes, that is a point I have been trying make. I have an SF buddy who has been my beta tester for gear for some 20+ years now. It was he who started me thinking down this path. He was one of the first guys I know who pivoted from what he was doing T,T,P-wise and started interviewing me on what we were taught during the cold war for peer to peer conflict. This was his idea that he brought to me, not me "chest-thumping" trying to be relevant again. He would be the first to admit that for most G-WOT vets, after SF selection, or Ranger School, or whatever, they did not have as much time in jungles or thick woodlands patrolling and looking for enemy spoor. Their experience was much more kinetic, offensive in nature. View Quote I agree. Guys discussing their experiences going out with just 4 or 6 guys into the jungle for a week or so, maybe even crossing borders in the process, knowing they are totally on their own for the most part, but definitely if/when a border was crossed (deniability) carrying everything they need for that time, no resupply, trying to avoid contact is considerably different than riding out in a vehicle for a direct action hit and leaving as soon as it's over. I respectfully disagree that if the Boog does happen, that folks will be imitating what straight line infantry has been doing for decades; that is an institutional approach that merely assumes we would be mimicking line infantry, or even law enforcement in our activities. That assumption means you have to listen to the subject matter experts in the military-industrial complex. Judging from what I've seen from our military as of late, they are the last persons I would be wanting advice from. In fact, to turn that argument on it's head, they could well be the enemy trying to herd you into FEMA camps. Yes, I have my tin-foil hat on firmly in place. But fuck it, I don't care how that looks anymore. I am war-gaming various scenarios and coming up with tactics to defeat them. View Quote Few "civilians" will have 1. Enough people 2. Enough TRAINED people 3. Enough TRAINED and EQUIPPED people to pull off "standard infantry" tactics. A presence patrol? Maybe if you had the above in a post hurricane type scenario- aka the "don't loot, drunks with guns" type thing you have seen in the past. But that's hardly the same thing. Even if you wanted to be seen doing the "chest thumping" others are talking about, would it necessarily be good for you in the long term? Letting your neighbors know you have 8 guys around armed playing Batman in the boondocks? Most (not all) of us live in areas with a lot of liberal POS around. You want Karen the HOA president to see this? Just like others that tout freedom and liberty and turn in competitors or try to limit competition, Karen, another liberal will be looking to turn your arse in ASAP. Some of this is psychological- re: do you make your presence known or not. And no, I don't claim to have a crystal ball, and say for certain that scenario may happen. It is but one of many. But serves to illustrate why I don't think you can just blindly follow what the mainstream military or LE T,T,P's are teaching. Case in point, I plan on being as far away from large urban centers as possible. I will be operating in a very rural environment, with very different T,T,P's. We will be lucky to have small 4-man teams. If we are lucky, we will be operating as long range patrol and surveillance assets for our local town. Looking for something wicked coming our way. At least this would be one initial phase that would be likely. View Quote Having been doing this sort of thing since the mid 80's, I can say most definitely it's true most folks will be lucky to have 4 to 6 man teams. Even now, ahead of time, when all the prevents them is getting a "kitchen pass" from the wifey, or a weekend BBQ, try to get a group of guys together to train regularly. And don't forget they need to equip themselves. No one is playing for Uncle Sugar- I.e, no one gets free shit, you have to provide your own. Very rare breed of men that will go out, give up a weekend every month (or more) to hit the field, live dirty and train. Summer soldiers and sunshine patriots and what not, all of this has happened before. Going back to my SF bud, our discussions centered on how we operated differently during the cold war. Things such as comms windows, and reporting procedures, when you could expect a rocket battery down your ass if DF'd. Things such as operating independently for days at a time, without re-supply. Things like walking around with your load out instead of being vehicle-centric. Lots of that old Vietnam vet shit that we learned. On top of that, we learned that you can't keep fighting the last war; many forward-thinking individuals had already pivoted to what we would be doing in a Northern NATO scenario. And again, many individuals today are stuck in the G-WOT and not looking at what future conflicts may look like. I think talking in terms of peer to peer is somewhat of a misnomer, in that nothing we might be doing, as slimy civilians, is going to approach any kind of parity with whatever group or opponents we may be facing. So talking in terms of what conventional line infantry would be doing is miles away from what we might be doing. At least initially. Granted, and hopefully, we could be organized into company-sized units, or dare I dream, BN-sized units, that would then mimic what Auggie envisions. The trick is to get from here to there. So I wouldn't entirely discount what he is saying, merely to point out that POV doesn't entirely cover the range of options available. So in closing I would merely suggest, that what we are trying to say isn't just chest-thumping, or old vets talking shit; it is taking a hard look at what we might be up against and selecting the best T,T,T's, both old and new, to meet the challenges ahead. That may or may not be what the mainstream community is teaching right now. View Quote My advice would be to not really give AF what the "mainstream" is teaching as it may not be totally applicable to what YOU need to do. Learn to tailor anything you learn to YOUR circumstances and your situation. Acting like an "infantry platoon" when it's you, Bubba Joe and 2 other guys, with mixed experience, is definitely not the way to go. We can use that type of thing as a general guide but learn to adapt it to just a handful of guys. There is much to learn from the "old guys" as well as the new guys, ALL of it however has to be tailored to YOUR situation. All the re-historizing and brash statements aside, everyone should have a learning attitude and be willing to sift through material, use what is good for YOUR situation and jettison the rest. Lots of "mainstream" training is like that, is there much value in 5 yard rifle drills? Is there any value in some of these little BS "scanning" techniques that are little more than a sideways glance while on line with other shooters? Very little value, but it allows people to stack 16 people on line on a range at one time and also to say "we teach scanning"- no, you teach a BS half head turn that doesn't actually allow the student to really "see" anything. Great for IG or whatever TF, but little value in real life as you can't really see shit doing it that way. |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
I didn't feel like you were chest thumping. Moreover, it felt like a healthy what-if scenario type conversation - and the forums certainly benefit from the added conversation.
|
|
|
I was and am aware that you're talking about the theoretical "Boog," and again, there's no real reason to discuss how or why that might happen, but for discussion's sake, let's pretend it has come to that.
The point of reiterating why most of the "mainstream" training and discussion revolving around lasers is the way it is is exactly that. Contextualizing discussions and training that may not feel relevant to you. I know I write a lot, so maybe you missed the whole part about irregular warfighting, harassment, hit and runs, etc., so let me go ahead and restate a couple of points, which may on the surface appear contradictory of one another but are two sides of the same coin: - On the one hand, the point that I was making is that don't seem to clearly understand the putative "enemy's" modern doctrine and TTPs, because they're basing them off of twenty year old newsreel videos and social media and open enrollment training classes that, as I and others have already acknowledged are not necessarily relevant to the scenarios some may be imagining / preparing for. However, while an individual may not find them relevant for themselves--if (the royal) you're going to fight an organized force, being familiar with how they're equipped, what their capabilities are, and how they are likely to react in a given situation is pretty important to a guerilla. Even by the late-2000s we were already saying: "the dumb ones are already dead." Desperate suicide bomber recruits aside, you can sure bet while they might not have been able to cite the FM paragraph and line number, the guys that were left had a pretty good idea of how we did business. - At the same time, whether you're talking about a lone-wolf, fireteam, or brigade, there's only so many ways a small arms fight can go, and the basic concepts and fundamentals of getting into a small arms fight and the concepts of offense and defense are still pretty stable. Equipment and specific TTPs and even doctrine may evolve and change, but the fundamentals, practiced by infantrymen at least since rifled barrels were invented more or less still hold true. So when I say at potential guerilla is going to want to essentially function like infantry, it's not that they should go taking lessons out of the 82nd Airborne's TY2024 TACSOP, it is that as best as they are able, they're going to be following and practicing the same fundamentals--as I said, a small arms fight is still a small arms fight. Any presumptive guerilla / insurgent is still going to want to maneuver, displace, mass effects, and in any element of greater size than "one," have some form of coordination. There's nothing "special" about a guerilla tactics once you start actually trading rifle rounds. If one were to want to get into the nitty-gritty about irregular warfare and a "Boog" scenario, really what they should be talking about / learning about (and some already are) are HME, IEDs, booby traps, supply and infrastructure vulnerabilities, not to mention more "modern" capabilities like commercially available SUAS, closed-loop communications networks, etc. If the theoretical scenario is that a primarily vehicle-based enemy is coming to "herd people into FEMA camps" and maintain and defend a rural stronghold, debating whether you need an NGAL a MAWL or if "something else" will do for small-unit dismounted patrols would not, IMHO, but a top tier item of considerations, as: A) it probably won't make that much of a difference in the limited engagement scenarios they'd most likely be facing, since they're probably not planning on standing and fighting a numerically and logistically superior force, and B) it would make more sense to worry about making roads and avenues of approach impassable and fixing or otherwise canalizing the enemy. Trading pot shots with the U.S. military is the worst way to run an insurgency, because that we know how to deal with, and it rarely went all that well for the insurgents, it was all of the other methods which proved most effective and has led to the loss of will in so many recent and not-so-recent engagements. Any former infantryman should know--shooting at an infantryman is more often than not going just going to excite them, if you want to demoralize them and get them to stop fighting, you've got to find another way, that's irregular warfare. And then, finally, to a point that was already brought up--assuming the plan is not going into the "Boog" with the intent of martyrdom, while an insurgent force may start with one to two man teams engaged in harassment and other guerilla tactics, at some point in time, the "aspiration," incidentally following along the progression of Maoist insurgency, would likely be to eventually get to the point of operating in larger, more organized units at squad, platoon, company levels and above, at which point in time, they're back to being a conventional infantry force and probably will want to equip themselves as such, in which case, what's it hurt to get it now while it's freely and readily available if the "scenario" planning for fantastical and extraordinary circumstances anyways, what's an extra couple thousand dollars on a credit card to a financial institution that will probably collapse so it'll never have to paid back anyways weighed against the years of guerilla fighting and sacrifice and struggle until the final phases when that stuff may be very much needed or at least highly desired? The other options I guess are to plan to take it off dead American soldiers or "collaborators," or to hope that some Chinese von Steuben or Lafayette will swoop in once the end-game is in sight. Am I being hyperbolic and I daresay sarcastic? Sure. But again, there's nothing at all discussed in this thread that couldn't be accomplished with TOR-MINI IR and an Inforce WML that would be lighter, cheaper, and lower profile than any of the "non-U.S. MIC supporting alternate options," unless desired "form factor" is a major factor of consideration. It's convenient to say that I'm nothing more than a mouthpiece for the "institution," I check all the blocks and more of what many seem to disdain. I'm deeply entrenched in the MIC, still serving in the Reserves, GWOT vet... I'm the guy that so many don't trust. ~Augee |
|
Tactical Night Vision Corporation - TNVC, INC.
http://www.tnvc.com [email protected] (909) 796-7000 Ex. 201 |
Originally Posted By TNVC_Augee: I was and am well aware that you're talking about the theoretical "Boog," and again, there's no real reason to discuss how or why that might happen, but for discussion's sake, let's pretend it has come to that. The point of reiterating why most of the "mainstream" training and discussion revolving around lasers is the way it is is exactly that. Contextualizing discussions and training that you rightly or wrongly don't feel are relevant to you. I know I write a lot, so maybe you missed the whole part about irregular warfighting, harassment, hit and runs, etc., so let me go ahead and restate a couple of points, which may on the surface appear contradictory of one another, but I trust you can tease through: - On the one hand, the point that I was making is that you don't seem to clearly understand your putative "enemy's" modern doctrine and TTPs, because you're basing them off of twenty year old newsreel videos and social media and open enrollment training classes that, as you, I, and others have are not necessarily relevant to the scenarios you are imagining / preparing for. Again, you may not find them relevant for you--but if you're going to fight an organized force, being familiar with how they're equipped, what their capabilities are, and how they are likely to react in a given situation is pretty important to a guerilla. Even by the late-2000s we were already saying: "the dumb ones are already dead." Desperate suicide bomber recruits aside, you can sure bet while they might not have been able to cite the FM paragraph and line number, the guys that were left had a pretty good idea of how we did business. - At the same time, whether you're talking about a lone-wolf, fireteam, or brigade, there's only so many ways a small arms fight can go, and the basic concepts and fundamentals of getting into a small arms fight and the concepts of offense and defense are still pretty stable. Equipment and specific TTPs and even doctrine may evolve and change, but the fundamentals, practiced by infantrymen at least since rifled barrels were invented more or less still hold true. So when I say you're going to want to essentially function like infantry, it's not that you should go taking lessons out of the 82nd Airborne's FY2024 TACSOP, it is that as best as you are able, you're going to be following and practicing the same fundamentals--as I said, a small arms fight is still a small arms fight. You're still going to want to maneuver, displace, mass effects, and in any element of greater size than "one," have some form of coordination. As much as you'd like to believe, there's nothing "special" about a guerilla tactics once you start actually trading rifle rounds. If you want to get into the nitty-gritty about irregular warefare and your "Boog" scenario, really what you should be talking about / learning about (and who knows, maybe... probably? you already are) HME, IEDs, booby traps, supply and infrastructure vulnerabilities, not to mention more "modern" capabilities like commercially available SUAS, closed-loop communications networks, etc. If you think that a primarily vehicle-based enemy is coming to "herd you into FEMA camps" in your rural stronghold, why are you and maybe your buddy dicking around in the woods debating whether you need an NGAL a MAWL or if "something else" will do? A) it probably won't make that much of a difference in the limited engagement scenarios you'd most likely be facing, since you're probably not planning on standing and fighting a numerically and logistically superior force, and B) wouldn't it make more sense to worry about making roads and avenues of approach impassable and fixing or otherwise canalizing the enemy. Trading pot shots with the U.S. military is the worst way to run an insurgency, because that we know how to deal with, and it rarely went all that well for the insurgents, it was all of the other methods which proved most effective and has led to the loss of will in so many recent and not-so-recent engagements. You were one, you should know--shooting at an infrantryman is often not going to do anything but excite them, if you want to demoralize them and get them to stop fighting, you've got to find another way, that's irregular warfare. And then, finally, to a point you already brought up--assuming you're not going into the "Boog" with the intent of martyrdom, while you may start with one to two man teams engaged in harassment and other guerilla tactics, at some point in time, the "aspiration" as you stated, incidentally following along the progression of Maoist insurgency, is to eventually get to the point of operating in larger, more organized units at squad, platoon, company levels and above, at which point in time, you guessed it, you're back to being a conventional infantry force and probably will want to equip yourself as such, in which case, what's it hurt to get it now while it's freely and readily available while you're planning for fantastical scenarios anyways, what's an extra couple thousand dollars on a credit card to a financial institution you expect to collapse so you'll never have to pay it back anyways weighed against the years of guerilla fighting and sacrifice and struggle until you hit the final phases and may need that stuff? The other options I guess are to plan to take it off dead American soldiers or "collaborators," or that you're hoping that some Chinese von Steuben or Lafayette will swoop in once the end-game is in sight. Am I being hyperbolic and I daresay sarcastic? Sure. But again, there's nothing at all discussed in this thread that couldn't be accomplished with TOR-MINI IR and an Inforce WML that would be lighter, cheaper, and lower profile than any of the "non-U.S. MIC supporting alternate options," but hey, as you said in the thread that prompted this, desired "form factor" is a thing. It's convenient to say that I'm nothing more than a mouthpiece for the "institution," and hell, I check all the blocks and more of what you seem to disdain, deeply entrenched in the MIC, still serving in the Reserves, GWOT vet... I'm the guy you don't trust. So take all that for what you paid to read it I guess, and I'll send you the $26 or whatever it costs to get a membership if you think even that's too much. ~Augee View Quote Can we please tone down the personal attacks? You keep taking digs at him, and that isn't really fair, especially as a site sponsor. |
|
|
Originally Posted By chosos: Can we please tone down the personal attacks? You keep taking digs at him, and that isn't really fair, especially as a site sponsor. View Quote I don't necessarily agree on the topic of fairness, but out of respect for you and for the site and your capacity as moderator, I've gone ahead and removed any language that is personal from both my posts, and will leave direct personal address out of any subsequent discussions and responses. ~Augee |
|
Tactical Night Vision Corporation - TNVC, INC.
http://www.tnvc.com [email protected] (909) 796-7000 Ex. 201 |
Well, better have him vent his spleen and let the reader decide. I have no night vison product, or associated equipment being sold that I have a vested interest in. And I am not accusing Augie of anything, other working for a company that does. It is again, up to the reader to reach his own conclusions. Augie may be totally truthful and honest in all his opinions, and just happen to work for a site sponsor. In fact, all their opinions may align so he's is just telling the word according to Augie. He does present a strong case, and many may decide he is right.
I think it's important that everyone has their say. Even if it is a site sponsor, and even if the perception is they are throwing their weight around. I think people are smart enough to see through that kind of thing. Again I do not have a crystal ball and I do not know what may come about. But I do know that something very bad is more than likely coming. And obviously, that varies with Augie's estimate of the situation. So there is that. Every one of you must take in the evidence, analyze, and come to likely courses of action. Each according to his own conclusions. Augie and I obviously disagree, but that is OK. He also makes a strong argument for a couple of products, they just happen sell, and in all likelihood would work just as well, if not better, than some products we have been discussing here. I'll take that at face value and say, right on, there is another choice. He again is correct, in that SF led guerilla warfare is nothing more than basic infantry tactics modified for the troops, weapons, and equipment available. So for sure some concepts are timeless; others are intrinsically linked to the terrain and situation. I suppose the trick is then to know what T,T,P's are appropriate for your situation, and just as importantly, which are not. Another point to consider is based on his comments, it would appear that Augie has an urban-centric outlook, at least according to his comments about urban centers and the amount of folks living there. While this is true, I must re-emphasize the point that I plan on being nowhere near them. With this in mind, my T,T,P's may more closely resemble those taught decades ago, rather than those taught in the past few decades. But even though, I still look at what T,T,P's have developed since Mogadishu, and how those can still be incorporated with the lessons of classic woodland/jungle patrol. For instance, Combat Casualty Care has made immense advances. And comms. And small weapons. Boots. Load Bearing Equipment. Not to mention CQB, even though my goal is to avoid it like the plague, it would still be useful have some knowledge of it, just in case. So on balance, I don't disagree with Augie all that much; only to say I have a much wider interest in what support equipment is available, be it foreign-made or domestic. He can insult me all he likes. It doesn't matter much if at all to me. I bear him no ill will. Again people can read all this shit and make up their own minds. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
My $0.02, for what it's worth, is I try and treat NV like unaided shooting - I use passive whenever possible and if I need the active aiming or the augment of illumination, I use it. Easy peasy discussion. Time and place for everything.
Edit - to add in on whatever battle of cheap vs expensive is - I think that if you were preparing for any type of conflict on US soil, the boog or a foreign military invasion, having quality gear would be important. Especially if replacing the gear isn't possible. Either buy something that'll last, or risk not having it. If boog, I always truly wonder just how many of the active military would stay and fight for whatever tyrant is in power. I assume based on my conversations I've had it would be a rather low percentage. If foreign invasion, I've often wondered how much help the citizens would truly provide the effort in repelling a force, and how often US mil and civilians would accidentally have blue on blue scenarios. Though that's not this discussion lol |
|
|
Let me ask you guys this "do you think it would be of greater value to have two or three mediocre MFALs or just one great one?" What's better, having some logistical resupply depth or putting your eggs all in one sturdy basket?
|
|
|
Originally Posted By KaerMorhenResident: Let me ask you guys this "do you think it would be of greater value to have two or three mediocre MFALs or just one great one?" What's better, having some logistical resupply depth or putting your eggs all in one sturdy basket? View Quote I think the bigger problem is most people do not train enough to truly KNOW if their gear choices are going to hold up. There was a recent thread in GD where people were asking "how many rounds through a weapon before you trust it?" To me, the responses were extremely low, some saying as low as "50 rounds" others higher but the average was likely around 250 rounds. Seriously? I rarely head to an afternoon range session with less than 500 rounds. And I damn sure wouldn't trust a new gun I wasn't familiar with (no matter the type) with only "50 rounds" through it. "Trust it" evidently means different things to different people. To me it means trust my eff'in life on it. Not "trust" it to put 50 rounds down range that one time a year Bubba goes to the range. I think if you have had problems with that particular type/piece of gear before, you should heavily test/beat TF out of it to KNOW. For example, I had several absolute shittake ARs in the 1990s and so did a bunch of like minded folks I know. Major jams, major problems, etc. Heard the "you gotta buy a Colt" argument from a customer and broke down and bought the nicest Colt I could find then. It also was shittake under not even "heavy" use. I walked away from that platform for a long time because of the problems. When I first got a BCM AR, I shot on average 2,000 rounds a month through it to begin with. At first cleaning it regularly, later not so regularly. It was flawless. After about six months I believed I could trust it with my life. We own several more now, all also of which have been flawless. Having had serious issues with the platform previously, I tested this a helluva lot more before accepting it. I had "heard" these were reliable ARs, but "hearing" shit doesn't equate to KNOWING stuff also. |
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
The thing about the MFAL market is that there really isn't a lot of inbetween mid tier items. VCSEL, which I think we can all agree is the new hotness for civilian legal MFALs is only at present found on very high price end MFALs like the MAWL or the RAID Xe. Everything else in the civilian MFAL realm either performs poorly or is made overseas with serious deficiencies (bad mount, terrible coalignment, etc.).
I really hope that Holosun and Zbolt can bring to market mid-tier VCSEL MFALs. Essentially we need that BCM of MFALs and right now all we have are the Knights and M&P Sports. Buying up any of the Chinese MFALs is just a compromise, they're pretty far from ideal. The Somogear mount stinks, in my opinion, the Invisible Sight EG had serious coalignment issues in 4MR Ranch's review (5 MOA divergence), and the high end IS takes half a year if you're lucky to get. The options like Laserspeed are the size of the DBAL D2, which at that point what's the point when you can get a D2? Somogear doesn't have a usable diffuser, you'd have to spend almost half of what you paid for it to get an aftermarket one to put on. |
|
|
While everything you are saying is true, another factor, for me, is it's priority in the overall scheme of things, meaning if having a full service (viz, IR pointer and illum) LAM is not absolutely critical to the mission (in your own opinion), then perhaps you would consider using units that are less than perfect.
Scenario #1: You decide to put all your eggs into one basket. Build the best rifle system you can, and hope like hell nothing ever happens to it. Depending on budget you might buy a domestic full service LAM. Scenario #2: You decide you need at least one back-up rifle, so you build two to essentially the same std. Now you have a spare. Depending on budget you might still buy two full service units, or decide to buy 2 x lower quality. Scenario #3: You decide that having several rifles, let's say 4, cached around your AO makes the most sense. So you build up 4 to roughly the same std. Now you would probably consider a lower quality unit, just to cover all the bases. Or in this case rails. Everyone of these scenarios ASSumes you are on some kind of budget and can't just build top end everything. Further it ASSumes that you are actually prepping for bad times and have to allocate money wisely to cover multiple budgets. Further it ASSumes that you have decided, in the scheme of things, that having something is better than having nothing. You accept the risk that it may crap out on you. That risk is less likely to cause mission failure than other factors, such as not having another fucking rifle available when required. And, at the end of the day, it factors in whether or not fighting under NV is a very likely scenario, and the use of a LAM would even be required. This is of course one man's opinion, based on what he figures he might see. Again you have to do this analysis for yourself and plan from there. Seeing that this is a NV forum, naturally we err on the side of buying more expensive shit, just cuz. But when this is included with the whole scheme of things, perhaps it loses some importance. YMMV. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
Great points DIZ.
See, that's my weakness, I need to think in terms of overall preps and prioritize my budget allocation. For example, I'm building up my Jeep Rubicon to be a proper overlander (not just for SHTF, but for recreational purposes) and so maybe it makes more sense to spring for the Warn Winch and to offset that cost go with a cheaper LAM/MFAL. I can make do if the MFAL goes down, but that winch can absolutely not fail me, because when I need it I need it to work without fail. I got too hung up on having to have everything be Tier One stuff prior to COVID and when COVID hit and we all initially had no idea how bad or not bad it was going to be it was a kind of sobering moment for me. I was absolutely not where I wanted to be prep wise at that point even though I've been slowly buying things for years leading up to it. Here I am more than four years later still trying to adjust and apply the lessons I learned about being prepared. Honestly, I'll just say that I'm also old enough now to be past the point of caring about having Instagram approved stuff. There is always going to be some dude with more high end stuff than me and I have to get past trying to keep up with the Tacticool Joneses. The more I've seen those type of guys anyways over the years the more I realize they're rarely well rounded folks. |
|
|
Well this is a new day for many of you guys that perhaps were on the fence about this prepping thing. Recent events have open the eyes of a lot of folks that are not naturally inclined to be suspicious bastards like myself. I have been around long enough to know this is a totally different country than when I was a kid in the 50's and 60's. You younger guys don't have that longer view to compare to. The new normal was just your every day.
You bring up a very good analogy, in that failure of some items is a real deal killer, whereas others made degrade the mission but not necessarily cause it to fail. And for sure, vehicle budgets can soak up as much money as weapons and equipment. Recent events have caused me to re-double my efforts to get squared away, so instead of discussing NV (or anything else) in a vacuum, I am now hyper-focused on how it fits into the big picture. That may or may not apply to all folks at this site. But if it does, I offer any stray thoughts I have on these issues. And for sure, time is way past (IMHO) for a fashion show where we compare who has the fanciest doo-dads. I used to have to hold my nose to consider using anything combloc. Then I finally got an AK and discovered there really is a utility to the thing, once you understand the philosophy behind it. It's basically diametrically opposed to how we designed weapons. But that didn't mean it wasn't valid. In much the same vein, a chicom LAM might not be "up to snuff" as compared to a US one, but that doesn't mean it has no utility whatsoever. There are many here who will argue that, and have various reasons for doing so. I would suggest that having one US laser on your primary, and maybe some foreign made on back up rifles cached around your AO might be a good COA for many of us. And that is probably part of the reason we sit here at the kiddy table discussing chinese products in a separate forum from the adults. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
I go back and forth on it. NV is definitely more common than it used to be, so caution is warranted with active emissions. I also don't think NV has proliferated as much as people in the gun world think it has, it's still an incredibly expensive novelty for all but perhaps a half a percent of the population. An even smaller percentage can actually effectively use NV offensively. I hate to say it but you can't really answer the question of "do I need it or not" with our current level of understanding of how "it" will happen.
The solution is to get as good as you can at both passive and active use. If you feel you don't want to spend what a "good" laser costs, then don't. I doubt that will be the decisive factor in your survival, in any case. I also think it's a waste of money to buy bottom tier stuff that is going to break much easier than a higher end unit. I'm not trying to attack Augee, but I don't think a Inforce light is going to last for you as long as even something like a cheaper DBAL, based on the Inforces I have handled. That's again a choice you have to make; I prioritize durability over most anything else. My other soap box: Frankly, the sloppy use of infrared emissions that GWOT created should have never been normalized to start with. It should have been treated like discharging a while light from the get go. There is a middle ground that is between "lasers are useless" and blasting IR emissions into the abyss openly to telegraph your location. |
|
|
In most respects take the military out of the equation - peer to peer, any signal you are gone, and with TOT everyone in a 500m x 500m area may also be gone.
If you keep it to specific case use then different levels of discussion can be had, but they are becoming more and more unique/specific. If you reduce it to civilian and LEO case use then its straightforward, the vast majority of people don't have access to quality NODS and IR systems so you become king of the hills your environment. |
|
|
Hot damn. That is probably one of the best responses I have ever read here. There is a little truth on both sides of this argument. Well said.
You know, as I sit here and ponder the future, I think back to JW Rawles, who was a survival guru way back in the 90's. That dude split for Idaho, and set up a retreat, in the mid-90's and has been "prepping" ever since. He was one of the first to popularize the "American Redoubt" concept. Now I wonder if the dude wasted his life sitting in his cabin waiting for the boog, or, was it still a good experience for him. And then, what IS really gonna happen. No one really knows. If you do get ready, perhaps you are just setting up the next generation for success. So would that still be considered worthwhile. We may not know when something is going to happen, but I think at some point something is gonna happen. But point well spoken. Even as we look at the possibility of employing NV, and lasers, having something up to a certain std is probably a good idea. I will admit the form factor has been a factor for me. And perhaps I should set that aside and make sure whatever it is I end up with will actually work better than good enough. Thanks for sharing that with us. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
The "boog" etc is interesting and you raise a good point about the man in Idaho, did he waste his life, to many, they would say yes and yet only he and his family can answer that. We're they happy and fulfilled, if the answer is yes to both they won the life lottery.
In my view, "being prepared" is a mind set rather than a list of tools, its better that you have family action plans in case of fire, flood, home invasion etc a house in the woods is irrelevant if you can't get there in good order. In terms of lasers etc how many people known the MPBR of their firearm for a specific cartridge and if they zero at 50 with 223, how high is the point of impact at 100 and how low is at 200 and 300? for a given factory ammunition for their barrel length and twist rate. Do they understand the limitations of their high priced BDC reticle and optic. There are good reasons why parallel zeros are used for lasers (or at least very long distance convergent) and yet you will hear people say they zeroed their laser at 25 so its good to go for 300 - in that case it doesn't matter if you have a $50 laser or $3500 laser. The drift being understanding what you have, being effective with it and having the mindset to get the right outcome trump the expense and amount of gear in most cases. |
|
|
Man hard truths breaking out all over this place. Well said mate.
|
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
So here's one - what criteria are you using to establish when you trust your life to one of these imported devices? Is there a certain round count, abuse factor, etc to where it can move from a secondary platform to being part of your primary loadout?
I am just curious where everyone seems to land on this one - especially since some of the reports on the somo peq's were zero drifts past 1500 rounds. I haven't run into anything like that, so I am sincerely curious. |
|
|
Good point mate. We have heard many stories about domestic and foreign lasers having issues. Would be nice to have head to head comparisons, so you can't say brand "x" laser has this issue, when in fact a lot of other laser have that as well. Case in point, zero shift under recoil. I have had active duty guys with experience in these things tell me that a laser zero check is practically a pre-combat check. So mother-fucking one laser about this, without acknowledging it is a common problem is mis-leading.
As far as stds, for an armed civilian in a WROL-type scenario, my vote would be: -usable pointer and illum, out to 100m -zero-able, and stays zeroed, as much as they are able, for at least 5.56mm -solid mount -reasonably waterproof, at least in a steady rain -reasonably durable, at least a 3ft drop on dirt -o-ring batt box to prevent bounce Obviously some units we have been discussing here are not quite there. But the Holosuns are, (and will be), and others are very close. I have chosen to field a few units that might not quite be there, but for cost considerations, R&D, etc. I'm OK with that. You may not be. Data point of one. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
First I must say this has been a great read.
I will come from a different angle and say there's definitely a use case for these cheaper options when it comes to hunting at night. Have just a few hours on a toughsoul IR Laser combo, but it's right up there with my TLR2iR, which in and of itself is a pretty cheap option. So far is held zero for about 200 rounds of 300BO and around 500 of .22 I will say I've switched almost to passive exclusively lately on pistols just to get more proficient with it. I actually like it better during the seasons with more foliage as I get less splash and bounceback from IR, and I'm usually hunting smaller critters with pistols. One thing I will comment on is thermal is still the game changer over NV in my experience. I have some kills with NV, but HMT then transition to thermal scope is the easy button. Walking and stalking with NV is fun but much harder. How all this would translate into force on force in the real world I'm not sure, and I don't pretend to be tier 1. I do know if we had some type of scenario like discussed above creeping into our ranch would be difficult and if you had ill intentions we'd definitely take our hunting methods and adopt them to 2 legged critters. I've spent more time, nights, hell full weeks under NV and HMT than pretty much any other gun people I know. I even have a bunch of boating hours and have caught some damn nice trout with my helmet on. What I'm trying to say is you need to get out there and actually use your stuff. You'll find out what works and what doesn't rather quickly. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Nameless_Hobo: I also think it's a waste of money to buy bottom tier stuff that is going to break much easier than a higher end unit. I'm not trying to attack Augee, but I don't think a Inforce light is going to last for you as long as even something like a cheaper DBAL, based on the Inforces I have handled. That's again a choice you have to make; I prioritize durability over most anything else. My other soap box: Frankly, the sloppy use of infrared emissions that GWOT created should have never been normalized to start with. It should have been treated like discharging a while light from the get go. There is a middle ground that is between "lasers are useless" and blasting IR emissions into the abyss openly to telegraph your location. View Quote FWIW, I was neither recommending nor not recommending the Inforce, though I do / have owned a couple, however it was a forwarded as a low-cost, non-Chinese option (not to get into the back-and-forth of “aren’t all LEDs made in China anyways”) discussion that would provide the same or better capabilities. Anyways, it’s your latter soapbox that’s somewhat more interesting to me Insofar as you’re not wrong that it should have never been that way, I think that a lot of folks these days forget the context of the early GWOT, which is incidentally the context into which TNVC was born and first started us down this path. While on the one hand, it surprises people that things like IR aiming lasers like the AN/PAQ-4 were being used as far back as Eagle Claw and in Mogadishu during Gothic Serpent (Black Hawk Down) and that the development of things like the AN/PEQ-2 and AN/PVS-14 in fact predate GWOT, for the most part, these tools were more or less reserved for SOF, and some of the more elite conventional infantry units like those in the 101st and 82nd. But when GWOT started, there were still a lot of reserve component units, particularly non-combat arms types that still had M16A1s and M1911A1s in inventory and maybe a handful AN/PVS-7Bs for drivers, squad leaders, and platoon leaders / PSGs. Of course what we learned very quickly during the days of lining the floors of soft-skin HMMWVs with flak jackets and sandbags and that the lines between combat arms and “REMF truck drivers” and such were not as wide as we’d once believed, and it became understood that pretty much every Soldier, Sailor, Marine, and Airman who might be expected to leave the wire at some point needed to have the capability to move and fight at night, because that was the only way to do so safely, and even then not always. The days of Pauly Shore’s “In the Army Now” Reservists and “Nasty Girls” faded pretty quickly to the point that in under ten years, even those units were packed to the gills with battle-hardened veterans. Within that context, if you think about the number of units that went if not from M16A1s, bone-stock M16A2s to M4s equipped with KAC rails, optics, and IR aiming lasers in the space of hell, even from 2003-2008 and 1::1 AN/PVS-14s, it’s kind of not surprising that there was some sloppiness and very rough “on the job training” on how to properly employ these tools in combat, and some of these units probably had never necessarily placed a high premium on white light discipline previously (and/or had previously rarely trained at night). Sure, did SOF and AD/RA fight and serve with distinction during GWOT? Of course. But a lot of the fighting was also done by your plumber, your mechanic, your high school teacher, your accountant, and even your stay-at-home moms, plucked from their “civilian” lives and a grueling OPTEMPO that they’d never realized they’d signed up for, and who were all of a sudden handed a green lunch sack with a PVS-14 in it and a PEQ-2 or PAQ-4 or PEQ-15 to slap on their rifle with little more than a “hope you don’t die, LOL.” And while I now know that it was an issue that had been identified a little bit prior to that—I didn’t even start thinking seriously about adversaries having NV capabilities and how to address that until a PVS-14 went missing from a sister platoon in 2007 that was never recovered while downrange, and started running a JPoint above my ACOG and preaching “passive aiming capabilities.” As a matter of fact, I think those unseen economies of scale in the cost of production of say, an ATPIAL, probably forever affected people’s sense and understanding of what it actually costs to build, develop, and design a fully duty ready and MIL-SPEC rated MFAL system—at one point, the government price for an AN/PEQ-15 was a decent bit under $1,000, however, the government, and law enforcement, and international companies were also buying so many of them that the government had to award a second-sourcing contract for the AN/PEQ-15A not just to meet the demand since L3 couldn’t produce enough of them fast enough, but as a backup in case there was some sort of production delay or some sort of other issue that would prevent them from delivering one time and to spec, and all of these factors heavily influenced the “go-to-market” pricing on both the DBAL-I2 and ATPIAL-C when we introduced those to the market, forever calibrating people’s pricing expectations at what, in retrospect, was an unrealistic point because of the unprecedented and unlikely-to-be-repeated economies of scale that existed at that time to totally equip a fully engaged fighting force from scratch. The MAWL for example, has been an extremely popular product for one of its type and class, but probably the total production numbers of the MAWL since it introduced in 2016 are less than the number of AN/PEQ-15s produced in say 2008 alone. Anyways, I got off on a tangent, though the point stands that economies of scale are real and the cost building a truly “government rated” laser, that will not only meet, but is certified by the proper independent testing laboratories and standards is a lot higher than I think a lot people realize. My main point was that “what we saw early in GWOT” was never really “the way it was supposed to be” or the “right way of doing things,” and that’s why the kind of training and education that TNVC was and is providing were so valuable (and I wasn’t part of TNVC at the time, but I was and am one of those reservists and aware of TNVC), and to be honest, why our emphasis has always been so much on “the best, duty-rated gear, don’t buy cheap crap” because a) there was so much of that cheap crap out there at the time, and b) in many cases, including by myself, that gear was being purchased to supplement shortcomings in issued equipment and being actively used in combat (lot of crazy ITAR violations those days too… and a lot of folks got their hands slapped and more over it, hence why so many companies have tightened that stuff up so much since then). But again, got off topic, sorry, I’m a ranter. Point: It was never “supposed to be,” and never should have been the way it was during early-GWOT, but we as a force and a nation got caught collectively with our pants down so to speak, and we had to find a way to make it work. ~Augee |
|
Tactical Night Vision Corporation - TNVC, INC.
http://www.tnvc.com [email protected] (909) 796-7000 Ex. 201 |
Originally Posted By GroundhogOZ: In most respects take the military out of the equation - peer to peer, any signal you are gone, and with TOT everyone in a 500m x 500m area may also be gone. View Quote Eh, at the risk of getting “off topic” again, I’m not sure I buy that. Yes, some awesome and fearsome technologies and capabilities exist out there that theoretically give some weight to your assessment, so it’s certainly not that I’m saying what you say is not possible. However, short of committing to MAD, it’s not necessarily rational or practical in a Clausewitz-ian sense of “war is an extension of politics by other means.” The thing is that most of the time, wars aren’t fought over random pieces of land for no reason, and in many cases, obliterating anything within a 500x500m area may render that area no longer worth fighting for—usually there’s some sort of critical key terrain, whether that’s a piece of infrastructure or resource, or even just a populated area that is either important to you, your enemy, or both. And then at that point, you’re back to Heinlein and Starship Trooper, who was of course more than well aware of both the future implications of technology to warfare and nuclear weapons / MAD, but who nonetheless IMHO correctly stated, (paraphrased) all the awesome and fearsome technology may be important, but at some point, at some time, the infantry needs to put boots in the mud in order to gain and hold ground. To that end, today, right now, effective infantry I2 capability is a critical component to having a viable, offensive, expeditionary capability that can seize and hold ground, which again, we can bloviate about transonic missiles, aircraft platforms, drones, but T-800 aint here yet, and the only way of effectively saying “this ground is mine” is to put regular human dudes on it, who need to be able to move, maneuver, and fight. And I think the Chinese know it too, which is why they’ve placed such a priority on analog I2 capability lately, which is frankly a little out of their traditional wheelhouse—but digital’s not there and you can’t maneuver troops with thermal. Meanwhile, we’ve flooded the Pac Rim with high quality analog I2 capabilities, not just our own forces there, but SuperGain PVS-31Ks and GPNVGs for Korea, and you Aussies who are allowed performance almost as high as what’s available to U.S. SOF, and they’re way behind and they know it. And the thing about analog I2 tube manufacturing, at least when you’re starting out, is that it’s a numbers game, and being able to make a handful of 2500 FOM tubes is not really that useful in a strategic sense, however, being able to make 10,000 1800 FOM tubes? Now that’s a strategic offensive capability, even if they’re “just” Gen. 2. The thing about I2 tube manufacturing is that it’s not terribly efficient unless you’ve really refined the process, yields are low and wastage and fallout is high, and when you look at the NNVT (Norinco) tubes that are being pushed out all over the world and flooding commercial markets, they’re generally around 1200-1400 FOM, and you realize they’re in a similar place to where ITT and Litton were 20-ish years ago, when the U.S. domestic commercial market started opening up, yes, in part to subsidize the production and manufacturing costs, but even more so to have an outlet for the vast amount of fallout that you get in order to produce a militarily viable number of decent tubes. And I don’t think they intend to take 20 years to catch up… All of that is to say in the end, that I think it is a very valid conversation to have, even in a conventional military context, of how to leverage capabilities and “what is really needed” to shoot, move, and communicate with I2 and I2-related tools in a new technological environment. ~Augee |
|
Tactical Night Vision Corporation - TNVC, INC.
http://www.tnvc.com [email protected] (909) 796-7000 Ex. 201 |
Having just re-read Starship Troopers, for my annual review, I would also add Heinlein's comment about the grunt working a Venier caliper while a caveman snuck up behind him and bashes his head in with a rock. Also thinking about "The Pacific" series, where the enemy does a mass frontal assault, and is in your foxhole. At that point, all that hi-tech shit goes out the window. But for sure, boots in the mud hold ground.
|
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
Originally Posted By Diz: I would also add Heinlein's comment about the grunt working a Venier caliper while a caveman snuck up behind him and bashes his head in with a rock. View Quote This has always been one of my go-to references when I talk about the potential downsides of things like IVAS and the various ______ Warrior (Future Force, Land, NETT, etc.) systems the Army has, by this point dumped billions into over the last 30-40 years. Even systems like TAK and the HUD/HMD stuff which offer some impressive potential capabilities, especially in conjunction with something like RAILINK, but I worry that it may cause information overload and decision-making paralysis, particularly in mid-level leaders, and this is why user configurable displays have become a critical requirement for all of these systems, you need to not only be able to turn off certain data, but also move it around the display as it best suits you. And to a certain extent, I’m not even worried as much about the individual soldiers—if you’ve seen one of these youngin’s play Call of Duty or whatever, and watched as they juggled and integrated all of the various different pieces and types of information, it can be pretty impressive, that’s what you get when you grow up in that kind of information environment I guess. What both myself and the various program offices have learned / realized is that it’s the older guys, including guys like myself, who can’t handle that amount of information in a GUI like that. And my fear is that as the technology gets more widespread, and as “middle management” (BN and BDE Commanders) get increasingly more risk averse and less willing to allow junior leaders to have autonomy, that not only are they likely to—but our training and evaluation system is set to where tactical battalion commanders will eventually insist on being able to see each individual PFC’s gun-cam POV before even allowing soldiers to fire their weapons at an enemy, grinding OPTEMPO to a screeching halt. We’re developing the technology to do so at breakneck speed these days with advances and ML and AR, but we’ve done next to nothing to adapt our training and doctrine for what’s increasingly seeming like the “weak link” in the system, the human being at the center that still (at least for now) needs to make the decisions. ~Augee |
|
Tactical Night Vision Corporation - TNVC, INC.
http://www.tnvc.com [email protected] (909) 796-7000 Ex. 201 |
Originally Posted By Diz: Having just re-read Starship Troopers, for my annual review, I would also add Heinlein's comment about the grunt working a Venier caliper while a caveman snuck up behind him and bashes his head in with a rock. Also thinking about "The Pacific" series, where the enemy does a mass frontal assault, and is in your foxhole. At that point, all that hi-tech shit goes out the window. But for sure, boots in the mud hold ground. View Quote Bit off topic, but Heinlein was a genuis. Too bad his merit based system of suffrage had to be put into a work of fiction that will never be taken seriously. If you haven't watched Sargon of Akkad's YT video on Starship Troopers, I highly recommend it. |
|
|
Originally Posted By chosos: So here's one - what criteria are you using to establish when you trust your life to one of these imported devices? Is there a certain round count, abuse factor, etc to where it can move from a secondary platform to being part of your primary loadout? I am just curious where everyone seems to land on this one - especially since some of the reports on the somo peq's were zero drifts past 1500 rounds. I haven't run into anything like that, so I am sincerely curious. View Quote For me, I feel it makes sense to give MFALs more leniency in reliability than I would other optics. If I'm going out to do the stuff, I'm gonna take a second to point my rifle downrange and check that my laser still converges with my red dot. I'll take a couple more seconds to make sure that the illum works, that my lights have their heads/tails/tape switches screwed in all the way, along with various other pre-checks. By contrast, theres no similarly simple check I can do to make sure that the zero on my primary optic hasn't shifted, so I have a MUCH higher expectation for reliability and durability there. Further, if the laser is off but the illum still works, I can blast that and aim actively behind my red dot. Personally I prefer that anyway as I feel I can be more precise and the muscle memory is the same as the reps I've put in during the day. |
|
|
My Somo NGAL sits on an 8.3" .300BLK next to my bed, set to Viz Low (no time for NODs when the door gets kicked in). Every time I pick it up to finger-fu*k it (sorry, I mean dry-fire practice), the LASER works. Every time I go to my range on the property, the LASER works - it works when I get back and put it next to the bed again. When I check alignment, it's good. For house distances (where even a little shift won't matter), it was a hell of a bargain at $450. If I ever have to head out to a Trench - I'll throw my Holosun LS321G in my pack, just in case. Or maybe an IRIS down the road. Still way cheaper than one MAWL.
|
|
|
Well Ranger sorta goes to the crux of the issue. Say whatcha want but peeps be voting with their wallet.
|
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
In re-reading this thread I am thinking about what Augee said about boomers vs millennials. The differences between the two have become increasingly obvious to me in the last few years. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. Now we can sit here and argue who would come "out on top"; I would say that would depend on each individual situation. In addition, very good point about "middle management" either not as agile on the tech, and/or trying to micro-manage it.
At the end of the day, I think both "cultures" will be in play; the advanced 1st world countries will be trying to leverage hi-tech to the max, with the kids that work well with it. And your lower-tech societies will be using their bag of tricks to counter it. Again who comes out on top is up for grabs. Just to add, all the high tech gizzmos in the world won't help you when the enemy won't come out to play your game. Just as the Minuteman would not stand on-line and trade shots with the Brits, but sniped at them from the woods, your modern-day warrior may refuse to fight on your terms, but do whatever is necessary to counter your advantages. And this is exactly what Heinlein is referring to. And what many are ignoring. Too much money and careers to be made. At the end of the day, and this is strictly my opinion, but, I think you will have pure AI up against human guile. When you try and do a hybrid approach, i.e. human w/AI augmentation, you might have the best of both worlds, but it is inherently flawed by human limitations. If you're going to go hi-tech, better to go all in, with a unit that needs no sleep. If you are still a carbon unit, then you need to max out your natural instincts and leverage these against the machine. Yes, we are rapidly approaching a real terminator type scenario. Either we will survive, or not. What this all has to do with lasers, I haven't a fucking clue. |
|
It's all about the fiddle factor.
|
Don't forget Gen X
Baby Boomers, 1946-1964, 60-78 years old now. Gen X, 1965-1980, 44-59 years old now View Quote This is the China section, no one cares |
|
|
www.jrhenterprises.com
Over 30 Years in business- Thank you for your business! Quickest ways to contact us- 912.375.1480 [email protected] |
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.