Author Topic: Say Goodbye M-16  (Read 2300 times)

Offline mrblack

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2191
Say Goodbye M-16
« on: November 22, 2003, 05:44:26 PM »
M-16 Rifle May Be on Way Out of U.S. Army
2 hours, 47 minutes ago  

By SLOBODAN LEKIC, Associated Press Writer

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).


AP Photo
 

Related Links
• M-16 Overview (fas.org)
 
   

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.

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2003, 06:18:01 PM »
HERE is an interesting article on 2 new rifles being developed for US troops.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Dune

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1727
      • http://www.352ndfightergroup.com/
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2003, 06:50:26 PM »
While the M-16 has been improved dramatically since it was introduced, I've never liked it compared to many of its contemporaries.  Guns like the FN-Fal, HK 93, AUG, Galil, and the venerable AKM were better.  Personally, the Fal is the best of the bunch, but that's me.

Offline Halo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3222
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2003, 06:52:41 PM »
Thanks, rpm, good perspective.
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. (Seneca, 1st century AD, et al)
Practice random acts of kindness and senseless beauty. (Anne Herbert, 1982, Sausalito, CA)
Paramedic to Perkaholics Anonymous

Offline vorticon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7935
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2003, 06:54:17 PM »
okay...so where are all those m16's going once theyve been phased out???

Offline Dune

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1727
      • http://www.352ndfightergroup.com/
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2003, 06:55:41 PM »


Ick.  Thing's ugly.  But it's interesting that it's a copy of the HK G36.   Seems it some of the main modifications are that it accept M-16 magazines and the buttstock is telescoping.

« Last Edit: November 22, 2003, 07:00:41 PM by Dune »

Offline bigsky

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #6 on: November 23, 2003, 12:14:15 AM »
the main problem with the planed replacements are 5.56mm bullets. sure they make good sub-machine guns when full auto and at close range. there also good for killing prarie dogs, woodchucks and other rodents but not good for people at long range. one of the main reasons that the m16 was issued was that after the korean war, the army did a study on infantry combat. they found that most troops didnt engage until the enemy got within 200 yards. hence a 200 yrd. gun. another problem is that the military wants one rifle suitable for every situation. to me thats like give everybody the same size boot. but for the basic issue rifle they should use a kalisnickov based action but with a bigger caliber like .243 win., 6mm ppc, or 6.5mm x 57mm swede. but that would be general issue. keep the m14s, snipers and m4. and last i heard the rangers use ak-47s or ak-74s, maybe not for propaganda photos though.
"I am moist like bacon"

Offline mrblack

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2191
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #7 on: November 23, 2003, 12:19:16 AM »
Rangers use M-4
Us Army snioers use M-24 7.62mm=308
USMC uses M40A1 7.62mm=308
And both use the M82A1 barrett 50call 12.7mm

I agree a larger cal would be nice.
But not at the expence of velocity.

Offline bigsky

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2003, 12:58:45 AM »
muzzle velocity is not the important factor. ballistic coeficiency is. for example for those who do not understand; 5.56mm nato bullet leaves the muzzle at @3200 feet per second, it is .22 caliber and weighs 55-62 grams. my hunting rifle is a winchester M70 .300 win mag. it shoots a .30 cal bullet that weighs 168-180 at @3200 feet per second at the muzzle. now getting that much bigger chunk of lead moving that fast requires alot more powder but it is much more flat shooting than the .22 due to the much larger weight of the bullet. now given the larger diameter the .30 has to punch a slightly larger hole through the air which causes drag. the slight drag affect doesnt even factor much considering the weight of the bullet. 5.56mm has a huge drop but the .30 cal that left the muzzle at the same speed dont. now im not suggesting that the army make a .300 win mag service rifle. but the army guys use them when they shoot the 1000 yard competions like most everybody. but if you want longer range and more knockdown power they need to start from scratch with a bigger caliber. i sure would be convinced that im wrong if somebody took an m4 and put 20 holes through a paper plate at 1000 yards with 20 bullets.
"I am moist like bacon"

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2003, 01:04:23 AM »
"i sure would be convinced that im wrong if somebody took an m4 and put 20 holes through a paper plate at 1000 yards with 20 bullets."


Why would you want to do that?    Plus I'm sure the troops would be even more pissed that they werent able to put a single hole in that bad guy 30yds away with an RPG from the inside of their vehice because they cant swing some full sized rifle around fast enough...

Offline flakbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
      • http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2003, 01:17:26 AM »
That's not the OICW, this is...



The primary problem with the whole M-16 family is one that Colt never bothered to fix. When a shot gets fired, gas is tapped off the barrel to work a gas piston which drives the bolt back. In most weapons, this gas is vented out of the gas tube once the piston moves far enough back to work the bolt. In the M-16 family, this gas isn't vented out the handguard (like the G-36) or into the atmosphere; it gets vented into the receiver. Since the gas and crud from the gas tube is being blown into the receiver, you end up with a real mess. What's worse, the M-16 family was designed with some very tight tolerances. Combine the two and you have a jam waiting to happen.

As for the OICW, it's supposed to replace the M4/M-203 combo by around 2005. The lower barrel is a modified H&K G-36 action that'll take regular M-16 mags. The upper barrel is a 20mm "cannon" that is supposed to offer better destructive capability than the current M-203 HE round. A programmable fuse lets operators pick an exact detonation point, and it has a built-in day/night sight. I'm just waiting for the inevitable complaint of... "Hey! We can't go to war! I'm outa batteries!"



-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School
Put the P-61B in Aces High

Offline mrblack

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2191
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2003, 01:22:48 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by bigsky
muzzle velocity is not the important factor. ballistic coeficiency is. for example for those who do not understand; 5.56mm nato bullet leaves the muzzle at @3200 feet per second, it is .22 caliber and weighs 55-62 grams. my hunting rifle is a winchester M70 .300 win mag. it shoots a .30 cal bullet that weighs 168-180 at @3200 feet per second at the muzzle. now getting that much bigger chunk of lead moving that fast requires alot more powder but it is much more flat shooting than the .22 due to the much larger weight of the bullet. now given the larger diameter the .30 has to punch a slightly larger hole through the air which causes drag. the slight drag affect doesnt even factor much considering the weight of the bullet. 5.56mm has a huge drop but the .30 cal that left the muzzle at the same speed dont. now im not suggesting that the army make a .300 win mag service rifle. but the army guys use them when they shoot the 1000 yard competions like most everybody. but if you want longer range and more knockdown power they need to start from scratch with a bigger caliber. i sure would be convinced that im wrong if somebody took an m4 and put 20 holes through a paper plate at 1000 yards with 20 bullets.



Really!

I have both cal Weapons and I will take the 223 over a wm300 out to 400yds any day.
For targets that Is.

Now For killin folks yes hell yes the wm300 is the weapon of choice there.

But I have shot 75grn bergers in my 223 with good results.

As well as 175 bergers in the wm300.
have to keep in mind that they want a full auto capability so a large 30cal weapon might be abit for some folks to be accurate with.

But I agree To the school of thought about larger bullets having a longer flatter tragectory.
thats why I'm looking at the EDM 408 chy tech or 50cal have not made up my mind yet.

But the 408 has some very impressive ballistics.
Like 10" groups at 2.700m

Below is at 300 yards 223 with 75grn bergers
no wind bench rested

« Last Edit: November 23, 2003, 01:25:44 AM by mrblack »

Offline bigsky

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 964
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2003, 01:24:42 AM »
umm... maybe they shoudnt be riding around in hummers during an infanty battle. we are talking about soldiers not gangstas if thats the case then the army should be buying 63 chevys and loading them up with guys with "gats" cruising bagdad, looking for sadam to driveby. and the last army hummer i drove had a "pickup style" bed with bench seats on the sides like a 2.5 ton truck. plenty of room to swing a rifle around in. but back to the point, when i was in the army it still had the m3 grease gun thats a good "gat". issued to most of the REMFs and tankers due to it small size and firepower. no i think its just a whine about the weight of the rifle they have to carry around. why dont the REMPs have those?
"I am moist like bacon"

Offline mrblack

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2191
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2003, 01:28:58 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by bigsky
umm... maybe they shoudnt be riding around in hummers during an infanty battle. we are talking about soldiers not gangstas if thats the case then the army should be buying 63 chevys and loading them up with guys with "gats" cruising bagdad, looking for sadam to driveby. and the last army hummer i drove had a "pickup style" bed with bench seats on the sides like a 2.5 ton truck. plenty of room to swing a rifle around in. but back to the point, when i was in the army it still had the m3 grease gun thats a good "gat". issued to most of the REMFs and tankers due to it small size and firepower. no i think its just a whine about the weight of the rifle they have to carry around. why dont the REMPs have those?


LOL:rofl
The "new"Army does seem to ride aroung alot don't they.
I think the Brass needs to do some rethinking to keep the deaths down.

The young people over there are doing a good job but the leadership :confused:

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Say Goodbye M-16
« Reply #14 on: November 23, 2003, 02:19:02 AM »
M8 would be capable of firing AK47's 7.62x39mm ammunition, now thats something cool.
I wonder how many would opt for 7.62mm rather than 5.56mm, after all theres a huge difference between hitting power.