Posted on 07/14/2003 1:31:45 AM PDT by xzins
U.S. forces rolled over the Iraqi military in just weeks.
The plans seemed flawless, and the courage of the soldiers and Marines unflappable.
But with the dust settling — and the adrenaline rush of battle now subsiding — military officials are finding some weapons performed as advertised. Others, however, let troops down when they needed them most.
Army and Marine officials recently released after-action reports compiling what was right and what was wrong about the small arms with which troops squared off against Iraqi forces. Soldiers and Marines rated the rifles and pistols they carried into battle, and not all got perfect scores.
Soldiers and Marines relied on variants of the M-16 rifle. The M-16, in service since the early days of the Vietnam War, was highly criticized then as unreliable, often jamming during firefights. Soldiers who participated in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan also complained the M-4 variant, a shorter version of the M-16, lacked what they needed in combat.
In Iraq, reviews were mixed.
Most soldiers carried the M-4 into battle in Iraq and “were very satisfied with this weapon,” according a report from the Army’s Special Operations Battle Lab. “It performed well in a demanding environment, especially given the rail system and accompanying sensors and optics.”
Marines carried the older and larger M-16A2 rifles, but a report from the Marine Corps Systems Command Liaison Team stated: “Many Marines commented on desire for the shorter weapon vice the longer M-16s.”
One Marine told the team that the shorter rifle would have been better in confined urban battle. Some also said the smaller rifle would have been easier to handle when climbing in and out of trucks and armored vehicles.
“Several Marines even opted to use the AK-47s that had been captured from Iraqi weapons caches,” the Marine report stated. “Others were trading rifles for pistols to go into buildings to allow for mobility in confined spaces.”
Marine Corps officials announced late last year that infantry forces would soon switch from the M-16A2 to the M-16A4, a heavier-barreled version of the long rifle with a rail system like the M-4. Stocks of the weapons, however, arrived in Kuwait too late to be fielded and sighted for battle. Most stayed in storage, but some weapons were delivered to Marines under a plan to initially field one per squad.
A number of M-16A4 rifles, fitted with a 4X scope, were given to Marine rifleman. The combination, Marines said, allowed them to “identify targets at a distance, under poor conditions, and maintained ability to quickly acquire the target in close-in environment[s].”
But not all soldiers and Marines were enamored with the performance of their rifles. Complaints centered on lack of range and reliability problems.
“The most significant negative comment was reference [to] the M-4’s range,” the Army report stated. “In the desert, there were times where soldiers needed to assault a building that may be 500+ meters distant across open terrain. They did not feel the M-4 provided effective fire at that range.”
Safety was another concern. The M-4’s bolt can ride forward when the selector switch is on safe, allowing the firing pin to strike a bullet’s primer.
“Numerous soldiers showed us bullets in their magazines that had small dents in the primer,” the Army report said.
Reliability complaints also found fault with the oil soldiers and Marines used to clean their weapons. In the dusty, sandstorm-plagued battlefields of Iraq, weapons became clogged with sand, trapped by the heavy oil, called CLP.
Several Washington Post articles recalling the night the 507th Maintenance Company was ambushed recounted moments when soldiers in the convoy, including Pfc. Jessica Lynch, battled their weapons to continue fighting Iraqi irregular forces.
“In the swirling dust, soldiers’ rifles jammed,” one article reported. “Pfc. Patrick Miller, 23, from suburban Wichita, began shoving rounds into his rifle one at a time, firing single shots at enemies swarming all around.”
“We had no working weapons,” Sgt. James Riley told The Washington Post. “We couldn’t even make a bayonet charge — we would have been mowed down.”
The Army’s after-action found more soldiers unhappy with CLP.
“The sand is as fine as talcum powder,” the report stated. “The CLP attracted the sand to the weapon.”
Unlike the soldiers’ reports after Afghanistan, Marines in Iraq said the 5.56 mm round fired from the M-16 “definitely answered the mail” and “as long as shots were in the head or chest, they went down.” The Marine reports said many were initially skeptical of the small rounds’ performance against the heavier 7.62 mm round fired from AK-47s. There were reports of enemy being shot and not going down, but most were referencing non-lethal shots on extremities.
Still, “there were reports of targets receiving shots in the vitals and not going down. These stories could not be described, but are of the rare superhuman occurrences that defy logic and caliber of round.”
The report said Marines asked for a heavier-grained round — up to 77 grains.
The M-16 series of rifles fires a 55-grain bullet, a projectile that weighs slightly more than three-and-a-half grams. Some servicemembers believe a heavier-grained bullet would carry more energy downrange, creating greater knockdown power.
Both soldiers and Marines also noted problems with the M-9 9 mm pistol.
“There was general dissatisfaction with this weapon,” the Army report said. “First and foremost, soldiers do not feel it possesses sufficient stopping power.”
Soldiers asked for a tritium glow-in-the-dark sight for night firing.
But soldiers and Marines alike railed against the poor performance of the M-9 ammunition magazines.
“The springs are extremely weak and the follower does not move forward when rounds are moved,” the Marine report stated. “If the magazine is in the weapon, malfunctions result.”
Soldiers complained that even after they were told to “stretch” the springs and load only 10 rounds instead of the maximum 15, the weapons still performed poorly. Lack of maintenance was determined not to be the cause.
“Multiple cleanings of the magazine each day does not alleviate the problem,” the Marine report stated. “The main problem is the weak/worn springs.”
Still, Marines wanted more pistols to back up their rifles, especially in urban environments, according to the report.
Didn't we go through all this in Desert Storm?
2. The M-9 and the 9mm round worthless.
So9
Shame on you!....to speak ill of the M60..
It's clear you've never had your position covered by M60s set up with interlocking fields of fire -- keeping the bad guy at bay all night.....with it's beautiful tracer rounds announcing and describing an unavoidable tight killing pattern...
Even the finest women in the world, require care, love and forgiveness from time to time.....but they're worth it..
The M60 was the same, in my book..
The only guys permitted to curse the M60, was the poor bastard that had to carry it!
Semper Fi
-The baseline model will be lighter than the M4 carbine, but similar in capabilities. It fires a 5.56 round and will have a selector switch giving single shot or full auto capability.
-The sharpshooter model will use a longer barrel.
-The light machinegun model will use a heavier barrel, bipod, and high capacity magazines.
-The grenade launcher will mount under the baseline model, like an M203, but can be swiveled sideways for loading to accomodate special ammo with longer casings.
-The commando model will have a shortened barrel and buttstock primarily for use by armor crewmembers and aviators or for special situations.
All models except the commando model wil have a collapsing butt stock. All models will have a multi-purpose optic with a red-dot reticle, an IR pointer, an IR illuminator, and a visible pointer--you zero the optic and that zeros the pointers also. All models will have common inner workings. Soldiers will be testing the XM8 this fall.
Never played with the 106 just the 90MM. Always fergot to keep my noggin in contact when fired from prone though........Ow !
Stay Safe !!!
Like I said, I thought overall it was pretty good, although my BS meter was bending the needle at several points, usually involving the blatant disobedience to orders -- that just don't happen. And I never knew that we had combo WP/napalm air-to-surface missiles! 
Also, bullet penetration is only one factor in determining stopping power. The amount of energy dissipated in the target is the primary consideration. A bullet that passes completely through an animal, making a small wound channel and not dissipating its energy isn’t effective. That’s why the 44 magnum with jacketed bullets isn’t a great man stopper. The round tends to completely penetrate without dissipating its energy.
That said, I went back and did some research and discovered that (choke) I was wrong about the 5.56 compared to the 7.62 Warsaw. The 5.56 does tend to dissipate much more energy in the target because of the bullet tumble induced when the bullet first strikes the target.
I made my comment about the ineffectiveness of the round at longer ranges based on some second hand information I got from some buddies who used them during Desert Storm. I still think that the 5.56 isn’t adequate for ranges beyond 200 meters, but agree that the AK-47 isn’t the answer.
I also agree that the 6.5 mil is a very capable man stopper when pushed to high velocities, but I wouldn’t use one on large game like moose or bear. I’m more of the 300 Winchester Magnum kind of guy.
Here's another, The Number 9, Mark I, one of my own favourites.
I want one, a semi-auto version, at least. I'm working on it.
Interesting. A pal of mine sometimes carried a cutdown double-barrelled Stevens in 16 gauge in addition to his M79 and PRC-74b radio, figuring it was both a better manstopper than most handguns and that he was more likely to get a hit with it at night if a target turned up too uncomfortably close for him to use an M79 grenade on it. When I asked him where he was finding ammo for it, he said that the Navy would never miss it... but he wished they had slugs as well as buckshot.
For a very short period I later carried a Browning 16-gauge autoloader in the underdash package shelf [later versions had a glovebox, but that shelf was handy]of the 1975 Volkswagon Rabbit I was running at the time. It was soon thereafter replaced by a Sten gun, replaced in turn by an old WWII German MP40, and finally, a folding-butt Uzi, all in addition to the rifle I carried aboard- a bit unhandy to use if I had to bail out through the VW's sunroof. The shotgun's barrel was just a little too long to fit across the seat of the Cessna bugsmasher that was my other ride then, and the buzzguns drew that duty as well.
When things get dark enough that it's hard to see one's sights, it's helpful to have a shotgun or SMG around, though there can be other times they're handy as well.
-archy-/-
Well, better if it had gone on to be just a little better developed, particularly if downward ejection suitable for left-handed users could have been incorporated [or forward through the foreend, or some other similar alternative]
But both the cartridge it used and the mechanical package that used it deserve some real consideration, and with the addition of today's electro-optical sights, it could remain a state-of-the-art development even today.
And just think about a beltfed Stoner in the same cartridge as a support weapon backing it up, or fitted with a telescopic sight for use as a designated marksman's rifle along with the Number Nine.... Happily, the 7x44mm cartridge of the EM-2/#9MkI is just short enough to fit in the magazine of a 5.56x45mm M16 or Stoner magazine; and with some rework, a belt feed caould be managed.
Okay, a handgun is still needed to go with these two goodies. You know about the Canadian NAACO *Brigadeer*? Or the Australian Owen [no relation to the top-fed WWII SMG of the same name]
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.