Army Possibly Phasing Out M-16

[Jonno06]

lmao..i like m-16's even though tey do jam up like a mofo.

[Army]

After 15 years of firing any and all weapons known around the world, I will take an M16 over anything else. They do not jam like a "Mofo" when properly cared for, like ANY weapon system.

Reliability is dependant on the user, keep your weapon clean, and it will work. Ignore the basic tenents of firearms, and it will not work. AK's are over-rated; too heavy, too unweildy, does not "fit" anyone of any stature, too crudely made regardless of which country made it, will indeed fail from being dirty, will not take a lot of abuse, and are terribly inaccurate.....but you can make a million of them for pennies.....or rubles. 7.62X39 ammo is only good for about 200m...IF you can hit anything with it. It has only about the same power factor as the .30-30.

5.56 ammo was first designed to be marginally stabilized by the original AR15. The original twist rate of 1-14" (one turn in 14") realized a bullet the would upset and tumble when it struck nearly anything. This tumbling would result in horrendous fatal woundings, if not actual limb removal. The twist was sped up to 1-12" when the rifle was first adopted by the Air Force in the early 60's. The M16A1 found the twist rate up to 1-9", and the M16A2 series is spun to 1-7".

The sad result in the faster twist rates, is the OVER-stabilized bullet, causing it to simply continue to spin as it travels through a body. All this does is make a 5.56mm hole with minimal, if any, collateral damages. Couple that with the newer, and heavier 69 grain "SS-109" ammo which contains a steel penetrator, and you have a wholesale lack of stopping power. This can easily be fixed by slowing the twist rates to at least 1-12", and going back to the original 55 grain bullet.

OK, on other things: The Steyr AUG is crap. The G36 is an over-engineered, delicate bit of expected Teutonic design (think BMW in a destruction derby). The Brit L-80/L-84 is a joke, but only when it is working as advertised. The OICW is a nightmare for anyone unlucky enough to get saddled with it in the field. The French F1 "Le Clarion" is the silliest firearm ever given to a civilized army, or even the French army.

My druthers? Re-engineer the FN-FAL (not the FNC) for 5.56mm and in carbine length. But I'll happily take a 7.62mm FAL into battle if given the choice.

BTW: most COLT M4's are nothing more than rebuilt M16A1's, and retain the full-auto markings on the receiver, but have been fitted with A2 internals for burst fire only. Many non-Colt M4 rifles were built on AR15 receivers, with NO provision for full-auto or burst modes.

If Dansim says his M4 didn't have full-auto....then it didn't.

[oldsoldier]

On a side note for the "jams like a mofo"...one, that is a wholly ignorant statement. When they first fielded the rifle, yes, there were pronblems. Mainly, they were because they were rushed into service, and proper maintenance wasnt taught. Also, the round wasnt perfected, poor quality control of the pwder, and, no forward assist. The addition of the forward assist was arguably one of the best steps forward for this rifle. It virtually stopped 90% of the problem created from fouled bolts/barrels. The "myth" of a poorly functioning rifle only exists from its first 4 years of service. In it current incarnation, it is an extremely functional and reliable weapon. Yes, it requires maintenance. So does every other rifle. You can get away with doing nothing more to an M16 than wiping down the bolt, cleaning the barrel, and oiling it. All in all, 10 minutes of work. UNfortunately, no one but the combat arms in the military appreciates this fact. It sickens me to hear of ambushes where soldiers didnt fire back because their weapon malfunctioned. I assure you, regular weapons PM will keep it firing in ANY weather condition. I have done so, and enforce regular maintenance on my soldiers every 3 days.

[nippinout]

Originally posted by oldsoldier
Quick story; a friend of mine was with 10th Mountaiin in Afghanistan. They had racked up so many kills at night, just merely walking up on ther enemy, that the Afghans stopped coming out after dark. We made them afraid of the night.

Afraid of the night. That is just amazing.

If oldsoldier trusts his rifle, it's gotta be good.

[Jonneh]

G11's 4 lyfe. Those things are cool.

[Torbo]

Originally posted by Army
The sad result in the faster twist rates, is the OVER-stabilized bullet, causing it to simply continue to spin as it travels through a body. All this does is make a 5.56mm hole with minimal, if any, collateral damages. Couple that with the newer, and heavier 69 grain "SS-109" ammo which contains a steel penetrator, and you have a wholesale lack of stopping power. This can easily be fixed by slowing the twist rates to at least 1-12", and going back to the original 55 grain bullet.

thats what i wanted to know, and was getting at. Thank you for explaining it.

[p8ntball1016]

Originally posted by Army
After 15 years of firing any and all weapons known around the world, I will take an M16 over anything else. They do not jam like a "Mofo" when properly cared for, like ANY weapon system.

Reliability is dependant on the user, keep your weapon clean, and it will work. Ignore the basic tenents of firearms, and it will not work. AK's are over-rated; too heavy, too unweildy, does not "fit" anyone of any stature, too crudely made regardless of which country made it, will indeed fail from being dirty, will not take a lot of abuse, and are terribly inaccurate.....but you can make a million of them for pennies.....or rubles. 7.62X39 ammo is only good for about 200m...IF you can hit anything with it. It has only about the same power factor as the .30-30.

5.56 ammo was first designed to be marginally stabilized by the original AR15. The original twist rate of 1-14" (one turn in 14") realized a bullet the would upset and tumble when it struck nearly anything. This tumbling would result in horrendous fatal woundings, if not actual limb removal. The twist was sped up to 1-12" when the rifle was first adopted by the Air Force in the early 60's. The M16A1 found the twist rate up to 1-9", and the M16A2 series is spun to 1-7".

The sad result in the faster twist rates, is the OVER-stabilized bullet, causing it to simply continue to spin as it travels through a body. All this does is make a 5.56mm hole with minimal, if any, collateral damages. Couple that with the newer, and heavier 69 grain "SS-109" ammo which contains a steel penetrator, and you have a wholesale lack of stopping power. This can easily be fixed by slowing the twist rates to at least 1-12", and going back to the original 55 grain bullet.

OK, on other things: The Steyr AUG is crap. The G36 is an over-engineered, delicate bit of expected Teutonic design (think BMW in a destruction derby). The Brit L-80/L-84 is a joke, but only when it is working as advertised. The OICW is a nightmare for anyone unlucky enough to get saddled with it in the field. The French F1 "Le Clarion" is the silliest firearm ever given to a civilized army, or even the French army.

My druthers? Re-engineer the FN-FAL (not the FNC) for 5.56mm and in carbine length. But I'll happily take a 7.62mm FAL into battle if given the choice.

BTW: most COLT M4's are nothing more than rebuilt M16A1's, and retain the full-auto markings on the receiver, but have been fitted with A2 internals for burst fire only. Many non-Colt M4 rifles were built on AR15 receivers, with NO provision for full-auto or burst modes.

If Dansim says his M4 didn't have full-auto....then it didn't.

but the m16 wont be around forever. in time its variants will be replaced with the xm8 and the oicw. hk has a good background in weapons. i think that the guns they make may be overengineered but these guns need to protect our soldiers in battle. they already have made weapons such as the usp socom and the mp5 that are already in use in our military.

[Jeffy-CanCon]

The most interesting thing in this thread has been the news that troops in Afghanistan were simply walking up to the Taliban under cover of darkness. That's impressive, and seems to justify the effort to build a night-fighting army.

The G11 is cool, Jonneh, but SFAIK it is not in production, and probably never will be. The Germans found it to be expensive and impractical. I heard this from a friend who was working as a firearms identification tech with the RCMP.

Army - I used to carry an FNC1 (Canadian FAL). They are rather heavy, significantly longer than the M16, and a bit fussy about sand and mud. Still, I loved mine and I see where you are coming from.

On the subject of foreign made weapons for the US military, I don't think the Army has issued significant #s of foreign built weapons since WW1. The Berettas are made under license in the USA, I think. And the H&K smgs and pistols are not in general issue, but only to SpecOps (I think). The USMC uses Belgian FN MAG-58 gpmg's, rather than M60's, but I understand that they get a little more leeway from Congress because they are a smaller force. They also use Canadian built APCs.

Funny thing about weapon weights, ranges and stopping power - they have all been going down for at least 100years, and armchair strategists have been complaining the whole time about the new weapons being too small/short-ranged. When the Brits moved from a ~.400 Martini-Henry to the .303 it was decried as being a weak round! But it had an effective range of almost a mile( and people hunt elephants with it). Each generation of ammo since, .308 to .223, has had less stopping power, and a shorter range. Each time the shorter range is justified by studies showing that the previous generation of weapons were usually used at less than their maximum range.

[-J�ker-]

http://strategypage.com/gallery/default.asp?target=xm8.htm

The U.S. Army has ordered 200 experimental XM-8 5.56mm assault rifles (shown below in a concept drawing) from German firm Heckler-Koch. The XM-8 is derived from the hugely successful Heckler-Koch G36 assault rifle (shown above). This weapon was modified to serve as the 5.56mm portion of the XM29 OICW weapon (which has a 20mm computer controlled weapon on top). The XM29 has not been able to get it's weight down to acceptable levels, but the Heckler-Koch has been very impressive. In recent tests, G36s were fired thousands of times, without being cleaned and in dusty and sandy terrain, and the weapons didn't jam. This was no accident, as Heckler-Koch have developed an innovative mechanism for the G36 that keeps crud from building up and jamming the weapon. It's expected that the XM8 will demonstrate the same degree of reliability during late 2003 field tests. While the major appeal of the XM8 is reliability, Heckler-Koch designs are also noted for their flexibility. The XM8 will also be able to easily switch barrels (standard, short for a carbine and longer and heavier for light machine-gun use). Heckler-Koch can also easily adapt their rugged design to accept a larger caliber round. This is important as many in the army are asking for something in the 6-7mm range to replace the current 5.56mm. A larger round would reduce instances where one hit did not knock down an enemy soldier, and would also make it easier to blast through doors, walls and dirt. On the downside, Congress may be reluctant to spend billions of dollars on a German design, after Germany tried to block America's invasion of Iraq. Sensing this possibility, Heckler-Koch has already begun scouting possible locations for a U.S. based plant to built the M8 rifle.

[SlartyBartFast]

I'd like to handle an F2000. (http://www.fnhusa.com/contents/tw_f2000.htm) Plus, that last accessory listed (http://www.fnhusa.com/contents/ll_303.htm

[Sir_Brass]

My druthers? Re-engineer the FN-FAL (not the FNC) for 5.56mm and in carbine length. But I'll happily take a 7.62mm FAL into battle if given the choice.

Now, I'm not speaking from any experience of actually firing the weapon, but from what I hear from guys who have AND from playing Rainbow Six 3 (yes, I know that sounds funny, but bear with me. Red storm worked their BUTTS OFF to get the weapons in that game as realistic in function in-game as possible), the FAL is an EXCELLENT battle rifle. Yeah, it's kind of long and heavy, but it packs one hell of a punch, and really good range. You want a good CQB variation of the FAL, then maybe try the FNC, that thing is pretty darn decent as well.

But I have heard from guys who have actually shot an FAL that it is one hell of a weapon

[banzaimf]

My biggest problem with the current M-16/m-4 and other variants it the total lack of knockdown power. During the Cold War, in a battle with another army, there was relevance to a wounding round. Current combat roles seem to suggest that a round with signifigant stopping power would be prefferable. I had heard an interesting anectdote from a retired general being interviewed on THC. He commented that he'd heard stories coming out of Afghanistan, in which, during the winter fighting, Taliban forces were taking multiple rounds center mass and not going down. Once they were able to get to the taliban forces, they were finding rounds stopped in one of the many layers of jackets and sweaters that are required to keep warm on Afghani mountains.

[p8ntball1016]

stopping power is a major problem. i have heard rumors of a 6.88mm rifle round being introduced.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Army
My druthers? Re-engineer the FN-FAL (not the FNC) for 5.56mm and in carbine length. But I'll happily take a 7.62mm FAL into battle if given the choice.

amen to that.

[Nomad]

Just outta curiosity has anyone here ever heard of the Diemaco C7A1 / C8A1?

Just wondering what's everyone's opinion of them.