We do, but there are lazy twits, who aren't willing to either do the work of properly assigning, or the record keeping of properly issuing.
I keep the log. When we get new soldiers, and are issuing out weapons, my Supply Sergeant re-works the assignment page, so that each soldier is properly indexed to their own weapon.
But weapons are assinged by duty position (the XO gets rifle no. 1, the 1SG gets no. 2, and so on down the line. So as people move around, they get new weapons. It's quite possible for a soldier to not know that a weapon was previously deadlined. In the 15 years I've been with my unit, I've had six different weapons assigned.
And I know the TA is willing to not worry about it. When I was up at Cameron last summer, it was first come, first served, so I got three different rifles in the course of time (though we kept the same weapon for all the ranges). I'd say it was just because I was extra, but it was across the board.
As for the SA-80 being hard to clean, you've never had to clean (or really maintain, which is a bitch) an M-16. Tha balance does stink on ice. Carrying it around for five days was a right pain in the ass, because it can't be carried, and having it slung, constantly, made getting at gear a pain.
The trade off is the way it handles, without having to shorten the barrel (the M-4, as well as the tanker Garand both suffer from problems related to 8this; they have a shorter barrel, and use the same ammunition, which decreases the muzzle velocity, which (because F=MA) reduces the energy, and then wind causes a larger decrease in retained energy at impact.
This isn't a real problem with the tanker Garand (or it's offspring, the M1A-S, though I had my ammo for that made to counteract that. Faster burning. A little more recoil, but in a semi-auto it's not a problem. With the 5.56 ammo the M-16 uses, it becomes a problem if someone is wearing body armor, and standing more the 150m away, but I digress).
I think the cover is silly, but having a piston, instead of dumping the gas directly into the chamber is so much better.
I'm responsible for the maintainence logs, and if a weapon is deadlined, I'm the first on the block for it should something go wrong later. The CO can re-issue certain types of malfunction; so long as it doesn't really affect safety, dinged sights, damaged buffer spring, etc.
At that, if I say it's dead, the CO won't question it, and I'll tag it, order parts (if it's a unit level fix, or send it to Depot if it can't be repaired on site. I can take it apart, all the way down, but am not allowed to do it at a unit level. If I were at a depot, I could. That prevents things, like burst/automatic sears from going missing, as well as people replacing bolts, without taking the wear and tear which creates the timing into account. It also makes sure soldiers don't try to fix things they don't really know how to mess with).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-05-09 04:43 pm (UTC)I keep the log. When we get new soldiers, and are issuing out weapons, my Supply Sergeant re-works the assignment page, so that each soldier is properly indexed to their own weapon.
But weapons are assinged by duty position (the XO gets rifle no. 1, the 1SG gets no. 2, and so on down the line. So as people move around, they get new weapons. It's quite possible for a soldier to not know that a weapon was previously deadlined. In the 15 years I've been with my unit, I've had six different weapons assigned.
And I know the TA is willing to not worry about it. When I was up at Cameron last summer, it was first come, first served, so I got three different rifles in the course of time (though we kept the same weapon for all the ranges). I'd say it was just because I was extra, but it was across the board.
As for the SA-80 being hard to clean, you've never had to clean (or really maintain, which is a bitch) an M-16. Tha balance does stink on ice. Carrying it around for five days was a right pain in the ass, because it can't be carried, and having it slung, constantly, made getting at gear a pain.
The trade off is the way it handles, without having to shorten the barrel (the M-4, as well as the tanker Garand both suffer from problems related to 8this; they have a shorter barrel, and use the same ammunition, which decreases the muzzle velocity, which (because F=MA) reduces the energy, and then wind causes a larger decrease in retained energy at impact.
This isn't a real problem with the tanker Garand (or it's offspring, the M1A-S, though I had my ammo for that made to counteract that. Faster burning. A little more recoil, but in a semi-auto it's not a problem. With the 5.56 ammo the M-16 uses, it becomes a problem if someone is wearing body armor, and standing more the 150m away, but I digress).
I think the cover is silly, but having a piston, instead of dumping the gas directly into the chamber is so much better.
I'm responsible for the maintainence logs, and if a weapon is deadlined, I'm the first on the block for it should something go wrong later. The CO can re-issue certain types of malfunction; so long as it doesn't really affect safety, dinged sights, damaged buffer spring, etc.
At that, if I say it's dead, the CO won't question it, and I'll tag it, order parts (if it's a unit level fix, or send it to Depot if it can't be repaired on site. I can take it apart, all the way down, but am not allowed to do it at a unit level. If I were at a depot, I could. That prevents things, like burst/automatic sears from going missing, as well as people replacing bolts, without taking the wear and tear which creates the timing into account. It also makes sure soldiers don't try to fix things they don't really know how to mess with).
TK