Posted on Feb 2, 2017
Is an AR-15 upper receiver authorized while on deployment?
20.7K
93
64
7
7
0
I have heard stories of people bringing personal ar15 uppers for use in Iraq and Afghanistan, but have seen no proof that this is allowed. Where could I find the answer or does anyone have an answer for this, its not technically a "modification" to the weapon itself.
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 21
No,. not even a little bit allowed.
Done, sure Im sure it has been.
I know of a SGT that took a side arm to a little conflict in Panama once...but authorized it was not...and having to ask your Regimental commander to hand carry it back as he was the only one that was not searched by customs was not a fun request to be made....it was later taken in stride and understood why, with no lasting negative ramifications,,,but that was luck of circumstances...said SGT very well could have been Court Marshaled, demoted and received a BCD instead of having a long and fulfilling service .
Done, sure Im sure it has been.
I know of a SGT that took a side arm to a little conflict in Panama once...but authorized it was not...and having to ask your Regimental commander to hand carry it back as he was the only one that was not searched by customs was not a fun request to be made....it was later taken in stride and understood why, with no lasting negative ramifications,,,but that was luck of circumstances...said SGT very well could have been Court Marshaled, demoted and received a BCD instead of having a long and fulfilling service .
(18)
(0)
MSgt George Cater
Peacetime in the 70's at Camp Lejuene, but it reminds me of another factual situation. I knew a 03 Captain on the Pistol Team who when he had a rifle company in 2nd MarDiv, always carried 1 or more mags of live ammo for his pistol when his company went to the field for tac ops. His logic was that since anyone can drive into many of Lejuene's training areas right from the off base roads, he was not going to have a couple of armed good ole boys in a pickup drive up and make off with 100+ M-16s, 27 M-249s, 6 M-60s, 19 M-9s, plus 203s, SMAWs & 60mm mortars, radios, NVGs, etc. He said he'd much rather be court martialed for defending his Marines and the government property than for losing their weapons. (I agreed. It always amazed me how vulnerable things were in non-live fire areas at CLNC.)
SGM Erik Marquez - CWO3 (Join to see)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs Col Dona Marie Iversen COL Charles Williams Lt Col Jim Coe LTC John Shaw Col (Join to see) 1LT Sandy Annala
Maj Rev. Fr. Samuel WATERS - Traditional RC Priest LTC Trent Klug CSM William DeWolf
1stSgt Eugene Harless SMSgt Minister Gerald A. "Doc"
Thomas 1stSgt Ron Gallegos SFC George Smith
GySgt Melissa Gravila SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
SFC (Join to see)
CPT Jack Durish
SGM Erik Marquez - CWO3 (Join to see)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs Col Dona Marie Iversen COL Charles Williams Lt Col Jim Coe LTC John Shaw Col (Join to see) 1LT Sandy Annala
Maj Rev. Fr. Samuel WATERS - Traditional RC Priest LTC Trent Klug CSM William DeWolf
1stSgt Eugene Harless SMSgt Minister Gerald A. "Doc"
Thomas 1stSgt Ron Gallegos SFC George Smith
GySgt Melissa Gravila SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL
SFC (Join to see)
CPT Jack Durish
(2)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
LTC (Join to see) - "I know exactly what you mean...I made many a decision as a young NCO that when I look back on them now I am either like, "Damn, what was I thinking?" or "Damn, I was lucky!" In all reality is usually a combo of both, but in the end it all worked out all right, and if nothing else those decisions served as great learning experiences!"
Sir I mostly credit my Senior NCOs and the officers in my chain of command who were wise enough to see the "good" in what I had done in those serious situations, and help me understand why it was not the better choice..vice just punishing because they could.
What they created, was someone that grew up to be able to do the same...
Yes I "Verbally assaulted" more then a few when they were caught doing something stupid...... But that and why it was dumb, and what would have been a better choice were always included, and then it was over.
a GO once told me, "Get mad, let them know why and what right looks like then get over it. Son, what they do Next time is what matters"
I spent a lot of years truing to emulate that.. I wont say I got it right each and every time... There was the SM that hit his son and broke his arm... I only got the "Get Mad" part on that one.... There was the SM that falsely accused her spouse of child molestation in effort to draw attention away from his testimony she was a thief, adulterer and habitual lier .. I may have missed the "get over it part" on that one as well.
Sir I mostly credit my Senior NCOs and the officers in my chain of command who were wise enough to see the "good" in what I had done in those serious situations, and help me understand why it was not the better choice..vice just punishing because they could.
What they created, was someone that grew up to be able to do the same...
Yes I "Verbally assaulted" more then a few when they were caught doing something stupid...... But that and why it was dumb, and what would have been a better choice were always included, and then it was over.
a GO once told me, "Get mad, let them know why and what right looks like then get over it. Son, what they do Next time is what matters"
I spent a lot of years truing to emulate that.. I wont say I got it right each and every time... There was the SM that hit his son and broke his arm... I only got the "Get Mad" part on that one.... There was the SM that falsely accused her spouse of child molestation in effort to draw attention away from his testimony she was a thief, adulterer and habitual lier .. I may have missed the "get over it part" on that one as well.
(2)
(0)
GySgt Melissa Gravila
SGM Erik Marquez - a lot of times its a ask for forgiveness instead of permission sort of thing. IMO it's the sign of a leader to know when to yank the chain and when to pull out the pen.js
(1)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
GySgt Melissa Gravila - Gunny, it is for sure, it is an unfortunate fact of life it takes lots experience to learn that, and that by definition means junior NCO's and Officers screw it up.. With luck there is a more experienced NCO or officer on hand to take the Junior one aside and explain why the sky is not really falling, no one died, let them learn from it. I got lucky and had that... ate crow, went back, worked though what "they" learned, and moved on.
(1)
(0)
What part of no isn't understood? You're issued a weapon, got a problem with it, you got an armor, you know that dud who knows the ins and outs of said weapon. Deal with it.
(6)
(0)
SGM Mikel Dawson
And this is why we got Rally Point - to help each other out with the knowledge we got
(0)
(0)
Is the upper a brand that the government contracts with already? Where are you going to secure your issued upper? Have you spoken to your PS or PL about it. Would it improve your mission capabilities? Or is this just an attempt to be an operator operating operationally?
(5)
(0)
I am not familiar with the exact regulation on this subject, however, I would not recommend bringing and using such items during a deployment.
But, as a gun-guy myself, I do completely understand the desire to do so. As a leader, my biggest concern would be that opening such a door would lead to every Joe Snuffy bringing in wild modifications that could possibly be unsafe or unreliable. I am sure that most everyone here knows enough about basic rifle functions where this wouldn't be a problem, but there is always that one guy who would ruin it for everyone.
I recall an issue in Iraq where one of our Soldiers tried to replace the pistol grip to his rifle, not realizing that the safety selector spring and detent were held in place by it. Luckily our armorer was able to fix his modification for him.
But, as a gun-guy myself, I do completely understand the desire to do so. As a leader, my biggest concern would be that opening such a door would lead to every Joe Snuffy bringing in wild modifications that could possibly be unsafe or unreliable. I am sure that most everyone here knows enough about basic rifle functions where this wouldn't be a problem, but there is always that one guy who would ruin it for everyone.
I recall an issue in Iraq where one of our Soldiers tried to replace the pistol grip to his rifle, not realizing that the safety selector spring and detent were held in place by it. Luckily our armorer was able to fix his modification for him.
(4)
(0)
I don't know how the Army does it but I know Marines and Navy have what is called a weapons card that you turn in every time you check weapons out. The Card states you will not do any modifications too your weapons with out the Armors or weapons officers permission.
I will also say MISPEC is the big thing.
I will also say MISPEC is the big thing.
(3)
(0)
CWO3 (Join to see)
CPO Wheeler, that's how we do it in the Marine Corps and as for the use of an illegal weapon whether it be a rifle, pistol, knife, bayonet or whatever is not on the T/E for weapons is not authorized period. Good discussions though and personal opinions.
(1)
(0)
It violates AR 750-10 "No modification is authorized for an application unless it has an approved MWO number. Commanders will not allow their equipment to be modified unless there is an official MWO.".
It does meet the definition under the regulation as a modification which is defined as "Modification is any alteration, conversion, or modernization of an end item or a component of end item (COEI), which in any way changes or improves the original purpose or operational capacity in relation to effectiveness, efficiency, reliability, or safety of that item. This includes, but is not limited to: conversions; field fixes; retrofits; rebuilds; redesigns; upgrades; extended service programs; engineering changes; software revisions; system enhancement programs; service life extension programs; system improvement programs; product improvement programs; preplanned product improvements; modifications developed and applied by contractors as part of prime vendor support
or contractor logistics support (CLS) agreements; horizontal technology integration; continuous technology refreshments (CTRs); technology insertions; and all other terms used to describe modifications as defined above."
At the ranges in which you are able to positively identify a legitimate target, the accuracy of the M16/M4 series is fine. So there isn't a need for greater accuracy for the average Soldier. A Designated Marksman is a different story, but they have different rifles for that role.
It does meet the definition under the regulation as a modification which is defined as "Modification is any alteration, conversion, or modernization of an end item or a component of end item (COEI), which in any way changes or improves the original purpose or operational capacity in relation to effectiveness, efficiency, reliability, or safety of that item. This includes, but is not limited to: conversions; field fixes; retrofits; rebuilds; redesigns; upgrades; extended service programs; engineering changes; software revisions; system enhancement programs; service life extension programs; system improvement programs; product improvement programs; preplanned product improvements; modifications developed and applied by contractors as part of prime vendor support
or contractor logistics support (CLS) agreements; horizontal technology integration; continuous technology refreshments (CTRs); technology insertions; and all other terms used to describe modifications as defined above."
At the ranges in which you are able to positively identify a legitimate target, the accuracy of the M16/M4 series is fine. So there isn't a need for greater accuracy for the average Soldier. A Designated Marksman is a different story, but they have different rifles for that role.
(3)
(0)
Like everyone and the regs are saying, no is the answer. Soldiers who are not well supervised do it, and there is no upside when it goes wrong. I've seen 100 rd circular drum magazines in M4's that were full of dirt from a lack of cleaning. My head exploded so violently that there were chunks of Soldier ass parts strewn everywhere. The weapon(s) looked cool, but were going to fail miserably when they really, really needed it to work. We all know what happens next.
(2)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
Yep, Engineers will always find a way to do things the way they want.
"ESSAYONS" From Navy "Can Do" I loved working with you guy's
"ESSAYONS" From Navy "Can Do" I loved working with you guy's
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
If there is ANY piece of the weapon that is personally owned and not government issued, that is not authorized. I had a briefing on this when I deployed, but I can't remember the regulation or ALARACT, so I would contact your OPS NCO at your unit or at your BN. They can certainly clear this up and provide the document
(2)
(0)
As an additional question; if I have an ACOG (identical to the army issued one) but a unit only has the aimpoint cco available, am I able to use that instead? Seeing as all marksmanship principles lead to "shooter's preference"?
(2)
(0)
I thought that this discussion was about the AR-15 5.56mm rifle SGT (Join to see)
In times past certain units or individuals were given amphetamines for certain type of operations.
Of course individuals have illegally used amphetamines at times. This individual type of illegal use would never be "allowed."
In times past certain units or individuals were given amphetamines for certain type of operations.
Of course individuals have illegally used amphetamines at times. This individual type of illegal use would never be "allowed."
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
yes, it is in reference to 5.56 ar15 uppers, I didn't even think of the other use for the term "upper" until this post.
(0)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
SGT (Join to see) - thanks for letting me know. I had never heard of 5.56 ar15 uppers before.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Any decent quality or better AR15 barrel is infinitely more accurate than a borderline shot out and poorly maintained by previous owners m4/16 barrel.
(1)
(0)
MSG Steve Wiersgalla
SGT (Join to see) - Does your MOS put you in situations that you would require a superior grade weapon.
(0)
(0)
Did not see the whole question at first - hmmm. Not something I ever saw... What would be the reason for this?
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
LTC (Join to see) - I have to respectfully disagree with 4moa vs 1moa at center mass, in distances less than 150 yards 4moa is absolutely effective. 4 moa at center mass is 8 inches (could be in any direction) at 200 yards and 12 at 300, there are loads of soldiers that can group and zero perfectly on the 25m range, but as soon as they shoot at the further targets they are missing by a foot. Granted the 25m zero without 100m verification is not the most reliable method, it still goes to show that the 4 moa can easily cause a miss without any error from a shooter. I'm not saying that every m4/16 is only 4moa, I'm just stating that they allow up to that spread to be shipped and issued.
(0)
(0)
COL (Join to see)
I can't fault any Soldier in our forces for wanting to shoot better! For the Army, arming 1.1 million Soldiers is going to require a contract with certain delivery standards, no doubt. Maybe these are too low? I don't know - but this would be a good topic perhaps for young NCOs to submit to their CSMs/SGMs and to get some visibility at top-level NCO forums and with the SMA. If you are that sure that this is a serious flaw, I'd pursue those channels! Also - contact the Infantry; err, Maneuver School... submit any actual AARs or TTP from deployments, and data, if possible! There would also be in the Pentagon (or TRADOC), a Program Manager for this acquisition program, that could probably speak directly to how the 4 moa standard was chosen and why.
(1)
(0)
SGM Erik Marquez
I always got a kick out of the New soldier that is a "gun guy" "the M4 is junk, its inaccurate, My XYZ is much better, I Should be allowed to use it I could score better".
At which point I laid down next to them, borrowed their rifle, shot three sighting rounds, then asked the tower to run the Qual course, and shot 40 out of 40 and asked the soldier,,,.."Yours may shoot better, but all Im asking you to do is hit a target at 50~300 meters and clearly the rifle is capable... are you?"
At which point I laid down next to them, borrowed their rifle, shot three sighting rounds, then asked the tower to run the Qual course, and shot 40 out of 40 and asked the soldier,,,.."Yours may shoot better, but all Im asking you to do is hit a target at 50~300 meters and clearly the rifle is capable... are you?"
(0)
(0)
MSG Steve Wiersgalla
I have never found an M-16 or M-4 that I could not shoot 40 out of 40 with on the qual range in almost 22 years. And I am a gun guy, a long distance shooter and handloader. There is nothing wrong with the service weapons provided by the military. You need to focus on and learn the marksmanship fundamentals, and quit looking for an easy way to look like an hero. I don't even know why you would think bringing your own upper would be a good idea. The military weapons are specifically designed and made to operate in a battlefield environment. I guarantee your civilian version is not.
(0)
(0)
Stories are just stories.
Only one I know personally was a friend of mine who's son was sent to Afghanistan fairly early on in our efforts there as a civil affairs soldier stationed at a forward base with lots of SF folks. He was issued an M4 with no optics. Dad was a former Marine Corps Force Recon officer and sent him over a very nice optic. He had the optics on his rifle for a few months until things calmed down enough for the brass to start showing up. He was told to remove the optics because it made him look like a sniper. He packed it up and sent it home.
Anything you aren't issued isn't allowed on your weapon. Or it is allowed until you get caught.
Only one I know personally was a friend of mine who's son was sent to Afghanistan fairly early on in our efforts there as a civil affairs soldier stationed at a forward base with lots of SF folks. He was issued an M4 with no optics. Dad was a former Marine Corps Force Recon officer and sent him over a very nice optic. He had the optics on his rifle for a few months until things calmed down enough for the brass to start showing up. He was told to remove the optics because it made him look like a sniper. He packed it up and sent it home.
Anything you aren't issued isn't allowed on your weapon. Or it is allowed until you get caught.
(1)
(0)
Sgt Marcus Anderson
I did the similar thing I changed out the optics on both of my weapons when I finished swapped back mailbox it home in 2002
(0)
(0)
It is an unauthorised modification. Any changes to the serial number item is an modification. If it came to my shop for repair you would receive it came in original issue configuration minus any unauthorised part.
(0)
(0)
I would rather use and wear-out the government's equipment than stuff I spent my hard earned pay check on.
(0)
(0)
Sounds like an easy way to get arrested.....does not sound smart to me. The Army provides you a weapon use that one.
(0)
(0)
Under that modification argument if anyone ever used tape to secure the straps on their ruck instead of the rubber bungee keepers that it comes with is guilty of violating this. I think it's important to keep common sense in play. I've seen numerous 'modifications' to rifles over the course of my deployments. This seems one of those don't ask don't tell kind of things and is on a case by case basis. I wouldn't let one of my special cases change anything.
As long as one isn't dead set on bringing the upper home (as it's not technically a firearm so who knows what customs will do) then the worst case is you lose a few hundred bucks. That being said, I'd not advise changing things drastically as yours and your teammates lives could depend on that rifle.
That being all said also, if anyone ever handed me a 20" M16 that I had to carry for a 15+ month deployment, I'd be quite tempted to swap that upper for a 14.5" one.
As long as one isn't dead set on bringing the upper home (as it's not technically a firearm so who knows what customs will do) then the worst case is you lose a few hundred bucks. That being said, I'd not advise changing things drastically as yours and your teammates lives could depend on that rifle.
That being all said also, if anyone ever handed me a 20" M16 that I had to carry for a 15+ month deployment, I'd be quite tempted to swap that upper for a 14.5" one.
(0)
(0)
This was specifically addressed as a "NO GO" by policy letter prior to our deployment rotation in 05-07
(0)
(0)
Being an armorer this was one of the questions we brought up in class. There are certain things we are allowed to improve on and make modifications. We cant mess with receivers, firing pins, bolts as a whole really. All the modifications are at the Units Commanders call but those ones are the big ones. We can play around with optics, foregrips, heatshields and buttstocks (mainly anything external but nothing that affects the actual functioning of the rifles). Even still were supposed to put MWO in to show record that it was altered at some point. I definitely don't recommend trying to do anything crazy.
If wrong I'm hoping someone would correct me but that's the last I heard of anything on that subject.
If wrong I'm hoping someone would correct me but that's the last I heard of anything on that subject.
(0)
(0)
Absolutely not. Something about ice cubes and hell comes to mind. Even personal accessories are of a limited variety. Nothing could change the internals, the hand guards, or the primary/backup sights. I have seen conventional soldiers get away with personal pistol grips, buttstocks, slings, forward grips, and flashlights. But no special firing pins, uppers, sights, triggers etc.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next