Weapon Failures in Astan?!?!?! - Page 2

dadof18x'er · 10-11-2009, 10:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by HowardCohodas

IIRC, this was based on interviewing troops about to leave for deployment. I don't believe that this is the sentiment of the deployed.

here's the article.......

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6865359.ece

**Ambush Master** · 10-11-2009, 10:29

I have an M16, that was built in the mid-70's (Colt). Purposefully, I did not clean the weapon, other than the Chamber, Bolt Face/Area and Bore. It was not at all to the Weapon's detriment.

One summer, at our annual Machinegun-Shoot, someone was bad mouthing the AR/M16 Platform. I grabbed mine/w 20 rd mag and an empty Dufflebag (which I draped over my leg to ward off the flying fragments), walked over to a Mesquite tree that was about 6-8 inches in diameter and proceeded to SAW IT DOWN with full automatic fire!! I then walked over to the disparaging individual, broke the weapon open and extracted the "Bolt Carrier Group"!! I then grabbed his arm and slapped the VERY GRIMY, but well lubed with LSA, BCG into his hand!!

He was amazed, to say the least.

A few weeks later he bought an M16!!

All you need to do is KNOW WHAT WILL KEEP THE WEAPONS RUNNING!!!

This is truly a Training/Command Issue!!!

Not a fault of the Weapon(s) Platform(s)!!

Take care.
Martin

**Team Sergeant** · 10-11-2009, 11:01

I was not aware the general purpose forces were issued M4A1's ?

greenberetTFS · 10-11-2009, 11:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

I was not aware the general purpose forces were issued M4A1's ?

A comment made by a British para on BBC said the Americans make the best body armor protection,but the Russians the best machine guns.....

He had served several deployments in Iraq and was now working as a military contractor and was being interviewed about their duties in Iraq now....

He stated he was making 10 times as much money than when he was a S/SGT medic......

Big Teddy

7624U · 10-11-2009, 13:28

No new rifle needed, All they need to do is upgrade to piston uppers.
MMMMmmmmm MMMMmmmmm MMMMmmmmmm

SF_BHT · 10-11-2009, 14:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by 7624U

No new rifle needed, All they need to do is upgrade to piston uppers.
MMMMmmmmm MMMMmmmmm MMMMmmmmmm

OK Quit trying to make sense........

You will confuse the politicians......

**The Reaper** · 10-11-2009, 17:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by 7624U

No new rifle needed, All they need to do is upgrade to piston uppers.
MMMMmmmmm MMMMmmmmm MMMMmmmmmm

That has been problematic lately, with the torque and impact of the piston/op rod causing upper receivers to crack and fail a lot sooner than a direct impingement gun would.

TR

**Peregrino** · 10-11-2009, 17:29

And if you're interested in piston conversions, do your homework. Not all conversions are created equal (and the bad manufacturers spend more on lawyers than quality control

[anybody remember Dragonskin?

]) I witnessed a friend taking gas pistons from one manufacturer, dropping them on a concrete floor from shoulder height, and shattering one in five. He dropped about twenty-five; five snapped cleanly, the rest had a very high-pitched ring. I would not have wanted to use any of them with live rounds in a functioning weapon. My buddy was illustrating a point and making another when he said this was the "good" batch. Other systems have their own problems. Peening is a good example. Reciever cracking usually doesn't appear until the 20,000 round point, sometimes they'll last as long as 60,000 rounds (some seperate after as few as 5,000 rds). Most civilians will never see these round counts; however, the military is at war and between training and combat weapons can see 20,000 rounds in as little as 12-18 months. Broken guns are inevitable - even a Kar-98 can be broken. That's why I keep spare parts, watch my round count, and practice transitions.

7624U · 10-11-2009, 18:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

That has been problematic lately, with the torque and impact of the piston/op rod causing upper receivers to crack and fail a lot sooner than a direct impingement gun would.

TR

TR is that a result of the bolt not unlocking and then the oprod not having anyplace to go with all that energy behind it ?

Ive noticed on alot of the SWC weapons after all the use we put them threw. Thats one of the major problems when the weapon gets hot, is the bolt fails to unlock and extract the round. its got me thinking maybe the bolt and the chamber need a redesign. I know if we make the thing loose it won't be as accurate. But would that solve the failer to unlock if the boltface and chamber where not so tight. gunsmiths got any feedback?

**The Reaper** · 10-11-2009, 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by 7624U

TR is that a result of the bolt not unlocking and then the oprod not having anyplace to go with all that energy behind it ?

Ive noticed on alot of the SWC weapons after all the use we put them threw. Thats one of the major problems when the weapon gets hot, is the bolt fails to unlock and extract the round. its got me thinking maybe the bolt and the chamber need a redesign. I know if we make the thing loose it won't be as accurate. But would that solve the failer to unlock if the boltface and chamber where not so tight. gunsmiths got any feedback?

The bolt carrier was not designed to take an impact to the top, it does not have rails to keep it running true. When it is hit, it tips slightly higher in the front and lower in the rear. Sometimes, it may ground out completely, and gouge the inside of the receiver. I would keep my eye out for any unusual wear in the receiver or on the bolt, and anticipate a catastrophic failure of the upper at some relatively low round count.

Just my opinion. YMMV.

TR

Harv · 10-11-2009, 20:52

My thoughts...(For what there worth)
If I let my gunner fire a continuous burst on the M240 Coax (think 10,000rds linked together) and we get a stoppage so severe, the gun goes down, is the gun a POS???

A M249 is a gas piston, last time I looked, and they can go down if you run 200 rd packs thru it non stop with no lube and no barrel change.

Fire discipline, proper cleaning and lube.

I Have put my fair share or rds downrange over the years on ranges and never had a stoppage that was not due to operator error. The average E-3 Joe is far from a small arms expert.. I would like to have been around to see the PCC/PCI's that were being done at squad/PLT level prior to this fight.

Basenshukai · 10-11-2009, 21:21

I've participated in three SFAUCCs (cut me some slack, I'm still young in this business) and I have deployed to AFG as well as some other places. I have fired thousands of rounds from my assigned M4s. Heck, in one deployment down south, the battalion that we were going to train did not show up - only a company did. So, guess who fired those thousands and thousands of rounds? Let me tell you, post-deployment we could shoot wings off a fly. Anyway, my M4 only failed whenever I used simunition, or whenever we used blue tip training rounds. I never had my M4 fail with live rounds.

**Team Sergeant** · 10-11-2009, 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Sounds like a leadership failure to me.

TR

Quote:

Originally Posted by Basenshukai

I've participated in three SFAUCCs (cut me some slack, I'm still young in this business) and I have deployed to AFG as well as some other places. I have fired thousands of rounds from my assigned M4s. Heck, in one deployment down south, the battalion that we were going to train did not show up - only a company did. So, guess who fired those thousands and thousands of rounds? Let me tell you, post-deployment we could shoot wings off a fly. Anyway, my M4 only failed whenever I used simunition, or whenever we used blue tip training rounds. I never had my M4 fail with live rounds.

TR already stated the probable cause and I agree. I've also fired tens of thousands of rounds through the M-4 without failure.
Personally I think the reporter RICHARD LARDNER is fabricating some of this story.

Dozer523 · 10-11-2009, 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambush Master

[url]The soldiers said their weapons were meticulously cared for and routinely inspected by commanders.---

Bull shit. When the final investigation comes out they are going to find a total breakdown. No one with a malfunction was taking care of their weapon. No one witht a Soldier claiming a malfunction was inspecting weapons or anything else for that matter. This battle is going to become the red-headed step-child / poster child for COIN. "Whatever you do DON'T do this."
That battle was lost long before any bad guy came out of that village. It was lost when we wern't having tea in that village.

LarryW · 10-12-2009, 08:13

Quote:

That battle was lost long before any bad guy came out of that village. It was lost when we wern't having tea in that village.

Makes sense, Dozer.

IMHO, it seems the greatest failure (as previously stated and alluded to above) was in leadership, and that probably could be sourced all the way up from SGT thru General.

Does a Mission Needs Statement exist for the M4? What is the Mean Time Between Failures noted in the spec? Was an Operational Test ever done on the M4, or were the changes introduced following factory testing? Just wondering. The Navy does (or used to) Operational Testing of damned near everything placed in service, and the last time I checked, the Army relies a lot on factory testing. (A cost cutting measure I think.) Contractors love it. This is more an acquisitions question. Sorry if this issue is a distraction.

My brass farthings worth...