i notice the M240 isn't on that list...
Posted on 06/18/2016 11:47:02 AM PDT by re_tail20
Since the end of World War II, only 10 U.S tank crew members have been killed in warfare. This is an amazing testament to fighting vehicle technology and the money spent to develop and sustain that tactical edge over our enemies.
In that same period, the United States has lost some 60,000 soldiers in small arms engagements, an approximate one for one exchange.
Few foes on the planet could hope to dominate America in a tank, air or naval battle. Yet every bad actor with an AK-47 takes on U.S. and NATO ground forces in a small arms fight. We are no longer suitably armed to prevent it.
This happens because the current U.S. Army small arms development and acquisition system is dysfunctional and virtually unworkable, even for those within the system. It has not brought troops substantial evolutionary small arms and ammunition capabilities in years, or even decades, and too often not at all, and almost never on or under budget. Lives are often lost as a result.
Case in point is the Battle of Wanat in 2008 at Combat Outpost Kahler in Afghanistan. Nine soldiers of the 173rd Brigade Combat Team — in a valiant attempt to prevent enemy insurgents from overrunning their positions — were killed and 27 others injured when numerous squad weapons to include M4s, M249s and MK19s stopped firing due to overheating.
The failures of the M4 carbines, caused by excessive sustained fire rates, were predictable and well known by experts. Army tests in 1990, and a 2001 report by U.S. Special Operations Command, documented this serious shortcoming and yet nothing was done to address it until after the avoidable deaths at Wanat.
Equal blame can be laid at the feet of those in Congress and our military leadership who support small arms programs...
(Excerpt) Read more at nationaldefensemagazine.org ...
Yes, this subject again, except that this article is one of the most comprehensive I’ve come across on it.
I would prefer a 7.62 weapon over the BB gun any day. Maybe they should use the AR10.
We really shouldn’t be sending any ground troops into war zones. Use mechanical soldiers. Drones, bombs, missiles, nukes, whatever.
Sustained ROF for ARs and their variants is very low. At one time, light weight small arms were only used in supporting roles to allow the crew served weapons to do their thing.
Now the M4s are expected to work like a heavy machine gun. Isn’t working and will never work that way.
And THAT is why we lowly civilians have their 6 with all these high powered ARs. Right?
***This happens because the current U.S. Army small arms development and acquisition system is dysfunctional and virtually unworkable,***
Gone are the days when independent gunsmiths like JOHN M BROWNING could develop better firearms for the government.
Anti-gun laws have shut them down.
Why is full auto fire being used so much that it is overheating the rifles? Does not the army teach basic marksmanship or is it just spray and pray once in the field?
I spent a career in military procurement from the seller’s side. In my opinion the most important factor is not battlefield effectiveness or crew safety or meeting the specifications the soldier needs. It is the politics. Who is making the device? Which state is it in and how many employees do they have? How effectively do they lobby, and by that I mean give away money directly or indirectly to decision makers. Do they hire people from the command that is making the buy or recommendation?
Then there are the hidden costs at the back of the contract. You will have a diversity program, a gay outreach, you will hire an ISO 9000 consultant, meet a small business set-aside, promote (fill in blank)...the list is practically endless and has nothing to do with the weapon being purchased.
No first hand experience in the Sandbox, but the shooting by our guys that is shown on various videos, all I see is somewhat aimed, suppressive fire and quick mag changes.
i notice the M240 isn't on that list...
“Why is full auto fire being used so much that it is overheating the rifles? Does not the army teach basic marksmanship or is it just spray and pray once in the field?”
You’re essentially right Gunner!
The current M-16 m-4s do not have full auto capability. They do have a 3 round “burst” selection. I think the article is just an attempt to end the reign of the AR platform over the past 50+ years.
Seems like every time they look for a new rifle the offerings do not stand up well against the AR especially in the cost/benefit comparison. The European Arms MFGRs are looking to re-equip the US with their newest gunk like what they did to the 1911 with the Beretta pistol. (The marines are going back to the 1911.)
I agree with “Chesty” who, when confronted with the latest wiz-bang weapon system, said “Where does the bayonet go?”
Failures in training can’t be overcome by new, untested weapons......
Since the end of World War II, only 10 U.S tank crew members have been killed in warfare.
As it turns out he is quoting what he heard in a speech, and you have to dig down into the comment section of the article to find out the loss refers strictly to tank on tank battles.
I understand the attraction of small caliber rifle ammo to grunts, we were all amazed how much 5.56 equaled 5-6 loaded M-14 20 round magazines. Made you feel well equipped.
But, low recoil rifles and tons of ammo make "somewhat aimed, suppressive fire" attractive, rather than precision elimination of targets with slow fire?
7.62 will have more knock-down power, but offers no advantage for overheating.
In fact, with a larger powder charge, there are more BTU to dissipate, so overheating may be a bigger problem.
The M-60 had spare barrels and the A-gunner carried an asbestos mitt so he could swap out the hot barrels. Even then, machine gunners were taught to “talk to each other”. The gunner on the right flank fire a burst, then pause while the gunner on the left flank took over. Back & forth, giving the barrels time to cool a bit.
We were up in the mountains north of Da Nang one night, looking down on a firefight below. The M-60 gunner must have panicked and kept firing continuously. We started making wisecracks about “you better let off there a bit”.
Sure enough, the steady “brrrraaap” changed to a “bap, bap....bap, bap, bap...bap...” He had overheated the barrel and the rounds were “cooking off” in the chamber - the barrel was so hot that the round fired without the trigger being pulled. You just have to break the ammo belt so it runs out of ammo, then try to get the spare barrel swapped out.
7.62 will have more knock-down power, but offers no advantage for overheating.
In fact, with a larger powder charge, there are more BTU to dissipate, so overheating may be a bigger problem.
The M-60 had spare barrels and the A-gunner carried an asbestos mitt so he could swap out the hot barrels. Even then, machine gunners were taught to “talk to each other”. The gunner on the right flank fire a burst, then pause while the gunner on the left flank took over. Back & forth, giving the barrels time to cool a bit.
We were up in the mountains north of Da Nang one night, looking down on a firefight below. The M-60 gunner must have panicked and kept firing continuously. We started making wisecracks about “you better let off there a bit”.
Sure enough, the steady “brrrraaap” changed to a “bap, bap....bap, bap, bap...bap...” He had overheated the barrel and the rounds were “cooking off” in the chamber - the barrel was so hot that the round fired without the trigger being pulled. You just have to break the ammo belt so it runs out of ammo, then try to get the spare barrel swapped out.
Yeah, I’ve seen that happen as well. Still, I love that hole punch.
Oh, they could always use that WWII water cooled 30-06 monster.
Not faulting the guys for the way they are using the equipment. It really does lend itself to that style of fire.
But it would be nice to see them have something that can stand the “heat” that does the heavy work.
It goes to training and planning as to what equipment is on scene and how it is used, and you fight with what you have with you, not what you want.
Provided you have a defilade position to reload, THIS is what you need in a infantry firefight!
Oooooh RAH!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.