Author Topic: M16 (Read 1881 times)

fdiron · « **on:** July 01, 2002, 08:35:26 PM »

Does the U.S. Army still use the version of the M16 that fires only 1 round or 3 round bursts? If so, what would the advantage of this be? I thought the main reason the U.S. switched to automatic weapons was due to the 'suppression' factor that automatic weapons could impose on enemy forces. I talked to a UH-60 pilot two years ago and he said the main reason his helocopter was armed with two M60s was to 'keep their (the enemys) heads down'.

So, doesnt a non-automatic battle rifle put the U.S. military in the same situation it was in during World War II and Korea?

XNachoX · « **Reply #1 on:** July 01, 2002, 08:42:48 PM »

It started in Vietnam when the soldiers would get toejam scared and blast away at nothing in full auto and damage the internals of the gun. They put 3 rd. burst on the M16 after that. It seems to me that they could take it off now because our soldiers are more refined than they were back then....but who knows.

Pongo · « **Reply #2 on:** July 01, 2002, 08:48:24 PM »

I believe it is semi auto, burst or full auto. What disadvantage where the US at in ww2 or Korea. They definatly had the best service rife in ww2 in the Garand. The Mp44 was revolutionary and the mg42 was awsome but for long rifles the US had the best. US infantry had awsome fire power in both the named conflicts.

Samm · « **Reply #3 on:** July 01, 2002, 09:44:44 PM »

m16a2 which is in service now does not fire full auto, the m16a1 did . The m249 has replaced the m16a1 as the squad automatic rifle . Switching from full auto to 3rnd burst had the desired effect of conserving ammo while at the same time increasing the accuracy .

Fishu · « **Reply #4 on:** July 01, 2002, 09:45:31 PM »

M16A2, that US Army still uses, that im aware of, has semi and burst modes.
There however is M16A3 that i know, but i don't think it exists in large quantities yet, nor produced so.

In the even of such big war as Vietnam was, there wouldn't be enough of these "refined" soldiers.

Garand was useful even after WWII for long time, but I wouldn't call the firepower it gave as 'excellent'
Korean war didn't prove much, as ground forces were mostly what they were and various guns were used, mostly not newest ones.

If it would been prepared army that didn't rely on masses of soldiers and witohut weapons with only importance being 'as long as it kills', it'd been much more even firepower.

Samm · « **Reply #5 on:** July 01, 2002, 09:58:46 PM »

The US army and I would imagine the USMC still use a lot of vietnam era stuff depending on what theater they are in . Heck I can remember carrying an m16a1 wearing OD green fatigues, getting in a jeep and riding to the flight line to board a UH1, this was in 1994 !

The DR8 wire spool which has been in service since before WWII is still in use, you can spot one in "Saving Private Ryan" . Also the browning M2 maching gun predates wwII and is still widely used in every branch including the coast guard .

Kratzer · « **Reply #6 on:** July 01, 2002, 10:00:57 PM »

I believe the canadians use the M16A3 with the full auto trigger group. EDIT: that is to say, they have it designated as such... I really don't know if they actually use it...

The A2 is semi and burst - but the M4, the carbine version, along with some other bells and whistles, has a semi/full trigger group.

Otto · « **Reply #7 on:** July 01, 2002, 10:46:32 PM »

The M-16 (any version) is too light a weapon to fire on full auto. The shooter can't keep it on target and the barrel overheats when he/she tries.

It's not that it wastes ammo; the last time we ran out of ammo was at Bunker Hill; it's just not effective at anything but 'aimed' fire.

The reason so many countires use the M-16 is because it fires a light, high veloicty round from a light and reliable weapon. You can't ask for much more.

The USA will have Laser's before they give up the M-16

Tumor · « **Reply #8 on:** July 01, 2002, 11:08:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Samm
The US army and I would imagine the USMC still use a lot of vietnam era stuff depending on what theater they are in . Heck I can remember carrying an m16a1 wearing OD green fatigues, getting in a jeep and riding to the flight line to board a UH1, this was in 1994 !

The DR8 wire spool which has been in service since before WWII is still in use, you can spot one in "Saving Private Ryan" . Also the browning M2 maching gun predates wwII and is still widely used in every branch including the coast guard .

Fatigues in 1994?

The USAF Security Forces were still carrying the M16A1 as late as 1995. In 1993 or 4 I participated in "Phoenix Ace", a Joint EX that at the time was conducted at Ft Chaffee AR. On one of our patrols out in the woods, we ran into an Army Unit (who fired on us first, we were both good guys). There was 15 of us, we had a couple Hogs and 203's and there were 5 of them.... it didn't last long lol, however... none of those guys had any idea the A1 (full auto) was still in service. They thought we had a bunch of SAW's.

Tumor · « **Reply #9 on:** July 01, 2002, 11:17:56 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Otto

The reason so many countires use the M-16 is because it fires a light, high veloicty round from a light and reliable weapon. You can't ask for much more.

The USA will have Laser's before they give up the M-16

Yep, the U.S. Military also likes this idea:

M-16 = Little round, less damage to the body. The 2.23 round was re-engineered years ago to help keep it from "tumbling" once it entered the body. Previous to that, there was one case of a 2.23 round entering a body at the upper chest and exiting the butt. Nowdays it pretty much pokes a hole through. Thats not to make light of the tissue damage done, but compared to 7.62 it's very light.

7.62 = Tear an arm off with a near miss... much higher probablility of an immediate kill and massive tissue damage.

....Wound a guy and you've tied up resources taking care of him. Kill a guy and you can come gettim later. Thats at least one of the arguments for the lighter round.

Samm · « **Reply #10 on:** July 01, 2002, 11:18:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tumor

They thought we had a bunch of SAW's.

You did, just not m249s . Yeah the army still uses the uniform that predates BDU's, there are ta50 so you're supposed to return them. What really surprised me was the jeep .

Samm · « **Reply #11 on:** July 01, 2002, 11:24:53 PM »

Consider the raw materials . It takes less resources to make ammo for armies armed with m16s and ak74s . Also contrary to popular opinion a field grade m16 is more accurate than a field grade m14 . They did tons of tests and m16s consistently produced tighter shot groups .

easymo · « **Reply #12 on:** July 02, 2002, 12:03:33 AM »

I was on the M6O MG most of the time. But when I did carry a rifle, guard duty, ect., it was a M14. We were so refined the M14 had no full auto. (If you had a key there was a switch on the side. But you would just end up shooting at sky.). The M16 was a POS with a stick built into the side, to poke the bullet in, when it got stuck.

Russian · « **Reply #13 on:** July 02, 2002, 12:12:23 AM »

USAF switching from M16A1 to A2, some squardons still have A1 but most of them are now A2, back in 2000 I trained with A1. Now its A2.

easymo · « **Reply #14 on:** July 02, 2002, 12:32:10 AM »

BTW. The "advantage" was that it was built for little guys, and girls. The M16 bullet is about half the size of an M14. That means you can hump around twice as much ammo.

I was given that "wounded man ties up three" speech also. I had doubts. If a guy goes down thats the medic's job. You have your own job to do.