Was on a website that had some non important article about Iraq
or Afghanistan, and it had a picture of a soldier, kneeling, in a huge swirl of sand and dust all around him, and he is holdind either an M16 or M4, it has an ACOG[sp?] scope on top…but on the underside of the bottom handgaurd, was a detachable carry handle mounted upside down.
For the life of me I cannot understand WTH is going on there.
Any thoughts/ideas on this?
Grip/keeping it handy.
I got out of the Marines in 2006, so things may have changed. But when i was in Iraq we were required to carry our backup irons with us. Most people threw them into the bottom of a patrol pack. Mabey the guy in the photo just wanted to keep them a little more handy.
Back in 02-04 we did just what you are talking about. Keeps you from having to dig around in your pack to find your backup sites if something happened to your optics.
Actually had one of my friends who had his Acog shot in half one day, all he had to do was take cover, remove optic and mount iron sights back in place to continue the fight.
From what I read there were somewhat strict rules in place about turning in all of you gear or keeping all the issued gear with the issued rifle. Some soldiers just decided to attach the carry handle so as to not lose it or keep it handy. This seems to be prevalent with US Marines issued m16A4s.
Seen it a lot over the years never had to do it myself. If I took off the carry handle and lost it oh well. As long as I turned in the weapon.
Curious to know if mounting the carrying handle/BUIS on the bottom of the handguard would endanger the zero if the rifle had a hard fall or whatever. I suppose mounting it anywhere on the rifle could subject the sight to any damage anyway so maybe this is a moot point.
We had gotten brand new m4s when I first got to my unit with just flat tops and flip up rear sights so no experience in my time in with those. Like previously stated I would assume quick access to it if your optic goes down. Though quite an eye soar. It also looks like a form of an angled foregrip…
Somewhere there is an “expert” on here screaming at the computer screen, “He’s holding his rifle wrong!”.
I’m no expert, but you caught me 
Sticking the CH to the rail is accepting suboptimal employment of the weapon in several aspects for a low probability failure of a tool-dependant fix.
And yes, one of those aspects is grip and use from cover.
huh???
kenken
I must be dumb or something because I didn’t understand one word of that.:fie: Either that or I must be a suboptimal low probability failure of a infantryman.
In laymans terms, I think F2S is saying he’s potentially fucking himself because that carry handle doesn’t belong there. 
He’s saying that the rifle has been hindered for a majority of uses in order simplify the fix of a rarely occurring failure.
Sort of like carrying a spare tire on a motorcycle.
Why? Perfectly good grip for kneeling position, gives additional point of stability by resting elbow just above the knee.
And it’s not like he is on 3Gun stage or something
BTW Carry handle mounted under hanguard makes nice makeshift AFG 
suboptimal: less than level expected, desired, or anticipated
low probability: unlikely, but not impossible
failure: not working properly, inoperable, not achieving an expected level of performance
tool dependant: requiring the use of an implement to properly manipulate
Why is it suboptimal?
It blocks hand placement and supported position stability and grip. In the pic, the kid looks like he is in the prone (maybe kneeling), so no huge issue on hand placement, just like perfect hand placement in any position during a gunfight is a variable not worth arguing over. However, limiting one’s ability to grip the handguard other than directly in front of the magwell (in this case) is a reduction in capability and flexibility. Mounting to the side or fore or aft on the bottom rail poses the same issues.
The CH could easily be retained somewhere on the carried gear of the user in a readily accessible location and pose none of these issues while being just as handy and better protected.
Tool dependant?
The thumb screws on the carry-handle need to be tightened at least 1/4 turn past hand tight to be even closely considered secured under rough conditions. The RCO’s TA51 mount is the same, for both security and zero retention. So, to get the RCO off, you need a tool, and to get the CH off, you need a tool, and to put the CH on with an expectation of it retaining zero and staying on the receiver, you need a tool.
Low probability?
The likliness of the RCO breaking or being unusable (if properly mounted and maintained), is low. The likliness of the shooter breaking his RCO and having the time to pull out his multi-tool, cut/untie the dummy cords, remove and replace the sighting device is way under that. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in having the back up sighting device available, as things do indeed happen, and even a sighting system that can’t guarantee return to zero (if the irons were even zeroed) is better than no sighting system.
So, my point is: why stick the CH to the gun, which negatively affects use, when you could just stick it in a pouch and suffer none of those issues?
Looks like Devil Dogs are trying to make sure they dont lose their carry handles. Not the best way to do it. Can’t say that I didn’t see some of our guys doing the same thing. Particularly in '04 after we got the first batches of ACOG’s showing up. Some people just did not trust the optics enough yet and wanted their irons where they could readily get to them (not being informed or forgetting that the thumbscrews needed to be more than hand tight). F2S - they need you! 
I think that its a good spot to put it. Looks secure and stays with the weapon it belongs to.
kenken
The amont of gear/ crap people stash, store, hang off of weapons confuses the hell out of me. F2S summed it up perfectly.