Comments on: Another Perspective on the M4 Sand Test

By: SMSgt Mac

SMSgt Mac — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 16:09:33 +0000

Hey Don,
Why 2000 Rounds between stoppages? (vs. 500, 1000, etc) I mean, yeah set something high like that as an objecitve design goal to explore the feasibility, but what is the realistic requirement from both an achievable technology and military need POV?
Remember, I know how you think: any number you come up with usually has a basis. So fess up! LOL

By: TrustButVerify

TrustButVerify — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:33:17 +0000

Christian,
Regarding “what do the soldiers have to compare it to?” is a good question. Personally, I’m given to trust them on this; the SA80 was near-universally hated by a generation of British soldiers who were arguably had less non-military shooting experience than their American counterparts.
Nevertheless I remain ambivalent. My experience is that the M-16 family chokes in conditions of dirt, dust, and mud that AK derivatives are said to shrug off (not having had a Kalashnikov in those situations, I can only go by what we all hear).

By: Dennis

Dennis — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:21:44 +0000

True TB,
He was laughed at by a couple people. One fellow did suggest thought, that now the solder in question had “a real weapon, not a toy”.
I am not going to debate whether he made the right choice, but what interested me was how quickly he abandoned his M-16 for somthing else. If he truly trusted the weapon, and had confidence in it, he would not have been so quick to grab somthing else.
Isn’t this an issue of trust? Trusting a weapon with your life?

By: TB

TB — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:47:09 +0000

Sounds great Don except for #9. That little computer would add 3 or 4 pounds to the rifle. Land Warrior already has a palm pilot-like device that does something close to that. I’m nowhere close to an industry expert, but I believe the desired weight for a rifle with a loaded magazine is no more than 8 pounds. The optics, flashlights, and lasers we use now bump that up to about 10 pounds.

By: Don Meaker

Don Meaker — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 04:58:34 +0000

The report on the dust test also provided accuracy figures. The XM-8 had twice the error when the test started. The M-4 was very slightly more accurate than the others, but not much. As they wore out, all became less accurate, and nearly all wore out to about the same level.
If it was me, I would look at a new rifle with the following requirements:
1. Bullpup configuration, with total length less than 30 inches, and barrel length of 24 inches (1 in 7 inch rifling), to give the standard or heavy weight 5.56mm rounds the extra velocity that makes it a perform at its best, and cut the length down for greater safety when getting in and out of vehicles.
2. Ejection path that permits left or right handed firing.
3. Locking or delay mechanism physically separated from combustion gasses.
4. Pistol grips front and rear
5. Ability to change ammunition to 5.56mmX45, 7.62mmX51, to 12 gauge (18mmX76) with a change of barrel and magazine. This allows the soldier to configure his weapon to his expected conditions
6. over 2000 rounds between stoppage, and over 4000 rounds between malfunction requiring armorer repair.
7. Shoot from a rest to 2 mils at 100 meters (a mil is about one inch at 100 yards)
8. Built in Thermal and optical sights
9. Integration with GPS, compass, 800 meter laser rangefinder, and a text messenger RF communication link to permit soldiers to silently report contact, and silently call for guided support fires.

By: Seahunt40

Seahunt40 — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:59:13 +0000

I just hope the new rifle doesnt go the same way the “SOCOM 45″ went. What a P.O.S. that was !!!
Seahunt40

By: EndSLDT

EndSLDT — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:34:00 +0000

I wonder just how much easier it is to clean the other weapons as well. We all know what a pain in the arse it is to clean the m16/m4 esp after lubing it so it doesn’t jam. I fully agree with christian on the lack of anything to compare it to as contributing to the minimal complaints as the m4 is an upgrade from the m16. Call me cynical but other than waiting for the next great improvement in combat weapons it seems the Army doesn’t really want to invest in all the retraining and experience gathering it will take to reach the same efficiency with the m16/m4 family that has been in service for over a generation for a nominal gain in performance with a new weapon.

By: WJS

WJS — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:36:47 +0000

No mechanical device is going to be perfect. I am not saying that the other tested weapons are the "perfect" choice. Revolvers and AK's can jam up as well. However, if there is a system that requires less maintenance overall and less lubrication and is more reliable than wouldn't it be prudent to go with that? I personally think the HK416 idea is the most cost effective as upper replacements would cost way less than a whole new system. We know how good HK's stuff is they turned that dog of a rifle the L85/SA80 into something approaching the reliability of the M16 so that has to count for something. Go with that until the laser blaster comes around because even at 3rd it was off the shelf and still kicked the M4's keister. I've seen AR's mess up because I didn't put a dab of oil in the right spot. That is just ridiculous.

By: Dennis

Dennis — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 15:16:07 +0000

Sorry, did not mean to come of like no-one here knows what they are talking about.
Just wanted to see if the confidence level in these weapons have gotten to the point where they are being abandoned whenever possible by the people it matters most to…

By: Roy Smith

Roy Smith — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:48:32 +0000

Thank God nobody expressed this opinion...yet,but for anybody out there who believes & SAYS that to prevent stoppages you need to "clean your M16/M4 better" & to knock down the enemy,you need to "aim better," I say that you are an absolute idiot.You are an absolute idiot,a paid stooge for Colt(which really sucks if you are also still employed by the Pentagon),or you are an arrogant asshole who thinks that our soldiers,sailors,airmen,& marines are just "expendable" Goyim Serfs who need to be "thinned from the human herd." Its you who needs to be removed from the gene pool.