If you're that worried about it [the Germans and Austrians aren't] it can be arranged easily enough. $5.00 to $15.00, depending on whether you want new or used.
Posted on 07/21/2003 12:58:43 PM PDT by yonif
Indeed. an AK shorty, firing 75-round drums, one after another, till the handguards charred, then smoked, and finally fell off. I was there. It took 11 of the 75-round drums, as I recall, 800-plus rounds. And it was still working just fine, though a little difficult to hold. Film at Eleven!
I've an Australian pal whose service goes back to the days of the Australian L1A1 rifle and F1 *Lawndart* who generally likes the F88, though his real cherished toy is the F89 Minimi. But he tells me the early ones indeed had their problems, worsened after they'd been affected by cleaning solvents, so don't assume all the horror stories were BS- most any weapon requires a shakedown period for the troops to become accustomed to it, but that's a fair simulation of some of the abuse they'll receive during extended combat where maintenance may be spotty, at best. I can recall keeping my own CAR15 going with oil dripped off an M35A1 truck's dipstick during a busy time or two, but it kept going for me, mostly.
-archy-/-
*Sigh*
I want an M35A1 truck. :(
Have you talk to any combat veterans about their feelings on what America should do about the M-16?
Yes. Many soldiers who have experience with the M-16 hate it.
However, what I said earlier is just my personal opinion.
If you're that worried about it [the Germans and Austrians aren't] it can be arranged easily enough. $5.00 to $15.00, depending on whether you want new or used.
Every military rifle now in service has shortcomings, even the highly-coveted ones made in Switzerland by magical little elves who live in snow-covered gingerbread houses. I was going to compile a gripe list someday covering all of the ones I am immediately familiar with, but never decided to do it. All it would do is get rocks thrown at me. :D
The short answer to your question is 'Yes', but the can of worms it opens doesn't answer the next question which is 'What should we switch to, then?'.
It's not just the rifle that's the problem. Just about every US small arm currently in service can't hold a candle to what the US equipped our troops with in 1941, with a little bit of 1958 equipment thrown in and a couple of WWII-vintage arms stolen from other countries.
Whatever the rifle is that's going to have the gusto to replace the M16 series needs is to have both optical and iron sights, shoot 1 MOA with a 'glass rod breaking' trigger break, not be chambered in 5.56mm NATO, not empty it's own exhaust into the receiver to cycle the action, have a quick-change barrel, use a rigid and comfortable folding/collapsing stock or be a 'bullpup', be almost immediately convertible for right and left hand shooters, use semi-transparent synthetic magazines, have the same trigger break feel when in auto or semiauto mode, headspace on the barrel, have few parts, be immediately ready to fire after being submerged in water, have a grit/dust/sand-resistant sealed design, be of such a design that it can fill the roles (in a pinch) of 'designated marksman' or 'squad automatic rifleman' or 'personal defense weapon' or 'vehicle crewman' in addition to 'rifleman', eject brass without attracting attention, be easily suppressed, have positive cycling and ejection, a long meantime between parts failures, carry all of it's gear and spare parts inside it, use a three-point 'Ching' sling design, and still be light enough that an average GI can hold it at arm's length for 60 seconds without struggling -- even if that GI is Jessica Lynch.
I've got my own preferences, so I admit that I am biased. Every time I consider designing a new service rifle from scratch in my head that will satisfy most of those demands, I keep coming up with the Steyr AUG-A2 in 6.5mm Remington or some such similar cartridge. That still wouldn't meet the expectations listed above, but it would come close. However, some of the demands would probably never be met with the AUG-A2.
There, I said it: The AUG is the best thing in military small arms since sliced bread -- at least when compared to the others in service.
Watch. Here come the rocks. (*bonk!*) Ow! ...See?
... I think I'd better leave this thread.
No intrusion at all. Yes and no, at the same time. For one thing they've already done that, as the M4/M4A1/M4A3 carbine has replaced the M16A2 in many units and roles. The M16A1 is still issue to many National Guard units and at least some naval ships and installations, so maybe some of the M16A2s freed up will now trickle down to those users, who'll be glad to have 'em.
And yes, development of at least a couple of *replacements* for the M16 family need to be developed, if not produced. The OICW and Land Warrior programs have just that in mind, with those efforts being duplicated to at least some extent in a couple of other countries. Whether that development will ever *replace* the M16A? as the general-issue soldier's tool is open to question, but there's also real room for the *Personal Defense Weapon* as a handgun/submachinegun substitute to replace or augment a few of them too; particularly if it can be combined with a light grenade launcher combo like the M203, maybe even with a HEDP anti-armored vehicle round, at least until the OICW gets its little bugs worked out...like the premature detonation of a high explosive round that killed one civilian ordnance technician.
Then too, there needs to be a design in reserve for a cookie-cutter, inexpensive weapon that can be issued to most anyone, dunmbest recruit or reservist expert, like the Britiash Sten of WWII, stamped out by the thousands with a unit production cost of $9.00 each for some austere versions...or a really cheap AK. We're probably talking pistol caliber here, and probably suppressed, but it might be a serious rifle, or a really heavy-duty pistol cartridge, since it's NOT particularly going to be used in a handgun...examples would be the FBI's 10mm round as used in the MP5/10, the .45 Winchester Magnum, or maybe the new .500 Smith and Wesson cartridge.
But there are a lot of AK's around, and they'll do the job, too. The M16 is okay, better suited to the needs of an army than an individual, but for either a minimally trained recruit, or in the expert hands of one well-familiar with it, it'll perform very well. And its belt-fed *Shrike* cousin may make that prove to be even more the case.
-archy-/-
The Mars Climate Orbiter perhaps.
It's not like an M16 won't put your eye out.
Funny thing is that my late father was a subcontractor for NASA for years. His designs are a part of the "crawler" that brings the launch vehicle to the pad; he had a part in designing the Verticle assembly Bldg as well.
I spent about 45% of my formative years being baby sat in some underground blockhouse on the Eastern Testing Range at Patrick AFB while dad was in meetings. I used to play "sub commander" by myself with the periscopes. They had to make sure all the buttons were "OFF!" cause I was always hollering "Fire ONE!" and stabbing the nearest button.
I went to the site and still don't take your meaning, except that I find it vaguely insulting (because the site featured a great FAILURE on the part of NASA/JPL)...you didn't mean to insult or flame me, did you?
I say we go back to the M-14. Nice rifle that one.
NOW I remember! And yes, of course...I'm chuckling too. Sometimes I can be such a chucklehead myself. So used to being flamed...sorry 'bout that.
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.