The US military needs something more accurate, lethal and reliable than the M4

[Kelevra TAR-21]

LOL...
I'll give you a B for your effort...

The OSS is now what we call the CIA...

You quote is where the actual use of the "Green Beret" came from...

Training with is not the same as being trained by...

I will take the B with honor. I used to be a flaming liberal who hated The Military until my friend opened my eyes. Now I try and learn everything I can, by reading or watching The History and Military channel

 

[jeremy]

I will take the B with honor. I used to be a flaming liberal who hated The Military until my friend opened my eyes. Now I try and learn everything I can, by reading or watching The History and Military channel

The Rangers chase their history back to the 17th Century, to 1676...

The Green Berets trace their Lineage back more than 200 years. Through units like the Jedburgh Teams, OSS Detachment 101, the Alamo Scouts all the way back to Francois Marion, The Swamp Fox of the Revolutionary War...

The SEALS only go back to about 1942 to the Naval Scout and Raiders...

The Rangers chase their history back to the 17th Century, to 1676...

Keep educating yourself...

 

[dom1104]

Wow this is too good.

IN THIS CORNER WE HAVE

1. "a flaming liberal who hated The Military until my friend opened my eyes. Now I try and learn everything I can, by reading or watching The History and Military channel "

VERSUS

2. "I have personally taken M16s and M4s up into the 10,000 round realm without cleaning them with ZERO malfunctions in the CZ."


Welp, I know who I am going to put my money on.

<Tosses his DDm4 out the window>

DDM4: " I HAVE NEVER FAILED YOU! You havent even cleaned me once!"
Dom1104: " I dont care, the jews dont use you! And they are fricking awesome!"
DDM4: "<insert anti-semitic phrase about who the jews use instead of the carbine>"

 

[jeremy]

Glad I could entertain...

 

[snowrs]

I have never been in the military but I do know one thing, pushing innovation is ALWAYS a good thing. The competition should always be lurking around the corner, if any product is not continually pushed it will become inferior. So the military should always be looking for a better way to arm their soldiers, it may not lead to a new rifle but it could lead to advancements in the one they currently carry.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Based on past military rifle competitions, innovation and competition are not necessarily game-winners. The vast military procurement bureaucracy and the potential dollar amounts of a major military small arms procurement make procuring a new battle rifle more a game of reading the minds of the project management team and greasing the palms (figuratively or perhaps literally) of the Congress Critters who will approve the funding.

As I've said before, I qualified with the M-16A1 in Basic Training in 1970, then didn't qualify with a rifle again until pre-deployment training in 2006 (M4), so I haven't carried a rifle much - but I would like to see a battle rifle with fully ambidextrous controls since I've noticed there are quite a few more left-handers in the service now than there were in 1970.

As a matter of policy, I think we should be looking for a battle rifle that combines the ruggedness/reliability of the M1 Garand with the light weight of the M-16/M-4. Yes, I know, the M-16/M-4 works well when properly maintained, but as someone upthread said, sometimes you just can't keep it clean enough. A reliable battle rifle (IMO) should be able to be dragged through the mud, have the barrel cleared, and still be able to shoot at the bad guys with no further cleaning. Caliber, as some have said, doesn't necessarily matter except as a function of lethality at combat ranges and ability to penetrate cover/body armor as necessary.

 

[roscott]

Phew! I'm glad we've settled on the M4 again. I was worried I would have to throw out my AR's!

 

[jmiller676]

Phew! I'm glad we've settled on the M4 again. I was worried I would have to throw out my AR's!

You still do, AKs are on the rage I hear.


<continue thread>

 

[xmas_asn]

I think this is the longest thread about changing/not changing the M16/M4 platform I have seen... Even tho Half of this thread has nothing to do with anything but a couple guy playing who's got the biggest willy..

 

[dom1104]

Even tho Half of this thread has nothing to do with anything but a couple guy playing who's got the biggest willy..

Ok, now THAT is anti-semetic.

Low blow dude, low blow.

 

[Kelevra TAR-21]

I still say The United States should test other platforms in combat. Sometimes change is good. I myself am always the last to change. I was the last person to get a computer, Ipod, xbox360 ect.... and I regret not being open to other ideas. It has set me back in life. I try to stay ahead in hand to hand combat, weapons and politics at least. I just wish I did not waste more than half my life thinking the wrong way. That is why I am working on a time machine to correct my mistakes.

 

[Kelevra TAR-21]

Wow this is too good.

IN THIS CORNER WE HAVE

1. "a flaming liberal who hated The Military until my friend opened my eyes. Now I try and learn everything I can, by reading or watching The History and Military channel "

VERSUS

2. "I have personally taken M16s and M4s up into the 10,000 round realm without cleaning them with ZERO malfunctions in the CZ."


Welp, I know who I am going to put my money on.

<Tosses his DDm4 out the window>

DDM4: " I HAVE NEVER FAILED YOU! You havent even cleaned me once!"
Dom1104: " I dont care, the jews dont use you! And they are fricking awesome!"
DDM4: "<insert anti-semitic phrase about who the jews use instead of the carbine>"

You kind of missed the point. Since 2001 the Israelis have used the Tavor on a limited basis. You know field testing. They still used The M-16, M4 and Galil during this time. It took until 2011 to decide to switch over totaly to The Micro Tavor, because the the other rifles cost 1/3 that of The Tavor.

 

[Kelevra TAR-21]

Here are stats for each platform
An M4 with Rail Adapter System (RAS), flip-up rear sight, vertical forward grip with bipod and Aimpoint M68 CCO.TypeCarbinePlace of origin

United StatesService historyIn service1997–presentUsed bySee UsersWarsWar in Afghanistan (2001–present), War in Iraq (2003-2010), Colombian Armed ConflictProduction historyManufacturerColt DefenseProduced1994–presentVariantsM4A1, CQBR (Mk. 18 Mod 0)SpecificationsWeight6.36 lb (2.88 kg) empty
6.9 lb (3.1 kg) with 30 roundsLength33 in (838 mm) (stock extended)
29.75 in (756 mm) (stock retracted)Barrel length14.5 in (368 mm)Cartridge5.56x45mm NATOActionGas-operated, rotating boltRate of fire700-950 round/min cyclic[1]Muzzle velocity2,900 ft/s or 884 m/s[1]Effective range500 m for a point target and 600 m for an area target[2]Feed system30 round box magazine or other STANAG Magazines.

 

[Kelevra TAR-21]

СTAR-21TypeAssault riflePlace of origin

IsraelService historyIn service2001–presentUsed bySee UsersWarsOperation Defensive Shield, Operation Summer Rains, Second Lebanon War, Operation Hot Winter, Gaza War, Colombian armed conflict, South Ossetia War, Cambodian-Thai stand-offProduction historyDesignerIsrael Military Industries (IMI)Designed1991–2001ManufacturerIsrael Weapon Industries (IWI)VariantsSee VariantsSpecificationsWeight3.27 kg (7.21 lb) (TAR-21)[1]
3.18 kg (7.0 lb) (CTAR-21)[1]
3.67 kg (8.1 lb) (STAR-21)
2.95 kg (6.5 lb) (MTAR-21)[1]
3.19 kg (7.0 lb) (TC-21)Length720 mm (28 in) (TAR-21, STAR-21)[1]
640 mm (25.2 in) (CTAR-21)[1]
590 mm (23.2 in) (MTAR-21)[1]
670 mm (26.4 in) (TC-21)Barrel length460 mm (18.1 in) (TAR-21, STAR-21)[1]
380 mm (15.0 in) (CTAR-21)[1]
330 mm (13.0 in) (MTAR-21)[1]
410 mm (16.1 in) (TC-21)Cartridge5.56x45mm NATO[1]
9x19mm Para (Optional on MTAR-21)[1] 5.56x30mm MINSAS (Optional on Zittara)[3]ActionGas-operated, rotating bolt[1]Rate of fire750-900 rounds/min[1]Muzzle velocity910 m/s (2,986 ft/s) (TAR-21, STAR-21)
890 m/s (2,919.9 ft/s) (CTAR-21)
870 m/s (2,854.3 ft/s) (MTAR-21)
885 m/s (2,903.5 ft/s) (TC-21)Effective range550m (estimated as the M16 rifle by the ammo and the barrel)Feed systemVarious STANAG magazinesSightsITL MARS with integrated laser and IR pointer, Trijicon ACOG (STAR-21), EOTech holographic sight, others available

 

[Socomike]

Kelevra TAR-21, you do realize that there is a lot more that comes with switching rifles then just switching rifles right?

You must build a entirely new supply chain. You must train all new armorers for a different rifle and the problems it may have. You must assign new NSN numbers to each and every part that is inside and outside the weapon. You must train supply guys on how to order which parts (as in quantity of specific parts to keep on hand).

Most importantly you must retrain the ENTIRE army from the Infantry on down on new weapons manipulation techniques. This will take MILLIONS of rounds of trigger time to erase the years of training with the M4 that our military has now.

Moreover, you must have an abundance of money to do so. We do not. I have my gripes and complaints about the military and some of its equipment. The M4 does not fall into that category. I have spent countless hours...let me rephrase that..Countless years with the M4 by my side, and I have yet to see one fail when we needed it the most. We spent a great amount of time and got great training on how to keep your weapon clean when in a dusty, sandy environment by a civilian group in Kuwait.

Can someone name one REAL reason why we need to change service rifles right now? Because we should isnt a real answer. Because other people are isnt a real answer. Because the Israelis are isnt a real answer. Because 5.56 is weak is definitely not a real answer.

Im not saying that keeping and eye open and constantly looking for the next evolution in firearms design isnt a good idea. However, so far, replacement would be classified as a want and not a need.

Oh and 3/187

 

[MilitaryArms]

Socomike,

The Army has trials now open to find a replacement for the M4. I would agree, it's not something we need to do at this time. But since they are considering a switch, it's a relevant conversation as to which rifles we should consider.

Chances are the Army will spend 3 years and millions of dollars to do what they've done several times before... decide the M4 is fine.

 

[xmas_asn]

Kelevra TAR-21, you do realize that there is a lot more that comes with switching rifles then just switching rifles right?

You must build a entirely new supply chain. You must train all new armorers for a different rifle and the problems it may have. You must assign new NSN numbers to each and every part that is inside and outside the weapon. You must train supply guys on how to order which parts (as in quantity of specific parts to keep on hand).

Most importantly you must retrain the ENTIRE army from the Infantry on down on new weapons manipulation techniques. This will take MILLIONS of rounds of trigger time to erase the years of training with the M4 that our military has now.

Moreover, you must have an abundance of money to do so. We do not. I have my gripes and complaints about the military and some of its equipment. The M4 does not fall into that category. I have spent countless hours...let me rephrase that..Countless years with the M4 by my side, and I have yet to see one fail when we needed it the most. We spent a great amount of time and got great training on how to keep your weapon clean when in a dusty, sandy environment by a civilian group in Kuwait.

Can someone name one REAL reason why we need to change service rifles right now? Because we should isnt a real answer. Because other people are isnt a real answer. Because the Israelis are isnt a real answer. Because 5.56 is weak is definitely not a real answer.

Im not saying that keeping and eye open and constantly looking for the next evolution in firearms design isnt a good idea. However, so far, replacement would be classified as a want and not a need.

Oh and 3/187

You are correct. It would cost more than the national budget to just "Up and Change" from the M4. Especially a bull-pup.

Oh and btw I have worked with the Australian Army in Kuwait and Iraq. They don't even like the bull-pup. They hate mag changes with the AUG and dislike a few other features. They favor the M4 for its adaptability. This information doesn't come from some armchair commando, it comes from the Aussy soldiers them self's.

I will admit they Australians do have something going there with there use of the M240 as a indirect weapon. They use a Tripod similar to our mortars and rain bullets down with plunging fire from above. Thats another story tho.

I have seen recent modifications to M4s over the last few years. I have seen multiple heavy barrels on many M4s. We have upgraded extractors. There are alot of things we have done to keep up with the times.

BTW

I was C 3/187 06-09

 

[xmas_asn]

Oh and the MARS on is a piece of HOT Garbage. I know.. I used to own one.

 

[Socomike]

Socomike,

The Army has trials now open to find a replacement for the M4. I would agree, it's not something we need to do at this time. But since they are considering a switch, it's a relevant conversation as to which rifles we should consider.

Chances are the Army will spend 3 years and millions of dollars to do what they've done several times before... decide the M4 is fine.

I agree with you that it is a valid discussion. I am simply looking for a valid arguement as I have not heard one yet. It is my opinion that the 5.56 is plenty for a service rifle caliber. Are there better choices..absolutely. I would love to see a 6.8 or better yet a 6.5 round in the hands of our soldiers. We have to keep a realistic arguement if we are going to talk about it. A bullpup, while being used successfully around the world, is not a realistic change to me. In my opinion the SCAR, both L and H, was a valid change. If we, as a country, had the money and the time to devote to switcing to the scar, I wouldnt mind. The most important thing to me is that the manual of arms is similar to the AR line we are using now.

As far as the army having a trial open, I am starting to wonder if they have it open just to push firearms technology forward. It gives manufacturers something to try for. That big paycheck when they design the next evolution.

Remember this is all my opinion. I am just here to put my in and keep the converstaion interesting.

 

[Socomike]

Oh and the MARS on is a piece of HOT Garbage. I know.. I used to own one.

I was a fister attached to Angel company. Also spent some time with 3-320th FA, 3/75, and now with 1-329th INF. I reclassed somewhere along the way to 11b. I hold 11B, 13B, and 13F. It has been a long road. Good to see another Rakkasan around here.