Navy seals weaponry
Suku
From: Suku <R2RS1%AKR...@vm1.cc.UAKRON.EDU>
I was recently watching "Navy Seals" for the first time. In the action
sequences I noticed them firing a sub machine gun that went 'brrrrrrr'
It had a very high rate of fire and was snub nosed, with a short stock
and a long magazine. Any body know what that was. The seals also had a
team member called "Guard" who was the heavy weapon backup guy and who
used a big gun almost like a bazooka. It was NOT a bazooka but had a
biggish magazine similar in shape to the M16 mag. The gun fired single
rounds and one round going thro a brick wall made a hole about 2 feet
in diameter. The "Guard" used it with a thermal sight and it looked
kinda like a 20mm cannon. Know what it is ? I'd appreciate more info
about special weapons and tactics these special forces use.
*=======================================================================*
* R Sukumar...............................(Suk...@Uakron.edu) *
* (R2...@AKRONVM.BITNET) *
* The University of Akron (R2...@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU) *
* Dept of Mechanical Engineering *
* Akron OH 44325 (216)434-6335 *
*=======================================================================*
* "Who dares wins" - Motto of The Special Air Service *
*=======================================================================*
Thanks to all those who corrected my signature
Edward Godwin
From: edw...@locutus.dell.com (Edward Godwin)
In article <1991Aug7.0...@cbnews.cb.att.com>, R2RS1%AKR...@vm1.cc.UAKRON.EDU (Suku) writes:
|>
|> The seals also had a
|> team member called "Guard" who was the heavy weapon backup guy and who
|> used a big gun almost like a bazooka. It was NOT a bazooka but had a
|> biggish magazine similar in shape to the M16 mag. The gun fired single
|> rounds and one round going thro a brick wall made a hole about 2 feet
|> in diameter. The "Guard" used it with a thermal sight and it looked
|> kinda like a 20mm cannon. Know what it is ? I'd appreciate more info
|> about special weapons and tactics these special forces use.
You are correct, it was not a bazooka. Nor was it a 20mm cannon.
It was a Barrett "Light .50". This is a .50BMG semi-auto rifle.
If I remember correctly it was a model 82A (possibly 82A1).
it feeds from a 10 round detachable magazine. The manufacturer
claims MOA accuracy at 1000 yards.
Other Specs:
Caliber .50 BMG (12 x 99mm)
Action: short recoil semi-auto
Overall length: 57 inches (144.78cm)
Barrel length: 29 inches (73.67cm)
Weight: 28.5 lbs. (12.9 kg)
Muzzle velocity: 2800 fps (with M33 ball)
Sights: iron or 12X scope (optional)
Suggested Retail Price: $6195.00 (with one 11 round magazine
and hard carrying case)
Optional Backpack case : $260.00
Ok, Ok you can see that I would not mind owning one of these, but
there ARE better long range rifles available also.
The effect on the brick wall,and the effectiveness of the thermal
imager were probably exagerated for effect. Also, I believe that
the sniper's code name was "God". Hope this helps!
Edward
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Switzerland proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that an armed society
is a polite society."
edw...@locutus.dell.com **NRA**ILA**TSRA**ARC**
________________________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer: My opinions are not presented as remotely related, or similar to,
the opinions of my employer. They can make up their own minds.......
________________________________________________________________________________
Allan Bourdius
From: Allan Bourdius <ab...@andrew.cmu.edu>
Point One:
"Navy SEALS" is in no way an accurate rendition of SEAL teams and their
operational capabilities and weaponry, as reflected by the official USN
statement on the film that went something like this: "The character
portrayed by Mr. Sheen in the movie would last about thirty seconds in
combat, not to mention the fact that his character exibited behavior on
several occasions that would have stripped him of his commission. We in
no way approve of or endorse the film."
Point Two:
The automatic weapon depicted in the film is a Heckler and Koch MP5 with
integral silencer barrel. It uses a 35 round magazine, is highly
reliable, and can fire single shots, three round bursts, or on full
auto. It is used by many of the world's special forces, including
GSG-9, the SAS, SBS, Mountain and Arctic Warfare Cadre, Delta, SEALs,
and USMC Force Recon, just to name a few.
The large caliber weapon is a 12.7mm (.50 cal) sniper's rifle that is
also used by special forces. I don't have any details on the weapon or
its capabilities. IMHO, I think the producers of the movie exaggerated
the effects of the weapon.
Allan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan Bourdius [USMC Officer Candidate/Brother, Phi Kappa Theta Fraternity]
ab...@andrew.cmu.edu or 1069 Morewood Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
"You can have it all. Just keep hope and keep on dreaming.".
The opinions in this post/mail are only those of the author, nobody else.
IronEagle
From: s91...@minyos.xx.rmit.OZ.AU (IronEagle)
edw...@locutus.dell.com (Edward Godwin) writes:
>From: edw...@locutus.dell.com (Edward Godwin)
> Ok, Ok you can see that I would not mind owning one of these, but
Really....???? I would never had guessed it :)
> The effect on the brick wall,and the effectiveness of the thermal
> imager were probably exagerated for effect. Also, I believe that
> the sniper's code name was "God". Hope this helps!
You are right there mate....his code name was 'God'....most likely cos
he was there.......but couldnt be seen by those that didnt know about
him :)
Damien
>"Switzerland proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that an armed society
> is a polite society."
>edw...@locutus.dell.com **NRA**ILA**TSRA**ARC**
Ralph Sporay
From: Ralph Sporay <spo...@brl.mil>
In article <1991Aug8.0...@cbnews.cb.att.com> ab...@andrew.cmu.ed
u (Allan Bourdius) writes:
>auto. It is used by many of the world's special forces, including
>GSG-9, the SAS, SBS, Mountain and Arctic Warfare Cadre, Delta, SEALs,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>and USMC Force Recon, just to name a few.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Contrary to popular belief special forces is not a generic term to
describe elite military units. Special Forces are units within the
U.S. Army which are composed of four active and four reserve component
groups and come under the 1st Special Operations Command. Personnel
within Special Forces wear the distinctive "Green Beret" and if the
soldier has completed the Qualification Course he will also wear a
"SPECIAL FORCES" tab. Some of the units that you have listed GSG-9,
SAS, SBS, Delta, and SEALs are considered to be Special Operations
Forces or SOF units. SOF units "are those military or naval elements
specifically organized, trained, and equipped to conduct or support
insurgency, sabotage, psychological, deception, counterterrorist,
foreign assistance, or commando-type operations. These units are
normally capable of performing rescue, reconnaissance, and intelligence
-gathering tasks". SOF units are not configured to conduct sustained
combat against regular forces and are not equipped with heavy ordnance
like artillery, tanks, fighter aircraft, or combatant ships. The U.S.
Marine Corps (and British Royal Marines) are not SOF units because they
are expected to conduct stand-up continuous battle against an opponent's
regular forces. The Marine Corps have no SOF units. American SOF units
come under one of four commands: the Joint Special Operations Command,
the army's 1st Special Operations Command, the navy's Special Warfare
Command, and the 23rd Air Force special operations unit. All four
commands listed above come under the U.S. Special Operations Command.
bxr...@csc1.anu.edu.au
From: bxr...@csc1.anu.edu.au
In article <1991Aug14.2...@cbnews.cb.att.com>, spo...@brl.mil (Ralph Sporay) writes:
>
>
> From: Ralph Sporay <spo...@brl.mil>
>
[excellent distinction made between Special Forces and Special Operations
Forces...deleted]
> The U.S.
> Marine Corps (and British Royal Marines) are not SOF units because they
> are expected to conduct stand-up continuous battle against an opponent's
> regular forces. The Marine Corps have no SOF units.
The US Marines might not however, the Royal Marines do. They have
their Commando Squadrons and the Special Boat Squadron. Both units are part
of the Royal Marines. The Royal Marines are trained to function both as
Commandos and as marine borne infantry. In addition they are _not_ intended
to conduct "stand-up continious battle against an opponent's regular forces".
They are intended to act as the first units ashore to create a bridgehead or
to act as light forces which are meant to either delay the advance of the
enemy's units or as pathfinders, leading an advance in difficult terrain (such
as in Norway). They are considered too specialised and too expensive to be
wasted in a war of attrition with an enemy (or course the exception to this is
in places like the Falklands/Malvinas campaign when they did advance well
beyond the initial bridgehead. However circumstances were against them there
and as a consequence they suffered far heavier casualties than they normally
would be expected to).
--
Brian Ross________________________________________________________________
"If we got it so wrong in the Middle East yesterday, what makes
you think we are going to get it right this time?"
_____________________________________________________Arthur Schlesinger___
fs...@acad3.alaska.edu
From: fs...@acad3.alaska.edu
In article <1991Aug14.2...@cbnews.cb.att.com>, spo...@brl.mil (Ralph Sporay) writes:
> From: Ralph Sporay <spo...@brl.mil>
>
> In article <1991Aug8.0...@cbnews.cb.att.com> ab...@andrew.cmu.ed
> u (Allan Bourdius) writes:
>
>>auto. It is used by many of the world's special forces, including
>>GSG-9, the SAS, SBS, Mountain and Arctic Warfare Cadre, Delta, SEALs,
>>and USMC Force Recon, just to name a few.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Contrary to popular belief special forces is not a generic term to
> describe elite military units. Special Forces are units within the
> U.S. Army which are composed of four active and four reserve component
He probably meant ``Special Operations Capable.'' While Special Forces is an
Army term for their SF units, most people use SF/SOC interchangeably and in
actual use the distinction is rather vague.
> Forces or SOF units. SOF units "are those military or naval elements
> specifically organized, trained, and equipped to conduct or support
> insurgency, sabotage, psychological, deception, counterterrorist,
> foreign assistance, or commando-type operations. These units are
> normally capable of performing rescue, reconnaissance, and intelligence
> -gathering tasks". SOF units are not configured to conduct sustained
> combat against regular forces and are not equipped with heavy ordnance
> like artillery, tanks, fighter aircraft, or combatant ships. The U.S.
> Marine Corps (and British Royal Marines) are not SOF units because they
> are expected to conduct stand-up continuous battle against an opponent's
> regular forces. The Marine Corps have no SOF units. American SOF units
As a member of a Marine Reconnaissance company, i can tell you that USMC
reconnaissance units (force AND battalion) are indeed trained to perform most
of the missions you have listed above. We do not specialize in insurgency like
the Army SF people do, nor do we specialize in amphibious raiding operations
like the SEALs do. However, we are trained for and occaisionally practice
raids. Marine Force Recon companies (esp. 2nd in LeJeune) are very heavy into
``Direct Action''-- anti-terrorist and hostage rescue, with several platoons
dedicated to the purpose. The training that my unit does would allow us to act
in any number of roles, and we carry the ``SOC'' lable (Special Ops Capable,
not the JSOC). We even have people in the unit who have earned their Army
Green Beret.
We are however not ``expected to conduct stand-up continuous battle against an
opponent's regular forces''-- we patrol in smaller teams than Army SF teams i
am familiar with/seen, and are very lightly armed. If we meet up with more
than a squad, we get out and fast, unless we're on a raid (and looking for
trouble).
If you close the definition of SOF or SF down to just the people in the Army
SF units, you are using an exeedingly narrow definition. There are many units
in the U.S. armed forces, ranging from Navy Special Boat Units to certain Air
Force ground elements that qualify under the definition given above. Even Army
SF units are not expected to perform equally well all of the tasks listed
above, but specialize to some degree (PsyOps people wear the SF tab, but the
ones i met in Jump school were linguists or interrogators with very little
field training).
Allan Bourdius
From: Allan Bourdius <ab...@andrew.cmu.edu>
>like artillery, tanks, fighter aircraft, or combatant ships. The U.S.
>Marine Corps (and British Royal Marines) are not SOF units because they
>are expected to conduct stand-up continuous battle against an opponent's
>regular forces. The Marine Corps have no SOF units. American SOF units
>come under one of four commands: the Joint Special Operations Command,
>the army's 1st Special Operations Command, the navy's Special Warfare
>Command, and the 23rd Air Force special operations unit. All four
>commands listed above come under the U.S. Special Operations Command.
It can be argued that the entire United States Marine Corps is a
"special operations force". For instance, the advent of the MEU(SOC) or
Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable). These units
practice anti- and counter-terrorist missions, hostage rescues,
non-combatant evacuations, etc. regularly. MEU(SOC)'s were used both in
Liberia and Somalia recently. If you look at any of the popular
information guides to US Special Operations forces they name not only
the Green Berets, the Rangers, the SEALs, but the entirety of the United
States Marine Corps.
Now, on to the Force Reconnaisance companies (of which there are four).
Force Recon Marines are jump qualified (to include HALO/HAHO jumps),
SCUBA qualified (including closed-circuit breathing gear), graduates of
USMC Amphibious Reconnaisance School, graduates of US Army Ranger
School, and they use much of the same equipment as the SEALs (swimmer
delivery vehicles, special operations submarines, etc.). Now, I don't
think it's fair to say that Force Recon isn't a "special operations
force" just because they don't fall under the joint command dedicated to
special operations.
The MEU(SOC) also allows for unity of command (one of the principles of
war) that is difficult for other special operations forces to attain.
In a MEU(SOC), the ground forces, air transport, and supporting arms are
all tasked from a common command. If SFOD-Delta wants to run an
operation, they have to rely on the Air Force to get them near the
crisis area and then they have to rely on another unit, Task Force 160,
to actually get them to where they need to go. This sort of arrangement
has a greater chance of another Desert One debacle than of success in my
opinion. Granted, a MEU(SOC) is dependant on the Navy for transport in
amphibious ships. However, once an operation begins, the MEU(SOC) is
dependant on nothing other than itself. The USMC is unique in that it
is the only armed service in the entire world that not only has ground
forces, but its own tactical air forces to back them up.
Also, you can't say that the Royal Marines have no special operations
forces. The Special Boat Service (SBS), which you named *as* a spec op
force, is entirely comprised of Royal Marines (they also do a lot of
training with Force Recon and vice-versa). The Mountain and Artic
Warfare Cadre (MAW), also of the Royal Marines, is perhaps the most
elite special unit in the world. It only has about fifty to one-hundred
members. Both SBS and MAW performed with distinction during the
Falklands conflict.
I'm not trying to degrade the other special operations units in any way.
The spec ops units and soldiers, sailors, and airmen of the USA, USN,
and USAF are outstanding. But please make sure to give credit where
credit is due.
Who bailed out the pinned-down forces of the US Army's Rangers and
SFOD-Delta, and Navy SEALs at the Governor's residence on Grenada by
landing on the east shore of the island and advancing all the way across
it? They were Marines of the 22nd Marine Amphibious Unit (these units
became MEU's and then MEU(SOC)'s)
Where were the US Army's "Special Operations Forces" when Liberia was
torn apart by civil war and there were Americans and other foreign
nationals who needed to be evacuated? I don't know, but the 24th
MEU(SOC), USMC was there.
Were were the Navy's heralded SEALs when the embassy in Mogadishu needed
to be evacuated? I don't know that either, but the 22nd MEU(SOC), USMC
was there.
Who were the first Americans who helped stop the Iraqis at Al Khafji and
who assisted the Saudis and Qataris in their counterattack by calling in
air and artillery from behind Iraqi lines? They weren't from
SFOD-Delta; they weren't from SEAL team 6. They were Marines of the 2nd
Force Reconnaisance Company.
Who were the first US troops to reoccupy the American Embassy in Kuwait
City, early in the second day of the ground phase of Desert Storm? By
now you can probably guess.
They were Force Recon Marines. Need I say more?
Allan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan Bourdius [USMC Officer Candidate/Brother, Phi Kappa Theta Fraternity]
ab...@andrew.cmu.edu or 1069 Morewood Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
"The last thing I want in my mouth is one of her nuts." --from "The Swap"
Ralph Sporay
From: Ralph Sporay <spo...@brl.mil>
In article <1991Aug1...@cbnews.cb.att.com>, bxr...@csc1.anu.edu.au
(Brain Ross) writes:
>> From: Ralph Sporay <spo...@brl.mil>
>> Marine Corps (and British Royal Marines) are not SOF units because they
>> are expected to conduct stand-up continuous battle against an opponent's
>> regular forces. The Marine Corps have no SOF units.
> The US Marines might not however, the Royal Marines do. They have
>their Commando Squadrons and the Special Boat Squadron. Both units are part
>of the Royal Marines. The Royal Marines are trained to function both as
>Commandos and as marine borne infantry. In addition they are _not_ intended
Yes, the British Royal Marines are organized around the "commando" model,
and one would expect them to be a special operation force or SOF unit.
But the British Royal Marines have an artillery regiment permanently
attached and are expected to conduct stand-up, continuous battle against
an opponent's regular forces. As they have demonstrated remarkably "in
places like the Falklands" and numerous NATO exercises. SOF units are not
configured to conduct sustained combat against regular forces and are not
equipped with heavy ordnance like artillery, tanks, fighter aircraft, or
combatant ships. ^^^^^^^^^
The Special Boat Squadron (SBS) of the British Royal Marines are with out
question a SOF unit, I wasn't disputing that.
Robert A. Bruce
From: rab%ginger.Be...@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Robert A. Bruce)
In article <1991Aug18.2...@cbnews.cb.att.com> ab...@andrew.cmu.edu (Allan Bourdius) writes:
>It can be argued that the entire United States Marine Corps is a
>"special operations force". For instance, the advent of the MEU(SOC) or
>Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable). These units
>practice anti- and counter-terrorist missions, hostage rescues,
>non-combatant evacuations, etc. regularly. MEU(SOC)'s were used both in
>Liberia and Somalia recently. If you look at any of the popular
>information guides to US Special Operations forces they name not only
>the Green Berets, the Rangers, the SEALs, but the entirety of the United
>States Marine Corps.
Marines often refer (tongue in cheek) to MEU(SOC)s as MEU(SOCROI)s, which
means Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable, Regular
Operations Incapable). But seriously, there is a big debate in the Marine
Corps about the proper role for special operations training. Many Marines
feel that it wastes time and resources better spent training for more
realistic missions. For instance the recent non-combatant evacuation
operations in Liberia and Somolia were more or less conventional operations
that did not involve any SOC skills. Long before there was any such thing
as a MEU(SOC) Marines were successful at evacuating civilians from hostile
areas.
General Gray, who was only recently replaced as Marine commandant, is
a big proponent of special operations. Now that he has retired, I expect
it to be emphasized much less.
Doug Mohney
From: sys...@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
>From: Allan Bourdius <ab...@andrew.cmu.edu>
>Who were the first Americans who helped stop the Iraqis at Al Khafji and
>who assisted the Saudis and Qataris in their counterattack by calling in
>air and artillery from behind Iraqi lines? They weren't from
>SFOD-Delta; they weren't from SEAL team 6. They were Marines of the 2nd
>Force Reconnaisance Company.
With all due respect, the handful of Marines were STUCK and ended up calling
artillery because the searching Iraqis would get too close to their positions.
A minor detail....
"Honey, you know I would NEVER wear black silk underwear"
-- > SYS...@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU < --