Posted on 01/06/2015 8:52:24 AM PST by C19fan
In the January issue of The Atlantic, retired Maj. Gen. Robert Scales slammed the United States Army’s M-4 carbine, and called for an entirely new weapon in the hands of the modern American soldier.
Scales describes the 2008 Battle of Wanat—when the Taliban attacked a forward outpost defended by American troops—and his own experiences in Vietnam with faulty M-16 rifles.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
There’s a huge difference between a Vietnam era M-16 and a Modern day M4 or M4A1.
Of course, there’s always room for improvement.
Yep - 6-1/2” of barrel length for starters.
The platform is very flexible ... and has a narrow range of “optimal”. Easy to make changes which drive performance to unacceptable, but not hard to adjust back to good performance. Other platforms are much more tolerant of changes, but simply can’t be adapted to what’s needed that the M4 can do. Keep the system balanced and it will work well. The Vietnam era M16 is the recurring prime case: right powder (as designed) would have run the system well, but some idiot decided otherwise without understanding the consequences.
The 5.56 isn’t going anywhere.
Poland, Bulgaria & Croatia have current 5.56 compatible rifles and Romania’s newest rifle will be in 5.56 as well.
There are always going to be those who want a bigger & “better” slug to lug around. You trade off several advantages & disadvantages when opting for bigger or smaller.
Thought they were retrofitting it with gas piston uppers????
That’s a better and cheaper way to go than completely replacing it.
And it works.
REPORT: The Mystery Rifle That Smoked The M4
http://www.shootingsportsretailer.com/2014/08/20/report-the-mystery-rifle-that-smoked-the-m4/
I can't believe this dog shit. We are being destroyed from within.
I dunno; at some point you gotta take a look at all the money that's been thrown at it fixing it and reevaluate.
Another thing you have to do is consider how you're fighting; e.g. flamethrowers wouldn't be a very good method for infantry room-clearing because the house catching fire and trapping the rest of the squad would be too distinct a possibility, but flame-throwers would be very good at clearing trenches, bunkers, and [dry] grassland. (Ignoring the possible political consequence of using flamethrowers on civilian populations.)
After the flame thrower hits the room, you no longer need to clear it. In Fallujah it would have been a nice tool. And in those mud huts in Afghanistan. The only downside is that they really are extremely dangerous to operate.
Advocacy for M4 pistons has gone on for years, yet remains but a minor upgrade for the uptight. A marginal improvement, again (like most AR improvements) a minor benefit for those in particular need of it, but otherwise irrelevant - if not problematic - for most users.
I don’t recall details offhand, but have seen critical respectable reviews grudgingly deem AR pistons more trouble (albeit minor) than it’s worth: greater weight, [sometimes] undesirable change in balance/feel, an unintended change to a system designed for direct gas impingement. Keep it reasonably clean, and the gas tube will function fine.
It may be a fine improvement for those articulating (or just desiring) the change, but not worth being a general-purpose ubiquitous modification. Most compelling benefit: attaching a suppressor causes significant increase in gas pressure, getting far more blasted into the operator’s face (gack blarg snort), which a piston can eliminate. Most compelling dissuader: it’s yet another moving part under pressure, just one more thing that can and will break.
Piston guns can have their own problems.
We need a 21st century Moses Browning.
RE Retrofit:
The thing is, the uppers already exist and are produced by a number of companies. It’s an easy swap, the guys are already trained on the platform, the ergonomics, mags, and ammunition don’t change... it runs cooler, runs cleaner, and runs better.
It would seem, on the face of it, to be more cost effective than developing a new firearm to replace it.
And like I said - it works. Look at the AK47 and it’s myriad variants. Piston drive is the way to go.
RE Flamethrower:
I would never, for any reason, want to strap one of those bombs on my back. Every rifle in the area knows who and what you are and what it will do, and will concentrate absolute ballistic HELL on you... those WWII guys had serious brass balls strapping those things on, for sure.
But you are correct - it was/is an awesome and terrifying battlefield weapon. I believe they had them on tanks back in WWII, also.
That’s a better and cheaper way to go than completely replacing it.
And it works.”
GOOGLE Daiwoo DR200 rifle.
Now, GOOGLE Daiwoo DR300 rifle.
The DR200 is 1.5 MOA, uses AR parts in the trigger assembly, and is hands down superior to the 'Matty Matell' foisted on our Vietnam infantry and its assorted, sordid bastard offspring toted by today's American soldiers.
That South Korea could produce a superior rifle should embarrass all Americans. Were Sam Colt to be revived and brought to a Colt Board Meeting, the board members better be wearing armor.
Col. Hackworth blew the whistle on the Matty Matell during the Vietnam War. His fellow officers at the Pentagon told him to “Shut up and buy Colt Industries stock.” What John Moses Browning would say about the AR series would be most interesting - probably obscene, but inlightening, none the less.
That’s going to really stink for those posted to areas without much cover, if air support gets to be in short supply. A high intensity conflict can still happen, because doctrine itself can’t prevent such a situation from building up.
True...
But look at the AK family of weapons.
They work. Always.
Until the machine gun ban is repealed, there will not be a new American designed full auto firearm in the hands of the military. Period.
We are stuck with the M16 and variants until that ban is gone. There is no economical reason for any company to sink any money into developing anything better here as the market for such an arm is insanely limited.
The MG ban was the Government cutting open it’s own throat. Now, our enemies are developing new and much more advanced small arms technology while we remain static. This will come back to bite us hard one day if the ban isn’t removed.
I thought the other problem was that since the design was rushed, the chroming was inadvertently left out of the design, and when pointed out, the McNamara’s whiz kids referred back to the rushed design specs.
While perhaps born of bad motivations, the “green round” seems to have better performance than its predecessor: http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/testing-army-m855a1-standard-ball-cartridge
Not everything “green” is bad just because it’s “green”.
Tell me how it does out of an 11.5” barrel, and I might just buy a few cases. [goes off to review “armor piercing” laws to see if it’s even legal to buy]
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.