DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Guns » New Lease on Life for the Beloved M-​​14

New Lease on Life for the Beloved M-​​14

EBR.jpg

The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have demon­strated how crit­i­cally impor­tant snipers are to a fight marked by urban canyons and high-​​mountain caves. Problem is, those highly-​​trained sharp­shoot­ers are in short sup­ply, and the need for accu­rate, long-​​range fire has out­paced the ser­vices’ abil­ity to field one-​​shot killers.

So both the Army and Marine Corps began a pro­gram to seed infantry squads with so-​​called “des­ig­nated marks­men” — call them “snipers-​​lite.”

The grow­ing need to equip these new marks­men with accur­ized rifles prompted the Army to recon­sider the role of the ven­er­a­ble M-​​14 rifle for the war on ter­ror. Back in Desert Storm, armor­ers from the 10th Special Forces group took M-​​14s equipped with a match bar­rels and fit­ted a gas pis­ton on them for opti­mal per­for­mance, re-​​designating it the M-​​25. They replaced the stock with a McMillan M1A fiber­glass one, devel­oped a scope mount and added a Bausch & Lomb 10x40mm fixed-​​power optic or a Leupold Mark 4.

The revamped M-​​14 pro­vides the Army squad des­ig­nated marks­man with on-​​command direct fire sup­port for his squad, a fire team or his pla­toon. The heavier-​​caliber sharp­shoot­ers pro­vide cover when machine guns dis­place, counter-​​sniper fire in urban areas, and they help in over­tak­ing valu­able real estate.

Infrared tar­get­ing lasers such as the AN/​PEQ-​​2 and PAQ-​​4C make the DM’s job more like 24-​​hour shift work. Now that sup­pres­sors for the M-​​14-​​series of rifles are avail­able, the night-​​vision capa­bil­i­ties cou­pled with sound mit­i­ga­tion makes the Soldier’s abil­ity to own the night even more secure.

Taking the M-​​14 mod­i­fi­ca­tions a step fur­ther, Crane Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center teamed up with Sage International to cre­ate an M-​​14/​M1A pack­age that is dubbed the “Enhanced Battle Rifle.”

Using the M-​​14 bar­rel, receiver and trig­ger groups, the EBR chas­sis adds a retractable stock, a cheek piece that’s adjustable for height and a floated Picatinny quad-​​rail fore-​​end made of high-​​strength alu­minum. The EBR also adds a pis­tol grip for addi­tional con­trol and ergonomic sling points.

But the new rifle is heav­ier than the M-​​16 or M-​​4 which weighs nearly seven pounds, with each 30-​​round mag­a­zine adding another pound. The basic M-​​14, how­ever, weighs nearly 10 pounds with an addi­tion of almost two pounds for every 20 rounds of 7.62 the EBR fires.

A soldier’s wis­dom varies from one to another but many don’t care about the weight. The con­fi­dence in the effec­tive range and ter­mi­nal bal­lis­tics of the M-14’s 7.62mm round brings the argu­ment back to the Vietnam-​​era rifle.

The EBR feels a lit­tle heavy at the fore end, but this helps the rifle address crit­i­cism that it is uncon­trol­lable when fir­ing on full-​​auto. The addi­tional weight — and the fact that the stock is in line and par­al­lel with the bar­rel — helps reduce muz­zle climb.

The EBR chas­sis comes with a Picatinny rail that replaces the stripper-​​clip guide, help­ing Soldiers mount high-​​powered scopes that can extend the rifle’s range. Unique to the EBR is an extended rail just for­ward of the receiver. For the fol­low­ers of the Jeff Cooper doc­trine on scout rifles, red dot optics work well in mak­ing this rifle an effec­tive close quar­ter bat­tle scout rifle. Regardless of scope height, the shooter can obtain proper cheek weld by adjust­ing the EBR’s stock.

As the Army and Marines Corps con­tinue to develop a semi-​​auto des­ig­nated marks­man rifle, many within the tac­ti­cal com­mu­nity feel that the res­ur­rec­tion of the M-​​14 is just a stop­gap. But praise from troops using the M-14’s vari­ants and moves made by the Navy sug­gest oth­er­wise. In 2004, the Navy signed a con­tract to upgrade nearly 3,000 of their M-​​14s with the Sage EBR chassis.

What will remain, in any case, is the des­ig­nated marks­man. The small­est infantry unit includes a team leader, two rifle­men and a gun­ner. One of these rifle­men will be expected to fill the role of the des­ig­nated marks­man, using optics to dis­tin­guish com­bat­ants from non-​​combatants and min­i­miz­ing col­lat­eral risk with pre­ci­sion fire in urban areas.

The book on small unit tac­tics has evolved to defeat a new kind of enemy, and the old standby Springfield Armory M-​​14 has evolved right along with it.

– Tactical​-Life​.com

Share |

November 13th, 2008 | Guns | 418030 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/11/13/new-lease-on-life-for-the-beloved-m-14/New+Lease+on+Life+for+the+Beloved+M-142008-11-13+19%3A59%3A07Ward You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Army Combat Shirt v5.3 | Army Aviation Accidents Top $16 Billion » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Big Daddy says:
    November 13, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    A new rifle with either the 6.8mm or 6.5mm round and cor­re­spond­ing SAW will elim­i­nate the need for a lot of dif­fer­ent types of weapons. Add a .40 cal SMG and pis­tol and we have effec­tive light infantry weapons for the first time since WWII.

    Reply
  2. Joe says:
    November 13, 2008 at 4:38 pm

    I would think that AR-​​10, would be the answer in the medium term. Changing ammo, has a lot of logis­ti­cal issues that are hard to fully under­stand before hand, and opens up issues of chang­ing the army’s main rifle at the same time. AR-​​10 and AR-​​15, are very sim­i­lar for the end users, and for the armor­ers. And the parts train can’t be worse than try­ing to sup­port M-​​14.

    Reply
  3. tipover says:
    November 13, 2008 at 5:47 pm

    The rifle and car­tridge is a good com­pro­mise for the mis­sion. The rifles are in inven­tory and avail­able. The 7.62 NATO car­tridge works well to 800 yards though a thou­sand is a stretch unless you are using cus­tom ammo (and have really young eyes and a very good spot­ter work­ing with you).
    The M14/​M1A has been used in marks­man­ship pro­grams for decades and good armor­ers and man­u­fac­tures know how to tune them and still keep them reli­able in the field. The recent devel­op­ments really keep the rifle on top of the tech curve. And it has a pis­ton gas sys­tem rather than gas port like the M16 & AR-​​10. I per­son­ally pre­fer the feel of the M14 over the M16 in the prone posi­tions as the grip seems to get in the way.

    Reply
  4. Vitor says:
    November 13, 2008 at 7:32 pm

    The AR-​​10 uses the “dirty” Direct Impingement, that gets really dirty with the extra pow­der of the big­ger round. One of the funs of the M14 is the pis­ton system.

    Reply
  5. TrustButVerify says:
    November 13, 2008 at 8:37 pm

    Yes, we cer­tainly haven’t had any effec­tive light infantry weapons since WWII. What else could explain our nearly unbro­ken string of losses since 1945?
    Forgive my snide­ness, it was a guilty plea­sure. I only know enough about the 5.56 debate to be cer­tain that I don’t know enough to have an informed opinion.

    Reply
  6. usedtocould says:
    November 13, 2008 at 9:33 pm

    im just won­der­ing why we didnt keep the .45 and make a larger mag capac­ity and adopt a smg of the same cal­iber. dpms ar-​​10 is a really fine black rifle or an fnc. avail­abil­ity is good and it has no prob­lem reach­ing out to 600 yds con­sis­tently. the m-14’s will get old quick and will need replaced too. m1a’s for des­ig­nated marksmen

    Reply
  7. SMSgt Mac says:
    November 13, 2008 at 10:26 pm

    “Bring back the M-​​14!” (sorry couldn’t resist)
    This does bite on one level: I was hop­ing these weapons would be released to the CMP soon. Looks like I wait a lit­tle longer.
    I wonder…Will col­lec­tors 40 years from now give the same cr** to the future own­ers of the fiberglassed-​​stock ver­sions that I now get for my grandfather’s ‘updated’ M94?

    Reply
  8. Byron Skinner says:
    November 13, 2008 at 10:59 pm

    Good Evening Folks,
    The old M-14’s are worn out and it makes no sense to refur­bish them when the mil­i­tary can buy off the shelf M1A1’s, with a $1,500.00 list price, I would ima­gin that the mil­i­tary could even cut a dealer’s dis­count of 40% with Springfield, with a 165gr. bul­let made by Black Hills, the cur­rent sup­plier of 7.62mm sniper/​marksman ammo, the M1A1 will hold a <1MOA out of the box.
    They are cheap, ready to go, and the M1A1 is com­bat proven. What more could the mil­i­tary ask for. I know, no big defense con­trac­tor has a piece of the action and can drive the price up to $10K w/​o scope.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  9. Sam Adams says:
    November 13, 2008 at 11:43 pm

    The M1A would never pass accep­tance test­ing. Not made to Govt stan­dards.
    SMSgt Mac, CMP can’t sell them because the are full auto. Once a machine gun, always a machine gun per BATFE. Besides, Obama is going to shut down the CMP and feed every­thing to cap­tain crunch.…either that or reis­sue them and all that greek ammo to his new civil­ian secu­rity force that will be as large as the military.

    Reply
  10. Dave says:
    November 14, 2008 at 10:12 am

    OK. This makes absolutely no sense at all.
    First, they’re going to keep the M14 bar­rel and trig­ger group. Granted that armor­ers can work magic on GI firearms, but the lack of a match bar­rel will severely limit accu­racy and effec­tive range. Every M14 bar­rel has been sub­jected to auto­matic fire, and some of these EBRs will be fired auto in the future. Not the best sit­u­a­tion for top accu­racy — match ammo not with­stand­ing.
    Second, I went to the Sage Int’l web site and observed that the photo of their stock sys­tem shows it mounted with a 1.5-5X scope. This is being sold as a limited-​​range weapon.
    It seems to me that this is being mar­keted for the same mis­sion as, and in com­pe­ti­tion with, the 5.56mm DMR. If the DMR is “sniper lite”, then this is “DMR much heav­ier”. It doesn’t have the accu­racy and maybe not the optics to take advan­tage of addi­tional range.
    I’d hate to think that GIs need a woo­bie, but that’s what this sounds like. “Be of good cheer, troop­ies! There’s a 30 cal. (with a rock-‘n roll switch)watching over you.“
    OTOH, I’ll take one if it means that I can sit on a roof with a camp chair and cooler. OTOOH, if I have to hump it, I’ll take the DMR and poke somebody’s eye out.

    Reply
  11. pedestrian says:
    November 14, 2008 at 11:11 am

    Sniper-​​lite LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Give em Cheytac Intervention :-D

    Reply
  12. Daniel E. Watters says:
    November 14, 2008 at 11:22 am

    FWIW: Technically, there are no dashes in US mil­i­tary small arms des­ig­na­tions. This was hashed out mul­ti­ple times in “The American Rifleman” back in the days when most of their tech­ni­cal staff were ex-​​Army Ordnance.

    Reply
  13. tipover says:
    November 14, 2008 at 1:10 pm

    Dave, at one time select M14’s were upgraded to unit sniper rifles with National Match bar­rels and sights. The selec­tor was welded and the spring guide upgraded and some were glass bed­ded. Army level and higher had quar­ter click NM sights and tuned up lock­work. We had sev­eral per com­pany in our Army Reserve Engineer unit. Unless they were sent to the crusher they are a very good start­ing point for a squad level des­ig­nated rifle. The 7.62 NATO round car­ries enough energy to be a decent mid-​​range car­tridge. Full auto is not a con­sid­er­a­tion, that’s what a SAW or M4 is for.

    Reply
  14. Red Graham says:
    November 14, 2008 at 1:20 pm

    Here’s my 2cents. I qual­i­fied with the M14 in the Marines in ’71 and also fired the old M16s with Full-​​Auto & with­out the Forward Assist, the M16A2, and the short female-​​friendly ver­sions at OIF with the Army Infantry. The M14 was a true rifle, reli­able, accu­rate and pow­er­ful. ALL of the M16 ver­sions had jam­ming prob­lems so you had to keep them heav­ily oiled. In ‘Nam the M14 was the weapon of choice unless you could snag an AK47.

    Reply
  15. Red Graham says:
    November 14, 2008 at 1:28 pm

    As for the appro­pri­ate weapons for OIF I rec­om­mend: 12ga Pump & .38cal Revolvers for build­ing raids, Otherwise an M1 Carbine would work just fine. The old 45auto was safer and more deadly than the female-​​friendly 9mm. On another note I was shocked to learn the HETT has an auto­matic trans­mis­sion. Stalls in the latrine, cur­tains in the bar­racks, the Monica beret, what’s next abol­ish­ing don’t ask-don’t tell.

    Reply
  16. Wes says:
    November 14, 2008 at 1:54 pm

    6.5 gren­del FTW

    Reply
  17. BAXTER STATON says:
    November 14, 2008 at 2:05 pm

    i was a cpl , usmc, when i arrived at my unit in nam , i was assigned to the reac­tionary plt, mag13, my issued weapon was a old m-​​16 with the wire cut­ter flash supres­sor, i didn’t like the weapon . so a msgt who so hap­pen was froum the same home town gave me a ak47 as a spare weapon i had qual with both the m-​​14 /​later at stag­ging the m-​​16. my cousin who was also at chu­lai but in 66–67 used the m-​​14, in nam but was was wounded in a ambush the m-​​14 saved his life although wounded badly by a rpd machine­gun what was left of his plt was saved . later in 1969 i was issued the new m-​​16 with the bird­cage flash supres­sor. at that time i was at the end of my tour in nam

    Reply
  18. stephen russell says:
    November 14, 2008 at 9:03 pm

    Mass pro­duce this for the Marine Snipers & Force Recon & Delta Force & US Secret Service &
    Scotland yard.
    & for home use.
    Nice.
    2 bad U cant add a drum mag for snip­ing or make into Multicaliber by adding new bar­rel & mou­unt for: 40mm,9mm,50 cal, 70mm rounds.
    Neat.
    I want one

    Reply
  19. P.J. Busche says:
    November 15, 2008 at 10:04 am

    One rumor needs to be quelled: The M14s being used for con­ver­sion to M25s are not old worn-​​out weapons. They are pre­vi­ously unfired weapons that have been stored using cos­mo­line preser­v­a­tive, and have been kept in vapor-​​tight crates stored in con­trolled tem­per­a­tures. Essentially, these M14 rifles have been kept in vir­tual time-​​capsule sta­tus. They are excel­lent weapons. If I weren’t already med­ically retired I’d be beg­ging to be issued an M25 as my T.O. weapon.

    Reply
  20. Wes says:
    November 17, 2008 at 10:51 am

    Oh, come on Byron Skinner.
    ANY M-​​14 deriv­a­tive is “1940s” tech­nol­ogy.
    In fact a new man­u­fac­ture M-​​1A, with its cast-​​steel reciever is INFERIOR to the M-​​14s fab­ri­cated in the 1960s, with their forged steel reciev­ers. And the stamped and cast smaller parts in an M-​​1A are vastly infe­rior too to the forged M-​​14 parts.
    Plus the M-​​14 design itself is archaic and not easy for armor­ers to main­tain.
    Direct gas M-​​16 and 6.5 Grendel FTW

    Reply
  21. Emastro says:
    November 17, 2008 at 12:28 pm

    How many M-14’s are left? Weren’t a bunch of them destroyed back in the Clinton Admin?

    Reply
  22. Vitor says:
    November 17, 2008 at 1:33 pm

    DI is also a 1940 tech (or older), silly ;)
    http://​world​.guns​.ru/​r​i​f​l​e​/​r​f​l​1​7​-​e​.​htm

    Reply
  23. anon says:
    November 18, 2008 at 7:14 am

    I’ve never seen active ser­vice, but had reserves train­ing. I’ve fired M16A2, Steyr AUG & FN FAL.
    The change in bal­lis­tics power between the 5.56 and the 7.62 is phe­nom­i­nal.
    I’ve seen a range line up of new­bies con­sis­tantly (as in 8–9 out of ten tar­gets down) hit man­size tar­gets at 600 metres on a mech­a­nised range with iron sights.
    And given the ter­mi­nal bal­lis­tics of the 7.62 round, and it’s abil­ity to defeat light cover,I have no doubt that even with lim­ited opti­cal improve­ments, the M14’s will greatly increase a fireteams tac­ti­cal options and lethality.

    Reply
  24. fmJK-47 says:
    November 28, 2008 at 8:17 pm

    The M14 is a proven com­bat effec­tive weapon-​​system. Its a good medi­a­tor rifle from a lighter assault rifle in 5.56x45mm NATO and a heav­ier pre­ci­sion rifle like the M40 or the M21. With semi auto capa­bil­ity and the pis­tol grip stock it pro­duces good, accu­rate, medium range fire power. Soldiers will feel more con­fi­dent with the stop­ping power of the 7.62x51mm NATO round

    Reply
  25. chehene says:
    March 21, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    I qual­i­fied with the M14…I wish I still had it…

    Reply
  26. gunjunkie says:
    April 30, 2009 at 9:43 pm

    The EBR is an amaz­ing rifle. When I fired it (about two mags) I was sur­prised at the low recoil. It did feel a lit­tle heavy towards the muz­zle but that’s because of the col­laps­ing stock and the rail sys­tem in the front-​​middle. It did keep on tar­get bet­ter than I thought I could in the dark. just luv the 7.62. the guy who owned it sold his cus­tom­mized m-​​14 to get it.
    over­all sweet weapon, maybe a lit­tle heav­ier, but hey, you can’t have 5lbs and seri­ous fire­power. if the big­ger rd keeps haiji from get­ting off a few rounds of the same size bet­ter than the puny 5.56 its worth it.

    Reply
  27. Luke the Intrepid says:
    August 10, 2009 at 9:52 am

    I think it’s high time we got seri­ous about man portable fire­power. None of this sissy 5.56 this and 6.8 that. Tactical bat­tle­field ther­monukes are where the future is at. That’ll put some day­light into the ene­mies calculatin.

    Reply
  28. Jim says:
    September 23, 2009 at 12:22 pm

    The new life for the M-​​14 is very redeem­ing. In 1965 (44 years ago) when I was in the U.S. Army (West Germany) our unite did the boots on the ground eval­u­a­tion of the M-​​14, M-​​16 and Stoner rifles for USAEUR. The results were a toss-​​up. All were very good on the fir­ing ranges out to 400 meters, if you were good with the M-​​14 you were good with the M-​​16 and Stoner and vise-​​versa. Some liked the light weight M-​​16 and it

    Reply
  29. A. Physicist says:
    October 15, 2009 at 5:32 pm

    @“Beliver” (sic): The plural of ‘anec­dote’ is not ‘data’. Sure, 7.62 is a bet­ter round once it leaves the bar­rel. But 20mm is bet­ter still, so why not use it? There are always going to be trade-​​offs in these acqui­si­tions, and it’s just unfor­tu­nate that Afghanistan presents ranges and ele­va­tions which exceed some of the lim­its of the M4. It’s not clear that there’s a bet­ter ‘over­all’ plat­form, though.

    Reply
  30. WEPTime says:
    November 6, 2009 at 10:31 pm

    Both 5.56 and 7.62 are vital and employed together in a cor­rect weapons mix are very effec­tive (Yes, even the 20, 25, 30 MM Ect have their place) Considering the logis­tics and capa­bil­ity, avail­ity, and all the other “ili­ties”, the M-​​14 is ful­fill­ing a valu­able modern-​​day com­bat role. It meets an obiv­i­ous need, adds bal­ance and effec­tive­ness to to a com­bat unit. The Teams rec­og­nized this many years ago, other SF’s fol­lowed suit and it is even­tu­ally becom­ming SOP for many oth­ers. (SNAFU’s not with­stand­ing) As far as a newer weapons (replace­ments) are con­cerned, there are many stud­ies, pro­to­types, field tri­als and per­haps actual com­bat tri­als for sev­eral calibers/​mechanisms. Procurement will still depend upon the bal­ance between guns and but­ter ver­sus need.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Most Popular Posts
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • What 60 Minutes Got Right (Thanks to Us)
    Recent Comments
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
      Do you really believe an MV-22 can survive at 200' against...
      Cole
    • Grim Wanat Footage
      Solomon, President Obama replaced General McKiernan not long ago. President...
      Cole
    • Grim Wanat Footage
      The biggest problem is these clowns can just stroll to the Paki side...
      STemplar
    • Grim Wanat Footage
      Taliban realy kicked ass.But what did you expect if US military pays taliban...
      MAt
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
      You know that the moon is within the earth's protective...
      Hibby
    • Brazil’s Blackout Soot or Cyber?
      Like they say… these power substations...
      Vstress
    • Helicopter Protection Enters New Era
      You have good questions, but I won't answer...
      pedestrian
    • Grim Wanat Footage
      It looks like 14 different segments of video with some looping. Is that...
      WJS
    • Caught on Tape: JSF
      Part II : You wrote: "Knowing your history I'm not...
      freefallingbomb
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
      The Osprey has not crashed in about 10 years. Any other...
      Mike
    Recent Articles
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • Helicopter Protection Enters New Era
    • Going to the Dogs
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • BREAK-​​BREAK: Units to Get New Camo Revealed
    • Brazil’s Blackout Soot or Cyber?
    • Stitching a Stretchy Crotch
    • Classified Bids Submitted For UK UAV
    • Caught on Tape: JSF
    • The Osprey has Landed
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage