Just one question: WHY?

Stupid way to get hurt, I wonder if he had someone hold his beer. Lucky he did not get shrapnel in the face or molted plastic.
 
I've seen someone do something similar with an AK.

My opinion? Do stupid things and win stupid prizes. He's lucky there wasn't a need for EMS.

Secondly, since it IS youtube, it likely will also promote, slightly, the perceived notion that gun owners aren't quite smart. :( I say SLIGHTLY...but at this point I'd prefer no shifting of notions at all.

Lastly - I SINCERELY hope those weren't good/rare parts. :(

D
 
My only question is why are they shooting it up in the air? Must have a long range. This is a pretty atypical failure. Usually the gas tube ruptures and turns it into a single shot which is why he knew to keep his left hand away from the front. New barrel, gas tube, handguard, and gas block and it will be fine.
 
In addition to the aforementioned reasons, there's also the potential that it's at least partially motivated by trolling. People who do ill-advised stunts with guns love it when it riles the people who believe they hold the all-inclusive list of thing that are acceptable to do with guns,
 
In Korea, I was assigned to assist another unit with their annual range quals. I was given a deuce and a half with a ton of ammo, stacks of magazines, and 10 US and KATUSA soldiers. We were told to load 20 round magazines until told to stop.

Problem was, nobody told us to stop. That unit was packing up, and I had a huge number of loaded mags. The officer in charge was aghast, and wondering how to put the genie back in the bottle, but being a resourceful NCO I had the answer. I had each member of my detail snag 4 M16's each, and we went to the firing line. I told them to fire full auto a max of 10 mags each, and then get another rifle, lather, rinse, repeat. We spent the next 45 minutes burning up ammo. Even with the limit of 10 mags each those rifles got hot.

I am glad that it was the other unit that had to clean them, as well as account for all the spent brass.
 
In Korea, I was assigned to assist another unit with their annual range quals. I was given a deuce and a half with a ton of ammo, stacks of magazines, and 10 US and KATUSA soldiers. We were told to load 20 round magazines until told to stop.

Problem was, nobody told us to stop. That unit was packing up, and I had a huge number of loaded mags. The officer in charge was aghast, and wondering how to put the genie back in the bottle, but being a resourceful NCO I had the answer. I had each member of my detail snag 4 M16's each, and we went to the firing line. I told them to fire full auto a max of 10 mags each, and then get another rifle, lather, rinse, repeat. We spent the next 45 minutes burning up ammo. Even with the limit of 10 mags each those rifles got hot.

I am glad that it was the other unit that had to clean them, as well as account for all the spent brass.

Glad to know the government spends our money carefully.
 
Usually the gas tube ruptures and turns it into a single shot...
That's what I was expecting too.
Sooo…. What finally failed? Did the gas tube blow out?
Barrel failure of some sort. Maybe the barrel started to droop and a bullet tried to go straight and caught on something--maybe a badly burned out gas port. Either that was enough to blow the barrel or maybe the one behind it did the trick.
 
ALCON:

I do not know the impetus for this particular video, but the subject of the M16/M4 undergoing malfunction/stoppage in the middle of sustained firefights hit the fan again back in Summer 2008 because of the Dien Bien Phu-like battle of Wanat/Afghanstan. The Times reported that "Soldiers who survived the battle described how their automatic weapons turned white hot and jammed from nonstop firing."

Since then there's been increased interest -- both professional and ad hoc -- as to just how tough s the M16/M4 rifle is in sustained/continuous fire. Some of that interest even discussed here:

Bottom line is that the current combat rifle is a lot tougher than anecdotal stories would suggest -- even when recounted by after-action combat troops -- but not indestructible when pushed beyond its design limits. (And remember, those design characteristics/changes/upgrades have been continuously chosen on balance for all-round needs and limits.)

But why this video at this time ?

Because the little boy in all of us is always testing whether those limits are real,
(It's hard-wired.)
:evil:




postscript: The Naval Institute article cited above ends on a note that the entire chain of command -- down to the company commander -- for the battle of Wanat received career-ending reprimands. Those reprimands were rescinded when it became obvious that those same officers were either ignored of unsupported by further higher ups when advised of problems/developing requirements leading up to the final assault.

In the end, it was the company-grade officers and troopers on the ground who had to dig themselves out of that mess -- even as the zero-defects crowd still try to say "it's got to be somebody's fault" when actual combat extracts a cost... any cost.
 
Last edited:
https://discover.dtic.mil/
The gov tests many things, to know when and if things will fail.

The video guy is more then likely firing a dealer sample, a lot lower cost than a fully transferable M16 that is worth $25,000 or more. The price of $632 was to anyone in 1979, before the ban.

index.php


index.php
 
Last edited:
Back
Top