RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,158468,00.html

There have always been concerns about the M-16.
America is a nation of rifleman, we should have the best. The short op rod system by Bushmaster and H&K would seem to be the best avenue to at least keep from dumping gas/unburnt powder into the bolt face.

For lethality the 6.5 Grendel seems a good compromise for compactness and downrange accuracy/lethality. We could rebarrel M-14,s and sniper rifles to that caliber for reported downrange accuracy and energy retained at distance.

The .308 in the M-14's combined with a shorter barrel and new chassis could also serve well and is compatible with current stocks of ammo.

In Iraq and Afghanistan the enemy always seems to have RPG's a poor mans artillery. Short of an air strike or tank to take out that position, we take casualties.

Where are our rifle squads not equipped with a man portable rocket launcher or knee mortar? Why won't our rifles launch grenades.(Not the 203 system) Most other military rifles can launch a grenade, our M1's could. Every rifle should be able to launch a grenade.

In Afghanistan we endured a firefight lost helicopters due to an ambush from a bunker manned by a machine gun with mortar support. Our troops did not have/use smoke grenades, or have a rocket launcher, or mortar to take out the bunker, air support was marginal due to our troops proximity to the bunker. A rocket launcher/mortar system might have solved the problem.

The enemy trades information on what tactics work against us, what our morale/fighting spirit is and seek to undermine our character by making narcotics available overseas and at home. The goal to win a media war to win politically what they cannot do on the field.

A tactic the works against us in Afghanistan or Iraq or anywhere else is passed around and used against us in a larger scale.

We need to constantly adapt,overcome and use initiative. security for our operations is paramount.

The greatest failures in keeping secrets have been our own NSA,Navy,FBI,CIA personnel who sold our secrets for money. Often operating for 15 years or more without detection.

AS USUAL THE GUYS MAKING THE DECISIONS ABOUT THE M-16 , M-4 RIFLES ARE'NT THE ONES CARRYING THEM INTO COMBAT. THERE ARE BETTER RIFLES OUT THERE AND I THINK THEY SHOULD FIRE ANYONE WHO DOES'NT THINK THE GRUNTS DESERVE THE BEST AND MOST LETHAL WEAPON THEY CAN GET. YES THE 5.56 IS A WEAK ROUND AND MOST STATES WON'T LET YOU HUNT DEER SIZED GAME WITH IT. IT SHOULD BE UPED TO 6.8 OR 6.5 GRENDEL. THEY ARE NOT THINKING THAT THE END USERS HAVE TO SPEND ALOT OF TIME CLEANING THEIR WEAPON AND KEEPING IT THAT WAY. THEY SPENT MILLIONS ON THE XM-8 AND DID'NT FIELD IT AND FOR SOME TO SAY IT WOULD TAKE DOWN DIFFERENTLY THAN THE M-16 FAMILY IS LUDICRIS,ARE THEY SAYING GRUNTS ARE STUPID? TRAINING IS WHAT IT IS ABOUT PERIOD..WE RESEARCH AND DEVELOP SOMETHING LIKE THE RAPTOR AT THE COST OF TWO OR THREE OF THOSE PLANES YOU COULD OUTFIT ALL THE GRUNTS WITH THE RIFLES THEY NEED. I AM TIRED OF THE OLD THINKING OF THESE SO CALLED EXPERTS THAT GAVE THE ARMY THE ACU,WHAT A JOKE! THE UNIFORM DOES'NT BLEND INTO ANY TERRAIN AND THE AIR FORCE FOLLOWED THEM WITH THE SAME COLORS ON THEIR DIGI TIGER STRIPES! WHEN DID THE AIR FORCE NEED CAMO. MOST OF THE AIRMEN ATTACHED OR WORKING WITH THE OTHER SERVICES WEAR THAT SERVICES CAMO (I HAVE SEEN THAT) WE NEED COMMON SENSE IN THE PROCUREMENT DEPT. LETS DEMAND THE POLITICIANS PUT PEOPLE IN THERE THAT WANT TO HELP AND IMPROVE OUR MILITARY AND NOT WHAT THEY THINK LOOKS GOOD OR IS PC. SORRY COLT BUT YOU HAVE HAD YEARS TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER. THE PEOPLE FIGHTING OUR WARS NOW DESERVE THE BEST GEAR THEY CAN GET. SEMPER FI

how many times did the ak jam?

I am OUTRAGED our soldiers are being equipped with inferior weapons.

Just love the comment made by BG Mark Brown. Seems the generals that buy this gear always think it is the greatest since "sliced bread."

In dusty conditions, give me my old M-14 anytime.

I read, years ago, the Army didn't want to arm everybody with the M4. But, when Colt lost the production contract to build the M16, the Congressman for Colt's district put huge quantities of M4s into the military budget to help Colt.

Kinda like when there were no M1 tanks procured one year. The plan was to shut the plant to transform the production line to M1A1 production. The local Congressman put 100 M1s into the budget. The M1s were built, then sat and rusted while the line was transformed. Then they had to be torn apart and rebuilt to M1A1 standards.

Hello to my fellow rifle men....in response to 13062380.....rifle grenades....good point...how wever are you talking about one that requires a special blank to fire it .....or a bullit through type? its important when your in a fire fight.....wrong ammo will get you pasted....and the comments of my fellow Marine First in action..he is correct....the lard *** Generals arent the ones using the tool's of our trade....they inturn should not be the deciding factor....after all thats how we got stuck with the mouse gun back in the 60's

The Army brass needs a news assault rifle period. Otherwise, put the Army brass on point in Iraq.

quote:

Originally posted by FIRSTNACTION:
AS USUAL THE GUYS MAKING THE DECISIONS ABOUT THE M-16 , M-4 RIFLES ARE'NT THE ONES CARRYING THEM INTO COMBAT. THERE ARE BETTER RIFLES OUT THERE AND I THINK THEY SHOULD FIRE ANYONE WHO DOES'NT THINK THE GRUNTS DESERVE THE BEST AND MOST LETHAL WEAPON THEY CAN GET. YES THE 5.56 IS A WEAK ROUND AND MOST STATES WON'T LET YOU HUNT DEER SIZED GAME WITH IT. IT SHOULD BE UPED TO 6.8 OR 6.5 GRENDEL. THEY ARE NOT THINKING THAT THE END USERS HAVE TO SPEND ALOT OF TIME CLEANING THEIR WEAPON AND KEEPING IT THAT WAY. THEY SPENT MILLIONS ON THE XM-8 AND DID'NT FIELD IT AND FOR SOME TO SAY IT WOULD TAKE DOWN DIFFERENTLY THAN THE M-16 FAMILY IS LUDICRIS,ARE THEY SAYING GRUNTS ARE STUPID? TRAINING IS WHAT IT IS ABOUT PERIOD..WE RESEARCH AND DEVELOP SOMETHING LIKE THE RAPTOR AT THE COST OF TWO OR THREE OF THOSE PLANES YOU COULD OUTFIT ALL THE GRUNTS WITH THE RIFLES THEY NEED. I AM TIRED OF THE OLD THINKING OF THESE SO CALLED EXPERTS THAT GAVE THE ARMY THE ACU,WHAT A JOKE! THE UNIFORM DOES'NT BLEND INTO ANY TERRAIN AND THE AIR FORCE FOLLOWED THEM WITH THE SAME COLORS ON THEIR DIGI TIGER STRIPES! WHEN DID THE AIR FORCE NEED CAMO. MOST OF THE AIRMEN ATTACHED OR WORKING WITH THE OTHER SERVICES WEAR THAT SERVICES CAMO (I HAVE SEEN THAT) WE NEED COMMON SENSE IN THE PROCUREMENT DEPT. LETS DEMAND THE POLITICIANS PUT PEOPLE IN THERE THAT WANT TO HELP AND IMPROVE OUR MILITARY AND NOT WHAT THEY THINK LOOKS GOOD OR IS PC. SORRY COLT BUT YOU HAVE HAD YEARS TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER. THE PEOPLE FIGHTING OUR WARS NOW DESERVE THE BEST GEAR THEY CAN GET. SEMPER FI

This certainly should not come as a shock to anyone as we've known for decades the M-16 was never all it was cracked up to be. Regardless of its shorfalls, the military has still been saddled with it only because of Congress and the good old boy system, namely Colt and company. I would love to see any one of them in a combat situation where they had to take 10 seconds or less to clear a jam...that could be a lifetime in a battle, in 10 seconds it could be all over and your shipped home in a body bag.

Our son dislikes the weapon as well as most of the men in his unit. Without going into detail, many of them are carrying AK's and believe it or not, old .45 cal grease guns they got from Iraqi weapons caches. I always liked the grease gun and carried one in my aircraft as an additional weapon to back up my M-60 (I really wanted a Thompson but couldn't get one). Never has a problem with the grease gun when say a link jamned the 60 and didn't have time to clear it or change a barrel that was real hot (who the hell was going to grab an asbestos glove, unclip the barrel, grab the spare barrel, insert it, lock it and reload) just a lot easier to grab the grease gun.

I cannot see why they don't retrofit the 16's a 4's with a better gas operating system. There are some good kits out there. I believe a company called ARC has about the best available. Simple, easy and cost effective.

S/F Gordon

Even after seeing the results themselves, they still do not get it! If they are concerned with replacing the whole system, why not get the HK upgrade and be done with it? The M-16 is a piece of **** compared to something with a piston system. My damn Mini 14 puts the M-16 to shame. And, it doesn't need to be cleaned every time you look it.

"The force will tell you the weapon system is reliable, they're confident in it"

This is telling comment here. Some guy back at the Pentagon is telling you that the troops don't want a new gun. The one they are using is just fine. But let's face some ugly facts here.

The vast majority of guys in the field have only ever fired one battlefield rifle. The M-4 (M-16). Their experience level with weapons is minimal. The average soldier never fired a weapon until he got to basic. He is like the guy that never owned any car except a Ford Taurus. And his boss is telling him that is all he will ever need. So that is what he is saying.

To replace the M-4 is a decision best left to people that actually know that other weapons exist. To people who know that if you shoot someone the idea is to kill them not slow them up to make them an easier target.

One other thing. Telling us that just keeping the M-4 clean is key to making it the weapon to keep? What a load of bovine waste. Any soldier, sailor, marine or airman had best keep his weapon clean. WTF it aint going to work long if it is dirty as a babies diaper.

While we're replacing the M4, can we get a little love for the medics? frickin' 9mm, might as well throw the bullets...

As normal the folks deciding most proberlly have jobs waiting when they retire. The M16 series has been a pos since started. those of us that knew the old guns, M14 M1909 springfeild, liike the reduction in weight but the stopping power and realiblity sucked. I was an Armoror in the army- lets see to get a weapoan right for inspection boil cleaner and dip parts into mixture.. cuse any other ways the weapon as it coled would seep out carbon resadue. when I retired in 92 the m16 was a pos and almost 20 years latter still is. Stats and test results can be made to show whatever you wish.

Excellent Comments by all.

Never Forget, Defense Secretary McNamara began this failure of the weapon systems in 1965 when he issued s directive to Colt Industries to eliminate the chroming of the bolt and chamber of the M-16. This cost reduction cost many a Marine and Soldiers life in SE Asia and began the constant cleaning to prevent jamming.
...The comment,"My Mini-14 never jams" is because the bolt and chamber is chromed. (not shinny chrome as we think of chrome, metallurically chromed as in (teflon slick non-sticking qualities).
Politicians must have votes to be relected, American Defense Industries must have Politicians support. You have read the previous comments about the M-1, you get the point, no need for me to elaborate further.

quote:

Originally posted by Woody_in_La:
Even after seeing the results themselves, they still do not get it! If they are concerned with replacing the whole system, why not get the HK upgrade and be done with it? The M-16 is a piece of **** compared to something with a piston system. My damn Mini 14 puts the M-16 to shame. And, it doesn't need to be cleaned every time you look it.

The fix is in.Anyone disagree?

What gets me is that they do not look at lives saved, but the expense of getting a new weapons system. You have people who have developed a new weapon, and developed a new caliber for the weapon. Its there, and the army still will not go for it. SF has the weapon, so why not use something that has already been proven to work, and work well. I get sick and tired of bean counters.

Its been a long time ago for me, but I distinctively remember the first M-16 Mattellamatic I was issued. It was so damn cute. Light and easy to sight and very little recoil. Having grown up in a rural farming community and having used weapons of many types and with the tutoring of my WWII father I was a really good marksman. In fact I fired expert and marksman with the M-16. However it always made me nervous to think that one day I would have to carry one in a war zone (which I did) because the one I was issued would only fire 25-30 rounds before it would hang up. So pull the pin and break it open and it would look like someone had dumped the waste from a BBQ grill in the bolt area. I was soooo happy to get a M14.

Dont know squat about the M-16, M-4,.......whatever. What I do know is that by and large the people who are familiar with it dont like it. There have been better weapons developed for use by our military and still the powers that be will not adopt them,... that's just wrong.

Whatever direction is eventually taken, I hope the manufacturer is American.

Accuracy, better operational reliability, ease of cleaning, greater stopping power, extended service life and adaptability.

The M-4 was not around then, but we did have the same troubles with the old XM-177E2...the Colt Commando.

I sure was glad to have the M-21 as a primary.

The procurement office seems to have the same fixation they always did.