Army, Marines rate weapon success (M16A2/A4; M4; M9)

Stars and Stripes, European Edition ^ | Sunday, July 13, 2003 | Mark Oliva

[Joe Brower]

Interesting you should mention replacing the .223 with the .243. Knight's Armament is currently working on a "SPR" variant that uses a 6mm short cartridge with ballistics similar to the .243, which resolves the low knockdown-power and long-range deficiencies of the 5.56x45 NATO. As I understand it, prototypes are already in service in Afghanistan.

GMTA! $;-)

[Squantos]

Weapons I carried during my career

GAU5A/AA & XM-177(Pre-M4 carbine)
M14/M1A
1911A1
Browning Highpower
M82A1 Barrett
M79
M60
HK21
MP5 Series
M148/M203
M12 or M870 Shotgun
Swedish K & M76 S&W

I was lucky enough to be in a job that allowed "me" to make sure my weapons and ammo were up to the task to be performed......prior to deployment or hostilities. I understand small team logistics are better suited to such selection and use but MOUT wasn't something that popped up yesterday. Rangers have used the short barreled pistol grip equipped shotgun for decades to breach reinforced doors . The lessons learned during DS/DS 1 regarding lubrication of firearms in desert conditions seems to have been ignored.

As to the M9 Beretta I was never issued that weapon, albeit I trained with it a bunch, it worked fine for me. We kept our 1911A1's and were allowed to carry a personal P-35 Browning Highpower if the mission needs allowed.

Were I to be tasked today to issue a list of standard weapons for MOUT needs I am of the opinion that a M4 carbine with a M203, A M249 SAW, and a Designated Marksman with either a SR25 or M1A (prefer the SR25 as the rifelman wouldn't "appear" to be anything special to a enemy sniper), a pistol grip sawed off 12 gauge pump like a Serbu 12 gauge albeit I'd like to have a 6 round magazine tube that would dictate a longer barrel.....(est 3 hinges hit twice as a minimum need) .......and the 1911A1 in 45ACP.

All these things being brought up have been known for years.....the small indentation on the primers, the CLP use in desert conditions like Kuwait, Saudi and Ft Irwin !! But hey if the DOD's current leadership will listen now then keep shouting and bitching loud and long ! Hopefully someday they'll listen.............

Just my opinions ............Stay Safe !

[XJarhead]

For some reason, the services don't want to come to the conclusion that the m-16 family is sub-par for actual battle conditions.

One problem is that different weapons are better in different environments. For example, the article noted that some troops wanted a shorter barrel than the M-16A2/A4 for urban fighting, but bitched about the shorter effective range of the shorter barrels. And a weapon that is machined too finely for the desert may be perfect in other environments.

I'm not keen on letting each troop choose his own weapon. If guys want to have a secondary weapon of their own choosing, I suppose that's okay. But the logistics of keeping different weapons supplied with ammo could be a nightmare. Ingenuity can only carry you so far. If you run out of personal ammo for your favorite hunting rifle, you're screwed.

What we really needs is a better mix of available weapons, so secondary weapons can be added based upon the particular environment. Perhaps you augment on a squad or fireteam level. Pass out one shotgun per squad in an urban environment. More 40mm where appropriate, etc.

[XJarhead]

For some reason, the services don't want to come to the conclusion that the m-16 family is sub-par for actual battle conditions.

One problem is that different weapons are better in different environments. For example, the article noted that some troops wanted a shorter barrel than the M-16A2/A4 for urban fighting, but bitched about the shorter effective range of the shorter barrels. And a weapon that is machined too finely for the desert may be perfect in other environments.

I'm not keen on letting each troop choose his own weapon. If guys want to have a secondary weapon of their own choosing, I suppose that's okay. But the logistics of keeping different weapons supplied with ammo could be a nightmare. Ingenuity can only carry you so far. If you run out of personal ammo for your favorite hunting rifle, you're screwed.

What we really needs is a better mix of available weapons, so secondary weapons can be added based upon the particular environment. Perhaps you augment on a squad or fireteam level. Pass out one shotgun per squad in an urban environment. More 40mm where appropriate, etc.

[R. Scott]

A bit heavy - but packs a mean punch.

[Monty22]

A .223 traveling less than around 3000fps when it hits the target makes a .22 hole. Might as well use a 22LR rifle.

The whole key to the .223 is low grain bullets that hit and cause 'hydrostatic shock' on the human target, which can kill someone even if hit in the arm.

[R. Scott]

I had no qualms about the 1911’s accuracy. While on a Combat Pistol Team I had the pleasure of teaching handgun marksmanship to the Company’s officers.
Every one of them parroted the same old crap about it “not being able to hit the side of a barn”.
Every one of them walked away after qualifying raving about how accurate and easy to use it was.
All it took was a little bit of training – about an hour.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Too expensive to have boutique ammunition. Supply is the overriding factor.

[R. Scott]

And can we PLEASE get news people to learn the difference between bullet and cartridge?

And between a magazine and a clip.

[R. Scott]

Agreed – but our esteemed politicians do like having a cheering section behind them.

[R. Scott]

I never experienced – or heard of – an actual slam fire, but the thought of it happening would be enough to hinder a soldier’s reaction in combat. The soldier has to have complete confidence in the weapon – and that is near impossible except through training (when budgets allow).

[SauronOfMordor]

In the NY Post a couple of weeks back, I saw a picture of a couple of US troops guarding an American official. The troops might have been Delta, because their uniforms were black, but they had US flags on their uniforms.

They were carrying AK's rather than M-16's.

[Shooter 2.5]

They didn't have MP-5's?

[LTCJ]

After our Iraq experience, I'm more open to getting rid of the 5.56mm. It's great advantage, the ability to carry double the ammo, may have been very suited to jungle warfare with long foot patrols and sometimes a long period between resupplies. But in our current warfighting, we are mostly talking about mounted troops dismounting from vehicles for short sharp engagements. In this case, .243 or 7.62 may do better.

My first experience on a military rifle range back in '75 was with the M16. I qualified as Expert but I still remember my initial impression - great close range rifle but I'd want the M14 they made us carry during PT if I ever deployed to the desert. Twenty eight years hasn't changed my mind.

Unfortunately, logistics dictates a primary infantry weapon and, until someone can divine the next three theaters of operations, it has to be a compromise. Excellent observation about mechanized warfare coupled with the 7.62 weapon, BTW.

[Joe Brower]

"The soldier has to have complete confidence in the weapon"

Very true. In my case, I had expended tens of thousands of rounds before I even heard of "slam-fires". No one in my unit had ever heard about it or given it any thought much less worry, either. A need for proper maintenence, yes -- slam-fires, no.

[SauronOfMordor]

Also, due to complaints, Ranger medics were at one time being issued HK MP5s instead of that horrible M-16 carbine. I loved that little beauty, it was so easy to carry on a sling with the heavy medic pack, gave me great close quarters firepower and I could have it right there slung over my shoulder at the ready when treating a patient.

Rather than trying to make the M-16/M-4 a "one size fits all solution", I've been saying for a while that perhaps the better solution is to have troops train with two guns: an MP-5 (whether in 9mm, or modified for a 5.56 round) for urban warfare and situations where it's unlikely you will be engaging targets beyond 50 yards, and a 7.62 NATO calibre weapon for long range work

[xzins]

When we were in Panama, I know of at least one helicopter that went down due to an RPG. In Iraqi Freedom, I think I heard of a few more. I think I read in the early days that one had even been successful in disabling (NOT destroy) an M1A2 Abrams tank. (They came up with counter-measures.)

The RPG is a wicked little weapon and deserves some counter-measure attention AND something similar deserves to be in the hands of our own troops.

[xzins]

Thanks, Joe. Appreciate the info. Wouldn't the 77 grains make it even faster or is there some physics in play here that I'm not recognizing?

[SauronOfMordor]

They didn't have MP-5's?

I'm imagining that in a bodyguard situation, reliability in a heavy dust/sand environment would be the overriding concern.

[Joe Brower]

Black Hills ammo, who is currently filling an order for something like 11 million rounds of the new 77-grain 5.56mm, lists the muzzle velocity at around 2,750. By comparison, the 62-grain SS 109 is 2,875 or thereabouts. It would appear that the heavier bullet goes a bit slower, which makes sense. Of course, muzzle velocity could be increased by using different powders and whatnot, but then one has to contend with shorter lifespan for the mechanical workings of the weapon, higher rates of barrel and throat erosion, and shorter maintenence cycles.