At 11:55, you can hear the movie camera grinding away in the background. I guess they had noisy cameras in this era. I've heard the camera before in other episodes. It doesn't detract... COMBAT always has good stories if not technical accuracy.
turned on TV today and there was Vic Morrows in a movie with Walter Matthau. And Vic was a little league baseball coach for kids! And true to form he was more than a little tense! Kids were scared to death!! too funny!
I can imagine how that german felt when his rifle jammed. The early model M-16s that we carried were plastic/alloy jam-o-matics. I much preferred the M-14, despite its greater weight and recoil.
+Jim Nesta The M16's jammed because they were not cleaned properly. When the weapon fouled out, jammed and cost lives, some brainiac decided it might be a good idea to issue cleaning kits. Also, the original M16 was designed using stick powder in the cartridge. The military uses dirty ball powder. That didn't help matters any. They eventually worked many of the bugs out of the M16, but it took casualties before that happened, unfortunately.
+PatriotNC1 When I was in the Army, 1969-70, we used both the early model XM-16E1 and M-16 A1 and they both jammed despite being cleaned regularly and properly. This was using the authorized cleaner/lubricant LSA, that we carried in little plastic squeeze bottles. Keeping them clean didn't seem to make much difference in reducing the tendency to jam. The forward bolt assist was of no value in clearing a jam, as we had to break the rifles down and do a field strip and cleaning to restore them to service. The brass did blame us for the jams, saying that we weren't keeping them clean. We didn't know until much later about the propellant change that Gene Stoner, the rifle's designer from Armalite Corp., apparently wasn't consulted on before the change was made.
Jim- I had the M-16A1 as well. Oh yeah, the illustrious LSA....when mixed with burnt ball powder, you had a nice mess inside the weapon, along with whatever the elements threw in there, dirt, sand, etc. The M-16 has very tight tolerances, making it accurate, but not good at preventing jams. Unlike the AK, which had more sloppy tolerances, but you could mud the weapon up and it would fire. I always considered the M16 more of an urban weapon, than a jungle or desert weapon. It seems to do better there. In my opinion, they should have stuck with the M-14 in 'Nam, because that Garand action could handle the muck so much better. Yeah, it was heavier, but I'd prefer the weight of rifle and ammo, over having to clear a jammed weapon in the middle of a fight. The propellant had much to do with the problem, no doubt, as the military uses ball ammunition, and ball powder is dirty stuff. I think Eugene Stoner originally chambered the first rifle in .222, and used stick powder, not ball powder. Big difference. Then the .223/5.56mm came into play, with nasty ball powder.
Apparently the powder change was made to increase the fire from 750 rounds a minute to 900 rounds a minute. The increased pressure caused the extraction claw to shear through the lip of the cartridge, jamming it in the firing chamber. I think it was Dupont and Olin Mathieson that were the two different powders.
I noticed however, the losing nations use AK's, the winning NATION uses the M16. Think we would have changed it if there were something better, right? I mean, we didn't lack the $$$ since the M16 was adopted, we certainly could have come up with something that has more knock down power etc. But we didn't, why? Do we like to lose wars? In my humble opinion, not having served, we WON Vietnam. 60k dead verses over 1 million says we won. I know, we didn't take the objective, but I'm quite sure Communism was still affected by that many deaths. What is Vietnam now? A poor nation of farmers. No military might. The Soviets? Their AK47? They ran like school girls in Afghanistan, over 15k dead, and the USA fought LONGER battles using the M16 among others, and we lost how many? 6800 approximately. Now one lost Vet is too much for me, however, you cannot deny, the M16 is the weapon of choice for the most powerful nation the earth has ever known. By far. I'll stick with accuracy, I'll stay far away, you'll have to get closer to hit something. Advantage, me.
Jonah 1:4 4 The Lord hurled a great wind on the sea and there was a great storm on the sea so that the ship was about to break up Ironic, isn't it? In the Book of Revelation, the sea is a metaphor for mankind.
This would have been a perfect episode for the show "Night Gallery". I always wondered when the NCO or CO called for a certain soldier to take the point doesn't that soldier need to know where he's going?
Good show but highly unrealistic it made the Germans horrible shots and our guys just fire from hip and hit everything.My uncle fought in Europe and said if not for our aur superiority and support it was even
At 11:55, you can hear the movie camera grinding away in the background. I guess they had noisy cameras in this era. I've heard the camera before in other episodes. It doesn't detract... COMBAT always has good stories if not technical accuracy.
We watched this religiously when we were kids! Back then we were allowed to watch all sorts of films except pornographic stuff...good ol' days.
yes, I remember the first scene in which caje engaged in a duel. it was too impactful to me as a naive kid.
It's better to be Lucky than Good...
Now Kirby has McCalls rubber band around his helmet!
thxs for these...
great
Before as a kid, these were so real. After being in war, I am glad to watch, just wish I could without picking them apart in my mind.
I was a fan and I didn't have to go to Nam or any warfare to notice the unbelievable incidents.
It was good for its time.
You ever pick a part with your mind, why you went to war? How you fought for Israel?
Nice opening scene.
turned on TV today and there was Vic Morrows in a movie with Walter Matthau. And Vic was a little league baseball coach for kids! And true to form he was more than a little tense! Kids were scared to death!! too funny!
Open to desperate knife fight in the rain, kudos!
The carbine M1 much better during Viet nam war and we used colt 45 with Pilot p 38 ...! ( ARVN)
I can imagine how that german felt when his rifle jammed. The early model M-16s that we carried were plastic/alloy jam-o-matics. I much preferred the M-14, despite its greater weight and recoil.
+Jim Nesta The M16's jammed because they were not cleaned properly. When the weapon fouled out, jammed and cost lives, some brainiac decided it might be a good idea to issue cleaning kits. Also, the original M16 was designed using stick powder in the cartridge. The military uses dirty ball powder. That didn't help matters any. They eventually worked many of the bugs out of the M16, but it took casualties before that happened, unfortunately.
+PatriotNC1 When I was in the Army, 1969-70, we used both the early model XM-16E1 and M-16 A1 and they both jammed despite being cleaned regularly and properly. This was using the authorized cleaner/lubricant LSA, that we carried in little plastic squeeze bottles. Keeping them clean didn't seem to make much difference in reducing the tendency to jam. The forward bolt assist was of no value in clearing a jam, as we had to break the rifles down and do a field strip and cleaning to restore them to service. The brass did blame us for the jams, saying that we weren't keeping them clean. We didn't know until much later about the propellant change that Gene Stoner, the rifle's designer from Armalite Corp., apparently wasn't consulted on before the change was made.
Jim- I had the M-16A1 as well. Oh yeah, the illustrious LSA....when mixed with burnt ball powder, you had a nice mess inside the weapon, along with whatever the elements threw in there, dirt, sand, etc. The M-16 has very tight tolerances, making it accurate, but not good at preventing jams. Unlike the AK, which had more sloppy tolerances, but you could mud the weapon up and it would fire. I always considered the M16 more of an urban weapon, than a jungle or desert weapon. It seems to do better there. In my opinion, they should have stuck with the M-14 in 'Nam, because that Garand action could handle the muck so much better. Yeah, it was heavier, but I'd prefer the weight of rifle and ammo, over having to clear a jammed weapon in the middle of a fight. The propellant had much to do with the problem, no doubt, as the military uses ball ammunition, and ball powder is dirty stuff. I think Eugene Stoner originally chambered the first rifle in .222, and used stick powder, not ball powder. Big difference. Then the .223/5.56mm came into play, with nasty ball powder.
Apparently the powder change was made to increase the fire from 750 rounds a minute to 900 rounds a minute. The increased pressure caused the extraction claw to shear through the lip of the cartridge, jamming it in the firing chamber. I think it was Dupont and Olin Mathieson that were the two different powders.
I noticed however, the losing nations use AK's, the winning NATION uses the M16. Think we would have changed it if there were something better, right? I mean, we didn't lack the $$$ since the M16 was adopted, we certainly could have come up with something that has more knock down power etc. But we didn't, why? Do we like to lose wars? In my humble opinion, not having served, we WON Vietnam. 60k dead verses over 1 million says we won. I know, we didn't take the objective, but I'm quite sure Communism was still affected by that many deaths. What is Vietnam now? A poor nation of farmers. No military might. The Soviets? Their AK47? They ran like school girls in Afghanistan, over 15k dead, and the USA fought LONGER battles using the M16 among others, and we lost how many? 6800 approximately. Now one lost Vet is too much for me, however, you cannot deny, the M16 is the weapon of choice for the most powerful nation the earth has ever known. By far. I'll stick with accuracy, I'll stay far away, you'll have to get closer to hit something. Advantage, me.
In real life Vic Morrow hated guns and Rick Jason (lieutenant Hanley) was a crack shot and an avid huntsman. Robert at 67.
13:53 looks like a husky Brad Pitt
Jonah 1:4
4 The Lord hurled a great wind on the sea and there was a great storm on the sea so that the ship was about to break up
Ironic, isn't it? In the Book of Revelation, the sea is a metaphor for mankind.
Give me mud. I'm fucking tired.
How old was that Corporal? 40s?
This would have been a perfect episode for the show "Night Gallery". I always wondered when the NCO or CO called for a certain soldier to take the point doesn't that soldier need to know where he's going?
👍👍👍👍😘👀
Wow 14 minutes into the episode they use the title Jonah
You mean 8:10?
What a long opening section 8 minutes 20 seconds, talking about setting the scene!
Tjl
Good show but highly unrealistic it made the Germans horrible shots and our guys just fire from hip and hit everything.My uncle fought in Europe and said if not for our aur superiority and support it was even
I like black and white better