I’ve shot the M1, M14, M16 & M4 in high power rifle competition. None of them had the fore grip; and when the stock is positioned & HELD TIGHTLY in the shoulder pocket, leaves no bruise. I’ll leave it to the grunts who use the weapon in auto-mode to speak to the effectiveness of that device.
I’d be surprised if ANY SWO has gone through combat rifle training, but again I’ll defer to the active duty Navy officers that post on this forum. I really don’t expect any CO of a vessel to be as competent with a rifle as a Marine!!
Historical point: the admirals erred in the USS Iowa turret explosion not in the mishap but the investigation afterwards. It was a textbook case of how not to conduct an accident investigation, and they stubbornly refused to change their minds after that fact was brought to their attention.
If it happened today it would be used as proof of the incompetence of naval leadership.
Which illustrates my opinion: USN leadership now is likely no less competent or no more competent than it has ever been. In the last century there have been naval scandals in nearly every decade, so I grade on a curve.
There never has been a Golden Age of Perfect Admirals. USN leadership is more competent in times of war, but even then admirals and COs get sacked left and right.
Nice, that must have been quite the experience! I always enjoy working with people who compete or are otherwise knowledgeable on the subject, it’s not quite a hobby for me but it’s always great conversation and I have a lot of respect for that.
I just don’t see an advantage to having a foregrip that far back at all. I have one with a Forced Reset Trigger and a Foregrip, which is similar to full auto without being full auto…and it does help to stay on target but the placement there so far back seems equally as pointless as the backwards mounted optic for muzzle control even for a short barrel like that one.
As far as recoil, I just mean If that were something larger, 30 caliber or greater and he had the corner of the stock shouldered like that and not the butt he would likely be hurting the next day. More or less, depending on the platform of course.
Agreed, but not everyone is a marksman either. Back in the day, when m16’s were being fielded in Vietnam, at RTC San Diego I was “allowed” to shoot the M1 & 1911. When I was aboard ship, only a few of the crew that stood Petty Officer of the Watch in port carried the .45-with the magazine out of the weapon. The ASROC watch carried a loaded .45. No-one carried the M1. We didn’t even have M14’s aboard the vessel. . .
My point being that VERY FEW of sailors have “intimate knowledge” and are “experts” in small arms. That’s all.
As a retired SWO Commander, I would opine that this CO was relieved due to his actions and/or comments after the big brouhaha that arose from the posted photo. JMHO
YES HE DOES. Sure enough. . . He’d be one of the few previously mentioned!!
If it’s the right guy. … The picture doesn’t have his “command-at-sea” pin, though.
So they say he was fired over a steering problem that he reported several times, said his crew couldn’t fix it on board and had his shore side technical support denied permission to sail with him to fix when his ship was ordered to sea with the problem unresolved. Sounds like he was set up to fail to me. Maybe he could have kept his job if went over his bosses head to get the problem fixed before leaving port like he asked? Wait a minute, that never works with the USN either.
Does sound like he reported the problem several times and got no response. You Navy personnel, is it common to make that many repair requests for a critical system and get no real help?
I think big Navy fucked over the ship, but I think the reason he was fired was not because they had a loss of steering but because they had an HPU gushing hyd fluid for 10 minutes while alongside the oiler before they decided to do a breakaway. Ship leadership was aware JSM had dodgy steering so my impression is that the CSG commander felt the CO should have initiated the breakaway immediately upon having the casualty which may have allowed for a “controlled” breakaway where everything could have been de-tentioned properly to avoid damaging any other equipment on JSM or the oiler.
Every time you do a RAS the immediate actions for a propulsion casualty while alongside are ALWAYS briefed. You immediately notify the oiler and commence an emergency breakaway. The fact that they waited until the rudder was stuck is a huge fuckup especially when they knew ahead of time that this was a vulnerability. It should have been thoroughly emphasized and there should have been no hesitation when the casualty was called away. Not saying big navy got this right because obviously they shouldn’t have sent them out to sea with this known issue but loss of confidence is understandable.
Yeah. “loss of confidence” seems justified. . . based on this new info.
and
Once again the MSM fails again… sigh
