Feral Jundi

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

History: Unconventional Warfare Lessons From the Selous Scouts, by Leroy Thompson

Filed under: Africa,History,Tactical Thought Process — Tags: , , — Matt @ 11:41 AM

   This was an interesting little article about the Selous Scouts.  These guys were very effective and certainly came up with some important lessons in unconventional warfare.  I am sure the writers of todays current COIN operations took some note of the efforts of these guys.  At the end of the article, I also posted a link to the Selous Scout manual and site that I found this article at.  –Head Jundi

——————————————————————  

Selous Scout 

UNCONVENTIONAL WARFARE LESSONS FROM THE SELOUS SCOUTS

By Leroy Thompson

    To understand the Selous Scouts’ methods, one must first understand the Selous Scouts’ mission. The Scouts evolved to varying extents from the Tracker Combat Unit of the Rhodesian Army, the CIO (Central Intelligence Organization), and the Special Branch of the BSAP (British South Africa Police). When Major Ron Reid Daly was given the mission of forming the Scouts, Rhodesia’s borders were becoming less and less secure, as ZANLA and ZIPRA terrorists infiltrated in greater and greater numbers. Though the cover mission for the Selous Scouts remained the tracking of terrorists, in reality the unit was a pseudo-terrorist unit, using turned terrorists and Black soldiers from the Rhodesian African Rifles, as well as White soldiers in black face make-up from the Rhodesian SAS, Rhodesian Light Infantry and other units. These pseudo groups would infiltrate terrorist areas of operation, passing themselves off as terrorists and attempting to subvert the terrorist infrastructure.

    In many ways, the Selous Scouts learned from US counter- insurgency successes in Vietnam, drawing on the examples of the Phoenix Program, the Kit Carson Scouts and the Road Runner Teams. Even more did they resemble the successful pseudo teams which had been active earlier in Kenya. Constantly adding turned terrorists, the Scouts kept abreast of current terrorist terminology, identification procedures, and operations; often they were better informed about terrorist procedures than the terrorists themselves.

    As the Selous Scouts evolved, they undertook other missions such as cross-border raids, assassinations, snatches, raids on terrorist HQs in Botswana or elsewhere, long-range reconnaissance, and various other types of special operations. One early raid typical of this kind of Scouts’ mission was the snatch of a key ZIPRA official from Francistown, Botswana, in March 1974. These direct action operations resembled in many ways the MAC V/SOG operations in Vietnam. The number of Vietnam veterans in the Rhodesian security forces, in fact, had a substantial influence on the conduct of the war and on slang that was used. Terrorists, for example, were often called ‘gooks’.

    The Scouts lured terrorists into ambushes, from which few terrorists normally walked away; captured terrorists and then turned them to serve in one of the Scout pseudo groups; or turned them over to the BSAP for interrogation. The Scouts were very successful in gathering intelligence, at least in part from captured diaries and letters. This is an important element of counter­insurgency operations. Due to the fragmented nature of their operations, guerrillas rarely have ready access to communications equipment. As a result, they may rely on written communication, leaving much open to capture. Few guerrillas are sophisticated enough to use ciphers, either, so often captured communications are ‘in the clear’. Many politically inspired guerrillas are actually encouraged to keep diaries documenting their political development, and these also frequently include valuable intelligence information. Third World insurgents are generally much less security conscious than organized military forces about documents; hence, captured written material can be an excellent intelligence source, especially for order of battle data.

(more…)

Monday, July 14, 2008

Weapons Stuff: The 6.8 SPC versus the 6.5 Grendel

Filed under: Weapons Stuff — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 11:16 AM

   In this post, I wanted to present two types of rounds being thrown around out there as possible replacements for the 5.56 mm round currently in use by today’s warfighters.  Wikipedia is the source for both of these reviews, and is certainly a good foundation for us to start from.  And like Col. John Boyd would ask, is this the bullet that we want, and is this the rifle that we want to shoot it with?

     Are we on the right track, by trying to fit a new round into an old rifle system like the M-4?  Should we be designing a weapon around the bullet, or the bullet around the weapon?  I like the ergonomics of the M-4, but is this a good idea to limit ourselves on the bullet, just because we want to save money on weapon design?  Or perhaps we should just start from scratch, and go with the best rifle that is designed around the best bullet for the job.  My personal opinion is to throw out doctrine and build that ‘snowmobile’, to get that round and rifle that we want.

    And if you talk with others out there about what guys want, they want a hard hitting and accurate round.  They want something that is going to put that bad guy down with one shot or rip a limb off when it hits them.  They want something that will be hard hitting beyond the 300 meter point, as well as accurate at all the pertinent ranges.  They also want a rifle that is ergonomic, lightweight, requires little maintenance, is easy to clean and fix, is tough, and will last awhile.  They want a rifle that can operate in all conditions and will work when they need it most.  A tall order, but not impossible to come up with.

    But if I had to choose between the rounds being evaluated right now, my personal opinion is that I like the 6.5 Grendel.  I want an accurate round that can hit hard at all ranges, and not just up to the 300 meter ranges.  Where as both rounds are sufficient, the 6.5 sounds like a better designed bullet for this.

    The other thing to remember is that both rounds were ham-stringed by the fact that they both had to be the same length as the 5.56mm.  The reason is cost.  Both of these rounds could be fed into an M-4 type platform with moderate modification to the original weapon.  But like I said, what would Boyd say?  Are we putting a ‘pretty bow’ on a shitty round, or are you getting the bullet that we want?  And are we getting the rifle that we want, that can shoot this round?  Things to ponder, as the war continues.  –Head Jundi

 

6.8 mm SPC

 

6.8 mm Remington SPC (Left) as compared to the 5.56x45mm NATO cartridge (Right)

 

6.8 mm Remington SPC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Type Rifle

Place of origin Flag of the United States United States

Production history

Designer Remington, SOCOM

Designed 2002-2004

Specifications

Parent case .30 Remington

Case type Rimless, bottlenecked

Bullet diameter 0.277 in (7.0 mm)

Neck diameter 0.298 in (7.6 mm)

Shoulder diameter 0.402 in (10.2 mm)

Base diameter 0.421 in (10.7 mm)

Rim diameter 0.422 in (10.7 mm)

Rim thickness 0.049 in (1.2 mm)

Case length 1.676 in (42.6 mm)

Overall length 2.315 in (58.8 mm)

Ballistic performance

Bullet weight/type Velocity Energy

115 gr (7.5 g) (7.45g) 2,625 ft/s (800 m/s) 1,759 ft·lbf (2,385 J)

Test barrel length: 24 in (609.6 mm)

(more…)

Weapons: Politicians to Test M4 Alternatives

Filed under: Weapons — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 10:34 AM

   Ok, I know it is all about politics, if you want to change a weapons system like this.  But something about this just pisses me off.  Why is the future of our armed force’s fighting rifle, in the hands of some aides to some politicians in DC?  I understand the politics of the matter, but the reality of it just chaps my hide. Anyway….

     Now for my choice of weapons.  The FN FAL and it’s variants are a fine weapon system(DSA made).  It is 7.62 mm, tough, accurate, easy to maintain, and works when you need it the most.  I also like anything from LWRC or HK, if we are going with M-4 design, just as long as it is 7.62 mm or something heavy.  It just doesn’t make sense to have two different types of rifle rounds floating around out there, like we have now (5.56 mm and 7.62 mm).  If it was all 7.62 mm, then you have a round that can be used by everyone in that unit and during that fight.  

   And as far as the weight factor, I think guys would gladly carry that weight if they knew they were carrying something that was hard hitting and deadly.  Oh, and they just might concentrate more on accuracy because they are carrying less ammunition. Or they might actually require less ammunition, because they put the enemy down with less shots.  Do we want a spray and pray soldier, or do we want a precision focused soldier that can actually take down the enemy from a distance with one or two shots?   

    If we were to go with what we have, as far as a two rifle round system(7.62 mm for machine guns and 5.56 mm for rifle), then I would change out the 5.56 mm with the 6.5 Grendel.  The 6.8 SPC is a good enough round, but the 6.5 Grendel is just a more accurate round.  Please see the comparison post above between the two, and make your own determinations. –Head Jundi  

—————————————————————— 

The DSA SA 58 is just an example of what the market could produce for a replacement

Hill Aides to Test M4 Alternatives

July 11, 2008

Military.com

by Christian Lowe

In a move that could ruffle the feathers of an Army command that views the Colt Defense-built M4 as the best carbine in the world, a select group of top senate staffers is gathering today to look at what could be the future of the military’s standard assault rifle.

About 30 legislative aides have signed up to attend a July 11 demonstration at Marine Corps Base Quantico, just outside Washington, D.C., that will feature weapons from various manufacturers vying to end the reign of the M16 and M4 as the U.S. military’s most fielded personal weapon.

The range day is intended to help familiarize key lawmakers with possible alternatives to the M16 and M4 once the exclusive contract with Colt Defense of West Hartford, Conn., ends in the summer of 2009, a senior senate aide told Military.com.

“When you re-compete the M4 it shouldn’t just be for the same thing we’ve been building for the last 20 to 30 years,” said the senior senate staffer who requested anonymity because the issue is so sensitive with the Army.

Over the past year the Army has taken fire from M4 critics who say there are better options available to troops, weapons that require less intensive maintenance and fire more lethal rounds. While the Army — which is responsible for procuring small arms for all the services — continues to stand by the M4 and M16, a small group of tenacious senators, including Oklahoma Republican James Coburn, have pressed the issue, forcing the service to subject the M4 to rigorous environmental tests and pushing for side-by-side competitions with several M4 alternatives.

“There’s no urgent need to improve the M4, it’s clearly working better than the M16,” the senior senate aide said. “Our concern is that, urgent or not, we really ought to be improving it on par with technological improvements [and] not be wedded to an older weapon just because that’s the way we’ve always been doing it.” 

While the aide declined to list all the companies participating in the demo, congressional and industry sources say the shoot will feature the standard 5.56mm M4 carbine, the FNH USA-build Mk-17 — which fires a 7.62mm round — and a modified “M4-style” rifle that fires a new 6.8mm special purpose cartridge round, among others.

The 6.8mm SPC round was born of a 6-month program launched by the interagency Technical Support Working Group which looked into how an M4 or M16 could be easily modified to fire a round that had better ballistic characteristics than the current arsenal when fired from a short barrel.

According to the TSWG, the so-called “modified upper receiver group” that accommodates the 6.8mm round “can be installed on [government-issued] M4 carbine lower receivers by operators in the field quickly and without tools for an immediate, considerable increase in projectile weight, surface area, and on-target terminal performance.”

“The 6.8mm MURG offers improved combat capability and user survivability over comparable 5.56mm platforms,” a TSWG statement said.

A consistent criticism of the M4 has been the 5.56 round’s perceived lack of stopping power. A 2006 Center for Naval Analyses report conducted for the Army showed 30 percent of Soldiers surveyed wanted a rifle with a more deadly round.

“Across weapons, Soldiers have requested weapons and ammunition with more stopping power/lethality,” the report said.

And one special operations Soldier who spoke to Military.com couldn’t agree more.

“I know that when I’m shooting at someone I want to be confident that when I hit him, he’s going to go down,” the Special Forces operator said during a recent interview. “That’s why I like the AK and its 7.62 round. It’ll drop whatever you’re aiming at.”

The Army brushes off such criticism, saying lethality is closely tied to marksmanship. If you hit a target in the right place, you’ll stop him, Army leaders argue.

The point of the July 11 test shoot is to allow manufacturers to showcase their M4 alternatives before an audience that’s becoming more influential on small arms procurement decisions. The senate group tried to hold a similar demo last year, but the Army abruptly pulled out when news reports of the event leaked out, senate sources said.

Participants will have the opportunity to observe the effects of different caliber rounds in ballistic jelly, be shown how to fire each weapon and, of course, there will be some hands-on time as well.

Colorado Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar is heavily involved in the M4 alternative push and wants a competitive process that rewards the kind of innovation that leads to a host of choices when the M4 is re-bid in June of next year.

“Senator Salazar’s concern is that the process itself could stifle industry innovation, it can result in lower weapons reliability and it can increase costs,” said Salazar spokesman, Matt Lee-Ashley.

“He’s going to work through the Army and the Armed Services Committee to make sure that when [the M4] is re-competed next June the process is open, that it’s based on performance-based requirements and that it encourages industry innovation.”

Article Link

Saturday, July 12, 2008

Technology: The Green Machine Brick Maker by TerraBuilt

Filed under: Technology — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 4:19 PM

I read about this in this month’s edition of Serviam.  This is an interesting idea and has a ton of potential applications.  In places like Iraq and Afghanistan, building material for the locals is always an issue, and something like this could go a long way in winning some hearts and minds.

That, and the use of this machine at a remote site would help reduce the need for sandbags when building fighting positions and posts.  Something like this, could become the Hesco of building materials in the near future.  Personally, I have not used this machine, so I really do not have an opinion on it.  I have had to fill sandbags before, and nothing sucks like having to rebuild a fighting position after a couple of months, do to deteriorating bags.  We’ll see if this catches on and I would be curious about the feedback on this thing.  –Matt

The Green Machine
The construction industry is faced with depleting resources, heightened environmental concerns, high costs, and deteriorating product quality. The United Nations estimates that worldwide housing shortfall exceeds one billion units and is growing.
The GreenMachine and the associated TerraBuilt Construction System enable construction of high quality, low cost structures made of long lasting materials that save life cycle energy costs, are durable, fire and disaster resistant as well as environmentally sustainable. The cornerstone of the Terrabuilt Construction System is the one-ton hydraulic GreenMachine.

(more…)

Friday, July 11, 2008

News: Somalia and Nigeria Are Biggest Piracy Hotspots–Lloyds

Filed under: News,Nigeria,Somalia — Tags: , , , , , — Matt @ 12:16 PM

 

     Nigeria is the one to watch for security stuff, just because of the oil contracts there.  Just today, oil made a big push because of problems in Nigeria.  – Head Jundi

————————————————————————————————— 

 

Somalia and Nigeria are biggest piracy hotspots

By Marcus Hand in Singapore – Friday 11 July 2008

The IMB said the increasing use of automatic weapons remains unacceptable.

MORE than one-third of the piracy incidents reported worldwide in the first six months of this year took place in Somalia and Nigeria.

Out of the 114 piracy attacks reported to the International Maritime Bureau’s Piracy Reporting Centre in the first half of 2008, 24 were off the coast of Somalia and 18 offshore Nigeria.

The failed state of Somalia remained the global black spot with a spate of violent hijackings pushing out well into the main sea lane in the Gulf of Aden. Of the 24 actual and attempted Somalia attacks, 19 were in the Gulf of Aden.

“In the Gulf of Aden at least eight vessels reported being fired upon by pirates armed with rocket propelled grenade launchers and automatic weapons,” the IMB said.

In Nigeria there were 18 attacks largely centred on the port of Lagos.

“Lagos is becoming an increasingly dangerous port, with the number of reported attacks in the area growing from 8 in the first six months of 2007 to 12 for the corresponding period in 2008,” it said.

According to the IMB, in the first six months of 2008, 71 vessels were boarded, 12 vessels were hijacked and 11 vessels were fired upon. A total of 190 crew members were taken hostage, six kidnapped, seven killed and another seven are missing and presumed dead.

“The frequency and level of violence directed at seafarers is cause for alarm. The abduction of crew and the increasing use of automatic weapons remains unacceptable,” said Potengal Mukundan, director of the IMB.

Article from Lloyd’s List

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress