Skip to comments.Looking Beyond the M4 Carbine
Posted on 11/15/2008 8:29:49 AM PST by re_tail20
As the Army scales back on its M4 carbine buys, the services top official said Thursday its time to look for the next carbine soldiers will carry into battle.
Secretary of the Army Pete Gerens comments set the tone for the small arms industry day that drew 19 companies from across the country to Washington, D.C., with the hope of replacing the services M4 carbine.
Today is an important step in an effort to ensure that our soldiers always have the best, Geren said. Not just the best today, but the best tomorrow.
The Army-sponsored event is the result of a request for information the service put out in August to assess what the U.S. small arms industry is capable of producing.
The Army purchased of the remaining balance of 473,000 M4s Wednesday, which will be delivered over the next two years, Geren said.
That completes the Army acquisition objective for the M4, Geren said, adding that the service would continue to buy the M4 in reduced quantities to maintain adequate replacements as needed.
The M4 is the Armys primary individual weapon. For more than a year, it has been the subject of increased scrutiny by lawmakers on Capitol Hill concerned about whether soldiers have the best available weapon.
Geren said the goal of the event is to help the Army determine what is achievable in terms of carbine technology.
This is the first step toward a carbine competition the Army intends to open next year after Colt Defense LLC, the company that makes the M4, turns over the weapons technical data rights in June 2009. When that happens, the Army will have the opportunity to improve the M4 or buy a new carbine.
Geren has directed the Army to update its requirement for a carbine to reflect the current and future needs of soldiers.
The new requirement is scheduled to be completed by the end of the calendar year and approved by next summer, said Col. Doug Tamilio, Program Executive Office Soldiers project manager for Soldier Weapons.
Provided that the new carbine requirement is approved and funding is available, the Army will issue a formal request for proposal for a new carbine to gun makers late next year, Tamilio said.
go back to the m-14
reconfigure the M4 to fire a 6.5mm grendal.
That's probably what will happen. We'll either get a new platform (more costly) or a modified M4 with a new caliber.
I say they need to look at the new 7.62 x 28 WSSSM (Win Super Super Short Mag) /s
>>go back to the m-14
I’m for the original - M1 Garand. That puppy would fire in all kinds of weather, take more abuse than a rented mule and was, according to General Patton, the best rifle ever made.
Some of my fellow Marines told me about smearing axle grease on the M1 to keep it firing in the Frozen Chosin.
They should just change the gas system. Replace the gas tube with a gas piston. That will keep it a lot cleaner and more reliable.
And while you're replacing M4 Uppers, replace the direct gas impingment system with a gas piston system ala HK416 and others.
The M14 is not practical for today's mounted urban environment, which is why the M4 has displaced the M16. Can you imagine egressing an MRAP with a 46.5 inch long M14?
The M14 is appropriate for Designated Marksman and SOCOM use as mission dictates, but not as a universal infantry weapon.
Looks like a small chance it might actually finally happen
I think that if the M-4 and the M-16 had undergone proper trials that they both would have been weeded out.
It’s their operating system. Propellant gas not only builds up in the receiver, making it more likely to jam, but gradually wears away the existent parts in the receiver. Heckler and Koch confirmed this in their own trials on the M4 when coming up with their HK 416, and this is something neither the Army’s Ordnance Corp did in the 1960’s or PEO Soldier has done
The operating system for every main assault rifle should be based around a gas piston. If you want to have rifles with direct impingement systems as well, they should be relegated to supporting roles.
I think 7.62mm is overkill in close quarters combat situation.
I COULDN’T AGREE MORE!!!
I see no problem with that.
Have you ever toted an M-14 for any distance/length of time?
I have extensive experience with the 14, onboard ships and boats. I think it is a very good rifle, but I would hate to have to carry that beast in the boonies. In addition to that, as a gunsmith/armorer the M16/4 platform is much easier to service in the field and at the repair level.
Of course I always know what he means, in this case that it must be manually recycled for each shot. Still someone should correct his misinformation before it gets on the show.
Also he comments about how lucky we were to select the M14 over the FAL. Sure, that is opinion but I think any really knowledgeable shooter would argue that the FAL was every bit the equal, and IMO better than the M14.
I don’t want to kill someone due to friendly fire.
By the time 0bama is through gutting the military they’ll probably be throwing rocks at the enemy.
In the upcoming Obama regime, the only equipment that the military will be need are many boxes of white flags.....