's 'sHow stupid is this? The HK416 is demonstrably a better carbine and it is completely familiar to anyone who has used an M4. It’s just an improved M4. It’s not like they have some wierd, nonstandard rifle, it just doesn’t have the stupid direct gas tube problems. I can’t see any possible reason they can “require” the M4 after they have bought better weapons. Stupid, stupid, stupid. They should be replacing all the M4 uppers instead.
I am awaiting your words of wisdom as displayed in your latest post to me...
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Pig Pig Pig Pig
I wonder if this is some kind of weird fallout from the Boeing tanker deal.
Did you see this?
The HK416 works better than the M4 because it is piston operated rather than gas impinging operated. It uses the same magazines as the M4, and the HK146 upper can be mated to an M4 lower, thus converting our existing weapons economically.
These rifles are already bought and paid for. The only reason to remove them from service is because the Army doesn't want the world to find out how superior a gas piston operated weapon is to the gas impinging operated M4/M16.
The Army is also in the process of purchasing even more M4s without any competition.
The USA’s M4 Carbine Controversy
This is the kind of $%#@ that burns me to no end! WE ARE AT WAR! Use the tools the get the job done the best, bottom line!
Apparently the puffed shirts at the Pentagon think sticking with the M4 is just fine and dandy. Let them use it outside the wire for a change.
Ba$tards!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LWRC_Infantry_Automatic_Rifle
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.
I’d like to know the price tag on the HK compared to the M4.
My guess is that it’s close to double.