Senator Tells Army to Reconsider M4

[Capstick1]

They need to replace the M16.

The 5.56mm rifles in use now are basically varmint rifles. The armed forces need to bring back the M14's and make the 7.62mm the standard issue round.
I know they're already talking about replacing the Beretta 9mm's with .45's.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Vern,

If we could just get somebody as articulate and well reasoned as you to oppose your every view we could dispense with all this mucking about with multiple posts and posters and just go with you and your opposite to make all the salient points to be made on any given subject.

Yes, but where could we find such a misguided and ill-informed person?

 

[buzz_knox]

The funny thing is that in terms of wound ballistics, the standard M80 7.62mm ball round isn't the lightning bolt of Zeus that so many make it out to be. It many cases, it works the same as 5.56, which means it works if the shot placement is great and the moons of Uranus are aligned with Jupiter and Mercury is in Venus' third house or whatever.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The funny thing is that in terms of wound ballistics, the standard M80 7.62mm ball round isn't the lightning bolt of Zeus that so many make it out to be. It many cases, it works the same as 5.56, which means it works if the shot placement is great and the moons of Uranus are aligned with Jupiter and Mercury is in Venus' third house or whatever.

For most combat situations, Amor Piercing is the proper round -- people will get behind things when you shoot at the, as unsporting as that sounds. 7.62mm AP is an impressive penetrator. It's particularly good for repeat shots at a material barrier.

 

[Chuck R.]

The funny thing is that in terms of wound ballistics, the standard M80 7.62mm ball round isn't the lightning bolt of Zeus that so many make it out to be. It many cases, it works the same as 5.56, which means it works if the shot placement is great and the moons of Uranus are aligned with Jupiter and Mercury is in Venus' third house or whatever.

Yup, Infantry Magazine SEP/OCT 2006 had an article titled “Small Caliber Lethality” dealing with wound ballistics. Here’s a quote:

“The specific values of the
chart are not meaningful; what is
meaningful is the fact that all of the rounds
act in the same band of performance.
Interestingly, the one 7.62mm round that
received the full evaluation, the M80 fired
from the M14 rifle, performed in the same
band of performance, which would indicate
that for M80 ammunition at least there
appears to be no benefit to the larger caliber
at close quarters range.”

Kind of surprising. Bottom line of the whole article is that “shot placement is key”.

Chuck

 

[Titan6]

Actually the funny thing is they are not even thinking about getting rid of .223.

 

[seeker_two]

I've always thought the M4 made a great submachine gun, but a poor battle rifle...

I'm with the politicians...let's open up the competition to everyone...and every caliber...and get a battle rifle that will do the job.

buzz_knox: Silly rabbit...everyone knows the Star Wars Han Solo blaster is the best of them all....

 

[another okie]

He's not demanding a change. He's asking for openness and competition, which seem like the American way to me.

There are no small arms contractors in Oklahoma. Why does everyone think that cynicism is the best reply to everything? I don't agree with Coburn all the time, but he is honest and hard-working, and he doesn't believe in ear-marks or graft. And he doesn't care if he gets voted out of office for following his conscience. That's pretty rare in Congress. Let's be nice to him.

 

[Titan6]

There are no small arms contractors in Oklahoma. Why does everyone think that cynicism is the best reply to everything?

And Bill Clinton is not from China.

 

[blitzen]

If we all took an objective look at the two different systems. One blew hot gas and crud into the bolt carrier group and the other used a piston to move the bolt. Witch one would you buy? You just have to pretend there hasn't been 30 years of marketing hype to make a good choice.

 

[ServiceSoon]

If we all took an objective look at the two different systems. One blew hot gas and crud into the bolt carrier group and the other used a piston to move the bolt.

Exactly! Why use a system that seems designed to fail. It appears that there are a few people here who think the M16 platform is the holy grail.

This Tom guy is only asking the Army secretary to do their job and "consider" fully investigating the possiblities before spending and possibly wasting our tax dollars.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The M16 is a mature system, and as a system matures, there comes a point where theoretical issues become irrelevant. We don't ask, "Do you think such-and-such a design feature will affect performance," we look and see what the effect is.

As odd as the M16 gas system is, there is no other weapon with such a long combat history, under so many different conditions. And certainly not one that has demonstrated greater reliability under those conditions.

The theoretically perfect system may well fail under the conditions the M16 has met -- and there are no tests we can perform to ensure that won't be the case.

 

[Shadowangel]

As odd as the M16 gas system is, there is no other weapon with such a long combat history, under so many different conditions. And certainly not one that has demonstrated greater reliability under those conditions.

Er....AK-47? In use over a decade longer, in half the world. More AK's have been produced than any other assault rifle, and i'd wager that the AK has higher reliability than the M16 or its variants under pretty much any conditions.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

He's not demanding a change. He's asking for openness and competition, which seem like the American way to me.

I might be inclined to agree if we were talking about purchasing a new weapon system; but we are talking about purchasing another batch of a weapon system we have already adopted. Colt is the sole manufacturer (currently) who has the legal rights to the M4 TDP, so they are the only people to buy the rifle from. It isn't like DoD could walk over to Bushmaster and buy them right now.

If Sen. Coburn is suggesting that we should have new competitive trials anytime we buy another batch of small arms, he is introducing even more expense and problems into the process - and one of the "problems" with the M4 is simply that some carbines have been in service for decades now and need replacement and/or repair. Adding a competitive bid before that can happen means less rifles for the same money and a longer wait for the replacement.

As to special operations guys using the HK416 - they have different requirements and some of those requirements (shorter 10" barrels and sound suppressors) are areas where a gas piston has an edge over a direct gas system.

For all the people pimping the HK416, I've yet to see any key pieces of data from H&Ks marketing department like:

1) What is the difference in the mean rounds between stoppage between a newly issued M4 and the new HK416 over a random sample of 100 weapons?

2) What is the total cost (logistics, new rifles, etc.) of replacing the M4 with the HK416?

The threshold MRBS for SCAR was 1 per 2000. Usually the threshold requirement indicates what is already being achieved, so let's assume that the M4 is making 1/2000 MRBS. The highest threshold number I've seen is for the Swedish AK-5 at 1/3,500 MRBS. How much money is it worth to have three less stoppages in 10k rounds?

If we all took an objective look at the two different systems. One blew hot gas and crud into the bolt carrier group and the other used a piston to move the bolt.

Objective eh? If we all took an objective look at the two different systems. One torqued the bolt carrier group violently with every shot and flexed the barrel and upper receiver. The other used the gas impulse of the fired round to move the bolt straight back with minimal weight or disturbance. Which would you choose? Everything in engineering is a tradeoff - you don't get something for nothing.

 

[bpsig]

+ 1 on a open bidding if they pick the winner not like in the m9 trials. where beretta was 2nd and became #1 when dropped $ per unit. then military had to beg sig for enough to fill orders in 228 at 3x $ . I hope he can force the military to convert all rifles to a m5 piston assembly or one in a larger caliber because good enought just is not . I carry my issues m16 or a frankenstein m4 at work daily, Instead of replacing a older m16 it was converted with a new barrel. Which would be good if I ever got to sight it in, instead i use a new m4 for training. But they only replace parts after they break no good pm program . My personal carbines have rails, sights and trijicon or an aimpoint . good tactical slings. BUt if you still dont get regular maintence they go down. Especially with bad magazines which are easily fixed with c mags and magpul followers . we procured another 40 m-4's but had option of colt m-5 model 1020's the piston version . We immediately ordered the m5's instead but We were overruled by upper staff told we could not have them didnt need anything that reliable. So my thought is go with a piston assembly or an ak reliable and fires a round that works albet less than 400 yds. I have used 6.8spc in a m4 and like it but availability is an issue. I would convert my personal and work weapons in a heart beat if possible to a pistol . Failure to stop or work with issue ammo or rifles / pistols do not engender feelings of faith in my weapons. A new round in rifle or changing of cartridge in 5.56 for leathality would go a long way. 9mm is in the safe boat marginal effectivness in fmj. and bad magazine springs . Simple fix call mecgar get new ones and federal efmj ammo . But a better choice is a 40 sw pistol capacity and power. regardless unless forced we are going to be stuck with another varient of m4 without fixing the problems.

 

[Steelcore]

You don't change rifles in the middle of a war.look what happened to the French in WW2.They had two rifles and two cartridges and there were reports of units with Lebels getting MAS ammo and vice versa.

 

[Echo Tango]

Alot of you guys are talking about the old" not changing weapons/ammo" in the middle of a war statement seem to be missing a key factor. Sen Coburn seems to me by the way the article reads to be pushing the HK 416 agenda, which is basically just a upper switch. That means same ammo, same basic functionality of the weapon, just a different gas delivery method.

I think the Senators call for open testing really means....a competition between colts system and HK system with no other weapon systems involed.....wonder if HK is funding his campaign

 

[Onmilo]

Forty years and six million rifles later and people are STILL arguing about the M16!

 

[buzz_knox]

That means same ammo, same basic functionality of the weapon, just a different gas delivery method.

With all sorts of problems of its own. At least, that's what the US Park Police found out when they started training with their 416s . . . and having failures.