- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Never should have left.
Hope I can get the course.
Hope I can get the course.
Yeah the .50 is coming back
- Thread starter Scoobie Newbie
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 3,100
- Points
- 1,160
I'll sell you my qual, I'm not using it
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
but then I wouldn't get to shoot it.
- Reaction score
- 79
- Points
- 680
I thought we still used the 50, as the wpn mounts are still in the 1 meter Cadlilac-GAGE turrets.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
CFL said:
You did 7 years regs and never got qualified on the .50? Isn't that a little unusual?
If you can aquire a .50 I'll be more than happy to run ya through the drills ;D
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Got really sick when they were running it. Then it eventually got phased out. It used to be the way but things have changed. Hell I couldn't tell you the names of the tools in the C6 cleaning kit. Sad I know but when they don't run the course what am I to do.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
GO!!! said:
Well, reserve units deffinitly lost them, and reserve courses don't include them any more. Mine was the second last year to have 'em, and that was 98/99. Is there still a RegF course which qualifies you for the .50?
- Reaction score
- 22,088
- Points
- 1,260
The Mech Bn's lost them and cut the .50 from the MG course (so it became "advanced" C6).
So when they needed .50 instruction - some of the dinosaur Cpl's got stuck teaching it (Jay4th and I amongst others...)
The Light Battalions where not as stupid as the Mech ones...
So when they needed .50 instruction - some of the dinosaur Cpl's got stuck teaching it (Jay4th and I amongst others...)
The Light Battalions where not as stupid as the Mech ones...
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
"The Light Battalions where not as stupid as the Mech ones..."
Thanks Kev.
The powers that be probabley thought that since they had the 25 they didn't need a .50 anymore. Either way I'm glad coming back (to my BN).
Thanks Kev.
The powers that be probabley thought that since they had the 25 they didn't need a .50 anymore. Either way I'm glad coming back (to my BN).
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
CFL said:
Heh, actually, that's EXACTLY the rationale that we were given at the time. "It's too heavy to be man-packed by a light BN, and the mech BN's have the 25, so it's not required any more".
If I remember correctly, our response was about 25 simultaneous snorts of derision. We were taking bets on how long it would take them to realize they'd made a mistake and bring it back.
M
MG34
Guest
The .50cal never left, at least not in Petawawa,we have been conducting .50cal shoots a few times a year.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
By your profile MG34 I assume your/were in a Mech BN. If so I wonder why the West Mech BN's went the other way.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
In DLR’s eyes the HMG is gone, they’re just waiting for the CASW so they won’t leave the light uits hanging. But for now, it is still in service and technically has never been retired, except from those who did not know better and started rumours on assumption. It was just re-added to the 3A/Small Arms course, complete with new drills (being validated with the 3A course that started on 30 Jan, then the pam goes in for translation). The fight to keep it is still ongoing, however when the CASW eventually does show up, the logistical/operational requirement for the .50cal will most likely be won by the new weapon system.
Whether one wants to admit it or not, the CASW is a more effective and lethal weapon system. Having both of these systems in a unit is costly and therefore when the decision comes to decide on the fate of these sytems, the CASW will most likely win hands down.
An infantry BN/Pl can only handle so many weapon systems and saying you have something that you may or may not use, depending on the task at hand simply does not make the grade. In the end the CASW will probably replace the .50 cal since it does the same job and more in one system.
Whether one wants to admit it or not, the CASW is a more effective and lethal weapon system. Having both of these systems in a unit is costly and therefore when the decision comes to decide on the fate of these sytems, the CASW will most likely win hands down.
An infantry BN/Pl can only handle so many weapon systems and saying you have something that you may or may not use, depending on the task at hand simply does not make the grade. In the end the CASW will probably replace the .50 cal since it does the same job and more in one system.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
By Company Area Suppression Weapon do you mean the 40mm automatic grenade launcher?
Now although the .50 may not have been "retired" in my BN at the very least no courses have been taught on this for years and our BN doesn't hold any that I'm aware of.
That said thank you for clarifing things.
Now although the .50 may not have been "retired" in my BN at the very least no courses have been taught on this for years and our BN doesn't hold any that I'm aware of.
That said thank you for clarifing things.
TangoTwoBravo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,282
- Points
- 1,110
Tracker,
Does the CASW have additional capabilities compared to the Mk19?
I conducted a short exchange with a USMC battalion in 1994 on a mountain warfare exercise (Bridgeport CA) that employed both 50 cal HMGs and Mk19 grenade launchers. I was with the Weapons Company and I spent a lot of time with the "Heavy Guns" Platoon. They had four 50 cals and four Mk19 grenade launchers in the platoon.
The platoon had HMMVWs, but for this exercise it was all foot borne. They had pack mules some of the time but for the most part they were man packed. This platoon gave the battalion some significant integral firepower. The HMGs and Mk19s were often paired off and chopped out to the rifle companies to give the companies some extra firepower for dispered ops. US Army "Light Cav" units also employed a pairing of HMGs and Mk 19s as the basic unit. The HMG and Mk19 have somewhat complimentary effects, and I think that both have a place in an infantry battalion. Does the CASW change this?
Does the CASW have additional capabilities compared to the Mk19?
I conducted a short exchange with a USMC battalion in 1994 on a mountain warfare exercise (Bridgeport CA) that employed both 50 cal HMGs and Mk19 grenade launchers. I was with the Weapons Company and I spent a lot of time with the "Heavy Guns" Platoon. They had four 50 cals and four Mk19 grenade launchers in the platoon.
The platoon had HMMVWs, but for this exercise it was all foot borne. They had pack mules some of the time but for the most part they were man packed. This platoon gave the battalion some significant integral firepower. The HMGs and Mk19s were often paired off and chopped out to the rifle companies to give the companies some extra firepower for dispered ops. US Army "Light Cav" units also employed a pairing of HMGs and Mk 19s as the basic unit. The HMG and Mk19 have somewhat complimentary effects, and I think that both have a place in an infantry battalion. Does the CASW change this?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
CFL,
NDHQ had the HMG on the way out the door (this is why some people think it’s gone. They then had it pointed out to them that the HMG was in service with the units tasked in Afghanistan, and removing it removed a capability they could not replace yet. So the HMG got a stay of execution.
Your right, not much has been done WRT trg in the past few years and with that said, the only experience in Bn's these days with the .50 cal are the older guys who actually employed it and recieved "THE" MG Crse, not simply a course designed around the C6. It was perhaps a bad move, nonetheless one that we all have to live with now.
2Bravo,
I think what the American's are doing is an excellent use of both systems together, however we have to get out of the habit of comparing ourselves with their military. We all know it is done daily in the units here in Canada, but to compare our military with that of the US cannot be done in relative terms. Just because the US does it doesn't make it the correct answer, however I agree with the practicality of employing both weapon systems in order to compliment one another. If I had my way, we would use both. However...those who decide these things do so with constraints placed upon them by government and available funds.
When it comes to the advantages and disadvantages of each weapon system and used in pairs, an entire book could be written on the subject. The only thing the CASW does is it gives us the reach of the .50cal with the effects of neutralizing a larger area that is engaged. Soft skinned vehicles/personnel are neutralized. Anyone with experience knows the .50cal is absolutely useless against armour and therefore that argument is lost.
I think what will happen in the end, is because of monies available, the cost of training and limited resources will define the CASW over that of the .50 cal. However, those that will define the CASW are trying to keep the .50 cal in service with the Bn's. But we will have to wait and see if "WE" win or not.
NDHQ had the HMG on the way out the door (this is why some people think it’s gone. They then had it pointed out to them that the HMG was in service with the units tasked in Afghanistan, and removing it removed a capability they could not replace yet. So the HMG got a stay of execution.
Your right, not much has been done WRT trg in the past few years and with that said, the only experience in Bn's these days with the .50 cal are the older guys who actually employed it and recieved "THE" MG Crse, not simply a course designed around the C6. It was perhaps a bad move, nonetheless one that we all have to live with now.
2Bravo,
I think what the American's are doing is an excellent use of both systems together, however we have to get out of the habit of comparing ourselves with their military. We all know it is done daily in the units here in Canada, but to compare our military with that of the US cannot be done in relative terms. Just because the US does it doesn't make it the correct answer, however I agree with the practicality of employing both weapon systems in order to compliment one another. If I had my way, we would use both. However...those who decide these things do so with constraints placed upon them by government and available funds.
When it comes to the advantages and disadvantages of each weapon system and used in pairs, an entire book could be written on the subject. The only thing the CASW does is it gives us the reach of the .50cal with the effects of neutralizing a larger area that is engaged. Soft skinned vehicles/personnel are neutralized. Anyone with experience knows the .50cal is absolutely useless against armour and therefore that argument is lost.
I think what will happen in the end, is because of monies available, the cost of training and limited resources will define the CASW over that of the .50 cal. However, those that will define the CASW are trying to keep the .50 cal in service with the Bn's. But we will have to wait and see if "WE" win or not.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,425
- Points
- 1,010
I beleive the .50 still has a valid use (take note our brothers to the south still use it very much and the UK Royal Marines have actually added it to their ORBATs about 5 years)..
I remember doing a dismounted deliberate company attack live fire in Shilo (when I was 2 VP) and we humped a couple of 50s plus the ammo for it. It is man portable if you have enough pack mules but man the damage they do on the objective is incredible....
The 25mm is great sytem IF LAV IIIs are around but .50 is much more versatile. You need both IMO. The 50 would make a good D and S weapon at Camps for when times get rough...
I remember doing a dismounted deliberate company attack live fire in Shilo (when I was 2 VP) and we humped a couple of 50s plus the ammo for it. It is man portable if you have enough pack mules but man the damage they do on the objective is incredible....
The 25mm is great sytem IF LAV IIIs are around but .50 is much more versatile. You need both IMO. The 50 would make a good D and S weapon at Camps for when times get rough...
