Army Wants Upgrades to Improve M4A1 Carbine's Performance, Accuracy

Military.com new ^ | 03-18-2015 | Matthew Cox

[familyop]

Thanks. I’m not a believer in the self-esteem kind of pride, although pride in a job well done is okay.

Yeah, the nation is going the wrong way. But individual survivability for the more technically inclined is enhanced. With more analytical behavior and less emotion, we can develop better tools and tactics outside of the pecking order of the more socially inclined group.

Long ago, even firing during training was done while running like a roach and crawling like a worm without regard for appearances. I was a lowly specialist and just fine with that and political REMFs from MBA (rear) specialties being platoon sergeant. Let them do the proud standing and stooping and listened to their sensors beep (laser-tag-like gear for training).

Now, I’m a lowly, old civilian without community rank and just fine with that, too. Learning, though...learning is great.

If those steeped in politics could only see what these eyes see, but they cannot. I can see through their eyes, though.

[familyop]

OAL and magazines, yes! A different case would be required, along with rifles and other big costs. Then, less ammo could be carried.

So they’re looking more at what can be done with 5.56mm for most soldiers. I can see carrying 14.5” barrels to drive vehicles or clear buildings, but there’s nothing wrong with using a rifle with a 20-inch barrel for the field and getting more intimate with dirt. Might lend to running a little more bullet length, if bullets didn’t get impacted in cases too much in the field (from going in and out of chambers too many times).

Improving on what’s already done can be complicated, eh? ;-)

[familyop]

"Plus....as we’re not in a fight with a uniformed enemy go to a boat tail hollow point to use on ISIS style enemies."

Yes. Really, even good personal equipment doesn't stop a group from losing the strength of a man who's hit for at least one battle (ouch!). And good armor on armored vehicles, earth, rock and the like don't yield to rounds from standard rifles.

It appears that match bullets would be the best way to go all around for two soldiers designated by highest range scores in each regular infantry/engineer platoon. Leave barriers to grenadiers, light AT weapons and the like. Let some of the volume fire soldiers get off their hienies with their hardball and go flank, if there's no easy air support.

[papertyger]

Improving on what’s already done can be complicated, eh? ;-)

Ain't that the kick in the pants, though?

The old "cone of fire" concept for the individual rifleman hasn't been around for a long time so far as I know, but then there is more than a little use for suppressive fire, particularly in MOUT operations.

I guess what I'm saying is the real bitch here is that the one round that does everything "enough" without giving up too much of anything in particular seems to be the 5.56.

Oh well....

[BerryDingle]

The AR-15 is a civilian version of a military carbine

Where did you hear that? The AR-15 has been around 10 years before the CAR-15. The CAR-15 was the grandfather to today's M-4 used by SOG units in Vietnam. I bought an AR-15 out of JC Pennys back in 1975, it was a "civilian" semi-auto of the military M-16.

[Farmer Dean]

The army ruined the M16 platform when they went to the fast twist rifling of 1 turn in 7 inches.Stoner’s original twist rate of 1 in 12 made the M193 bullet barely stable in flight.The bullet tumbled as soon as it hit,inflicting horrendous wounds.The M16A1 was probably the most deadly assault rifle ever built,at close range where you could use full auto effectively-your opponent was shreaded.I own an original class 3 M1A1,it’s effect on close range targets is amazing.

[KC Burke]

Going through basic in the Vietnam era we were told by our D.I. about the tumble effect. When did they change the rifling pitch rate?

[Farmer Dean]

I think it was with the M16A2.They had to to stabilize the heavier bullet they were adopting.Now they bullet stays point on and inflicts a small wound,especially at longer range.The short barrel on the M4 means the muzzle velocity is down to about 2800 fps.I’ll take my original M16A1 any day over the newer guns.Or better yet,my M1A.Now there’s a rifle.

[Farmer Dean]

I seem to remember Springfield armory offering their M1A in .243.I think .243 would feed from a .308 mag with no problems.

[Squantos]

Yes it does ..... OAL for the 243 is just a wee bit shorter than the .308/7.62x51 NATO ..........functions perfectly.

[gundog]

Just about any bullet not designed to mushroom on impact will tumble at speeds above 2400 fps. That was one of the reasons the Geneva Conventions ban on exposed lead in bullets was moot; the higher speeds from smokeless powders and the advent of spitzer bullets allowed for nasty wound channels without the exposed lead.

[gundog]

Wow, that’d be sweet.

[Farmer Dean]

The bullets out of an M4 won’t tumble,they just bore small holes in the target.

[gundog]

Which bullet? M855?

[archy]

I haven’t heard as much about the gas pistons lately. Fad? Or slow to catch on? I know those Korean Daewoos have them and they work good with a gas piston system.

The Marines also seem pretty happy with their new M27 H&K gas-piston equipped SAWs. The introduction of a reliable 225-round magazine hasn't hurt that little innovation a bit, and the $23.6 million worth buy now gives the Marine fire teams so equipped a weapon light enough that the team's SAW gunner can keep up with his three buddies as they go about their business.

[archy]

The first step would be to move up to a caliber that ends a fight with one hit.I gave up on 5.56 as a serious caliber years ago,give me a 7.62x51.

I waited nearly a decade for the 6.8SPC to catch on, but the necessity for cartridge-unique magazines went against it. Then the .300 Blackout came along, and for suppressed weapons, it does indeed answer some real need- and it works with the standard GI mag, or replacements thereof.

Now I think I've found the one that works for me. I've got about 8000 rounds through my .300 Blackout barrel [well, 1500 rounds about 5 times each] and so I have a new chambering reamer on the way: 7.62x40 WT

Yep, standard GI magazines. Or MagPuls, or what have you.

We shall see....

[archy]

I wonder if anyone has done much work with the 6.5 Jap?

The Russians did, in the days when they were considering a switch to a rimless cartridge for easier engineering of a soldier-proof [that's IVAN the soldier-proof!] semiauto rifle.

What they came up with was Federov's Avtomat, not as Ivan-proof as they'd hoped, so only around 3250-3500 were built. Neither were the various Tokarev semiauto designs of circa WWII overly reliable; many found use as sniper weapons. Dragonov's SVD is pretty decent, but the Russian troops' nickname for it is *the oar*- it's not especially handy, nor light. But it'll hit and kill longer than the max range of an RPG-7 [about 900 meters, for the PG-7] and the troops found that....helpful.

[archy]

Stoner’s original twist rate of 1 in 12 made the M193 bullet barely stable in flight.

The rifling twist of the first early model M16 barrels sent to US Advisors and Special Forces units prior to the adoption of the XM16A1 with a 12-inch twist, had 4 grooves, right hand twist, 1 turn in 14 inches.

The bullets were not terribly well stabilized, and at that time there was not yet a tracer round. When the first mass issue of M16A1 rifles came out circa 1965-66, the twist was changed to 1:12. Most of the contacts at that time were while on patrol at 35 meters or less, with some opportunity for longer shots on firebase and Special Forces A-team camps out to 200-300 meters. But there were enough ARVN and Striker team M1 Garands around, and plenty of good ammo to feed them.

[saleman]

Here’s a writing from someone I consider more than an expert on such things: http://www.ballisticstudies.com/Knowledgebase/.223+Remington.html

And an excerpt: From the very outset of its adoption the M16 was plagued with troubles. Stoner had designed the original AR 15 with a very slow barrel twist rate of 1:14 which was literally a doubled edged sword. By using a slow twist barrel the 55 grain bullet was only just stable in flight, producing a small degree of yaw. On impact the bullet would immediately tumble and render a wide, incapacitating wound. This was initially considered a brilliant design premise but some rifles produced too much yaw and were very inaccurate at longer ranges. McNamara ordered that the twist rate be changed to 1:12 before final adoption of the rifle in 1964. This cured longer range accuracy problems but completely destroyed the stopping power of the 55 grain bullet which now poked needle holes through its victims. Nobody questioned the potential consequences of this move and ignorant of the facts, Ordnance brass continued to believe and promote the M193 as a highly effective cartridge

---

Also on the site is wound research done on many different
animals with many different cartridges. 5.56 were examined on wild goats mostly.

[yarddog]

In the biography of Erich Hartmann, he mentions the time he was captured and escaped from Russians. He was being held in a room and he watched some of them with a radio.

He said they played around with it and appeared to have no idea how it worked.