Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Mountain. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Concern, money at stake?; Used to hear a lot of this
Topic Started: Apr 30 2007, 08:39 AM (316 Views)
Condor
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Senator Tells Army to Reconsider M4
Military.com | By Christian Lowe | April 30, 2007
The debate over the Army's choice to purchase hundreds of thousands of M4 carbines for its new brigade combat teams is facing stiff opposition from a small group of senators who say the rifle may be inferior to others already in the field.

In an April 12 letter to acting Army Secretary Pete Geren, Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn said purchase of the M4 - a shortened version of the Vietnam-era M16 - was based on requirements from the early 1990s and that better, more reliable weapons exist that could give Army troops a more effective weapon.

Coburn asked the Army to hold a "free and open competition" before inking sole-source contracts worth about $375 million to M4 manufacturer, West Hartford, Conn.-based Colt Defense - which just received a $50 million Army contract for M4s on April 20.

"I am concerned with the Army's plans to procure nearly half a million new rifles outside of any competitive process," Coburn wrote in the mid-April letter obtained by Military.com.

A Geren spokesman said the secretary's office is putting together a reply to Coburn's letter, but provided no further details.

Coburn has banded together with a small group of like-minded senators to push the Army into a competition to determine whether the M4 is the best choice to equip newly-forming brigade combat teams, a top Coburn aide said.

The senator's concerns grew out of media coverage that showed the M4's design fails in critical situations and that special operations forces prefer other designs.

"Considering the long standing reliability and lethality problems with the M16 design, of which the M4 is based, I am afraid that our troops in combat might not have the best weapon," Coburn wrote. "A number of manufacturers have researched, tested and fielded weapons which, by all accounts, appear to provide significantly improved reliability."

Related Article: Army Won't Field Rifle Deemed Superior to M4

Special operations forces, including "tier one" units such as the Army's Delta Force and the Navy's SEAL Development Group - or SEAL Team Six - have used their own funds to purchase the Heckler & Koch-built 416, which uses a gas-piston operating system less susceptible to failure than Colt's gas-operated design.

"That's significant, because these guys don't screw around," the aide said.

In fact, Colt included four different weapons in the competition to build the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle, or SCAR, none of which used the M4s gas system, the aide said.

In a routine acquisition notice March 23, a U.S. Special Forces battalion based in Okinawa announced that it is buying 84 upper receiver assemblies for the HK416 to modify their M4 carbines. The M4 fires using a system that redirects gas from the expended round to eject it and reload another. The 416 and SCAR use a gas-operated piston that physically pushes the bolt back to eject the round and load another.

Carbon buildup from the M4's gas system has plagued the rifle for years, resulting in some close calls with Soldiers in combat whose rifles jammed at critical moments.

According to the solicitation for the new upper receiver assemblies, the 416 "allows Soldiers to replace the existing M4 upper receiver with an HK proprietary gas system that does not introduce propellant gases and the associated carbon fouling back into the weapon's interior. This reduces operator cleaning time, and increases the reliability of the M4 Carbine, particularly in an environment in which sand and dust are prevalent."

Yet the Army has still declined to buy anything other than the M4 for its regular troops, requesting about $100 million in the 2007 wartime supplemental to buy M4s for its Soldiers.

The office in charge of equipping Soldiers said in a March 30 statement the service has no plans to purchase the HK416.

"I am certain we can all agree that America's Soldiers should have the best technology in their hands," Coburn wrote. "And there is simply no excuse for not providing our soldiers the best weapon - not just a weapon that is 'good enough.' "

The Army has not yet responded to Coburn's letter, but his aide said if the senator doesn't receive a response to the letter by Monday, Coburn plans to call Geren personally to address the issue.

"Our feeling is once people see the facts on the face of it they're going to say that this is ridiculous and demand that the Army does it right and competes the contract," the aide said.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
STEVEN1
Ruler of the Hill
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The work I do here at Camp Shelby is weapons training. I see a lot of M4's every day and ask the troops how they like them. A majority seems to like it because of its collapsible stock and shorter barrel. The Army still uses the M16 series of rifles today--mainly by special forces. Both are good weapons and I qualify "expert" with both.
The only way to keep a weapon working for you is to clean and maintain it properly. That's part of the classes we teach and the troops are amazed when we tell them they've been cleaning their weapons the wrong way. We show them how to do it right.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Almtnman
Member Avatar
Administrator
Admin
Steven, do you think that senator may be onto a better rifle by going to the Heckler & Koch-built 416? I know that the Army probably wants a shorter rifle due to the fact that it would be better served when a fast shot was made from a Humvee and that looks like the way things are these days. After reading the article that Condor posted, it has me wondering if the Army is going with the best rifle. There was a documentary not long ago about the Top Ten Combat Rifles and listed them from #1 on down with #1 being the best. The AK47 came in at #1 due to it's loose built tolerances which made it perform better in dirty conditions.

Top Ten Combat Rifles
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
STEVEN1
Ruler of the Hill
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
He might be on the right track in looking for a new combat rifle. If he wants the Army to look at other manufacturers he needs to get the Army leadership to poll the troops about what they are looking for in a weapon. But some are going to say the Army has trusted Colt for a long time--so why change. As for as the Koch I haven't had any dealing with it so I can't offer a good opinion.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
greatwhiteelkhunter
Member Avatar
Ruler of the Mountain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
STEVEN1,Apr 30 2007
06:30 PM
The work I do here at Camp Shelby is weapons training. I see a lot of M4's every day and ask the troops how they like them. A majority seems to like it because of its collapsible stock and shorter barrel. The Army still uses the M16 series of rifles today--mainly by special forces. Both are good weapons and I qualify "expert" with both.
The only way to keep a weapon working for you is to clean and maintain it properly. That's part of the classes we teach and the troops are amazed when we tell them they've been cleaning their weapons the wrong way. We show them how to do it right.

I saw a lot of them in Iraq carried by everyone from ISF and IA to Black Water folks and Marines and most said it was a good weapon but a great weapon for getting and out of vehicles. For longer range shots over 400 yards I would not use it BUT it's not made to be a long range weapon. Got to tell you Colt makes a very good weapon!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
« Previous Topic · Military Topics · Next Topic »
Add Reply