No more burst fire mode?

[CLP]

This is news to me. I was told the Army is converting its M4s to full auto. I don't if my leg's being pulled or not. I thought the idea behind the burst mode was to prevent panicked individuals from emptying their magazines- I guess conventional thinking has changed.

 

[cslinger]

I thought the M4 was a true select fire full auto from day 1. The M16 had that horribly implemented burst mechanism.

I could be wrong so don't take as gospel.

As far as conventional thinking most of these are shot semi anyway from what I have seen and been told.

 

[Wisco]

M4 is safe-semi-burst
M4A1 is safe-semi-auto

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/tech/2015/07/04/army-m4a1-rifle-carbine/28173291/

 

[Devonai]

When I was in the infantry, we only used burst at the end of a range day when we wanted to burn off "extra" ammo. Everything else was semi. I didn't use burst as part of an official course of fire until I transferred to the Air Guard and became a Security Forces augmentee.

Interestingly, the two candidates in my class failed only because they couldn't complete the burst fire portion of M4 qual (which was too bad for them, since it was the last bit of training of a 40-hour class).

Giving more soldiers the option of full-auto is fine if you train them on when to use it. Personally I've only trained on full-auto systems like the M249, M60 and M240B, which are obviously very different animals. Still, I wouldn't use an M4 in full-auto unless I was less than 15 meters from my target, or burst in less than 25.

 

[statelineblues]

I thought the M4 was a true select fire full auto from day 1. The M16 had that horribly implemented burst mechanism.

Back in the day (late 1970's) the M16 I carried was SAFE-SEMI-AUTO and we were taught trigger control.

 

[USAF_Vet]

Devonai, I was an SF augmetee, too, after 9/11. That was a fun week of training. Did you guys get to use any 40mm?

Aside from the M4 burst training, I also got trained on the M249 and the M2.

My issue M4 in Iraq was Safe-Semi-Burst, never did fire it in anything but semi.

We were taught trigger control, too, like everyone else. But some guys who aren't really accustomed to shooting, who are in a stressful situation for the first time, like their first enemy contact, a bit of panic can set in and full auto is as dangerous to the guys on their left and right as it is to the enemy. I had a guy dump half a mag trying to clear a non-existent jam on his weapon. He ditched it for his side arm until he ran it dry. When he went back to his rifle, training kicked in and he turned it from Safe to Semi and re-engaged. Yeah, his weapon didn't operate and he SPORTS the hell out of it, all because the safety was engaged.

The guy was an activated reservist with 13 years total time in service, 10 of which was on active duty US Army. He wasn't an 11B, so he didn't have anywhere near the level of familiarization. Of that real one and only fire fight I had, that was one of the biggest things that stood out and stuck in my memory.

 

[WardenWolf]

Full-auto isn't very useful normally, but I can see it being extremely useful for clearing a room.

 

[Drail]

Very useful for Hollywood. Pretty impractical for guys who must actually hump all that ammo.

 

[GRIZ22]

The big advantage of FA in a M4 is you get a much better semiauto trigger. The mechanism used for burst fire makes the trigger horrible in semi. The fact it has a memory is also a bad feature IMO. If you short stroke the trigger in burst fire and only shoot 1 or 2 rounds, the next pull only gets you 2 or 1 rounds. You can easily shoot 2 or 3 round bursts in FA with proper training.

 

[Sam1911]

Guys, I think the question is whether the Army is changing the triggers on any rifles or not. (Not what the merits of full-auto or burst may be.)

Does anyone actually know?

 

[Nature Boy]

If my memory serves, the 3 round burst rifles were not successful and never fully implemented. I was never issued one and I know that when we deployed in 2006 they were all pretty much phased out, with most of them transferred to the Air Force.

That's my recollection anyway

 

[Theohazard]

Here's an article from the Army Times about it:

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/tech/2015/07/04/army-m4a1-rifle-carbine/28173291/

From that article:

The Army-wide modification of about 483,000 M4 rifles into M4A1 started in 2014, an upgrade now about 11 percent complete according to Picatinny Arsenal spokesman Pete Rowland. The Army's targeted finish line: the end of September 2020.

Since the M4A1 does not have a "burst" setting and instead has "auto", it does look like what the OP heard was correct.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Burst is silly.

Semi is the way to go. Most SpecOps dudes will agree.

 

[1911 guy]

When I was in the Navy (yes, Sailor with guns instead of boats), we were issued M16's with auto capability instead of burst. One man on every 4 man fire team was the Automatic Rifleman. We didn't get issued light machine guns like the M249 and M60's were issued as needed. So everyone was on semi except the guy acting as light machine gun for suppressing fire and final protective fire.

I see three round burst a a solution looking for a problem. Keep it on semi automatic unless you're the designated man for suppressive fire. And just spraying rounds downrange isn't doing anything. It has to be hitting close enough to make them keep their heads down and controlled enough to not have to reload every three seconds.

 

[dogmush]

Yep, we are. For a variety of reasons, based on a lot of feedback from the field. The Auto feature isn't the only difference between the M4 and the M4A1.

The article linked below even has a picture of them laser engraving the marking in the OP's pics.

http://soldiersystems.net/2014/05/23/army-begins-upgrade-m4-carbines/

 

[lysanderxiii]

There once was a test of muzzle rise and controlability in a variety of full automatic weapons. One of the things that came out of that test was all weapons had a some tendency to climb, but at some point a 'steady state', could be achieved and the firer could hold the weapon pretty much on target. For an M16, the steady state was reached after about three rounds.

This was before the M16A2 was introduced. After the adoption of the three round burst, one of the testers noted that all the three round burst did was guarantee two out of three rounds would miss.

 

[J_McLeod]

My unit in Korea just got them, and we're no where near the top priority.

 

[yugorpk]

There once was a test of muzzle rise and controlability in a variety of full automatic weapons. One of the things that came out of that test was all weapons had a some tendency to climb, but at some point a 'steady state', could be achieved and the firer could hold the weapon pretty much on target. For an M16, the steady state was reached after about three rounds.

This was before the M16A2 was introduced. After the adoption of the three round burst, one of the testers noted that all the three round burst did was guarantee two out of three rounds would miss.

Instead of FA where 29 of 30 miss?

 

[lysanderxiii]

If you aren't afraid of it, you can hold more than that on target.....

(provided you not expecting to keep them in the 5 ring.)

 

[yugorpk]

If you aren't afraid of it, you can hold more than that on target.....

(provided you not expecting to keep them in the 5 ring.)

The average soldier trains for about 12 minutes with Full Auto. While there are some specially trained troops that can make use of full auto fire for the vast majority of soldiers its a waste of ammo with shots flying everywhere. I always thought the 3 round burst was a great idea for the majority of soldiers. It slows you down and gets you back in the vicinity of the target. My experience with 3 round burst was that at 100 yards shot 2 and 3 would be 10-12 inches up for each shot past the first one.

 

[bearcreek]

Take a look at the article dogmush provided, if you haven't already. They're doing a fair bit more than just switch to a full auto trigger. The burst triggers suck (full disclosure, I have not used one. This is based on a good understanding of firearm actions and diagrams of the two operating mechanisms). This explains the increased accuracy they've observed when using the M4A1 in semi mode. They're also getting ambi selectors as well as a number of new wear parts like barrels, bolts, gas tubes, pins, etc. Are the barrels of the two versions the same? Side note, per the article, I found it interesting that they're averaging 12,000 rds between stoppages. Thats got to annoy the "AR's suck, AK's rock" crowd.

 

[USAF_Vet]

The barrels on the M4A1 are heavier than the M4. I don't know the profile or weight difference, but the M4A1+ is getting the heavier barrel of the M4A1.

 

[herrwalther]

Full-auto isn't very useful normally, but I can see it being extremely useful for clearing a room.

Three round burst is far more useful in room clearing. Pulling the trigger while aimed at the waist area will send the first round there and the following two in the middle of the thoracic cavity. Typical training of room clearing is to put two rounds in the thoracic on semi. Using burst adds a bonus incapacitating shot to the hips.

Full auto is another story. The rounds would ideally climb up the thoracic in a mostly straight line. I have trained with soldiers doing room clearing with full auto rifles and none of them were able to create an ideal shot placement with full auto.

 

[12Bravo20]

I was issued both the M16A1 and M16A2 when I was in the Army. I can say from personal experience that the semi-auto trigger pull was better on the A1 compared to the A2.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Our M4s don't have a very good semi-auto trigger.

We treat burst mostly as a novelty. The general consensus in my unit is that semi-auto is much more effective.