[Chainmail]

It was criminal. I wouldn't doubt that the enemy learned to take advantage of the mess we had with them.

All we got at the time was know-it-alls in the chain of command and above telling us that it was our fault for not cleaning them well enough or using the wrong lubricants. We did clean them well - we were Marines - but the idiot things would tear the rear halves from the fired cartridges, then ram a new cartridge into that partially-filled chamber to make a fused mess that only a cleaning rod could clear after a lot of pounding. Not a huge issue at a rifle range, but a death sentence for a young man in a firefight.

Only long after the war did we hear that it was really the wrong propellant in the ammunition. A lot of those names on the Wall in Washington DC are there because of an improperly-tested weapon and the callousness of our leaders.

[antidisestablishment]

I read a book years ago about government logistics that used the AR-15 as a study case. I don't remember the author or the name of the book, but those chapters really cemented my perspective as a conservative. The original tests proved the weapon almost impervious to failure. The soldiers loved it, but the brass hated it. The Army and Air Force were at odds as to the requirements, and the manufacturers did not have the capacity to provide any consistent source of ammunition-regardless of its specification.

Besides the cap and ball ammo, the government also required that the weapon shoot at distances that exceeded the design. Ultimately, they increased the rifling and in concert with the powder change, that increased the cyclic rate, bore pressures, and powder residue. These bean counters and politicians killed more of our guys than any VC. The weapon that was fielded was completely different and the reliabity that sold it to the testers was gone.

There's a good link about the gunpowder debacle at The Gun Zone.