I have neither the time or the inclination to pick apart this article in the detail it deserves, but a few things need to be said.
"The gas tube is thin, fragile and subject to bending or breaking—usually taking the rifle out of commission."
In the history of the M16/M4 how many time has this happened? And by the way, if you get a dent in the cover of an AK-type weapon, it won't work either. I have seen them with such damage.
"If a build up of mud, water or carbon decreases gas pressure to the bolt, the the AR-15 fails to cycle."
True of every weapon in the world , past and present.
"The star chamber and bolt face are perhaps the single biggest design flaw of the AR-15. That’s the eight-petaled flower at the front of the bolt. Flowers don’t belong in assault rifles. Some say the star chamber provides accuracy. It does not. Bolt-action sniper rifles don’t have star chambers. They have two or three lug bolts and they are the gold standard for accuracy.
Ask any soldier about weapons inspection and they will tell you the test is worming a pinky in the chamber of the rifle. The pinky never comes out clean and that should give us a clue. The single most important part of the rifle is nearly impossible to keep clean even in a garrison setting. Think about that for a minute: the point where the bolt, bullet, and barrel meet is almost impossible to keep clean in an AR-15."
Apparently, he has not had the pleasure of cleaning a Mauser-type design for inspection by a mean-spirited Stabsfeldwebel. They all suffer from the same difficultly of cleaning inside the locking recesses. Most Mannlichers share this design "feature" . . . Quit whining.
"Almost all infantry soldiers carry cleaning rods to clear this brutal malfunction so they can knock a spent casing out of the chamber and get back in the fight."
Not since 1967 . . .
"The bullet itself is a reliability issue. The 5.56 has a relatively long, slightly tapered casing which begs for issues disengaging it from the chamber."
The body taper of the 5.56mm cartridge case is almost exactly the same as the 7.62mm, the .30-06, and the 5.45mm, Gasp!
"Why do we only load 28 rounds into a 30 round magazine?"
We never did. And all my time in the Army, the only time I saw a down-loaded magazine was at the qualification range, when you got 4 ten round magazines, or three rounders for zeroing...
"The hammer only goes to a 90 degree angle, which is ok, but does not take into account any mishaps, cold or weak primers, or a bolt that is not seated all the way."
Or firing out-of-battery. Incidentally, all weapons include this "feature" . . .
Editor's Note: Before you flame a 28-year Green Beret, please be so kind as to read the research attached below. Then, flame away.
I see three news articles that seem highly biased, to the point of being click-bait, and an actual report that disproves everything in this article and the other three. From the summary:
CNA conducted over 2,600 surveys with soldiers who had returned from Iraq or Afghanistan within the previous 12 months and had engaged in a firefight using the M9, M4, M16 (A2 or A4), or M249 during their last deployment.
Soldiers reported being most satisfied with the M4 and least satisfied with the M9. This trend was found with regard to satisfaction with weapon accessories, maintainability, training, cleaning equipment, ammunition, corrosion resistance, accuracy, smoke/noise/flash, range, and rate of fire.
When soldiers were asked if they experienced a weapon stoppage at any time during an engagement in theater, they reported the most stoppages with the M9 (26 percent) and the M249 (30 percent). Most stoppages were reported to have a small impact on continuing in the engagement with the weapon. . . .Over fifty percent of soldiers utilizing the M4 and M16 reported that they never experienced a stoppage while in theater (this finding includes stoppages during an entire deployment and is therefore not limited to firefights and includes training).
Soldiers issued cleaning kits were less likely to experience stoppages and more likely to be confident in weapon reliability. However, weapon cleaning type and frequency had little impact on stoppages
and repairs overall.
I find the author's research severely lacking, he is apparently very deficient in weapons design knowledge in general and with the M16 in particular. And, a little confession, I am not the M16's biggest fan, but I can judge it without bias.I will happily admit the M16 has some flaws, and some are quite bad, but all in all, it performs adequately enough that lives are not being placed in danger by its continued used by the military.