# Bashing of the M4



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 8, 2008)

I think its funny how GI Joe can say "yeah we like it, it's a good piece of kit" but all the people working for there weapon companies or people who stand to gain from a big fat Gov contract. Can say "oh no, lets do harder tests, lets prove that we can make the good kt suck"! The fucking people pulling the trigger want the M4!!!!:doh:




> By Richard Lardner, Associated Press
> 
> HARTFORD, Conn. — No weapon is more important to tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan than the carbine rifle. And for well over a decade, the military has relied on one company, Colt Defense of Hartford, Conn., to make the M4s they trust with their lives.
> Now, as Congress considers spending millions more on the guns, this exclusive arrangement is being criticized as a bad deal for American forces as well as taxpayers, according to interviews and research conducted by The Associated Press.
> ...




*And then you have the "TEST" who the fuck fire's tens of thousands of rounds in the middle of a dust storm???*



> M4 FALLS SHORT IN TEST
> 
> HARTFORD, Conn. — When the dust finally settled, Army officials sought to put the best face on a sandstorm test that humbled Colt Defense's vaunted M4 carbine.
> 
> ...






> After months of heated debate, the Army will conduct a side-by-side test shoot next month with its standard-issued carbine to see how well it can withstand extreme dust and sand environments.
> 
> The tests, which will be conducted at the Army's Aberdeen Test Center in Maryland, will include three other rifles some say are better constructed to withstand the grueling environmental conditions often found in Iraq and Afghanistan.
> 
> ...






> by David Crane
> defrev at gmail.com
> 
> December 17, 2007
> ...


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 8, 2008)

Thanks JAB!
Excellent information, and it will come in very handy when I get the call back from McCain's office.   Good post, and very good timing.
:)

JAB, to your knowlege are the troops in Afghanistan as happy with the M4 as the troops in Iraq?  I have to wonder if the longer typical distances are resulting in less satisfaction.
Do you from your experiences feel that a longer barrel should be installed for Afghanistan?
Also, if so, do you feel that we should go back to a (more effective?) 1:12 twist?
I've heard figures of loss of 40% effectiveness when we "stabilized" the bullet more with the faster spin barrels...but maybe "stable" is what you want at longer ranges of Afghanistan.

PM me if you think this is too much of an Operational Security question, or if that's info that I shouldn't be privy to anyway.  I can accept that if that's the case.

I just want to have the proper info for the McCain call (they will be calling soon)...to make it as productive as possible to get you guys the training and equipment that you need and want.

I will also keep you informed as to the answers I get (and anyone else vetted who wants to be included in the loop..just PM me). But, I'm also fine just sticking to the topics we've already submitted in the letter.  
But if we can do more, hey that's good too.

JAB, do you want me to have the Senator contact you, or just stay annonymus?
I don't mind taking the "heat"...but whatever is more comfortable for you, and more productive in the end. I'm sure I could have him contact you in confidence also.
Just let me know.

Boon, does that sound about right for Opssec? Let me know if treading close to the line here.
Especially with any info I get back from the Senator.  Should that be vetted only?


----------



## BLACKMags (Dec 8, 2008)

Makes you wonder sometimes if all these contractors have our best interests at heart.


----------



## AssadUSMC (Dec 8, 2008)

Hey JAB - I hear you loud and clear about the troops liking the M4, but you guys would be in for a treat if you could 416s.  EVERYTHING handles like an M4 - no retraining required other than the maintenance piece.  It has a smoother recoil impulse and shoots much cleaner.  All the same optics, grips, etc. work on it.  Uses the same mags, etc.

I've put tons of rounds through 416s (and M4s) and I've never had anything close to a hiccup with the operation.  The only issue we saw was one gun had a broken disconnector, so every time you'd fire a round on semi, when you release the trigger, it'd fire another round.  Not good, but an easy fix.  

Given a choice, I'd take the 416 over an M4.  But I'd take an M4 over most everything else.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 8, 2008)

arizonaguide said:


> JAB, to your knowlege are the troops in Afghanistan as happy with the M4 as the troops in Iraq?  I have to wonder if the longer typical distances are resulting in less satisfaction.
> Do you from your experiences feel that a longer barrel should be installed for Afghanistan?
> Also, if so, do you feel that we should go back to a (more effective?) 1:12 twist?
> I've heard figures of loss of 40% effectiveness when we "stabilized" the bullet more with the faster spin barrels...but maybe "stable" is what you want at longer ranges of Afghanistan.



I have not seen any official reports and I do not have any current lessons learned, or AAR’s regarding performance of M16/ M4 rifle in Afghanistan. OEF (Afghanistan) as a whole was put on the back burner for a majority of reasons, especially when it came to the hard need to know facts. I would imagine a lot of data will begin flowing here over the next 18 to 24 months. 

Now what I do know is that a majority of the fighting is happening on in the mountain range areas of Afghanistan. Not to say that it’s all happening there, but the majority to my understanding it. When considering the ballistic effects of the bullet at distance vs. the actual affects of wind and gravity. You have to keep in mind the shot angle…

For example: The target may be 500 meters away, but due to the angle “ballisticlly” it is only 300 meters away. <~~~ Not actual numbers…. Thus the bullet would perform as it would at 300 meters vs. the expected performance at 500 meters.

The 1/12 twist can only fire the M193 (55gr) bullet, if you run M855 (62gr) in it the bullet tumbels past 90 meters. Losing all effectiveness and accuracy. 1/9 twist is actually the better way to go for the M855, but b/c the M856 (tracer) can not be stabilized with anything slower then a 1/7 twist, the army opted for the ability to have ball and tracer. 

Personally I would prefer a 1/8 twist, 7 degree target crown and MK262 (77gr) ammo. Giving me the ability to stay sub MOA out to 600 meters.





AssadUSMC said:


> Hey JAB - I hear you loud and clear about the troops liking the M4, but you guys would be in for a treat if you could 416s.  EVERYTHING handles like an M4 - no retraining required other than the maintenance piece.  It has a smoother recoil impulse and shoots much cleaner.  All the same optics, grips, etc. work on it.  Uses the same mags, etc.



I am all about the 416 upper as well... My old unit tested a few of them and they will run DIIIRRRRRRRTTTTYYYY! Good upper!

My only issue, is that we have the M4, why not put one of these new gas piston kits in all of them and call it a day? Do we really need to buy all new uppers???:2c:


----------



## DA SWO (Dec 8, 2008)

For the life of me; why can't we just buy conversion kits?  Why does it have to be a new rifle?

Guess $400.00 (or less) per rifle isn't as good a deal as $1700.00 per rifle.


----------



## Hush (Dec 8, 2008)

BLACKMags said:


> Makes you wonder sometimes if all these contractors have our best interests at heart.



Come on...the next thing you'll tell me is that theres no Santa Claus!


----------



## rv808 (Dec 8, 2008)

I've always liked the M4.  I have it here with the ACOG.  While I clean it just as much as I did with the M16, I will always love the M16 better.  Just personal preference.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 8, 2008)

Good stuff JAB. Thanks. The more I learn, the more knowlegable I can be when the phone call comes in (without violating OPSEC, of course).
Do you have any other (non-classified)articles/links I should come up to speed on in the meantime.
The above info was EXCELLENT and very informative, when combined with your expertise.

It usually takes a week or two before I get something back from the McCain folks, so if there's anything else I should become aware of, let me know. I'm cramming as fast as I can!
PM me if you think that's advisable.


----------



## parallel (Dec 8, 2008)

*Good to know!*



AssadUSMC said:


> The only issue we saw was one gun had a broken disconnector, so every time you'd fire a round on semi, when you release the trigger, it'd fire another round.  Not good, but an easy fix.


Amazing how the right information just seems to flow from this forum. I had an issue with my AK-101 on Saturday that sounds very much like the same issue. Any thoughts on whether or not that could also cause FTF on nearly every other round?


----------



## AssadUSMC (Dec 8, 2008)

It could - depends on how the AK trigger works.  I know how to break 'em down, but not as familiar with the guts as I am with an AR type.  Depends on the feed cycle I guess - if it fires but short-strokes, then it would fail to fire every other round...


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 9, 2008)

Some more food for thought:

The standard of accuracy for the M16/ M4 rifle with the use of M855 (green tip) is a 3 MOA requirement. This basically means that at a bare bone’s minimum the rifle/ ammo combination must be able to perform at 3 MOA accuracy at the affective range.

M16 A2:  	Max affective range on point target is 550 meters.
		(3MOA @ 550yd would give the ability to shoot a 16.5 inch shot group)

		Max Affective range on area target is 800 meters. 
		(3MOA @ 800yd would give the ability to shoot a 24 inch shot group)

M4:		Max affective range on a point target is 450 meters.
		(3MOA @ 450yd would give the ability to shoot a 13.5 inch shot group)

		Max affective range on an area target is 600 meters.
		(3MOA @ 600yd would give the ability to shoot an 18 inch shot group)

Now there is no standard of accuracy with the M16/ M4 with the use of MK262 (open tip). However, through personal experience it is normally a 1 MOA average. Meaning at the longest distance M16 A2 (800meters) you could hold an 8 inch shot group! 

Average human head is 6 to 9 inches from ear lobe to ear lobe and 9 to 11 inches from chin to crown. *(Possible head shot at 800 meters with M16 A2 
/ MK262 and for sure head shot at 600 meters with M4/ MK262)*

Average human torso is 18 to 21 inches from shoulder to shoulder and 36 to 40 inches from neck line to pelvic. *(Possible body shots at 800 meters with M16 A2 M855 and for sure center chest shots with M16 A2/ MK262)*


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 9, 2008)

*Ultimate Upgrade?*

So, what you ultimately prefer would be:

M16A2 (or M4?), with MK262 rounds, a gas piston upper, and realistically a 1:7 or 1:8 twist barrel?
Correct?  Lay it out for me JAB.  Let's finalize it for sure. Remember, the emphasis will probably shift to Afghanistan fairly soon after inaugeration, I would think from the rhetoric.  Don't worry about everyone else JAB, they've got a chance to input.  Just give me YOUR opinion.  You seem to have as good a handle as anybody.
They can bitch/suggest/improve after we have a starting "best suggestion".
So, lay out exactly what's best (your opinion):
1.
2.
3.

I want to make sure I can include the "ultimate" (yet realistic) "prefered combination" *upgrade* for suggestion to McCain, along with my bitching for 3000+ rounds per soldier of proper and realistic training.

*And, if anyone else wants to input/disagree/make additions to what we're suggesting, now is the time to do it.*
We MAY effect history and save lives, folks.
So, let's do this right, and hammer out the exact right combination/upgrade to the M4 (M16A2?) as best we can.
The perfect upgrade/combination would be: (?).


----------



## Rabid Badger (Dec 9, 2008)

arizonaguide said:


> We MAY effect history and save lives, folks.
> So, let's do this right, and hammer out the exact right combination/upgrade to the M4 (M16A2?) as best we can.
> The perfect upgrade/combination would be: (?).



I have to ask and I'm not trying to be a smartass, trust me. Anything that can make the soldiers more effective is a plus in my book but:

1. At what level are you writing to the McCain folks?? As a concerned citizen or as a genuine dealer/R & D jockey with plans for equipping our troops with what they need?

2. Are you PMP (Project Manager Program) qualified? This would be important as it dictates the level of importance that your emails are received at the McCain camp vice as a civilian and them telling you what you want to hear.

3. Have you dealt with DOD contractors/companies at an executive level? This would be important because the R & D involved runs into the millions of dollars. This is apart from equipping a force of say, a battalion of SF dudes looking for/testing a new weapon.

HK416 or the LWRC IMHO. Same same as the M4. Check the sidebars.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHreIMu1d6M"]YouTube - LWRC PSD Future Weapons[/ame]

:2c:


----------



## AssadUSMC (Dec 9, 2008)

I still say 416.  Uppers, whole guns, who cares - that is the ticket.  It is a fucking machine...


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 9, 2008)

Okay I can not speak for every soldier and their mission needs and or mission requirements. I would think that some of the SOF guys would have some great impute as to what they would feel would be the best rifle combination for their mission.

On a combat arms level (Infantry) the following is what I would like to see:

M4 lower, topped with a flat top upper.

ACOG 4X weapon sight with the integrated reflex sight.

10.5to 14.5 barrel length (I lean more towards the 14.5)
Shorter barrel is a huge plus for urban combat and  the test's given show that the shorter barrel has minimal affect on the round at the affective range (the longer ranges).

Keep the 1/7 twist so that it can still handle the different rounds, so that I can still use the M193/ M855-M856/ MK262 and what ever NATO is carrying. I would like a target crown on the rifle to give the added accuracy.

I want MK262 as standard issue ammo, meaning that I am getting 210 rounds of MK262 to carry in combat. I get to zero and qualify with MK262 and I get to carry it to combat. I would still like to have M855 and M856 available so that if I need some extra penetration or say a magazine of tracers to mark targets.

I would love a gas piston system, however I am not fully convinced it is necessary. Yes it keeps the carbon out of the chamber and off the bolt. But you are looking at firing 600 + round with out cleaning before it really has an affect on the operation. Realistically I can not see firing more then 600 rounds with out having the ability to clean my bolt and lubercate my weapon. The combat load is 210 all though most soldiers carry 210 to 300 rounds, it still not even close to 600+ rounds...

Accuracy requirements should be 1MOA.... There is no reason why we can not give match grade accuracy to our troops! Every soldier should  have the ability to tag a mortar crew at 600 to 800 meters....

As for training, I would like to see 2000- 3000 rounds of basic skill progression training (say a 10 to 15 day basic/ advanced rifle marksmanship course) and then 1000 to 1500 rounds of annual training. MARKSMANSHIP is a PARISHABLE skill!!!

But then a again that is just me.... ;)


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 9, 2008)

razor_baghdad said:


> I have to ask and I'm not trying to be a smartass, trust me. Anything that can make the soldiers more effective is a plus in my book but:
> 
> 1. At what level are you writing to the McCain folks?? As a concerned citizen or as a genuine dealer/R & D jockey with plans for equipping our troops with what they need?
> 
> ...





1. Nope. 
2. Nope.
3. Yup. Sure have...for about 9 solid years...from the Engineering/research side of one of the largest Defense contractors.

But, I'm addressing this problem as just a concerned citizen with "friends" reportedly in need of more REAL training ammo/rangetime, and "friends" with suggestions they would like to pass along.
I'm just the concerned citizen passing along information from the "trigger pullers"...or at least *ONE trigger puller that is passionate about better training*.

I have effected change this way before with good results, but then again my Senator (at the time) was a ranking senator, and held the pursestrings.  Now, he's a felon...and I have a different senator.  We'll see if McCain's as responsive.
All I can do is try to help, instead of sitting and doing nothing about it.
Think it's a waste of time?


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 10, 2008)

razor_baghdad said:


> Are you PMP (Project Manager Program) qualified? This would be important as it dictates the level of importance that your emails are received at the McCain camp vice as a civilian and them telling you what you want to hear.



So what is a PMP and how does someone become PMP qualified???:confused:




arizonaguide said:


> 1. Nope.
> 2. Nope.
> 3. Yup. Sure have...for about 9 solid years...from the Engineering/research side of one of the largest Defense contractors.
> 
> ...



I don't think RB was trying to bust on you here, more so trying to get some background so that he could offer advice in the proper areas... He is one of those people who forgets more while taking a dump then most of us will ever retain in a life time...

I can say for every service member on this board, that we appreciate any efforts out of your own free time at helping better our training and or equipment! Thank you for taking the time to write your government representatives in regards to these issues...


----------



## 8'Duece (Dec 10, 2008)

I'll add my :2c:

When reports first came out about the stoppages with the M4 carbine I had one question..........."Who and what units where they speaking too when they came up those conclusions?"

Thus, if your asking a bunch of 19 year PFC's from a conventional ANG unit your likely not going to here much good about the M4 platform.  These are the soldiers that cannot tell you what a gas block is, nor the difference between a "buffer" and a "bolt"  Not knocking the ANG but if your not asking a Special Forces soldier, a Navy SEAL or other SOF BTDT's then it's likely that your talking to soldiers that have little if any knowledge about lubricating the weapon properly, maintaining a ready full parts kit to replace  bolt gas rings, inproved extractor upgrades etc, and they sport crappy mags due also to their lack of maintaining them.  It's been my experience with our local Reserve engineer Brigade that they have little if any real knowledge of their weapons systems, espcially the Beretta M9.  I mean really, how much sidearm training do the ANG unit soldiers really get ?  Not much and then they complain when their M9 go's down. It just so happens that they have an M9 pistol that has never had a new spring kit installed, nor a new barrel and it's at it's service life when issued.  Take any pistol and put 30,000 rounds through it and your going to be picking pieces of it on the deck.  And, they can't hit their targets with a 9mm Luger, let alone a .45 ACP 1911 clone, which is what most seem to be asking for. Yeah, one thing at a time their cherry bomb. 

I remember hearing or reading stories about ANG unit soldiers that where convinced that running their M16/M4's completley dry in Afghan and Iraq was a good thing because lubricant attracts the dust and sand.  Larry Vickers will tell you all day long that he'd rather have a wet and sandy rifle than a dry and sandy rifle.  Makes sense to me, how about you ? 

Hell, I learned more about the M16/M4 platform AFTER I got out of the Army than I ever did while IN THE ARMY. :confused:  But, that's the BIG ARMY, not the SOF side. 

Do I like the gas piston system ? You betcha, but a well maintained M4 standard gas impingement system should run smoothly for up to 5,000 rounds before needing any parts replacement or real scrubbing.  If your having stoppages then the likely culprit is your mags. 

The BIG ARMY does not keep a decent record of round counts on their weapons systems and when something breaks or fails the PFC is yelling about his or her weapon is a POS and they need something more exotic and expensive.  What they need is more training, not another weapon system, at the moment.   This holds true especially of the Beretta M9 9mm Luger.  It's one of, if not the best 9mm Luger available, assuming it's clean, lubricated and has new springs and barrel replacments every 15,000 rounds.  And, mags are the biggest culprit of failures with the M9.  Factory 15 round mags are the only thing that I will slap into my Beretta. Yes, I know Mec Gar makes them, but the factory mags are much better than the Mec Gar mags that they will send you if you order directly from them. 

As for the debate over caliber ? I think the 6.8 SPC is a no brainer, but if you hit your Tango 3 times with a 5.56 he's not going to be doing so well, especially if you've given him an M885 between the running lights. 

I'm only speaking what I know, not what I've done, which isn't much compared to some of the guy's on this board, but I do have an opinion and you just read it. 

Take it for what it's worth. :2c:


----------



## 0699 (Dec 10, 2008)

82ndtrooper said:


> ...when something breaks or fails the PFC is yelling about his or her weapon is a POS and they need something more exotic and expensive.  What they need is more training, not another weapon system...
> 
> :2c:



Good training beats out fancy gear every time.  Thanks for the reminder.  I'd rather the GOV spend the money on training & more ammo intead of another weapon.


----------



## Viper1 (Dec 10, 2008)

0699 said:


> I'd rather the GOV spend the money on training & more ammo intead of another weapon.



Or another shiny uniform or piece of shiny metal for the uniform (i.e. the beret, the new blues, the acu, metal combat unit identifier badge for the blues, etc)


----------



## Rabid Badger (Dec 10, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> I don't think RB was trying to bust on you here, more so trying to get some background so that he could offer advice in the proper areas... He is one of those people who forgets more while taking a dump then most of us will ever retain in a life time...
> 
> I can say for every service member on this board, that we appreciate any efforts out of your own free time at helping better our training and or equipment! Thank you for taking the time to write your government representatives in regards to these issues...



Great post and on the $$$$$$$$...

AZG, with your experience at an engineering/RD level, *WTF* are you doing in a hospital wrestling crack addicts??

Determining level of experience is a vetting measure. 

but I do know guns as a shooter and what the 'fellas' want.

I wrote 5 contracts for Triple Canopy, 4 of which were fielded, from the comfort of my bunker solo in Baghdad. I'm a cut n paste aholic.

PMP is a program I have yet to invest in but would be worth the time for any entrepreneurs wanting into the contract management business, either with DOD or DOS, HS, any of the big contractors.

http://pm.umd.edu/page.php?id=1

Another helpful site: TEC news (Technology news)

http://www.technologyevaluation.com/news/m_20081128.html

and fedbiz.gov (use a .mil address or a PMC as your source of reference)

http://www.govdirections.com/users/register/?gclid=CIbF5uTctpcCFQt4HgodGWO7kA

Have a good one and good luck!!

AZG, send the link to Sen McCain's website/email??

:2c:;)


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 10, 2008)

*Thanks RB!*



razor_baghdad said:


> AZG, with your experience at an engineering/RD level, *WTF* are you doing in a hospital wrestling crack addicts??
> 
> AZG, send the link to Sen McCain's website/email??


THAT's what my Dad keeps asking!! :doh:  

RB, thanks for that question. It's a funny silly-ass notion I have about "making a difference" (read that: stupid "sheepdog/hero" complex).  Things changed after my Mom died last February...(resulting in serious "soul-searching" about _MY_ legacy, and how I want to be remembered).  

I wanted to go back into the Military right after 9-11, but had to put everything on hold to care for Mom for 5 years (alzheimers).  
So, NOW I'm what you could call "pent up" (feel like I'm behind the power-curve)to make a difference.  
I tried to get in again last year (Intel or MP), as Mom was passing, but there were medical issues (bullshit, and since proven wrong) with the MEPS doctors(idiots! no other word for it).  Now, another year has gone by and I aint any younger. (but still a bit of an adrenaline junky).
:uhh:

But, I have come to the conclusion that I SHOULD find a better protection gig (one that I can believe in)...as the current company/people (mostly)suck.  Just have a couple more things to do (teach) first, and another couple important purchases to make before vacation/re-evaluation.

That, or maybe back to (fulltime) Tourguide work, where I _was_ "changing the world 10 people at a time":cool:
(_example_: I had an israeli family and arab family on the same tour, who became "friends" at the Grand Canyon with my help...good stuff.)
My tours are small (10 person), so much more "intimate/personal" than the big busses.  That, and if I can help here at SS, and with our folks overseas, at least _that's_ making a difference.

Thanks RB! for the kind words. And thanks for the links/information. I will pass that stuff on.  I do know of a couple folks who are also sending a copy of the letter to their congress people, so we should be able to at least get the "151rds to combat" issues resolved.

The equipment issue is a "bigger story" ($$$/egos/contracts/etc) though...and all the points folks have brought up are very valid.
I (like JAB) am interested in more info about PMP, and etc.  Good stuff RB!
Thanks.


----------



## Marauder06 (Dec 10, 2008)

razor_baghdad said:


> ... I'm a cut n paste aholic.
> ...



lol, you have "officer material" written all over you


----------



## car (Dec 10, 2008)

Marauder06 said:


> lol, you have "officer material" written all over you



I can hear the "Ouch!" all the way down here!


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 11, 2008)

82ndtrooper said:


> When reports first came out about the stoppages with the M4 carbine I had one question..........."Who and what units where they speaking too when they came up those conclusions?"
> 
> I had the same questions, but geared more towards combat arms or combat service and support. The round count and training time as per STRAC allows for more training time and round count for combat arms. (at least on the NG side)
> 
> ...


I agree with training joe to shoot first, however there are minimal things that can be done to the M4 to make it a lot more affective! Why buy an ACOG and Aim Point? Why not have one optic system that had both intergraded, standardizing your training even further? Why replace a barrel with MIL-SPEC when you can put a target barrel with 1/7 twist? Why run M855 when MK262 is more accurate and just as affective?

Good post 82ND, I just wanted to clear some things up


----------



## pardus (Dec 11, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> I would love a gas piston system,



That is all I want, all the other stuff is extraneous to me.



0699 said:


> Good training beats out fancy gear every time.



Amen, I should know lol


----------



## HOLLiS (Dec 11, 2008)

I am going to start a adoption home for all the unwanted/unloved M4s.   If you got one and feel it falls into that category, please give them a better home.

PM me, I will give you my address and you can send them here.  They will be cleaned, given a warm dry spot and fed good ammo regularly.  

I will be putting in for a non-profit status if is seems warranted,

Thank you.

H.

H's home for unwanted M4s.


----------



## HoosierAnnie (Dec 11, 2008)

HOLLiS said:


> I am going to start a adoption home for all the unwanted/unloved M4s.   H's home for unwanted M4s.



H - I have foster experience if you need help  ;)


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 11, 2008)

Hell, I'd be happy to just take just one of the old non-piston uppers, when the Big Army swap out time comes!
(wish I could find a good lower receiver right now, though).
:2c:


----------



## P. Beck (Dec 11, 2008)

What is the advantage in carrying twice as many rounds if it takes four times as many hits to put the target down?

"...if you train the soldiers to shoot head/ center chest..."

Shooting only for the head and chest is just peachy. I practice it. I do it. I teach it.  And if we could just get Hajji to train his guys to stand still, like on a pop-up range, that would be really keen too.  Little fuquers just haven't got the memo and they've been known to move.

Just because you're shooting center of mass, doesn't mean your shot is gonna hit center of mass.  Gunfights aren't laser tag. There's this little thing called "time of flight".  Ask any cop who's been through an OIS investigation that involved him firing at a suspect who chose that exact instant to turn and, what would have been a nice CoM hit and a clean shoot, now everybody wants to know why he shot the suspect in the back.

Forgive me, but I want a round that will incapacitate even with peripheral hits because the vast majority of the hits are going to be just that.  And that may be all you going to get on that particular hajji that day.  I want a round that drops the target as if he was hit by lightning, no matter where I hit him.  I want a round that causes the target to question his belief in allah. I want a round that blows off body parts. I want "impressive secondary kinetic effects."  And I know for a fact that it's technically possible.

Hajji likes to do the old un-aimed, ak-over-the-wall, spray and pray.
I have, on more than one occasion sighted in on where I last saw arms and fired when they popped out again.  I have also used the arms as a reference to gauge where Hajji was standing, off-set my point of aim a little and fired through the mud wall and scored.

Anybody who's been reading my posts knows that I favor a regular old, rack-grade, plastic-stocked, minute-of-hajji M14, stoked exclusively with M993 AP.  126 grains of cupra-nickel jacketed tungsten, at 2985 fps,  slows down when it gets tired.  Getting one of those through one or both fore-arms tends to have a negative effect on your offensive potential.  Not to mention your ability to feed yourself or wipe your own ass. Another side benefit is that if I hit the weapon?  It's out of action.  M855 will not do this.

One round of M993 AP?: $1.14
The look on Hajji's face when that mud wall turns out not to be cover after all?: Priceless.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 11, 2008)

Yup, and they could easily "tool up" and spit out M-14 (carbines?) quickly and all-day-long, if there really was a demand.  This just seems important to me with the emphais probably moving to Afghanistan's longer ranges, soon.

If not, then at least go to the mk262 round, as JAB points out?



:2c:


----------



## pardus (Dec 11, 2008)

P. Beck said:


> What is the advantage in carrying twice as many rounds if it takes four times as many hits to put the target down?
> 
> Just because you're shooting center of mass, doesn't mean your shot is gonna hit center of mass.
> 
> Forgive me, but I want a round that will incapacitate even with peripheral hits because the vast majority of the hits are going to be just that.



Exactly!!!

The old carry more ammo argument never jibbed with me for that exact reason.
People don't take into effect penetration power through walls etc...

5.56 is good for ideal conditions, I wonder how many combat vets have seen that on a regular basis.

5.56 is fun to use but if I'm going to war I'd much prefer a serious round :2c:


----------



## 0699 (Dec 11, 2008)

HOLLiS said:


> I am going to start a adoption home for all the unwanted/unloved M4s.   If you got one and feel it falls into that category, please give them a better home.
> 
> PM me, I will give you my address and you can send them here.  They will be cleaned, given a warm dry spot and fed good ammo regularly.
> 
> ...



What would work out really nice (even though I know it won't happen) is if the Army sold off the old M-4s to help pay for the new weapon (if they go that route).  Even with replacing the current trigger group for a semi-only trigger group, they'd make money selling them.

I'd buy one.  Tried to get our armorer to "lose" mine when I checked out, but he's too honest...


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 11, 2008)

pardus762 said:


> The old carry more ammo argument never jibbed with me for that exact reason.
> 
> 5.56 is good for ideal conditions, I wonder how many combat vets have seen that on a regular basis.
> 
> ...if I'm going to war I'd much prefer a serious round :2c:



Yup, the 7.62's increased effective range, AND the redefinition of enemy "cover". Damn. 
I know the M-14 (carbine?) could be tooled up with existing M-14 machinery, and punched out in VOLUMES for the price of ONE F-22.

SOCOMs for all, dammit!  Put it on MY (ex-USAF)tab.


----------



## HOLLiS (Dec 12, 2008)

arizonaguide said:


> Yup, the 7.62's increased effective range, AND the redefinition of enemy "cover". Damn.
> An M-14 (carbine? if that's what's wanted) I know it could be tooled up with existing M-14 machinery, and punched out in VOLUMES for the price of ONE F-22.
> SOCOMs for all, dammit!  Put it on MY (ex-USAF)tab.



This is a old discussion that has been going around in circle for years, a least 40 years that I know of. 

Yes if we can keep Hajj standing still, or Charlie, or even better, keeping the battle scape the same in every conflict.  


More ammo is always preferred to less.  One shot one kill maybe the sniper's ideal but the reality of a grunt is it takes lots and lots of rounds.   Staying a live is better than the alternative,  if your putting rounds down range the "opponent" will have problems putting rounds down range at you.

If your in a fix position the M14 is a great weapon, if you are a mule it is not.  If your in a fixed position there are other choices too.  Everything is going to be a trade off.  When your "opponent" does manage to get a shot off your next shot may be less than ideal.  Effective fire is what a grunt shoots for.  

I should dig up the Marine Corps rules of gun fighting.  If you got the time to B-R-A-S-S, then you are at the range, not in a fire fight.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 12, 2008)

Okay that settles it; we give every soldier M14’s and M993 AP ammo. That way they will be able to still kill hajji when they miss! :doh:

The USMC in their findings and said that their Marines simply were not trained well enough to hit the target and even when they did it was in non vital places with little to low affect, regardless of caliber used..

*It is not a bullet issue, it is a marksmanship training issue!!!*



pardus762 said:


> 5.56 is good for ideal conditions, I wonder how many combat vets have seen that on a regular basis.



I will take 5.56 over 7.62 (rifle) any day of the week!



pardus762 said:


> 5.56 is fun to use but if I'm going to war I'd much prefer a serious round :2c:


 Well the Army always needs a good M240 B gunner, and you get all the 7.62 you can carry


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 12, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> Okay that settles it; we give every soldier M14’s and M993 AP ammo. That way they will be able to still kill hajji when they miss! :doh:


Yup, and I'm buying, dammit. :cool:  I'm trading in my F-22.
You want M-14 regular, or carbine?

In the meantime You and me are gonna increase the shit out of the training budget...and switch to the Mk262. Yes?  Maybe throw a piston upper on that bitch, with a match grade barrel. (and we _ain't even kidding!_)
:)



HOLLiS said:


> More ammo is always preferred to less.  One shot one kill maybe the sniper's ideal but the reality of a grunt is it takes lots and lots of rounds.   Staying a live is better than the alternative,  if your putting rounds down range the "opponent" will have problems putting rounds down range at you.



What is the typical 5.56 combat load?  300rounds?  How much of that _DOES_ become suppressing fire in a typical engagement?  How much _is_ used to "pin" the enemy? Am I to understand that typically MOST of the 300rds is used for suppression fire? Is that until the guy with the 7.62 shows up and can penetrate what he's pinned behind? Until something else is used? Gunship? I'm curious about the "typical" firefight.  *IS there such a thing?*  Let's take a serious look at typical tactics and outcomes, if there is such a thing.  Does Charlie (or Hadji) hide behind a tree in Afghanistan?  Is he firing from behind a rock that a 7.62 isn't gonna penetrate anyway?  What are the enemy using in Afghanistan? WTF is the norm (if there IS such a thing)?

*Does the "typical" firefight usually end with Hadji (or Charlie) taking a "typical" center-of-mass hit at close range(without having to penetrate cover) with the 5.56, and then only after a bunch of supression fire?*

I don't know these answers, and that's why I'm asking. If OPSEC prevent's answers to these questions, I understand.
But, you bring up a Good question, Hollis.


----------



## pardus (Dec 12, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> Well the Army always needs a good M240 B gunner, and you get all the 7.62 you can carry




Fuck yeah, That is my favourite weapon and the one I'd carry over anything else giving the choice! :cool:


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 12, 2008)

arizonaguide said:


> Yup, and I'm buying, dammit. :cool:  I'm trading in my F-22.
> You want M-14 regular, or carbine?
> 
> If 7.62 is going to be pushed on me, I will take it an Stoner AR form!
> ...



I am not saying that 7.62 is not another tool to keep in the bag, every rifle comapany has a few... I am saying there is no reason to put that kind of weight and recoil on a riflemen. Besides it will never mean shit anyway unless you *train* them to be better shooters!!!:cool:


----------



## pardus (Dec 12, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> I am not saying that 7.62 is not another tool to keep in the bag, every rifle comapany has a few... I am saying there is no reason to put that kind of weight and recoil on a riflemen. Besides it will never mean shit anyway unless you *train* them to be better shooters!!!:cool:



Every Squad should have one 7.62 rifle IMO.

This always swings back to one thing, better training, regardless of what caliber we are talking about.

There is NO excuse for poor weapon skills, none!

Officers, listen up, this is your responsibility!


----------



## HOLLiS (Dec 12, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> I am not saying that 7.62 is not another tool to keep in the bag, every rifle comapany has a few... I am saying there is no reason to put that kind of weight and recoil on a riflemen. Besides it will never mean shit anyway unless you *train* them to be better shooters!!!:cool:



Good points, that is why there are squads, platoon, company, etc size weapons.  It is not a individual carrying everything.  It is a unit of soldiers carrying what is needed.  The load is divided up among the members of the unit.  If there was one perfect weapon, then that would be all we would see carried.  

I carried 35 20 rd magazines.  I also carried a can of  gun ammo (M60) and a few 60 mike mike.  Maybe even some blooper (M79) ammo among other stuff in my pack.  I don't think anyone like when 81s where with us.  We sure liked the fire support, but not humping that stuff.  This is a issue of resource and preserving that resource.  This gets into squad, platoon and company tactics.  What weapons are used and when.  How to preserve your resources while exhausting the enemies.  All that adds up, whether you come home or not.

The military makes the choice what is best for the unit, if we make the choice it would probably be, what is best for me.  Often this is the bases of disagreements because what is best for the unit may not be best for me.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 12, 2008)

*IMPROVED TRAINING to include improved tactics, lessons learned, etc.*



HOLLiS said:


> We sure liked the fire support, but not humping that stuff.  This is a issue of resource and preserving that resource.  *This gets into squad, platoon and company tactics.  What weapons are used and when.*  How to preserve your resources while exhausting the enemies.  All that adds up, whether you come home or not.
> 
> The military makes the choice what is best for the unit, if we make the choice it would probably be, what is best for me.  Often this is the bases of disagreements because what is best for the unit may not be best for me.



Right there is the basis of the issue.  Well put Hollis.
That's my point.  We cannot say 5.56 is better than 7.62 is better then 6.8, until we look at the tactics of each situation...and to my understanding, there is no TYPICAL firefight.  The emphais is supposed to be (rhetric) switching to Afghanistan, but does that mean we screw the guys in Iraq with Big Army wide changes? Or, visa-versa?  

Consider this:
If most of the fight is suppression fire until a gunship arrives, then hell, just hump something light (.22 long rifle? (just kidding, but you get the idea)) that is good for MOSTLY suppression fire.

If the situation is for long distance rifle shots (with no backup on the way) then I would think you surely would want something to reach out and kill at range, or punch thru a barrier.

There may be no "typical" firefight, but we (and Big Army) DO have to look at the commonalities, and make huge sweeping training and equipment changes based on those "common/typical" tactics.

As Hollis said, it's a lot about compromise.  Trying to cover every situation with one issued rifleman's piece of kit.  And what I'm hearing is that what most of the trigger pullers want is (mostly) 5.56, with a 7.62 or two thrown in.
And, MORE IMPORTANT an increased emphasis on *training training training* with whatever the tool, and I'm hearing it's the 5.56 that's wanted the MOST!!!



> All that adds up, whether you come home or not.


Well put Hollis.  Tactics, suppression fire, etc..._all have to be an improved part of an increased training agenda_.  As Pardus said, OFFICERS have to ensure that this takes place.  And, THAT'S _*not* just a matter of increased range time_...but discussions of improved tactics, lessons learned, etc.  My gut still tells me that we're missing something important though...or we're still not on top of it.  Something _still bothers me _about what I'm hearing. 
:2c:


----------



## HOLLiS (Dec 12, 2008)

arizonaguide said:


> My gut still tells me that we're missing something important though...or we're still not on top of it.  Something _still bothers me _about what I'm hearing.
> :2c:



Maybe the hardest part of all.   Death(not always the worse outcome) is a part of combat.  No guarantees.  Even doing everything right, things go wrong.  Until it is over, one never knows what price was paid.  That always promotes second guessing.  Some of it is good, some is just part of our natural human desire that things should not have happened.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 12, 2008)

HOLLiS said:


> Maybe the hardest part of all.   Death(not always the worse outcome) is a part of combat.  No guarantees.  Even doing everything right, things go wrong.  Until it is over, one never knows what price was paid.  That always promotes second guessing.  Some of it is good, some is just part of our natural human desire that things should not have happened.


Amen, Bro!   Well put (again) H!  :cool: 
Still, we gotta do what we CAN do.  But, logic is still not adding up on all this. Something about the "suppression fire" concept still bothers me.  There may be no "typical" firefight, but we DO have to look at the commonalities, and make training and equipment changes based on as much "common/typical" tactics data as we have.


----------



## P. Beck (Dec 12, 2008)

Don't know if these have been posted before:

http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Schatz.pdf

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/

Read both in their entirety.  If you're not pissed at the end, you're not paying attention.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 12, 2008)

Great links PB, and need to be read several times.

I guess it boils down that we have to make *training and equipment plans* based on current operational data, lessons learned data, current (trained)tactics, as well as predictions about future terrain and tactics. I guess all I can do is try to help get the resources to the folks that are doing the training and making those decisions.
Perhaps with a little oversight, to make sure it actually GETS to Joe.

But, what I'm asking is Afghanistan's most common occurance of a firefight happen "on patrol" or while stationary in a "firebase" type of environment. (or both?). And is that patrol on foot, or out of a vehicle? Is the getting out of the vehicle (CQB carbine size) type fight more common than trying to be shooting at the shitbags from 500 yards behind rocks on the side of the ridge? Is it "mountain goat hunting", or more of an up-close (beltbuckle distance) CQB thing? Or, a lot of both? Again, just thinking out loud...about something I can only wonder about..and will probably never really know.


----------



## P. Beck (Dec 12, 2008)

You can ( and I have) engage targets in all of those range bands in the course of a single operation.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 12, 2008)

P. Beck said:


> You can ( and I have) engage targets in all of those range bands in the course of a single operation.



Damn.


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 12, 2008)

New letter to Senator:

Dear Senator,

The boys need more freakin ammo.
Emphais on lots of training ammo, and Mk262.

Also send a bunch of piston uppers.
Other than that, quit fuckin with shit, and send ammo.

(me)


----------



## pardus (Dec 12, 2008)

Tell them to re-open the ammo factories Clinton closed. :2c:


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 13, 2008)

P. Beck said:


> Don't know if these have been posted before:
> 
> http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Schatz.pdf
> 
> ...



Great links! 

Do you have any more links, of say unit leson learned??? I have Big Army and USMC, but I do not have any unit level AAR/ CLL...


----------



## pardus (Dec 13, 2008)

J.A.B. said:


> Great links!
> 
> Do you have any more links, of say unit leson learned??? I have Big Army and USMC, but I do not have any unit level AAR/ CLL...



Here's a great link for you J.A.B. '5.56 caliber comparison guide'.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Dec 13, 2008)

pardus762 said:


> '5.56 caliber comparison guide'.



The gayness is soooooooooo strong in you!


----------



## arizonaguide (Dec 13, 2008)

Dammit. Everytime you guys mention that gayness shit...I have to go and find something like this:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPYL6-SoBc4&feature=related"]YouTube - Women shooters[/ame]
And it's not easy sorting thru all that related youtube stuff.:cool:


----------

