Posted on 11/22/2003 1:50:36 PM PST by Ex-Dem
BAGHDAD, Iraq - After nearly 40 years of battlefield service around the globe, the M-16 may be on its way out as the standard Army assault rifle because of flaws highlighted during the invasion and occupation of Iraq (news - web sites).
U.S. officers in Iraq say the M-16A2 — the latest incarnation of the 5.56 mm firearm — is quietly being phased out of front-line service because it has proven too bulky for use inside the Humvees and armored vehicles that have emerged as the principal mode of conducting patrols since the end of major fighting on May 1.
The M-16, at nearly 40 inches, is widely considered too long to aim quickly within the confines of a vehicle during a firefights, when reaction time is a matter of life and death.
"It's a little too big for getting in and out of vehicles," said Brig. Gen. Martin Dempsey, commander of the 1st Armored Division, which controls Baghdad. "I can tell you that as a result of this experience, the Army will look very carefully at how it performed."
Instead of the M-16, which also is prone to jamming in Iraq's dusty environment, M-4 carbines are now widely issued to American troops.
The M-4 is essentially a shortened M-16A2, with a clipped barrel, partially retractable stock and a trigger mechanism modified to fire full-auto instead of three-shots bursts. It was first introduced as a personal defense weapon for clerks, drivers and other non-combat troops.
"Then it was adopted by the Special Forces and Rangers, mainly because of its shorter length," said Col. Kurt Fuller, a battalion commander in Iraq and an authority on firearms.
Fuller said studies showed that most of the combat in Iraq has been in urban environments and that 95 percent of all engagements have occurred at ranges shorter than 100 yards, where the M-4, at just over 30 inches long, works best.
Still, experience has shown the carbines also have deficiencies. The cut-down barrel results in lower bullet velocities, decreasing its range. It also tends to rapidly overheat and the firing system, which works under greater pressures created by the gases of detonating ammunition, puts more stress on moving parts, hurting its reliability.
Consequently, the M-4 is an unlikely candidate for the rearming of the U.S. Army. It is now viewed as an interim solution until the introduction of a more advanced design known as the Objective Individual Combat Weapon, or OICW.
There is no date set for the entry into service of the OICW, but officers in Iraq say they expect its arrival sooner than previously expected because of the problems with the M-16 and the M-4.
"Iraq is the final nail in the coffin for the M-16," said a commander who asked not to be identified.
The current version of the M-16 is a far cry from the original, which troops during the Vietnam War criticized as fragile, lacking power and range, and only moderately accurate. At the time, a leading U.S. weapons expert even recommended that American soldiers discard their M-16s and arm themselves with the Kalashnikov AK-47 rifle used by their Vietcong enemy.
Although the M16A1 — introduced in the early 1980s — has been heavily modernized, experts say it still isn't as reliable as the AK-47 or its younger cousin, the AK-74. Both are said to have better "knockdown" power and can take more of a beating on the battlefield.
The FAMAS has an ejection port cover that can be switched to deflect fired cases in either direction in a few seconds. You just turn it around 180 degrees.
You're in procurement, order us up a few dozen of the used ones.
We need to do our part to keep our Military up to date and get these
obsolete weapons out of circulation as quick as we can. I'll FReepmail you my FEDEX account number.
Enough of the "one size fits all" mentality
In WW-II, we had the M1-garand for open (European) environments and the M1-carbine for jungle fighting in the Pacific, plus all sorts of special weapons (tommy guns, BARs). Things worked out
Let's just standardize on a full-size battle rifle (7.62 NATO, or maybe .270) with nice optics and backup iron sights, plus something modelled on the MP5 for close-quarter urban environments and to give to vehicle drivers. Plus a nice .45
Let's also kill some multi-billion-$$$ pork program and use the money for training ammo. I'd like to see ALL military get at least an hour of range time every week
Well, I've not carried the SA80 for really extended periods of time the way I have the M14 and M16A1- I had 4 M14s to pick and choose from when that was my daily tool, and used a few others as well. And from January 1968 to March 1970 I wore out four out of the five M16A1s or Car 15s that came my way...I wasn't using one every day, but almost always had one or an alternative around, and learned their strengths and weaknesses well. But I've carried SA80s daily for just short of a month, under circumstances in which the targets could shoot back.
1) The stirling smg has been decommisioned, and to my knolage sold to thirdworld countries or put to scrap.. I don't belive any have been retained for war stock, however some deactivated ones are kept within some regimental, or corp museums as displays.
The Brtish Army has indeed put their L2A3 Sterlings into War Reserve or museum, but the Nepalese Army still uses them daily, as does the Pakistani Armed Forces. I first made my introduction to the things in 1967 during an exchange toiur with the British Army of the Rhine, also now under new management. But quite a few of the Special Forces teams free to pick whatever they like have been using ex-Iraqi Sterlings, handy from the confines of a raider's gun HUMVEE, and from which the muzzle flash at night is a bit less obvious than thaty of an M4 carbine.
The stirling it'self i belive was desinged by an WWII SF officer, and is an more sturdy, and more reliable of the massproduced sten gun...
Just so; the Stirling works at Dagenham was also the producer of the Royal Navy's Lanchester Machine Carbine, a bit heavy, but still in use aboard some Royal Australian Navy vessels during the 1991 Iraqi war, just as some Marine Commandos favored the Lanc over the heavier Thompson or flimsier Sten...though many of the Sten's faults came from the magazine, which was also that of the Sterling, AKA the Patchett in its earliest days.
2) The british bulpup you are refering to is the Enfield L85 A1 & A2 (Indervidual Weapon) often refered to as the SA80... With the LMG version being the Enfield L85 (Light Support Weapon). The L86 is the designation set asside for the cocking cadet GP, which is only used for cadets or shooting tournimants... This weapon dose not contain any gas parts so soe not permit Semi-Auto Or Auto Fireing.
Well, no. The L85/A1/A2 is the Individual Weapon, the L86/A1/A2, the Light Support Weapon. The Cadet Rifle, which I've only dealt with once, is the L98A1 model. Not a bad little target shooter, and I'd dearly love to have one, but the one I fired didn't have the SUSAT fitted. I was told then [1998] that a semi-auto cadet rifle was in the works after H&K worked out the alterations that have now become the L85A2. We shall see.
3) Yes the SA80 can take M16 mags, and are used to replace the flimsy pressed meatal mags... These have been replaced ith more bulkey stel mags, as the magerzines if knocked, do not fit properly in the magerzine housing or can NOT be secured by the magerzine catch.... {So i have often had to take an pair of pliers or an hammer to magerzines to hammer out defects to get them to work.... The last thing i wan't is to lightly put in an magazine let go and watch it drop to the floor while some rag head puts some well earned lead into my skull.
Agreed. Note though that many of the surplussed British steel magazines have found their way to the U.S. where they're very prised as an improvement that works very nicely in the M16 and AR15 rifles hereabouts. The Canadians seem to have given up on their Thermold plastic magazines for their C7 and C8 M16 family rifles by Diemaco, so it remains to be seen what will be thought of as the best of the M16/SA80 magazine breed.
4) You'd be better off with an aug, than an SA80.... For an number of reasons... while i can't comment too much on the A2 version, as my unit is not an frount line infantry unit therefore we have not been issued with the upgraded weapon, yet... Due to the fact tthat wqe were reprioritised, due to reacent milatry conflicts taken part accross the globe, so we are stuck with our A1's with smoth bores, and broken parts....
I'm very familiar with the AUG, both as the Austrian Stg 77 version, and in the Australian F88 variant, another shooter with some teething problems. I came quite close to owning my own as a motorbike rifle, since the AUG would dismount the barrel for carry in the restricted space saddlebags. Note that those Australians who could [SAS] used American or Canadian M16s with M203 grenade launchers while in East Timor and Iraq/Afghanistan, wehile those with the F89 SAW were generally quite happy with their burden.
The main problems with the SA80 IW & LSW are the following:
+ The Butstock often cracks due to poor manufacture.
Observed.
+ The access cover to the gasparts is dificult to open {As an upgrade taken to the origonal weapon}, therefore get access to in an emergancey.
Concur. Not yet certain how that's been dealt with, if at all, with the L85A2- I've yet to have my hands on one.
+ The magerzine catch is too stiff, due to another upgrade taken. {Meaning increased load times.
Too light and the mag is on the ground, too stiff and it's as you note. Hopefully improved on the A2 versions- we shall see.
+ The magerzines are too flimsy and get eaaly dented making them useless. Replaced with steel ones for A2.
The steel ones are also the ducks guts for M16 rifles. Supposedly, the new H&K version magazines are even better. A large part of the difficulty is that magazine well meant to guide the original straight-profile 20-round magazines up the spout, which meant that the top of the 30-round version has to be straight in profile, with the bottom half curved. This is not likely the best possible arrangement....
+ The magerzine housing is too weak, to withstand high pressure when changing magerzines. Belive strengthened for the A2.
Listed as one of the H&K design fixes. Hopefully.
+ The extractor, is not reliable, so you often end up with stuck rounds fouling the bolt mechinisum, and the outer casing... {Frequent occourance}... Replaced for the A2.
Again, said to be one of the primary improvements of the newest version. If there's a weakness there still, it should have shown up in the last year in the sandbox.
+ The locking pins are week and sometimes fall out all together, when they become ditatched from the Trigger Mechinisum Housing. Allthough they are not suposed to.. Sticks make good replacements though :). If forced too hard you can dammage the steel housing making the gun unusable. So it will have to be returned for refit, or scrapped.
Replaced by sections of vehicle brake line tubing or copper radio antenna by some Gurkha L85A1 users.
+ The barrel of both the LSW and the IW overheat after 150 rounds aprox... and rounds jam soon after that, which is why there is an barrel replacemnt for LSW only as part of the A2 upgrade.
Plus the addition of the FN-Minimi SAW to the toybox, which should take off some of the strain. Of the stoppages I've experienced and observed with the L85A1, most were on semi-auto; there's a right easy fix for that! With the LSW, it was in the auto fire mode they had the problems you describe, interesting in that they fire automatically from the open bolt for better cooling.
+ The cocking handle is hard to access to cock the weapon, so it has been modified for the A2. Appears the whole palm of the hand can be used to get things moving if mud or sand gums up the works. An obvious external *spotrting featrure* of an L85A2
+ The Bolt rleace catch is weak, and becomes loose or drops off from time to time, orkward at the best of times.
I've observed L85A1 rifles with the bolt release removed. I expect that's why.
+ The issue bayonet is weak, and often snaps off in victims, reducing the future combat efficancy of the soldier...
I'll have to admit that I've never used the sticker in such a fashion. The lads with the Khukuris didnb't seem to be bothered by the idea, and neither was I. When I first made my acquaintance with them, I carried an oversize American Bowie knife, just as a bit of snittery. They were much taken by it, particularly the sharpened top edge, allowing a fast reverse slash. They presented me with a Kukri of my own, and I made their commander a present of my Texian toadsticker. When I returned to their fold a few months later, I was wearing the Khukuri they'd given me, and they seemed to approve of my decision and choice.
+ The holes above the barrel, often get mud sand etc, in and are hard to clean... And the Reciver often becomes cloged with debrey or sand...
The French issue a nice fitted bag for their FA-MAS Clarion. I've been known to use a tennis racket bag. Chicago musicians were said to be fond of violin/viola cases.
+ The dustcover is weak and often drops off altogether.
Bends rather easily too. Perhaps improved.
+ The safty catch is unrelyable, and can be bypassed if you press fimly enougth on the trigger. It also makes too much noise when you change from Safe to Ready.... This will give you away in an ambush situation.
Not as bad as a Kalishnikov, at least, and they're popular enough. I got taught to carry the thing in the *go* position, always, probably not an option for those Brit units with snoopy NCOs.
5) Why not use the dust cover when the weapon is cocked. Is because the weapon once fired can and dose catch on the dustcover and jams or brakes the dustcover alltogether, belive me iv'e done it myself so i don't put the dustcover once loaded.... Not sure if fixed for the A2, as this would increase reliablity in deasrt conditions.
I've seen a German MP44 similarly jammed. I'm less happy about the rattle of the dustv cover in the open position.
6) The only good thing about the SA80 is the SUSAT {Sight Unit Small Arms Trilux} sight it has an 4x magnification, can be set to ranges upto 800m. It also has an radioactive lighting elimet that iluminates the slight eliment, for low light or night combat. It also has inbuilt iron battle/emergancy sight ontop, and this can be used insted of the sight depending on personal prefrance, however is less accurate then the other iron sights provided. The SUSAT however is given mainly to frontline, Infantry or marksmanship weapons, however all most all of the weapons in my rgt have SUSATS, unless they have been dammaged or sent to someone else, who needs them more than we do. The susat makes an soldier an effective marksman and efficant at hitting targets individualy at 300m or as an section at 400m where as the LSW is individualy caperble of hitting targets at 600m and is increased by the A2 modifications to 800m.
Agreed that the SUSAT is superb; I'm fond of the earlier SUIT scole for the L1A1 SLR as well. If there's a bright and shining spot worth keeping the SA80 on, it's the accuracy of the weapon, nicely augmented by that neat optical sight. The new side-opening 40mm grenade launcher from H&K for the L85A2 is a slick little unit as well.
I liked the LSW but noticed noone else was carrying one and took the L85A1 I was offered instead. And found that the LSW gunners on our exercise were carrying M79 grenade launchers or Remington pump-action shotguns instead. Two Gimpys were along for the trip as well, but if we'd run into any trouble, it would have been the radios that got us out of a fix, not the shooters. But I learned a good deal about immediate action drills over the three weeks out bush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.