Old story...new comments (M4 sux in Afg)

[cebeu]

Nothing new here but...sharing for casual reading...

SOURCE: FOX News

U.S. Military Reconsiders Army's Use of M4 Rifles in Afghanistan

M4 Vs. AK-47: Is U.S. Army Outgunned in Afghanistan?

[BigBear]

Wasn't this why people were looking into the 6.8?

So personal question: If you had to supply your own weapon to carry in the sandbox, what would it be? (make and caliber please)

i.e - Scar in 6.8?
- ACR in 7.62x39?
- etc.

[275RLTW]

Radio....Little Birds, DAPS, A-10's and B'2's have more firepower than I could carry. (and I don't have to clean them!)

[BigBear]

Appreciated humor, but sometimes you don't have a 2-15 minutes to wait on air support.

So back to the original question.

[275RLTW]

I carried and standard 16" and 10.5" M4's and had no problems with them. Malfunctions are, more often than not, due to operator error. In dusty environments with varying temperatures, you have to use a lubrication that does not burn off after the first round. Grease (like milcom's TW-25B) works much better than any oil and doesn't collect dirt. As far as 5.56 retaining terminal ballistics, I've had single shot success as far as 647 yards with M855 (I won't get into the defficiencies of M855 here, that's another discussion). Soldiers now are not taking care of their gear and not making the shots count. This easily corelates to the 9mm vs .45 or 1911 vs Glock arguments. The people complaining about the M4 are the same ones who lack proper descipline to maintain their equipment and work on basic rifle fundamentals. I've yet to meet anyone else in USASOC that doesn't like the M4. The M4 is not the best in every dept, but the best overall for our guys deployed in Afghanishit. The M4 can be a <600 yd weapon if the shooter wishes. Anything beyond that requires a bolt gun or Chey-Tac/Barrett.

[BigBear]

Nice answer Coloccw. Thanks for the explanation.

I would believe that it's often operator error - but in that case, how come the douchebags always get on TV/etc? Ha. I see soldiers at the range practicing and sometimes the things they do and how they handle their firearms are downright scary.

And then theres the fight of: AK round hits harder than the M4. But the M4 is more accurate. etc.

I guess it is likening of the 9 vs 45 debate.

[iamhunter]

Nice answer Coloccw. Thanks for the explanation.

I would believe that it's often operator error - but in that case, how come the douchebags always get on TV/etc? Ha. I see soldiers at the range practicing and sometimes the things they do and how they handle their firearms are downright scary.

And then theres the fight of: AK round hits harder than the M4. But the M4 is more accurate. etc.

I guess it is likening of the 9 vs 45 debate.

I know a ton of military guys and I often ask them "so do you do alot of firearms training/practice"

there answer is typically, "no, at best we go down to the range at the base and shoot of 200-300 rounds a few times a year".

Granted they weren't infantrymen, but stil....

[DocMedic]

Radio....Little Birds, DAPS, A-10's and B'2's have more firepower than I could carry. (and I don't have to clean them!)

^This

[iamhunter]

Anyways, there is an easy answer.

It would come in the form of a monolithic piston-operated upper chambered in 6.5 grendel.

7.62 ballistics,
5.56 recoil and capacity,
Monolithic/piston dust tolerance and reliability.

win/win.

And it would push the grendel into the mass-market, so I could finally afford it

[275RLTW]

Only problem with 6.5/6.8 (SPC, grendel, etc) is that magazine capacity is less. Although only about 4 rounds per mag, you have to figure 6 mags per soldier, times 28 per platoon, times 4 per company etc. The Commander sees that as a loss of almost 2700 rounds carried per company. To make up that difference, each soldier has to carry an additional magazine which adds weight to their kit, $$ for mag puches and more mags, etc....Not a good logistical choice despite the ballistic benefits.