Air Force contract training rifles

[melensdad]

For those unfamiliar with the M16 training rifles our newbie combat troops get to handle, here is a photo taken at the Olympic Arms factory of a batch getting ready to be packed up and shipped out to the Air Force. These are part of a 400 gun contract. Olympic Arms has contracts with every branch of our armed forces for various configurations of rifles.

I'd actually like to get a set of the blue furniture for one of my ARs

 

[cce1302]

What's with the blue? Do they not fire live rounds? Blue on ammunition normally denotes inert rounds.
I remember using blue M-16 uppers to train with SESAMS (paintball-type) rounds.

 

[phylodog]

Interesting, do you have any of the specs? Are they fully functional rifles? 22lr or 5.56mm? What is the reason for the blue furniture?

 

[JcJ]

The blue reminds me of NATO, but they wouldn't have any magazines.

 

[slacker]

Blueguns - Train Safe & Train Smart

They are just for training, they don't actually do anything.

Although the ones in the picture do look different, maybe I am mistaken

The blue furniture would be fun to have though

 

[shooter521]

Blueguns - Train Safe & Train Smart

They are just for training, they don't actually do anything.
Although the ones in the picture do look different, maybe I am mistaken

"Blue Guns" by Ring's and "Red Guns" by ASP are just gun-shaped chunks of solid rubber. I believe the rifles pictured above are referred to as the "Cobalt Trainer"... based on the gov't contracts I've seen, they are functional (i.e. can be manipulated, taken apart, etc) but non-firing, hence the blue (inert) color coding.

 

[phylodog]

...

 

[Cwood]

"Blue Guns" by Ring's and "Red Guns" by ASP are just gun-shaped chunks of solid rubber. I believe the rifles pictured above are referred to as the "Cobalt Trainer"... based on the gov't contracts I've seen, they are functional (i.e. can be manipulated, taken apart, etc) but non-firing, hence the blue (inert) color coding.

Ok, I am a little slow on the uptake....

Why would they order those? Doesnt the Air Force recruits have pass some sort of Basic Rifleman?

 

[melensdad]

"Blue Guns" by Ring's and "Red Guns" by ASP are just gun-shaped chunks of solid rubber. I believe the rifles pictured above are referred to as the "Cobalt Trainer"... based on the gov't contracts I've seen, they are functional (i.e. can be manipulated, taken apart, etc) but non-firing, hence the blue (inert) color coding.

Yes, you are exactly right. The cobalt trainer designation is the proper one, but many refer to them as duct tape guns. They are non-firing but fully functional training weapons.

They are issued to the new recruits to learn gun handling before being given live guns/ammo. They are also used for parade duty and parade demonstrations of fancy gun handling.

There is absolutely no connection to the United Nations.

 

[cougar_guy04]

I'd actually like to get a set of the blue furniture for one of my ARs

Check with Cav Arms. If I remember right, they have (or had) some AR furniture in that shade of blue.

 

[ryanmercer]

Ok, I am a little slow on the uptake....

Why would they order those? Doesnt the Air Force recruits have pass some sort of Basic Rifleman?

Yes but most recruits have never held a firearm, a good chunk have never even see one in person other than on the hip of a LEO... would you rather have them get their initial exposure with a fully functional weapon or not?

 

[Cwood]

Yes but most recruits have never held a firearm, a good chunk have never even see one in person other than on the hip of a LEO... would you rather have them get their initial exposure with a fully functional weapon or not?

I guess what I am getting at is it seems to be a waste of taxpayer money (yes I know...). They will have to use a firearm in oder to qualify so why buy a non firing weapon and have a fully functional weapon?

I was in the service and I know that some people entering the service have never fired a rifle before. Still I see no true reason to have these in the inventory. There is still upkeep for these just like a service weapon.

 

[ryanmercer]

I guess what I am getting at is it seems to be a waste of taxpayer money (yes I know...). They will have to use a firearm in oder to qualify so why buy a non firing weapon and have a fully functional weapon?

I was in the service and I know that some people entering the service have never fired a rifle before. Still I see no true reason to have these in the inventory. There is still upkeep for these just like a service weapon.

I'm less worried about them, and more worried about the multi-million dollar missiles that we were launching every 30 seconds for DAYS and DAYS and DAYS at the beginning of Operation Freedom. Heh.

The US budget for Iraq in FY 2007 came to $4,988/Iraqi. It's like spending $121,000 per person... all I want is like... 10k and I"d be happy hahah. They should give me 10k$, and I'll say "sure use those ugly blue training rifles!"

I know I know... not really related... I just want me some money! hahaha... then I could have bought more than a stinkin flashlight at Indy 1500.

 

[shamowfski]

Just don't give them ammo?

 

[ryanmercer]

Just don't give them ammo?

Who needs soldiers anymore anyway... don't we have attractive robots like Summer Glau?

Yeah yeah... I know *goes and stands in the corner*

 

[cce1302]

would you rather have them get their initial exposure with a fully functional weapon or not?

Yes, absolutely. A replica/nonfiring training aid will be treated like a non-weapon. I had never heard of these being used by any branch of the service until now. Is it only the AF that uses these?

 

[melensdad]

Yes, absolutely. A replica/nonfiring training aid will be treated like a non-weapon. I had never heard of these being used by any branch of the service until now. Is it only the AF that uses these?

NOPE. EVERY branch of service now uses them.

 

[munky_3434]

yeah, i was down at lackland AFB about 2 summers ago, and i saw a bunch of those things. i believe they don't fire, but i will ask some of our FNG's next weekend to verify. i think it has more to do with the whole "battlefield airman" concept theair force is pushing.

basically we are now doing more"outside the wire" missions as the army is overtasked. they want all troops to be more familiar with the weapon. asfor why they are using16's, the m-4 is'nt really prevailiant outside of more specific careers such as security, eod, tac-p's and pj's. and most of the 16's i have seen have been updated m16 A1's that have never been used.

outside rant, but i can't wait for the army to scrap the ACU and pick up a different uniform, so the air force will follow suite

 

[melensdad]

The Cobalt Trainers are made in all currently used configurations, including the M4. The photo I posted is simply the M16 A1 (I think) variant. Cobalt Trainers come with collapsable or fixed stocks, FRISK handguards or not, etc.

 

[ryanmercer]

The Cobalt Trainers are made in all currently used configurations, including the M4. The photo I posted is simply the M16 A1 (I think) variant. Cobalt Trainers come with collapsable or fixed stocks, FRISK handguards or not, etc.

I really hate the banner in your signature... *sighs* makes me miss Firefly.