Skip to comments.Army takes HK416s from special unit
Posted on 04/08/2008 5:33:15 PM PDT by LSUfan
click here to read article
This is the kind of $%#@ that burns me to no end! WE ARE AT WAR! Use the tools the get the job done the best, bottom line!
Apparently the puffed shirts at the Pentagon think sticking with the M4 is just fine and dandy. Let them use it outside the wire for a change.
It is totally awesome. But it’s not parts compatible with the M16/M4. The 416 is an obvious upgrade to the M16. Well, lets see, the grip, trigger, and magazine are the same as the M16, but that’s about it I think.
The impressive thing about the SCAR is that it is available in 308 caliber and this version of the rifle can be FIELD MODIFIED to shoot AK 30 caliber ammo and mags taken off the killed enemy combatants.
SOCOM has bought a bunch of HK416s as well in recent years, however.
Right on! Another stupid decision by the Brass. Listen to the soldiers, not the chair-polishers.
The Army wouldn’t let my son carry his own personal handgun when he went into Iraq, as a backup weapon. Now, he liked the M249 and used it effectively, but what happens if it jams? He might have had an M-16 around, but it is not the most reliable weapon either.
Oh, about that knife in his boot!
[PS: Heard the same complaints about military policies in Vietnam. Most guys on “point” used sawed off shotguns, often sent from home, because they were more effective for close-in fighting, esp. in an ambush.]
What is wrong with our military leaders here at home?
Im actually more impressed by this rifle than by the SCAR or the 416. The LWRC IAR should be the next rifle adopted by all branches of the military. The IAR also uses a piston mechanism as in the 416 and is also an M16 variation. But is has a finned barrel, kinda like the old tommy guns did, and also has a selector switch that allows it to fire from an open bolt as in the FN minimi.
REMFs at work.
The following is simply an observation: The US Army desperately needs to upgrade the weapons systems of the infantryman as well as any sidearm carried by support personnel and officers.
The M16/M4 series has had it's day and so has the 5.56mm cartridge. The basic platform is okay as it goes as can be seen in the somewhat derivative H&K 416, which is still a huge improvement in the reliability factor. But the 5.56 isn't doing the job. Perhaps the 6.8mm would be a better choice. If the operations anticipated in future war will be engagements at less than 300 meters than perhaps one answer could be found in the .300 "Whisper." Perhaps not, but it's a suggestion. Maybe the 300 Whisper could be a specialty cartridge for SOF folks but then they'd only fall victim to those same bottom feeding bureaucrats. In any case, there must be trials to discern what might be superior and then to seize that information and actually act upon it.
I also think that suppressor technology can be advanced to the point that a suppressor can be attached to all battle rifles lowering noise signature and flash. Probably make BRM (Basic Rifle Marksmanship) easier to teach, too. But that's a side issue and I certainly don't have the knowledge to speak with authority.
Speaking of sidearms, now: IF we weren't constrained by the Hague accords on ammunition and could employ JHPs with our 9mm sidearms they'd probably be fine since technology makes the expansion properties of the 9mm and the 45ACP nearly identical while still allowing for the single most important factor in a handgun encounter at any range: SHOT PLACEMENT. Still if we're stuck with BALL ammo then the 9mm becomes wholly inadequate. Cross sectional density and velocity almost dictate the tried and historically proven 45 ACP, but NOT the 1911 platform. I know a lot of folks will consider that heresy, but I think that the H&K 45 should be the sidearm of the future armed forces. Just MHO.
Bureaucrats lining their pockets.
Follow the money!
The big difference is instead of the hot gases and dirt being vented directly into the receiver to push the action back, there is a gas piston inside the front handguard. That way the hot gases and dirt don't get blown back inside the receiver into all the working parts, they just exit into the air through the handguard. The receiver parts stay clean and cool and oiled. It's a simple, subtle change borrowed from the Kalashnikov, which is proven to work better when dirty or without maintenance. So you get the best of both worlds; you get the elegant, accurate M4 with AK reliability.
But hey, let's not upgrade the rest of them, let's go back to the devil we know.
For a sidearm, I’d vote for something along the lines of a sig 250 modular setup. For caliber, a 10mm.
Someone may have already touched on this, but you are correct. The 416 uses the same exact lower receiver, stock assembly, and magazine as the M-16/M-4.
The only thing that gets changed out is the upper reciever assembly which will be the same thing that happens IF and when the Army goes with the 6.8mm round. That is a big if since we would have to get NATO on board to do that because the current 5.56mm is the NATO standard for rifles.
I’d like to know the price tag on the HK compared to the M4.
My guess is that it’s close to double.
Someone (Bushmaster, I think) has recently reintroduced the AR-180 with a plastic lower. I’ve never known anyone who owns one.
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.