Because you dont need to get close on average

You wouldn't have to be close

Then you wouldnt have to maneuver

Dont get me wrong you are a bit slower but it isnt a huge deal considering that one person is another 4 people firepower wise

It isnt 4 man squad vs 4 man squad at that point maneuver wise. Its 4 man vs 8 man.

Only as fast as your slowest man. Yeah of course tactics will change a bit but this means the team is faster

And think of the implications for mout

Clearing rooms etc

Saw is always last but will also make it impossible to assault buildings

From the enemy perspective

I assume in Afghanistan most of what you did was in the mountains and valleys, and the little villages and huts in between

It was mostly city and town acctually

No real open fields

And I think the SAW definitely shines in a field, you can cover a lot with 200 rds

It shines in high intensity mout as well

The loss of mobility is made up for by the gain in firepower.

You still have to be careful so it isnt like being a second or 2 slower on a 100m dash is going to hurt. If anything Id say moutains hurt MGs more because that is where weight really magnifies effort required

I never had trouble in MOUT but I was also one of the faster guys in the squad.

Dont get me wrong if we are talking tears of the sun run through a forest all night mobility sure a mag mg will beat out a saw most likely. But in normal operations the shear firepower of the saw is going to overwhelm the shit out of people, while still being way more maneuverable than the same firepower squad with rifles and mag mgs.

No problems with linked ammo? Barrel changes?

If you're gonna force a LMG to be used as an AR then you shouldn't be firing more than 85rpm. Anything else and you're wasting ammo and not engaging targets properly.

You dont have to change barrels and Ive never had problems with linked ammo

You honestly hardly carry enough ammo to force a barrel change. You can get to the point you would want one but you shouldnt need one.

You would be more likely to have problems with fat mags thn you would a belt of ammo

There are much more short comings with attempting to use a rifle as an mg then there is an mg as a rifle. For instance you cant change an AR barrel as easily and because it is also closed bolt a cook off is infinitely more likely. If something is wrong with a mag you lose all that ammo, with a belt you rip the links and lose a couple rounds.

Malfunctions are less likely and way easier to clear from a mg due to the design. And again its way easier to carry SAW ammo than it is to carry the equivalent in mags. 2 boxes on your kit and one on the gun is the equivalent of roughly 21 mags in around 8 mags of space taken.

The biggest hit I can think of is that if supply lines break down the SAW is far less useful without linked ammo. But that probably means you have even bigger problems to worry about

M27 isn't intended to be used as an MG. It's intended to be used as an automatic rifle

Now say you field strip the SAW

A lot of small parts

A lot of problems with the 200 rd box, of course with the 100 rd softpack it fixed a lot of that

The 200 rd box problems arent problems. They are disposable boxes that were getting reused. If you reuse a 1 use box and it breaks on the second use that isnt a real problem, that is a retard not understanding their gear. There are also 200rd pouches. There also isnt a lot of small parts.

Taken apart you would have the stock, the pistol grip the bolt, that breaks down into 3 parts, the barrel and the heat shield if you are a pog.

The smallest part is the bolt face which is still bigger than an M4s firing pin, FP retaining pin and its bolt face. Those first 2 are lost far more often than any part on the saw.

For the record the person carrying SAW is designated as the automatic riflemen.

I know

So its direct and only competitor and weapon it is replacing is a mg. Not an automatic rifle. Its a rifle filing in for an mg

It's an LMG filling the role of an automatic rifle

No its an lmg filling in a role that is called that. There hasnt been an AR in service since the BAR IIRC

It doesn't fire a better round than the M16 family. It's less accurate. It's heavier. Your advantages are the capacity and full auto capability

And capacity and range and ability to swap barrels and that it has linked ammo eliminating mag problems

The SAW is a severely cut down lmg, it isnt as heavy as 240 or m60. It also isnt compared on a 1 to 1 basis with the M4, it is compared in squad vs squad.

Swapping barrels losing zero, and you shouldn't need to shoot enough to need a barrel change anyway

You dont lose your zero

Every barrel is different

And you shouldnt shoot enough on mission

No two barrels are completely alike

You can shoot that much on base

And while true the saw isnt a precision weapon. While it will shoot differently you will still hit the same as any SAW

Hell going from long to short doesnt even effect accuracy

22 lbs for a SAW, or 9 lbs for a M27

Saw weighs like 12 to 16 lbs...

Loaded

And even still that only matters on long distances and really only to new people using the weapon

Then you also neglected to mention the m27 only has 30 rounds to the full size SAWs 200...

That's a lot of weight for your arms

Yes the capacity is a problem and they need to address it with a larger mag

The real weight difference would only be 7 lbs considering you would have 7 mags on the kit

The weight is a non issue for someone who is physically fit

Im not even that big and it hardly slows me down. Compare that to someone who dumb bell presses 150 in each hand? Its fucking nothing.

That's the weight of a gallon of milk

And?

Attach a gallon of milk to the receiver of your rifle

You'll feel the difference

Not when I was a 240 gunner most the time

A SAW felt like an M4 to me and an M4 felt like a pistol.

This is when you are already loaded down with 30 to 40lbs of gear

You arent running around in gym clothes

The difference between running around with 49 lbs to 62lbs is negligible

Maybe for you. For us ordinary people it's noticeable

And thats assuming you arent carrying extra water, a radio, at4, grenades, ammo or anything else period

Gustav, javelin, breach tools, shotguns etc etc

So what it comes doen to is that you think military should act like soldiers are normal civilians and take things normal civilians think are hard into account despite being soldiers?

If you want to buy a m27 over a saw be my fucking guest but dont act like your reasoning applies to the military. Jesus christ.

We had to bring a fucking M2 with us once for fucks sake and here you are bitching about a 13lb difference.

More weight = not good = less efficiency

There's no amount of NCO bitching and "get the sand out of your clit" that will change physics and nature

13lbs isnt a lot for anyone trained

You are talking about losses under a percent

That m2 mission? Sure no question we would get fucked up maneuver wise.

Having a saw?

Not really at all.

Its a question of individual fitness at that point

A 300 pt score soldier with a saw will out maneuver a 250 all day.

And even if they are the same fitness level you cant just outmaneuver what amounts to 4 extra rifles unless you are a goddamned super hero and you know it.

I mean really who do you think would win a firefight, 3 rifles and a M27 or 3 rifles and a SAW? Only the weapon and the ammo it carries.

Its not track and field its war. Maneuver speed because of the weapon means little unless it was compounded by something like also not wearing helmet or armour and employing serious guerrilla tactics.

I dunno where you're getting 62 lbs from. Our saw gunners carried like 80

That would then boost up the m27s numers to 56 provided they only have 7 mags and no one had any extra weight that also weighted them down

In my experience gunners will have the least weight on average

Under constant physical stress every pound matters. I wear body armor every day, peak performance for a full minute is hell and I'm in reasonable shape. Not what I was when I was 17 but still it is hard on the body and exhausting.

Now imagine trying to out run a bullet

You cant

Firepower means more than maneuvering.

You can manuever if you are pinned down by superior firepower and getting flanked

And I'm talking about fighting load. Not just on the march, which you know is a lot more

What is worth more firepower or manuever speed?

There's a balance

Both are important

But SAWs dont break that balance