Skip to comments.OUR TROOPS UNMET NEEDS or after 40 years the DoD Inspector General will look in to the crappy M-16.
Posted on 01/11/2006 7:09:45 PM PST by undocumentedrat
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- Many in Congress and the Pentagon boast American troops have the best equipment in the world. But reports from the battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan say otherwise. The information about the failures is not new; solutions are long overdue. Some of the most worrying questions center on the efficacy and lethality of the firearms U.S. forces are using. Official reports show high levels of dissatisfaction with the M-4 carbine, M16 rifle magazines, and M249 machine gun. The small size of the 5.56mm bullet used in these weapons is also highly controversial among some troops. But problems with weaponry are just a subset of the larger issue: equipment that is not up to scratch. Reports from the Army`s Natick Soldier Center, its Tank-automotive and Armaments Command, and the Marine`s Systems Command Liaison Team in Iraq -- all from 2002 and 2003 -- tell us, for example, troops` 'dislikes.' Among those dislikes: uniforms that rip easily, eyewear that fogs up and fits poorly under helmets, and boots that blister, crack, and burst, and are 'poor for movement,' or as in one soldier`s e-mail are 'truly awful and also painful.' Troops buy some equipment with their own money, usually because government issue performs poorly. Such items include gloves, socks, flashlights, padding for backpacks, 'CamelBak' hydration systems, and weapons cleaning equipment. Banal items? Perhaps to us back home, but certainly not for soldiers fighting in the mountains of Afghanistan and the desert of Iraq, doing whatever it takes to keep their bodies and their weapons working. continue -> http://news.monstersandcritics.com/northamerica/article_1074708.php
(Excerpt) Read more at news.monstersandcritics.com ...
OK, most successful western self loading rifle. And my criteria is actually production volume, only the AKM has been manufactured in greater quantity - again excluding bolt guns that have been in and out of production for 100 years.
The kicker is that the M16 has been in service as the primary US infantry arm longer than any other rifle.
Not bad for a "crappy" rifle in a "varmint" cartridge.
No sweat - they agree with you.
It had a 60 year head start. I'd also expect 762x39 to be all alone out front in terms of sheer volume of hostile fire, after 50 years of pretty much nonstop use worldwide.
The Russians have been developing a new round and went back to using 7.62, and the Chinese have quit building QBZ-95 rifles with 5.8 ammo because of our problems with the 5.56 ammo, and their problems with their small caliber weapons.
Chamber those with 6.8 ammo, and problem solved.
My favorite of all-time has to be the .30-06. But the .308 is a competent round worthy of reconsideration.
have they developed a new rifle to chamber the 7.62mm?
OK, so that means that (IIRC), according to your "production volume" criterion, that the 'second best' "western self loading rifle" might be the M-1 carbine (6.5 million copies produced)? That's the M-1 carbine, AKA the reincarnated, unsuccessful, .32 Winchester Selfloading, not-good-for-much-of-anything, what-cha-ya-ma-call-it?
(Not that I'm volunteering to get pasted by a .30 Carbine SP or HP round - NYPD detectives and other US cops apparently swear by the things... ;>)
What say you, compadre: are you claiming that the M-1 carbine was a "more successful western self loading rifle" than the M-1, M-14, FAL (my personal favorite - and of course, YMMV ;>), or G-3? What's your take? Would you rather "go in harm's way" with an M-1 Carbine, or an M-14? What about the G-3? And what about the poor, ignored, under-rated FAL (which [courtesy of DS Arms] has reportedly been in service with US special ops troops since 2001 - and I don't remember hearing that said about the M-1 carbine ;>)? Are you suggesting that our neighbors in uniform (who are putting their friggen' @sses on the line) would be better off with your uncle's National Postal Meter M-1 carbine, than a current-production DSA light-weight FAL in 7.62mm NATO?)
((No harm intended, compadre - I'm just pulling your chain... which you left hanging out with a BIG sign saying - "PULL ME, PLEASE!!! - when you cited "production volume"... ;>))
Funny thing: the Soviet 7.62x39 M43 cartridge is pretty much nothing but a shortened .303 British round (cut off the 17mm of the case closest to the .303 rim, and reduce the bullet weight, and you're there ;>). In fact, you can fire the Soviet round in a .303 British Lee-Enfield barrel - without rechambering - simply by cutting off the threads (http://www.surplusrifle.com/shooting/no4223/index.asp - look near the bottom of the page ;>)...
In other words, the Soviet round is nothing but a '.303 British Short'...
" However, I do know that I would rather carry the pig (M-60) over the M-249"
The M-60 has been replaced by the M-240G as our Medium Machine Gun. The M-249 still is what it has always has been; the Squad Automatic Weapon (it is as it's always been a POS). The 240G is a reliable machine gun, though a little heavier than the 60, and still chambered in 7.62
Now there's a thought, except by definition the carbine is no rifle, nor was it adopted as a primary infantry arm. They did make a lot of them though.
Are you suggesting that our neighbors in uniform (who are putting their friggen' @sses on the line) would be better off with your uncle's National Postal Meter M-1 carbine, than a current-production DSA light-weight FAL in 7.62mm NATO?)
ROFL, that's EXACTLY what I'm suggesting, you've uncovered my hidden agenda.
Sorry about that - I'm not a politician, so I don't do 'hidden agendas'...
Actually, from what I heard, the M-16 itself wasn't a bad weapon. Rather, the real problems were that all too often, the troops were issued ammo that was unsuitable for full-suto combat use. Also, the idiot bueareaucrats in charge of the Army back then failed to instruct our boys on the right care and maintenance fo the 16. It was wrongfully referred to by some as "self-cleaning". With the right ammo, some modifications, and the right instructiong, the 16 turned out to be a pretty good weapon.
"BTW: if you stop by the Pentagon, you'll note that the guards there are using XM8-family G36 rifles, not M16 or M4 carbines... I guess the top brass feels safer knowing that their guards have weapons that'll work."
Maybe. Or maybe they got the weapons out of friendship with the Krauts. The Pentagon, IMO, is less likely to experience actual combat. After all, the only attack on it has been on 9/11 when AQ crashed a hijakced plane into it. I wish that we could get a American-designed weapon that would fire the 6.8 mm.
Just out of curiosity, what's your opinion about the M-16 rifle and the 5.56mm round?
I have absolutely no reservations about the 5.56mm AR15/M16 system - it has flaws, but it's the best rifle of its type available today.
As to 556mm, there are a host of issues associated with lethality and the reduced velocities from the popular sub-16" barrels in use today, especially when combined with the steel core 62gr M855 ammo used by NATO armies. With the right ammo, from a rifle length barrel, 556mm is tremendously lethal. Anybody that believes otherwise should closely review the 2002 DC sniper case.
Ultimately, shot placement and SPEED are what wins gunfights- two critical capabilities that the 556mm M16 system excels at. These elements also lead militaries and law enforcement agencies to choose 556mm over larger calibers.
Finally, the rifles popularity speaks for itself. While the "poodle shooter" crowd wants you to believe the M16 is somewhow forced on unwilling troops, the truth is that skilled warriors, given the choice of any weapon in any caliber, will more often than not choose an M16 variant.
In an interview Uzi Galil said he developed the Galils because of the failure FN-FAls. The 7.62mm was the export version.
The main reason Galil developed the Galil was becasue he wasn't getting a piece of the Fabrique Nationale deal. Everything else was a rationalization.
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.