SoCal ASL › Forums › SoCal ASL Club Members › Off Topic › M4 Problems
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 11, 2009 at 11:59 pm #4445rdfMember
Do you think this is a weapon problem or a situational problem? Is the crux of the problem too many bullets and poor design or too many bullets?
I've never been in the service and so can't speak for the soldiers in the field. It would seem though that given 'infinite' ammunition as a lay person, I'd feel safer shooting.
I'm reading D-Day, by Antony Beevor and the Airborne units dropped into the field around Carenten were issued about 150 rounds of ammo, perhaps a bit more for those with automatic weapons (Tommy Guns). Given the rate of fire of current weapons you couldn't hope to carry what you could shoot in an hour. Is the raw firepower really suppressing and effective? Would you rather have a really good scope? If 'that guy' is blowing out all of that horsepower it's going to be visible and fairly random in effectiveness. A scoped M41 would seem to be extremely effective against a hot point laying down suppressing fire.
BryanOctober 12, 2009 at 5:47 am #5843King ScottMemberI would say the problem in this situation is the M4's full-auto capability. In an urban environment, or one where the engagement distances are short, then that full-auto would be a plus. However, at long ranges, it's more important to have a longer (and sometimes heavier) barrel to improve accuracy and help disperse the heat. If the soldiers were firing mostly on full-auto, then I can understand why they might have had problems with heat. I just don't think it's meant to fire in that mode constantly.
As far as the M249s having problems, that's a little tougher to figure out. In my experience, that was a very reliable weapon if maintained properly. The article said that they put 600 rounds through it before it jammed, which is 3 drums, but it didn't say in how short a time they fired that much. Also, SAW gunners should have an assistant gunner who carries a spare barrel, and this can be changed out in about 3-5 seconds. The heat wouldn't have much impact on the carrier assembly because there is a lot of room in there–not like the tightly-fitting M4-M16.
But as far as the bullets issue goes, I do think that in any situation, it's better to be the side putting down more firepower. The psychological impact is huge–it takes a lot to continue an assault in the face of a curtain of fire.
In any case, I hope they figure this out and get those guys the best weapons we can produce.
October 12, 2009 at 2:05 pm #5844King ScottMemberThe biggest problem is that, given the opportunity, the average soldier will fire his weapon on full-auto. One of the reasons that the M-16A2 removed the full-auto option and replaced it with the three-round burst option.
Semper Fi!
ScottOctober 15, 2009 at 4:37 am #5842Jim AikensKeymasterYep full-auto with the M16A1 was a problem. I remember firing at full auto with only three clips and the gas return tube was red hot. Shortly there after the thing jammed. Assuming the shortened barrel length of the M4 would also reduce the ability of the weapon to disipate heat then it too might have problems with full auto – and sooner than the M16A1. Assuming these grunts had the M4A1 which is fully auto and from the description of the fire fights they were engaged in I would assume the weapons jammed due to the volume of rounds being put down range which in turn caused the weapons to overheat. What these soldiers were doing is actually doctrine – final protective fire – when everything you have is let loose on the enemy as they close with your positions. Looks like it's time to find a new assault rifle for our troops.
Checkout the last paragraph under the heading Design – [link=hyperlink url]http://www.mydaforms.com/Weapons/M4rifle.html[/link]
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.