Better than M4, but you can’t have it

[Stan]

Was it the weapon or the magazine? Or was it the ammo? In the heat of battle, did the Soldier insert a magazine that was half ammo and half sand? Was the weapon damaged during the fight?

An interesting coincidence having just read an article about Colt Defense providing 6 or 7 new mags with each M4 (up to 800 shipped each month). I think that article referred to damaged mags not being discarded (read not rotated frequently).

... but the Army has too much money invested to undertake a big change for small gain.

Concur. The Army (and Marines a year or so more) were into the M4 and its development since 85 or 86. But then, Colt's current contract ends this year

[Schmedlap]

I appreciate the responses, but I still would like to know why our guys do not have fully auto capable rifles. I understand fire discipline and conserving ammo, but I believe training would for the most part make this a moot point.

I can only speak for myself, but I cannot recall a single situation when it would have made any difference for any of my Soldiers carrying an M4 to fire on full auto. Each fire team had a SAW, which was always sufficient.

On the other hand, I can't recall a single occasion when one my Soldiers fired on burst. It might have occurred a few times, but I don't recall it. And if it did happen, I can't imagine it was all that necessary.

[Uboat509]

I have never fired my weapon on full auto in combat and did not feel like I needed to. In training the only two drills that I can recall using full auto for were vehicle drills where the vehicle was driving at us and we needed to try to get as many rounds into the block as possible and near ambush drills where we were trying to use overwhelming fire to overcome having been caught in a near ambush.

SFC W

[davidbfpo]

This thread is very much a "boots on the ground" collection and as an outsider can I ask whether the calibre (IIRC 2.23mm) of the US rifle suffers the same problems as the UK SA80 (5.56mm) as outlined:

In October 2009, we saw a survey of more than 50 servicemen who had fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. It concluded that the 5.56mm calibre rounds used by British soldiers "tailed off" after 300 metres yet half of all Helmand firefights are fought between 300 and 900 metres.

From:http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.co...en-as-now.html

[jcustis]

While similar, .223 Remington and 5.56mm rounds are not identical. Govt.-issued weapons are chambered in 5.56mm though.

The interesting thing about this snippet:

yet half of all Helmand firefights are fought between 300 and 900 metres.

is that the basic weapon du jour of the threat over there is an AK-47 or variant in the family of similar weapons. Since that assault rifle has a max effective range of roughly 300-400m, which would compare with the gripes about the 5.56mm rounds, then at 400m and beyond it becomes a machine gun fight...so fight with machine guns!

Frankly, "tailed off" means so many things and also so little, that I think the complainants in that article need to slow their rates of fire, sight in better, and deliver more precise fires. Not surprisingly, one isn't going to enjoy effective fires against an enemy threat 300-500m away on a hillside by returning fire wildly, but we still see video of troops doing exactly that, and running out of ammunition in the process.

[Firn]

Frankly, "tailed off" means so many things and also so little, that I think the complainants in that article need to slow their rates of fire, sight in better, and deliver more precise fires. Not surprisingly, one isn't going to enjoy effective fires against an enemy threat 300-500m away on a hillside by returning fire wildly, but we still see video of troops doing exactly that, and running out of ammunition in the process.

I think the key problem is usually finding the enemy which tries to suppress you. It is hard to quickly take aimed shot at longer distances at fleeting targets while you are under fire and it is even harder to do so if you can not see them.

In such instances it would be ideal to have some unseen set of eyes with good optics and decent rifles. The advantages of a supporting sniper team/marksmen team are just that. But why don't we let squads use periscopes or spotting scopes which enable more or less overt observation from a covert position? Attach a digital camera an you can record what you are observing from behind cover (the attachement point of the spotting scope can be rotated). Good modern spotting scope have an amazing optical reach due to amazing optical qualities even at a magnification of 60. The information and the digital files can be easily shared with your mates and used to facilitate the use and direction of indirect fire.


Not the same as an UAV in the sky but a cheap and easily implemented solution with staying power. The power of digiscoping

Fi

[Kiwigrunt]

The interesting thing about this snippet:

'yet half of all Helmand firefights are fought between 300 and 900 metres'

is that the basic weapon du jour of the threat over there is an AK-47 or variant in the family of similar weapons. Since that assault rifle has a max effective range of roughly 300-400m, which would compare with the gripes about the 5.56mm rounds, then at 400m and beyond it becomes a machine gun fight...so fight with machine guns!

Totally agree. And that would of course be real MGs, the gimpy in 7.62
The SA80 series (both IW and LSW) have both got good length barrels and are inherently claimed to be very accurate so, wind and other external factors permitting, should be able to outreach any AK by a reasonable margin. That short-barreled Minimi on the other hand……

The article is not very specific but I wonder to what extent the ‘tailing off’ refers more to the Minimi than to the SA80. That said, and as discussed at length earlier, there are better 5.56 projectiles available than SS109 that should be able to turn almost any SA80 into a near-DMR.

Also from the article:

We were told that the British soldier couldn't attack the Taliban "with any certainty that if he hits the enemy he will kill or incapacitate him." The study thus claimed that, for want of a rifle with a longer range, Javelin anti-tank missiles, costing £100,000 each, were often fired at lone gunmen.

Now that seems a bit silly. That would suggest that UK small-units have more Javelins at hand than GPMGs and sniper rifles. That should be an easy fix, cost wise and weight wise. In fact, I’m hard pushed to see any justification for a smallish patrol in Taliban country to even be carrying Javelins.

[jumpinjarhead]

I can only speak for myself, but I cannot recall a single situation when it would have made any difference for any of my Soldiers carrying an M4 to fire on full auto. Each fire team had a SAW, which was always sufficient.

On the other hand, I can't recall a single occasion when one my Soldiers fired on burst. It might have occurred a few times, but I don't recall it. And if it did happen, I can't imagine it was all that necessary.

I generally agree with Schmedlap...In Vietnam, my Marines were "encouraged" to use single well-aimed shots and only used auto for fire suppression to exit ambush kill zones etc. Once they realized that they were actually killing people quite effectively with single shots, it became a matter of scorn and derision (as Marines are wont to do) if some Marine "inadvertently" went to auto, followed by a good ass-chewing by my gunny.

[Uboat509]

In the last few years the only two situations where our SOP called for full auto were near ambush and vehicle drills, where the vehicle is driving at me and I dump a mag into the windshield because the windshield can make accuracy iffy at best.

SFC W

[Schmedlap]

Come to think of it, if our M4s had a full auto selection, I can recall one occasion when we would have run out of ammo and things would have gotten real ugly. Our patrol base came under a pretty intense, complex attack. Everybody responded as we rehearsed, in that they went to the positions that they were supposed to go to and took up sectors of fire that they were supposed to take up. But 18-year-olds, adrenaline, and a big gunfight sometimes don't mix well. I spent more time than was acceptable just grabbing team and squad leaders and telling them to get control of their men and start taking well-aimed shots so that we wouldn't run out of ammo. It was one of the few days when I wondered how everyone could simultaneously forget every bit of training they'd received.

[SethB]

That said, and as discussed at length earlier, there are better 5.56 projectiles available than SS109 that should be able to turn almost any SA80 into a near-DMR.

SS109 is almost a catch all for the various NATO rounds, all with a common weight and construction.

American made M855 is within that specification, but the M4 allows higher pressures than the British use. Radway Green is loaded much lighter and so even with a longer barrel the velocity difference isn't that great.

And if you want better performance, get any of the heavier bullets.

Most Soldiers would never be able to use the advantages of better rifles or ammunition. Basic Training Soldiers aren't even trained in the basics of trajectory. Just where to hold to pass the qualification. Under those circumstances you can't expect them to hit a target at more than 300M with any regularity, although the rifle is more than capable of it.

[William F. Owen]

This thread is very much a "boots on the ground" collection and as an outsider can I ask whether the calibre (IIRC 2.23mm) of the US rifle suffers the same problems as the UK SA80 (5.56mm) as outlined:

From:http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.co...en-as-now.html

Really? How can anyone with a serious infantry background state something so blindingly obvious. 5.56mm does not work well over 300m? OK, what effect was sought? Why are you trying? So what?

The platoon should have a good weapons mix that includes 7.62mm GPMG, 8.59mm and various forms of projected HE.

[Schmedlap]

The platoon should have a good weapons mix that includes 7.62mm GPMG, 8.59mm and various forms of projected HE.

And bayonets.

[SethB]

Wilf, I continue to wonder why you advocate the .338 for the PLT level. It is a 1500M cartridge when used properly, but has disadvantages. It is expensive to purchase and more expensive to use.

What kind of training (initial and sustainment) would you advocate and how would the weapon be employed?

I'm not saying that it is a bad idea, but it is fairly unconventional.

[reed11b]

And bayonets.

talk about unneeded wieght.
Reed

[William F. Owen]

Wilf, I continue to wonder why you advocate the .338 for the PLT level. It is a 1500M cartridge when used properly, but has disadvantages. It is expensive to purchase and more expensive to use.

What kind of training (initial and sustainment) would you advocate and how would the weapon be employed?

I'm not saying that it is a bad idea, but it is fairly unconventional.

Yes, it's expensive, but that is mostly a function of procurement issues. Buy more and it will cost less. The UK now has the L115A3 in Battalions.
The trajectory is very flat compared to 7.62mm, and it's good in high winds, so it's easier to hit stuff at 1000m because range estimation is less of an issue. Plus it's big bullet able to deal with light cover. I wouldn't bother training folks for over 1,000m, so I like 8.59mm cos it makes the snipers job easier! - that's it.

....and yes, a 7.62mm bolt action is probably more than adequate for more situations.

[Rex Brynen]

It seems to me that the thread has thus far ignored one of the key requirements for any assault rifle, namely the ability to shoot hostile laptops.

Haaretz - 21:40 15/12/2009

Police shoot U.S. student's laptop upon entry to Israel

By Bar Ben Ari and Or Hirshauga


Israel Border Police officers shot at an American student's laptop as she entered Israel via Taba, Egypt, two weeks ago.

Lily Sussman, 21, wrote on her blog that border police subjected her to two hours of questioning and searches prior to shooting her Apple Macbook three times.

"They had pressed every sock and scarf with a security device, ripped open soap and had me strip extra layers. They asked me tons of questions?where are you going?" Sussman wrote, describing the experience.

"Who do you know? Do you have a boyfriend? Is he Arab, Egyptian, Palestinian? Why do you live in Egypt? Why not Israel? What do you know about the 'conflict' here? What do you think? They quizzed me on Judaism, which I know nothing about," she continued.

Sussman said that she then heard an announcement on the loudspeaker. "It was something along the lines of, 'Do not to be alarmed by gunshots because the Israeli security needs to blow up suspicious passenger luggage,'" she wrote on her blog.

Moments later a man came to her and introduced himself as the manager on duty. "I'm sorry but we had to blow up your laptop," Sussman said he told her.

"The security officers did not ask about my laptop prior to shooting it," Sussman told Daily News Egypt. "They used the word 'blew up' when they told me they destroyed my laptop. I don't know why they shot it."

[Schmedlap]

It seems to me that the thread has thus far ignored one of the key requirements for any assault rifle, namely the ability to shoot hostile laptops.

That is a staff officer's wet dream.

[Firn]

Note the careful selection of weapon, caliber and bullet to deliver the desired effect upon the enemy with quick and accurate semi-automatic fire.


Firn

[Kiwigrunt]

Here is another drop-in gas system for the M16 series.