Why are they fitted with 3-round burst only?
What's the advantage over full auto?
Why does it seem to get so much criticism on this board?
How can it be fixed?
>>29446191
the M16A2 rifle and carbine, and M4 carbine used a 3 round burst under the idea that controlled burst fire was more effective than panicked automatic fire. additionally the 3 round burst was selected because very often two of the rounds would hit the target and one round will likely cause a wound. soldiers in the field during night ambushes would become blinded easy by lots of automatic gunfire, and likewise the 20 round magazine would very quick run dry.
other burst mechanisms exist, but the reasons for their use are largely the same: controlling the rate of fire so that there are more rounds on target than wasted as noise - the purpose of a rifleman is accurate point shooting, not suppressing fire (that's the automatic rifleman's job).
most submachineguns and carbines retained full auto as they were expected to be used in close quarters at short ranges and the more ammunition you fire the more likely you are to hit at close ranges.
>>29446191
>Why are they fitted with 3-round burst only?
The idea is that it prevents soldiers from wasting ammo.
>What's the advantage over full auto?
It prevents soldiers from wasting ammo.
>Why does it seem to get so much criticism on this board?
Because most countries allow their soldiers full auto and being limited to burst fire makes the M16/M4 seem inferior to other rifles like the G-36 that can go full-auto. Also, the burst fire mechanism itself is poorly implemented and it actually reduces the reliability of the weapon system.
>How can it be fixed?
Swap out the lowers for ones that allow full-auto.
We didn't like it when they were first introduced either. When I was in, we had full auto A1s. Everything was hunky-dory. Then they gave us this 3 round burst crap. It is a disadvantage in a counter ambush. Depending on where the cam last set, you may only be able to fire one round when you pull the trigger instead of three rounds. It's a shitty configuration.
>>29446222
people need to learn to allow the mechanism to fully fire all rounds and not "burst" the "burst". when i swapped from an A2 to a M4A1 that was a slight difference in use that some people never learned. less common with volunteers and training than during the draft years.
>>29446191
3 round burst is for suppressing, eggheads in the military think its more efficient than full auto, and the shot that kills you is from a marksman or more often, airstrike, arty or armor. Its why some generals back in the day thought infantry might be obsolete, but it turns out you still need them to occupy and to do other shit. Sorry for the armchair general in advance, just what I read, could be wrong.
>>29446207
>the purpose of a rifleman is accurate point shooting, not suppressing fire (that's the automatic rifleman's job).
according to US infantry doctrine that is...
>>29446442
No. The purpose of the rifleman is to maneuver and close with the enemy.
>>29446615
The purpose of the infantryman is to kill and destroy.
>Lvl. 1 SQT
>>29446207
I have a relevant gif
>>29446615
>>29446703
>American infantrymen actually believe they still do this
Kek. Airplanes and arty do the killing, you just hold people in place. That's a fact, not an opinion
>>29447344
>has never been in a firefight.
>>29447344
What was it like the last time you traded fire with ground forces?
>>29447344
>That's a fact, not an opinion
that you are retarded and never been in the military.
>>29447344
>That's a fact, not an opinion
You're a retard. Pic related is data from Vietnam. And the recent trend is that the share of bullets will only increase because of increasing urbanization and more asymmetric conflicts. For IDF soldiers bullets are already the #1 cause of death.
>>29447372
>>29447393
Never, smart enough to not take a role that does that. The fact is that small arms cause ~5% of enemy combatant casualties, whereas artillery and airpower cause 59%. Engagements with small arms are far more likely to be indecisive, and result in far greater casualties. Doctrine (At least in Afghanistan) was very heavily reliant on CAS for this reason.
What's the point of burst?
You got semi auto if you need to conserve ammo. And the argument that it's better suited for night warfare is stupid as they can just limit themselves to only semi for such
>>29446191
did you not get the memo when they did this 25 years ago?
>>29446191
>what's the point of burst
To stop people from blowing all of their ammo the minute an ambush happens.
>why does it get criticism?
It decreases the reliability of the weapon and at times full giggle is necessary. People get used to it after a while and stop cutting bursts short. That was a problem on the earlier burst weapons, especially the m4.
>how to fix it?
No conceivable way. Most people don't even put it on burst and use single. The Mg is supposed to have the giggle monopoly.
As a middle man between single shots and full giggle, it's eh.
>>29446216
you don't even have to swap the lowers, all you need to replace is the trigger and sear
>>29447464
But anon this clearly shows that over half of all casualties are the result of fragments. Like, from explosions.
Not that a quarter of all kills isn't significant.
>>29448583
Of all wounds*
I think 2 round burst would be best
>What's the advantage over full auto?
It's supposed to cut down on ammo expenditure. However, considering the role of a rifleman in the US armed forces, it's pretty much a useless measure.
>Why does it seem to get so much criticism on this board?
Riflemen don't really magdump with their full-retard M4s anyways, and semi-auto actually tends to be the go-to firing mode, with the dedicated MGs taking care of full HUEHUEGIGGLETIME. In the event that more volume of fire is needed out of the M-16/M4...well, you guessed it, FA is by far superior. In short, burst doesn't really do anything but detract. Also the burst FCG is complete ass.
There's a reason you barely ever see burst being used in those Funker vids.
>>29448583
It's a big difference to the claim that "you just hold people in place". Even without the recent trend towards an even greater share for bullets.
