European Disdain For Combat Shotguns

[BLAH]

Yes.

 

Though you're probably only effective out to 100 or so with a one second sight picture and a burst on target (say a 9 round burst).

 

Reloading doesn't matter much when people are in cover, as you only have a small amount of time to engage. One shell, a burst of SMG fire, or a couple of rifle rounds.

 

It changes if you're fighting amateurs who stand around in the open or in an ambush position, of course.

[Argus]

How about simple availability? European shotgun culture has mostly been about double barrels and the repeating shotgun mostly an American business. Sure FN have always made them, and nowadays there are other European manufacturers offering them, but many/most nations had a domestic SMG at some point or certainly had them on the shelf from military sources.

 

shane

 

PS on jungle use, IIRC the British/CW experience tended towards SSG (US #2 Buck, circa ~0.27"), getting the pellet count up while still retaining a decent size projectile.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Argus

[EchoFiveMike]

SMG's tend to go high and to the weak side during burst fire, making most of the burst useless, regardless of aim, where as SG's tend to create roughly round patterns. Makes snap hitting with an SG easier relative to an SMG. S/F.....Ken M

[Chris Werb]

00 buckshot is pretty damn good out to 100 yards when all you care about is a hit, and when you've only got a second to throw lead at someone out of cover, it's probably better to throw the 00 buckshot than a single round from a rifle/SMG at that range.

 

3.5" magnum being the best due to twice as many balls, and you're probably guranteed to get some on a human target at 100 yards.

 

The big drawback is poor amor penetration, but if we're dealing with modern body armor, that might not matter when your rifle won't get through the torso anyway.

 

Have you ever shot a 3.5" magnum buckshot load out of a non gas operated shotgun? I think I'd be more scared of that than the enemy!

[Simon Tan]

Chris...you be pussy. Real men use 10-ga!

[Chris Werb]

Real men don't need to boast about what calibre guns they shoot.

[Simon Tan]

I don't claim to be a Real Man. Never shot 10Ga.

[Olof Larsson]

Real men don't need to boast about what calibre guns they shoot.

 

 

Or in the world of real man Walter Bell, that anything markedly bigger then 7x57

against elephants was for lousy shots or men with small genitalia.

 

 

00 buckshot is pretty damn good out to 100 yards when all you care about is a hit, and when you've only got a second to throw lead at someone out of cover, it's probably better to throw the 00 buckshot than a single round from a rifle/SMG at that range.

 

3.5" magnum being the best due to twice as many balls, and you're probably guranteed to get some on a human target at 100 yards.

 

The big drawback is poor amor penetration, but if we're dealing with modern body armor, that might not matter when your rifle won't get through the torso anyway.

 

AFAIK most 12ga 3&1/2" 00 buckshot have 12, 15 or 18 pellets, with 15 being the most common,

while most 12ga 3" 00 buckshot have 12 or 15 pellets, with 15 being the mot common.

Obviously with the pellets being fired at a lower velocity in the 3" vs. the 3&1/2".

 

V.s. 12ga 2&3/4" there a much bigger difference in pellet count.

[BLAH]

Yep, SMGs will rise, so most of it will be useless at 100 yards+. Perhaps the smaller caliber SMGs offer better recoil reduction conpared to 9mm, and you can probably walk them up from feet level with the 9mm anyway, but then you're doing a lot just to get 1 round on/near the target, compared to just holding on with the bead and sending the shot on its way.

 

3.5" 12 and 10 gauge kick close enough. It's not that bad as long as you don't hold it like a 5.56mm rifle.

 

And yeah. I'm thinking of the 18 pellet 00.

 

The HE rounds might be pretty good too. I don't know what the casualty radius is, but I'm guessing they'll be fine at inflicting damage if they land within a few yards of the target. Limbs full of fragments can be effective. If the velocity of the things is like a typical full bore slug, then you've got 200 yards easy, and out to 1 km+ when lobbing them.

[Simon Tan]

4.6 and 5.7 are basically hoses. They exhibit negligible muzzle rise, mainly because they are not old school blowback guns.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Simon Tan

[John T]

Have a read of this please John.

 

http://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound

 

Yes, the discussion on how to handle criminals high on dope is a problem understood, but still Swedish law say's

"Vid skottlossning mot person skall eftersträvas att endast för tillfället oskadliggöra honom."

rough translation -

Fire to temporary disable the target.

 

And the Swedish police statistics goes something like 1 killed to 7 disabled criminals, (my rough estimate)

 

http://www.fvv.uni-mb.si/conf2004/papers/knutsson.pdf

 

 

Cheers

/John

Edited August 30, 2014 by John T

[tankerwanabe]

The problems with shotguns are -

 

1. Reloading. If you think about it, you are actually loading one round at a time. And it's very easy to load the rounds backwards since they feel the same on both ends. It feels like you're loading 60% of the time and only shooting 40%.

 

2. Ammo size and weight. a 12 gauge is actually a 70 caliber gun. People complain about the .308 being too heavy. How about a .700? Anyways, the biggest complaint coming from the USMC and its use during WW2 was that it runs out of ammo far too fast.

 

... on the other hand, if you need to put an attacker down with a single shot...

 

single shot 00 buck = 8x .38 cal = 8 rounds of 9mm = simultaneously taking 2 burst from a MP at the same time....

 

just saying.

[Dawes]

A 12 gauge slug may not penetrate body armor, but I would imagine it would leave a mark

[mnm]

Yep, SMGs will rise, so ...

 

Not true in all instances, see here for an example especially at 2:00 - 2:10.

[Colin]

At a 100m we were taught to shoot semi-auto, auto was out to 50m normally after that semi or short burst.

[Markus Becker]

The problems with shotguns are -

 

1. Reloading. If you think about it, you are actually loading one round at a time. And it's very easy to load the rounds backwards since they feel the same on both ends. It feels like you're loading 60% of the time and only shooting 40%.

 

 

How relevant is that in a self-defence/law enforcement context? I once read that lengthy shotouts between cops and criminals are very rare even in the USA. And in case of self defence the matter is decided with less than the six rounds a revolver has?

[Ivanhoe]

 

The problems with shotguns are -

 

1. Reloading. If you think about it, you are actually loading one round at a time. And it's very easy to load the rounds backwards since they feel the same on both ends. It feels like you're loading 60% of the time and only shooting 40%.

 

 

How relevant is that in a self-defence/law enforcement context? I once read that lengthy shotouts between cops and criminals are very rare even in the USA. And in case of self defence the matter is decided with less than the six rounds a revolver has?

 

 

Lengthy shootouts are indeed rare, and when they happen it tends to be mutual suppressive fire with ludicrously low hit rates (like 80 rounds fired per officer, 2-4 officers, one perp with one or two peripheral wounds). Gunfights where one or more end up on a granite slab are short and fast.

[tankerwanabe]

 

 

The problems with shotguns are -

 

1. Reloading. If you think about it, you are actually loading one round at a time. And it's very easy to load the rounds backwards since they feel the same on both ends. It feels like you're loading 60% of the time and only shooting 40%.

 

 

How relevant is that in a self-defence/law enforcement context? I once read that lengthy shotouts between cops and criminals are very rare even in the USA. And in case of self defence the matter is decided with less than the six rounds a revolver has?

 

 

Lengthy shootouts are indeed rare, and when they happen it tends to be mutual suppressive fire with ludicrously low hit rates (like 80 rounds fired per officer, 2-4 officers, one perp with one or two peripheral wounds). Gunfights where one or more end up on a granite slab are short and fast.

 

 

I think that's the stat of pistol shootouts. Trying to hit anything with a pistol is extremely difficult even for those trained exclusively in pistols.

 

But when you have a long gun... and the perpetrator has a pistol...

 

I know that cops are trained to look at their pistols as a temporary firearm until they can reach their shotguns.

[Colin]

Most "training" for cops involves a once a year qualification event of 50-100rds, the RCMP allot around 200 rds per year per officer for extra training. They do get some simulator training which helps but that will vary by department. The cops I have seen who are good with firearms are very, very good, but the vast majority are quite bad.

 

there was a cop here (VPD) that took out a bad guy at 75m or so with a pistol about 2 years ago.

Edited August 30, 2014 by Colin

[iamcanjim]

And one of my grade school friends who is an OPP(Ontario Provincial Police) officer loosed 10 rounds at 5 yards at a suspect and misses all 5 (the bad guy got him on the 3rd round through the buttocks). I thought that would have gotten him laughed off the force but he's still a policeman.

[Simon Tan]

Why would you want to go from a short ranged weapon to another short ranged weapon?

[baboon6]

 

Seem to remember from the Vietnam days that shotguns were considered next to worthless in the jungle environment. Should apply for medium to dense brush.

 

A couple of my teachers at high school were Vietnam vets (on the Australian side - you never can tell THESE days). Anyway these guys were officers for the cadets. They related that a standard infantry section patrol had the two scouts one of which was armed with a shotgun. When contact was made the scouts simply blasted away with whatever they had - shotgun / F1 SMG - towards the contact whilst taking cover.

 

The blasts themselves initiated the rest of the section to do what they were trained to do in drill. The shotguns kept the enemies heads down for a vital few seconds, even if they did little damage in themselves.

 

Shotguns were not used by other members of the section.

I was under the impression that forward scouts initially used Owen guns but changed over to M16s as soon as those became available. No mention of shotguns here:

 

http://www.army.gov.au/~/media/Files/Our%20history/AAHU/Primary%20Materials/Vietnam%201962-1972/Training%20Materials/TIB%2069%20Infantry%20Battalion%20Lessons%20from%20Vietnam%201965-71.pdf

[DougRichards]

 

 

Seem to remember from the Vietnam days that shotguns were considered next to worthless in the jungle environment. Should apply for medium to dense brush.

A couple of my teachers at high school were Vietnam vets (on the Australian side - you never can tell THESE days). Anyway these guys were officers for the cadets. They related that a standard infantry section patrol had the two scouts one of which was armed with a shotgun. When contact was made the scouts simply blasted away with whatever they had - shotgun / F1 SMG - towards the contact whilst taking cover.

 

The blasts themselves initiated the rest of the section to do what they were trained to do in drill. The shotguns kept the enemies heads down for a vital few seconds, even if they did little damage in themselves.

 

Shotguns were not used by other members of the section.

I was under the impression that forward scouts initially used Owen guns but changed over to M16s as soon as those became available. No mention of shotguns here:

 

http://www.army.gov.au/~/media/Files/Our%20history/AAHU/Primary%20Materials/Vietnam%201962-1972/Training%20Materials/TIB%2069%20Infantry%20Battalion%20Lessons%20from%20Vietnam%201965-71.pdf

 

 

Maybe not a mention there, but official and semi-official accounts don't always tell the truth. I was repeating what a couple of infantryman who were there saw and experienced for themselves. Quite possibly the shotguns were obtained 'privately' or using battalion discretionary funding.

[baboon6]

 

 

 

Seem to remember from the Vietnam days that shotguns were considered next to worthless in the jungle environment. Should apply for medium to dense brush.

 

A couple of my teachers at high school were Vietnam vets (on the Australian side - you never can tell THESE days). Anyway these guys were officers for the cadets. They related that a standard infantry section patrol had the two scouts one of which was armed with a shotgun. When contact was made the scouts simply blasted away with whatever they had - shotgun / F1 SMG - towards the contact whilst taking cover.

 

The blasts themselves initiated the rest of the section to do what they were trained to do in drill. The shotguns kept the enemies heads down for a vital few seconds, even if they did little damage in themselves.

 

Shotguns were not used by other members of the section.

I was under the impression that forward scouts initially used Owen guns but changed over to M16s as soon as those became available. No mention of shotguns here:http://www.army.gov.au/~/media/Files/Our%20history/AAHU/Primary%20Materials/Vietnam%201962-1972/Training%20Materials/TIB%2069%20Infantry%20Battalion%20Lessons%20from%20Vietnam%201965-71.pdf

Maybe not a mention there, but official and semi-official accounts don't always tell the truth. I was repeating what a couple of infantryman who were there saw and experienced for themselves. Quite possibly the shotguns were obtained 'privately' or using battalion discretionary funding.

indeed I'm sure it did happen but probably wasn't very common. Your post gave the impression that pretty much every Aussie rifle section in Vietnam had a shotgun.

[Argus]

<snip>

 

2. Ammo size and weight. a 12 gauge is actually a 70 caliber gun. People complain about the .308 being too heavy. How about a .700? Anyways, the biggest complaint coming from the USMC and its use during WW2 was that it runs out of ammo far too fast.

<snip>

 

IIRC a significant factor there, or at least for shotguns in tropical climes in WWII/earlier was that the normal cardboard cased rounds of the day had a very limited shelf life. The cardboard would soak up humidity and swell to the point it wouldn't chamber. The only alternative being brass cased rounds which weighed a ton.

 

shane