Army quits tests after competing rifle outperforms M4A1 carbine

[pcfixer]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#disqus_thread

A competing rifle outperformed the Army’s favored M4A1 carbine in key firings during a competition last year before the service abruptly called off the tests and stuck with its gun, according to a new confidential report.

The report also says the Army changed the ammunition midstream to a round “tailored” for the M4A1 rifle. It quoted competing companies as saying the switch was unfair because they did not have enough time to fire the new ammo and redesign their rifles before the tests began.

Exactly how the eight challengers — and the M4 — performed in a shootout to replace the M4, a soldier’s most important personal defense, has been shrouded in secrecy.

The Times earlier this year published a two-part series on the M4 revealing that, as the war on terror began, the carbine flunked several reliability tests when subjected to rapid fire. The Times spoke with soldiers who had used the M4 in intense combat.
They said the magazine is tinny and subject to jamming. The gun itself requires constant cleaning. One Green Beret said he and his colleagues, once in theater, rebuild the gun with better parts.

[Streck-Fu]

The gun itself requires constant cleaning.

Sweet jebus, not this still....

[The Reaper]

Here we go again.

TR

[blacksmoke]

The M4A1 also requires lubricant, and bullets to function.

[PRB]

...at least put a piston in it....

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by pcfixer

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#disqus_thread

They said the magazine is tinny and subject to jamming. The gun itself requires constant cleaning. One Green Beret said he and his colleagues, once in theater, rebuild the gun with better parts.

Five bucks says it was a Jr. SSG 18B....... Funny that damn M4A1 worked just fine for me for all those years. Did it jam, yeah, maybe once a year. Watching the TV reporting the war and keeping a close eye on how some of the lads are carrying and firing the M4A1 it's amazing it doesn't jam every other round.

Since when was it a smart idea to hold onto the mag while firing? Seen quite a few of our military doing that while engaged with the islamic morons.

[Box]

...no it was actually an 180a that did time in 3/3 and 4/3


Because after all, some add on furniture and a trigger job from brownells will make your M4 infinately more reliable.





PLus, you know, using all the non-standard ammo that was never designed for a 14.5 inch barrel makes it so much more reliable..
...and then bolting on a 10.5 and exclaiming thta you "just cant get decent performance" out of your ammo.


SF is full of fucking experts these days.

[The Reaper]

Well said, hermano!

You left out making it hard to get replacement mags, so teams are still using pre-ban crap that has been through hell and back 10 or 12 times already.

Hey, aluminum mags are expendable and should be regularly replaced. Just like aluminum cans.

Bad parts swapping as you noted, is not conducive to reliability. Most should have no effect.

Many people also neglect their regular small arms maintenance, and then gripe about the weapons not running.

Finally, the AR was designed to run wet. If you aren't using some sort of lube, it is going to quickly choke and stop.

TR

[chance]

"Finally, the AR was designed to run wet. If you aren't using some sort of lube, it is going to quickly choke and stop."

What? You mean it can't be white glove inspectable and still run like a scalded dog?

[DDD]

All the Bravos I worked with (and 11Bs before) told me "Doc, put oil on your rifle". I did it cause they told me to. Had very few problems.... and most (99.9%) of those problems were magazine related...you know the cheapest part of of the system.
If the M-16/M-4 system is so unreliable, why is it so evil for civilians to own? One would think if it doesn't work, it can't be dangerous

[WarriorDiplomat]

Originally Posted by DDD

All the Bravos I worked with (and 11Bs before) told me "Doc, put oil on your rifle". I did it cause they told me to. Had very few problems.... and most (99.9%) of those problems were magazine related...you know the cheapest part of of the system.
If the M-16/M-4 system is so unreliable, why is it so evil for civilians to own? One would think if it doesn't work, it can't be dangerous

The Weapon is a piece of shit not because it doesn't work but because of the design.

The weapons shits where it eats the gas tube runs across the top and directly into the bolt this puts the trash from the round in the middle of the moving parts of the bolt carrier group. It makes no sense the HK416 or the SCAR with its piston design which requires little cleaning and maintenance like the AK you can fire 1,000's of rounds with little cleaning required it is designed for a low maintenance capability which is perfect for austere environments and reliability.

There is no reason for a weapon to have such a complicated design as the M16 series and it's advancements. There is no excuse for the amount of lives lost due to engineering failures of the weapon from it's beginnings. I think I may have read that in Vietnam the amount of combat casualties lost by us is upwards of 50% could be attributed to the weapons deficiencies. I am shocked in the book "We were soldiers once and young" that so many survived since the weapon was not accurate until the enemy was within 100M. The initial weapon was designed with poor rifling in the barrel I believe 12 right hand twist design and no ammunition to match it so the rounds tumbled at about 100M. Anyone remember when the M16 could not be used by lefties? Were lefties barred from the military at one time?

Does anyone here wonder how a field as precise as engineering could design a weapon and test it could have missed the math involved in the barrel design and round weight, shape and speed? or they tested the thing with the 5.56 ammo and it fired accurately out to at least 300M consistently?Why would the original engineers be so flawed that it requires these dramatic reboots every so many years.

I have rarely picked up an old rusty AK that didn't work even without maintenance or lube. I have never not been able to get at least 200M accuracy out of an AK different makers and after a zero. The HK was awesome a friend of mine at the OTC talked about the first time he had fired thousands of rounds during firearms training with the HK after the first week he was worried about the amount of cleaning it would require and as I stated it required hardly any.

For those of us who have been up close and personal in combat the 5.56 green tip sucks, you get no immediate feedback from a hit like impact and unless you hit a vital there is a good chance of survival. Aim all you want people move unpredictably. I fired and swore I had hit a guy he didn't break his stride and I ended up putting 5-6 accurate rounds into him because he had no reaction to the first few rounds I could not guarantee I hit him so I fired more. Because of the situation I today cannot say I had killed him.

Give me a weapon that fires a heavy intimidating body moving round, give me a weapon that if I am on patrol I do not have to worry about a detailed cleaning especially if I fired it, Give me a gun that doesn't have those damn gas rings that have to be offset or a free floating firing pin that the junk from every round fired coats or the intricate lttle gas holes that need a pipe cleaner pushed through to keep open. I will accept 2-300 meter accuracy so I am not wasting ammunition on a bad guy I am not sure I hit or not.

What was that called the military industrial complex that Eisenhower mentioned?. It is clear looking at the evolution of the weapon that it was designed to be upgraded every few years which means it was intentionally designed with flaws so it could be updated and revamped with new nomenclatures and all. I have no issues with money making endeavors except when it comes to the lives of the patriots who serve selflessly in the military who are the end user of it. The lobbyist keep this gun alive and us as patriots should question why the military are stuck this thing with while clearly superior low maintenance highly durable weapons are being trumped.

[WarriorDiplomat]

Mr. Davis: If the problem is timing with the weapon, that is, if it is opening too soon while the gas pressure is still too high and for this reason and this reason only the cartridge fails to extract, then this has a significant effect.
However, if the cartridge case sticks in the chamber because the chamber IS PITTED OR CORRODED, remember that it continues to stick, even after the rim has been sheared through and you have to take a cleaning rod to knock it out.
A matter of a fraction of a millisecond delay one way or another will not materially assist failures to extract which come from RUSTY OR CORRODED CHAMBERS.
In the particular instance of the M-16 rifle our analysis of the cause of failures to extract is such that I think we would not gain very much in that particular remedy by reducing the cyclic rate.
Mr. Ichord: Of course now the ball propellant does give you increased debris which will clog up the chamber and make the cartridge difficult to extract, will it not?
Mr. Davis: WELL, OUR TESTS HAVE NOT REALLY CONFIRMED THAT THIS IS TRUE. WE HAVE HAD A HIGHER MALFUNCTION RATE IN EXPERIMENTS WITH BALL PROPELLANT, USUALLY, PERHAPS ALWAYS ASSOCIATED WITH THE HIGHER CYCLIC RATE. But the increased amount of visible fouling from ball propellant, I must say we cannot correlate with any increase in the gun malfunction rate.
Mr. Ichord: Apparently we have some disagreement among experts. The only thing this committee wants, the only thing the full committee wants, the only thing this Congress wants, and the only thing the American people want is some way that we can correct these excessive malfunctions. They cannot be tolerated, period. I don't care what you do to the gun.
AND I CANNOT BUY SOME OF THESE REPORTS THAT I HAVE SEEN THAT IT IS ENTIRELY THE FAULT OF THE MEN OUT THERE IN THE FIELD NOT CLEANING THEIR WEAPONS.
You can't be wet nursing a weapon. You can't be turning around cleaning that weapon when a Vietcong comes towards you. And I know a man - when his life depends on it - is not going to fail to clean his rifle. He should have gotten sufficient training to be able to clean his weapon. The difficulties are not caused by insufficient cleaning and maintenance of the weapon, alone.

...................

Just think had there been a piston design instead of the faulty chamber design that allows for the bullet trash to dirty the chamber

[WarriorDiplomat]

Mr. Ichord: In order to establish our hypothesis, at this point I want to read into the record the result of tests of the SAWS study:
Field experiment conducted at Fort Ord, California: Section V, Material Reliability Results.

2. Major causes in malfunctions in 5.56mm weapons.
Major causes of most malfunctions in the 5.56 mm. weapons are attributed to an interaction of ammunition (and belt link) deficiencies:
1. Weapon fouling, judged to be caused primarily by qualities of the propellant used in the standard ball 5.56 mm. cartridge.
2. Cycling of weapons in excess of design rates, judged to be caused by combinations of:
(a) Pressure characteristics of the propellant used in the standard ball 5.56 mm. cartridge.
(b) Factory calibration of M-16E1 rifles for a propellant with different pressure characteristics than that in the standard ball 5.56 mm. cartridge.
(c) Mismatch in internal ballistic (pressure) characteristics between the standard 5.56 mm. ball and tracer cartridges.
.................

(a) fouling

Fouling in the 5.56 mm. weapons occurred throughout the experiment. Dirty chambers resulting from rapid carbon buildup caused most of the failures to extract and some of the failures to chamber. Fouling remained a problem throughout the experiment, although cleaning and inspection of weapons were considered more stringent than would be possible during combat.
Inquiry to AMC determined that the propellant adopted for the standard 5.56 mm. ball cartridge is different from the original propellant used during the development and service testing of the M-16E1 rifle and during the development of the Stoner weapons. A USACDCEC test of samples from the lot of standard ammunition used in the experiment showed more fouling than an AMC provided sample containing the original propellant. This supplemental fouling test was conducted using ammunition lots WCC-6098 and RA-5074. This limited test firing of 12,620 rounds indicated a malfunction rate of 5.6 per 1,000 rounds for the cartridge loaded with ball propellant as opposed to 0.91 for IMR propellant loaded cartridges.
(b) Excessive cyclic rate
Excessive cyclic rates were noted early in the experiment. In addition, surging (uneven firing) was noted when ball and tracer were fired together. There was also an increasing incidence of malfunctions attributed to ammunition cycling the weapons beyond their design rates. The cyclic rates were higher than the design cyclic rates, particularly with the M-16E1 rifle and Stoner machinegun. It is concluded that this excessive cyclic rate caused, complicated, and multiplied such malfunctions as failure of the bolt to remain to the rear after the last round was fired from the magazine, FAILURES TO EJECT, and magazine feeding problems.
A concurrent propellant investigation by Frankford Arsenal showed that the propellant currently used in the 5.56 mm. ball cartridge cycles weapons faster than the original propellant.
Inquiry to AMC determined that, to meet a government acceptance requirement, M16E1 rifles are calibrated at the factory for the gas port pressure of the original propellant rather than that of the propellant currently used in standard ball 5.56 mm. cartridges. Interaction of the higher gas port pressure of the current propellant and the sizing of the gas port for a propellant with a lower gas port pressure is considered the reason for the excessive cyclic rate in the M16E1 rifle.

.......................

[WarriorDiplomat]

Mr. Ichord: Then we seem to get down to the question - perhaps I am being a little derogatory - how much can we wet nurse a rifle by extensive cleaning under combat conditions?
General Anderson: Well, you have to clean the rifle no matter what kind of powder. Whether it would be more difficult to clean it with the ball powder, or with the IMR, I am not sure at all.
Mr. Ichord: One of the generals, the one who returned from Vietnam, has stated - of course, we have statements all over the lot on it. Some say it is no more difficult to clean than any other weapon, and I think we have statements by high authority that more care and maintenance has to be directed to it --
General Anderson: There is more visible residue on the ball powder than on the other.
Mr. Ichord: Yes. I THINK THOSE STATEMENTS THAT THE M-16 REQUIRES MORE CARE AND MAINTENANCE SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE BALL PROPELLANT RATHER THAN TO THE RIFLE ITSELF.
General Anderson: We would like to cut down the so-called dirty rifle with either. But with ball powder leaving more visible residue, there is some speculation as to whether it takes longer to clean it. I am not sure of that at all. I don't know.
Mr. Ichord: I am going to ask if anybody else wants to add anything to the record today. I am not going to adjourn the subcommittee sine die. I had hoped to be able to do so. But I want to give you the chance to clarify the record, straighten up any inconsistency that might result, before I adjourn today.
Mr. Counsel.

Notice that weapon fouling and having to wet nurse the weapon was attributed to the ammo not the weapons design. Why would the entire hearing not address the design that caused the fouling?

Below is a more clarified description of what the shitting where it eats I stated earlier.

Direct impingement is a type of gas operation for a firearm that directs gas from a fired cartridge directly into the bolt carrier or slide assembly to cycle the action.

Unlike conventional gas-operated firearms, direct impingement does away with a separate gas cylinder, piston, and operating rod assembly. High-pressure gas acts directly upon the bolt and carrier thereby saving weight, lowering costs, and reducing the mass of the operating parts, and thereby the wear on mechanical parts due to movement.

The main disadvantage of direct impingement is that the breech of the firearm's firing mechanism becomes fouled more quickly due to being exposed to the propellants of the cartidge. This is caused by solids from the high-temperature gas condensing on the bolt face and primary operating mechanism. The combustion gases contain vaporized metals, carbon, and impurities in a gaseous state until they contact cooler operating parts. The deposits increase friction on the bolt's camming system leading to jams, so that thorough and frequent cleaning is required to ensure reliability. The amount of fouling depends upon the rifle's design as well as the type of propellant powder used. For example, the French MAS 44 and MAS 49 series of rifles was known to have been successfully operated for years with corrosive-primed ammunition using ordinary field cleaning expedients such as gasoline (as solvent) and straight-grade motor oil (as lubricant).

A further disadvantage of direct impingement is that combustion gases heat the bolt and bolt carrier as the firearm operates. This heating causes essential lubricant to be "burned off". Lack of proper lubrication is the most common source of weapon stoppages or jams. These combined factors reduce service life of these parts, reliability, and mean time between failures.[

[Pericles]

Summary - using propellant that was out of spec and left over from 7.62 NATO production caused problems. Who could have expected that?