Best improvement for the next battle rifle?

Capt Richard I P. — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 20:46:37 -0500

The below article by Robert Scales makes lots of points about improvements that may be needed in the next major service rifle. Which specific improvement do you think is most necessary? Why? Which are likely to be improved the most in the free market -hunters -LE? In the Military Procurement system?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/gun-trouble/383508/?single_page=true

Gun Trouble

The rifle that today's infantry uses is little changed since the 1960s—and it is badly flawed. Military lives depend on these cheap composites of metal and plastic. So why can't the richest country in the world give its soldiers better ones?

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2014 8:51 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 20:51:42 -0500

I voted feeding system, Capt Richard I P., because I think the issue of jamming is THE most important issue to be improved. The author highlights that issue near the top of his list, and I agree.

Response by CMSgt James Nolan made Dec 29 at 2014 9:35 PM

CMSgt James Nolan — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 21:35:10 -0500

Mechanics of the weapon system. Everything else is "me".

I am a fan of larger caliber. High Quality Optics. No flash would be awesome, although unrealistic. The ability to mount extra goodies (modularity) is awesome. But the mechanics are the biggest issue. If she fails, I have a large club.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Dec 29 at 2014 10:50 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 22:50:53 -0500

Is that the weapon from Starship Troopers?

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Dec 29 at 2014 10:57 PM

MSG Brad Sand — Mon, 29 Dec 2014 22:57:15 -0500

Really none of the above. The rifle is a tool. Best improvement for the next battle rifle has to do with the soldier holding it.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 30 at 2014 12:14 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Dec 2014 00:14:10 -0500

Sir, you didn't give the option of "Leave it alone," so I didn't answer the poll. New technology is not at a point where it is of any advantage to adopt a new rifle. If we did adopt some new technology without it being refined to a point of usability, such as the plastic cased ammo, we would be in the same place we were, when they rushed the adoption of the M16. Adopted over the objections of the Army, who if you remember DID NOT want it. If meddlers like the author of this article would have stayed out of the process, we would have adopted a more modern rifle than the M14 in due time.

As for reliability, I just do not believe it. I know it has been widely reported that they had issues with the weapon at the battle of Wanat. There were issues reported at the beginning of the Iraq war as well. I will continue to say that if the Army would spend the money they spend on chasing a perfect rifle on training troops to use the rifle, almost all, if not all the issues would go away. The rifle is capable. Google "M4 torture test." Heck, I'll give you a head start, here's a youtube link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kzfm4pYhIyY There are many others out there too.

If the rifle is such a piece of crap why is it that other countries such as Canada make a clone of it for their troops. Great Britain issues their troops the L85 bullpup, except of course the SAS who uses the C8, which is the aforementioned Canadian clone of the M4. http://www.eliteukforces.info/special-air-service/weapons/c8.php The Aussies use the F88 Bullpup. Except the SASR whose primary weapon is the...drumroll...the M4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Air_Service_Regiment (scroll down to where it says equipment and weapons) They aren't the only ones, but I think I've proved my point.

Modularity? It's a very modular system. Just because the Army chooses not to take advantage of it, ain't the rifle's fault.

Caliber? There is no modern military fielding a larger round than we are. The Ruskies dropped the 7.62x39 back in 1974. They saw the performance of our 5.56, and decided to copy, hence the 5.45x39 that they use to this day. Norway and Germany were among the last two holdouts with the 7.62x51, or 7.62NATO, Norway waiting until the mid 2000s to switch to... no, not the 5.56! Yes they did. I don't know of a single country in the world using a 7.62 caliber rifle as their general rifle for any other reason than that they can't afford to upgrade.

Sights? Computer guided sights are a VERY new thing, the Army cannot be blamed for not adopting them yet. Otherwise, ACOGs and Aimpoint M68 CCOs have been around for a while now, long enough that even support units are carrying them. And both are excellent optics.

Suppressors? Only place he has an argument.

As far as direct impingement vs. op rod, the Stoner system was not the first to use direct impingement. The Swedish Ljungman, the Egyptian clone of that rifle, the Rasheed, as well as the French MAS 49 are all direct impingement weapons without a reliability issue.

I have never personally met someone who has had an actual issue with the rifle. I have had people tell me, "Oh, it jams all the time on the range." Yes, that's because ranges use mags that have long overlived their lifetime and should be thrown away. I've seen soldiers over oil it, I've seen them under oil it. I've only met one soldier other than myself who has read the TM front to back. That's just the technical manual, that's not even getting to know the weapon.

I hope I wasn't to sarcastic, or offend anybody, but I feel that article is a hack job, and it did raise my blood pressure a little.

AR-15 Fired Full Auto Untill It Catches On Fire

Colt AR-15/M4 fired Full Auto until Gas tube Melts, however barrel is OK. http://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=516531

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 30 at 2014 3:28 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Dec 2014 03:28:11 -0500

I had to go with piston over gas. It’s cleaner where it counts and makes the weapon more reliable as is the case with the AK platform. All the other options in the poll mean nothing if the weapon won’t fire due to being dirty.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 30 at 2014 3:46 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Dec 2014 03:46:14 -0500

Capt Richard I P.. Give the highest priority to continuous practice / first rate operator training . . . then make available in quantity new technology . . . cheaper, smaller, more accurate, DARPA EXACTO ( Extreme Accuracy Tasked Ordinance) Smart Bullets. Warmest Regards, Sandy

http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Extreme_Accuracy_Tasked_Ordnance_(EXACTO).aspx

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 30 at 2014 11:01 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Dec 2014 11:01:49 -0500

I vote for feeding system. There are more issues regarding this than any other. The individual writing this even say's so.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 30 at 2014 2:33 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Dec 2014 14:33:51 -0500

I went with caliber but also believe the operating system needs improvements. All in all I think the M16/m4 platform has performed pretty well. So I don't think we need a new weapon system just to change. Spec ops has fooled around a little with the 6.8 spec out of the AR15 platform with some success. But there are problems using the 5.56 mags with the 6.8 different bolt etc. One of the problems I see is when they went to the shorter barrel on the 5.56 and lost effective distance, but better for CQB.

I say caliber because I believe they could improve the AR15 platform going to 300 black out. Noting has to change except the barrel they use the same bolt and mags as the 5.56. And the 300 blk out was designed for the shorter barrels (CQB) and for suppressed fire. It also has the ability to penetrate barriers with high mass projectiles. Also use subsonic rounds and still have a max effective range of 460 meters. So I believe an all purpose round as much as anyone can be.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 6 at 2015 11:43 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 Jan 2015 23:43:24 -0500

Here's a piece written as an answer to the Atlantic article. It is a much more balanced view on the M4, I believe.

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-m-4-carbine-is-here-to-stay-fe9012f293f4

The M-4 Carbine Is Here to Stay — War Is Boring

Despite calls for replacement, the Army’s primary weapon isn’t going anywhere

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 23 at 2015 4:25 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 16:25:10 -0500

I have voted for Caliber because when it all comes down to it, you could have everything else figured out BUT if it can't stop the threat then it is useless. I think the 5.56 has outlived its hype. Don't get me wrong, good round but the current theatre that we are in has outgrown the 5.56 round. I think we should go back to the 7.62x51 round.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 7 at 2015 2:07 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 07 Sep 2015 14:07:27 -0400

I can't pick just one. All these things need to be fixed or at least examined for alternatives. But of them all, probably feeding system needs addressing the most. Star with a piston like the HK-416, AK series, etc. and work from there.