OT: sutibility of M16

May 22, 2010 13 Replies

I thought some one else would have posted this by now.



formatting link
rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills



By SLOBODAN LEKIC (AP) ? 1 day ago



KABUL, Afghanistan ? The U.S. military's workhorse rifle ? used in battle for the last 40 years ? is proving less effective in Afghanistan against the Taliban's more primitive but longer range weapons.



As a result, the U.S. is reevaluating the performance of its standard M-4 rifle and considering a switch to weapons that fire a larger round largely discarded in the 1960s.



But a U.S. Army study found that the 5.56 mm bullets fired from M-4s don't retain enough velocity at distances greater than 1,000 feet (300 meters) to kill an adversary. In hilly regions of Afghanistan, NATO and insurgent forces are often



2,000 to 2,500 feet (600-800 meters) apart.

Afghans have a tradition of long-range ambushes against foreign forces. During the 1832-1842 British-Afghan war, the British found that their Brown Bess muskets could not reach insurgent sharpshooters firing higher-caliber Jezzail flintlocks.



Soviet soldiers in the 1980s found that their AK-47 rifles could not match the World War II-era bolt-action Lee-Enfield and Mauser rifles used by mujahedeen rebels.



"These are important considerations in Afghanistan, where NATO forces are frequently attacked by insurgents using ... sharpshooter's rifles, which are all chambered for a full-powered cartridge which dates back to the 1890s," said Paul Cornish, curator of firearms at the Imperial War Museum in London.



The heavier bullets enable Taliban militants to shoot at U.S. and NATO soldiers from positions well beyond the effective range of the coalition's rifles.


Any observations



-- Unka George (George McDuffee) .............................. The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there. L. P. Hartley (1895-1972), British author. The Go-Between, Prologue (1953).


formatting link
US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills

Isn't that what FISTers are for?

formatting link
US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills

Armies are always being accused of fighting the last war -- in this case, from what I've read the M16's evolution started with jungle fighting in the Pacific during WWII, and really came of age in the jungles of Vietnam, where even if you could know what was 1000 feet out you couldn't shoot it for the tree trunks.

Now we're fighting a bunch of well-armed hillmen who know their country and really know how to shoot.

So yea, the war is different, hence the tools must be different.

Be a bitch to change over, both logistically and from a personnel training point of view. Even if you could train all the troops up in an instant you'd have way too many instances of good troops with good gun and good ammo that won't fit.

formatting link

It's not just an accusation, Tim. It's a career choice!

The M14 is VERY popular in the Sandbox and there are a number of mods that have been tested that utilize the M16/M4 lowers and simply need a new upper (contains barrel and bolt) with new and far superior cartridges such as the 6.8 Remington/SPC and the 6.5 Grendal and other similar superior rounds that will still fit in the existing magazines

formatting link
formatting link
Both of which are FAR superior to the 5.56 (223 Remington) used for the past 40 years in the M-Zipteen and its variants

The M14 in 7.62 Nato (.308) is a marvelous rifle in the sandbox, but it is heavy when compared to a Zipteen, even in the short variations.

I only own a couple .223 weapons that get shot seldom, frankly..I didnt care for it in RVN either..but the .308...now thats something that will compete very very favorably against bolt action Mausers from WW2, and Russian M91s from the 1st world war we are up against in the sandbox.

I carried an M21 in RVN, along with a chopped shotgun..shrug..and still love both as life savers..and life takers.

Gunner

F. George McDuffee wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

That's why M14s are being reissued.

The '14s (and their unbelted ammo) started being reissued last fall according to TV documentaries. (It takes TV documentaries ~6-9 months in post-production to get aired.)

Hopefully, they'll put the selector levers on the rifles before issuing them. (If not, a pin punch and a pair of pliers will resolve the problem! )

Gunner must have been working ;)

I am not surprised that the wondergun is coming up short in that situation. It was a Vietnam era rifle with Vietnam era assumptions.

The M4 carbine with a 14.5" barrel is almost a pistol. It looses 210 fps over the marginal M16.

A Doughboy with his 1903 Springfield or a WWII grunt with his Garand would not be feeling short changed in Afghanistan.

Hopefully we didn't destroy our stocks of M14's and can also purchase some .308 sporting rifles along with say .300 WSM's or whatever makes sense to those at the pointy end of the stick.

Wes

-- "Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

Wes wrote in news:ke3Kn.314623$ snipped-for-privacy@en-nntp-05.dc.easynews.com:

The M14s had been stored and are being reissued.

According to a Military Channel program that aired tonight, the Army is in the process of rebarrelling/rechambering their sniper rifles to the .300 Win. Mag.

This process may already be complete since it takes the TV show people ~

6-9 months to go from the camera to broadcast...

I absolutely agree. The downside of long range rifles is the weight and the logistical burden of the ammunition. Humping those rifles and the limited amount of ammunition you can carry up and down those hills is not to be underestimated. Steve

formatting link
US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills

Good article. Here is a tiny URL for it.

formatting link
remember that other areas of the middle east, that the M-16 and now the M-4 don't work as well.

I was born in 1946 and grew up on a farm. My Dad (and I) loved rifles. In the 1950's surplus military rifles and ammo were cheap through mail order houses like Monkey Wards or Sears. After the field work season was over Dad would order ten to twenty rifles (usually 1917 Springfields in 30/06 or Royal Enfields in .303) every month from Monkey Wards. When they came we would clean the cosmoline off them and thoroughly clean them. He would fire a group of ten rounds on a bullseye target at 100 yards and that paper stayed with the gun when he resold it. He kept five of the best grouping rifles for family members and I got the one we all referred to as El Perfecto. The test target on El Perfecto (a 1917 Springfield) was a ragged hole with all ten rounds in an area about the size of a quarter. I was only six or seven when he gave that rifle to me and although surplus 30/06 ammo was relatively cheap it still wasn't as cheap as the .22 Long Rifle ammo for my Stevens single shot rifle. I saved El Perfecto for long range work like Deer or coyotes when the sixty or more pounds of venison or the bounty on a coyote would justify the higher cost of the expensive ammo. I kept it as issued except for a different iron sight. Sadly I sold that gun when I was in college and in dire need of tuition money. Years later I realized how special that gun was but I never was able to find it. It has probably been sporterized and tapped for a scope and all the other crap people do to fine weapons to turn them into junk just like the Gun magazines tell you is ideal. However if any of you have an old 1917 Springfield in 30/06 with El Perfecto burned into the wood under the steel butt plate drop me a line. I would like to hear where my old friend has been through the years.

DL

logistical burden of the ammunition. Humping those

hills is not to be underestimated.

On the other hand..you shoot a whole lot less of the big stuff over long ranges.

Gunner

formatting link
> US rifles not suited to warfare in Afghan hills

logistical burden of the ammunition. Humping those

hills is not to be underestimated.

Long range would tend to be deliberate fire.

I wonder how the typical patrol is armed out side of the cities?

Wes

-- "Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

be feeling

pointy end of the

The M16 / M4 are close combat weapons. House to house, they are superior. Jungle, close combat, they are superior to a M1/M14. Just like the Thomson sub-machine gun was a fantastic weapon in cities in Europe in WW2. Lots of firepower in a short weapon. They have been issuing M14 for awhile in Afghanistan for at least a year from my info.

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required