Posted on 07/10/2003 4:36:05 PM PDT by Aliska
Several soldiers of the 507th Maintenance Company could not defend themselves or their comrades March 23 because their weapons malfunctioned while they sustained a lengthy fire attack by Iraqis near Nasiriyah, Iraq, according to a U.S. Army report on the ambush.
The weapons that jammed or otherwise failed included a M-249 machine gun called a SAW (squad automatic weapon), a .50 caliber machine gun, as well as several M-16 rifles. The M-16 is the Army's standard issue weapon.
The report is not conclusive about why up to three different kinds of weapons failed and suggests that the "malfunctions may have resulted from inadequate individual maintenance in a desert environment."
For rest of story click on link.
(Excerpt) Read more at borderlandnews.com ...
Thanks, pal.
Regards,
L
The tradition continues, I am afraid.
Ever fire one? Try it and you'll know why.
I've fired the AK47, and would choose it only above throwing rocks. It's a cheap ($17 in materials and labor), simple weapon intended for untrained conscripts for use in short-range "spray and pray" engagements.
In no particular order, I've found that:
1. The sights suck.
2. The safety sucks even more. The "AK clack" is extremely loud. You have to shift your grip to move the lever, and there are plenty of sharp edges to cut your hand.
3. Mag changes are a bit awkward and noisy.
4. Accuracy stinks. Aimed fire at man-sized targets beyond 50 meters is a joke.
No professional soldier, or even the Fr*nch, would touch this weapon, except in desperation. It's not designed for a long life, for either the weapon, or the peasant that carries it. The large amount of gas tapped off to cycle the weapon lets it work in the mud, crud, and dirty ammo, but it also batters it internally. I have a plastic buffer inside my semiauto AK47S, but that's just to protect my investment.
When I do my part, I can get hits at 300 meters firing offhand with my AR15. Then I shoot a few rounds through my AK47S, just to remind myself why I love the AR15/M-16. Anybody who can't find five minutes a day to do a quick clean-and-check of their weapon (any kind of weapon), is asking for trouble.
I agree. I don't know if they'll give one of those to every soldier or whether there will be one per squad or something, but it seems that they forget all the hard lessons that eventually led to the adoption of the M16 in the first place. Some people forget that the M14 had a number of significant design flaws as a military weapon which were key factors in it being replaced.
I think there would be diminishing returns in replacing the M16 action with something else at this point, and there is no other action in mass production at this time that would represent a significant improvement. It is one of the finest actions ever engineered for its role, it is mature and all the bugs have long since been ironed out, and it is relatively cheap to produce (the gov't pays about $500 for it). It is also a very flexible and modular design that is easily hacked for various roles.
My personal opinion is that at this point the only valid reason for replacing it would be to switch to a fundamentally different small arms technology. As a conventional military firearm it works too well to throw away the investment in it at this point.
Not easily. My experience in the field shooting military ammo is that you've got about 1500 rounds of solid reliability before cleaning becomes a significant necessity i.e. several full loads of ammo. The weapon can actually get really filthy and still function, and there are only one or two small places on the weapon that you have to keep kind of clean for it to function and as long as you keep these somewhat clean it will pretty much run forever. I find it is usually a combination of sand in the action AND accumulated powder residue together that take their toll; the weapon handles either one individually quite well and if you start out with a squeaky clean weapon you can expect to shoot your entire ammo loadout and then some without a single problem.
Again, it is operator familiarity. I personally find the M16 to be a relatively low maintenance weapon if you know what you are doing with it. If you start out with a clean and well-maintained weapon, you can keep it fully operational in the field pretty much indefinitely with the occasional quick touch-up. Note that I've never had much problem with sand and grit either. Those only became an issue when the weapon already had a lot of accumulated powder residue inside, which normally takes a long time to build up. By the time your weapon will start failing to function reliably, it also means that you've obviously skipped several opportunities to give your rifle a quick cleaning and gone through a few ammo resupplies.
Amen. The AK was built to withstand the lowest common denominator of soldier, environment and maintenance frequency.
They're great if you're willing to forego any sort of accuracy in exchange for not having to clean it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/798202/posts
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.