View Full Version : Forget the CAR and the GAU, meet the GUU.
This was at the range today with an Air Force LTC it is a M16 lower, M16-A2 upper, M4 barrel and stock. They call it the Goo, he said the armorer called it Frankenstein.
12621
12622
The Air Force will not get rid of anything if they can make it last a few days longer. The GUU-5/A, GUU-5-A/A, GUU-5/P are all frankenguns. some had forward assists, some not, some had 14.5", 10" and 11.5" barrels...some not. The AF had and still does have a hard time with small arms. Other than Security Forces, PJ's and Combat Controllers, not too many jobs require rifles...about the same in the Navy. Always liked the look of the GUU series, every one was differant...from the parts, make, armorer, finish (or lack there of)...just cool. If I did a retro, that would be the first one I'd do. Crazy thing is, the weirder and crappier it looks...the more realistic it is.
Oh, that SO needs a set of the ancient triangular CAR handguards on it!
The Air Force will not get rid of anything if they can make it last a few days longer. The GUU-5/A, GUU-5-A/A, GUU-5/P are all frankenguns. some had forward assists, some not, some had 14.5", 10" and 11.5" barrels...some not. The AF had and still does have a hard time with small arms. Other than Security Forces, PJ's and Combat Controllers, not too many jobs require rifles...about the same in the Navy. Always liked the look of the GUU series, every one was differant...from the parts, make, armorer, finish (or lack there of)...just cool. If I did a retro, that would be the first one I'd do. Crazy thing is, the weirder and crappier it looks...the more realistic it is.
That M16 lower is grey, I wonder how old it is?
Norseman1950
06-26-12, 16:43
If you notice it has an original ar15 marked lower which tells me it's probably one from the original purchase back in the early 60s. We still have a metric ass ton of these lowers with burst triggers and a2 uppers/furniture on them. Until a few years ago many still had hard chromed bolt groups.
RogerinTPA
06-26-12, 17:03
The Air Force will not get rid of anything if they can make it last a few days longer. The GUU-5/A, GUU-5-A/A, GUU-5/P are all frankenguns. some had forward assists, some not, some had 14.5", 10" and 11.5" barrels...some not. The AF had and still does have a hard time with small arms. Other than Security Forces, PJ's and Combat Controllers, not too many jobs require rifles...about the same in the Navy. Always liked the look of the GUU series, every one was differant...from the parts, make, armorer, finish (or lack there of)...just cool. If I did a retro, that would be the first one I'd do. Crazy thing is, the weirder and crappier it looks...the more realistic it is.
I never did understand that. Back in Somalia (Blackhawk Down episode), I was amazed that there were so many unarmed Airmen. An AF O-5 stated that AF personnel were not used to carrying a weapon, especially a loaded one.:rolleyes:
If you notice it has an original ar15 marked lower which tells me it's probably one from the original purchase back in the early 60s. We still have a metric ass ton of these lowers with burst triggers and a2 uppers/furniture on them. Until a few years ago many still had hard chromed bolt groups.
Cool
I never did understand that. Back in Somalia (Blackhawk Down episode), I was amazed that there were so many unarmed Airmen. An AF O-5 stated that AF personnel were not used to carrying a weapon, especially a loaded one.:rolleyes:
Ironic since it was General LeMay that got us the AR.
Norseman1950
06-26-12, 18:32
He also brought us the KC135 and B-52 both of which are still in service. One of the great forward thinking, ass kicking generals. Sadly, men like him would never make it that far in todays Air Force.
Suwannee Tim
06-26-12, 18:46
.....The AF had and still does have a hard time with small arms.....
They got ICBMs! Whata they need mouse guns for?
....Ironic since it was General LeMay that got us the AR.
And the Army got us the revolutionary M14!
HackerF15E
06-26-12, 18:51
I never did understand that. Back in Somalia (Blackhawk Down episode), I was amazed that there were so many unarmed Airmen. An AF O-5 stated that AF personnel were not used to carrying a weapon, especially a loaded one.:rolleyes:
Some parts of the AF continue to spaz at Bagram, where the Army 2-button running the show insists all personnel be armed at all times.
It's much better now that it was 5-6 years ago, when you still had Squadron and Group Commanders trying to buck the order and not trusting their personnel to be able to safely carry firearms full time.
HackerF15E
06-26-12, 18:52
He also brought us the KC135 and B-52 both of which are still in service. One of the great forward thinking, ass kicking generals. Sadly, men like him would never make it that far in todays Air Force.
Damn true and incredibly sad.
That M16 lower is grey, I wonder how old it is?
No telling. In the mid 90's I was responsible for the weapons used by our base staffers. Mostly M9's except our Weather folks who smartly wanted to keep rifles. When I did my first inventory I was amazed to see an M16 with olive drab furniture (triangular handguards) and a reduced diameter version of the 3 prong hider. It had a serial # around 8,000 or so and said, "Armalite patent pending". It still worked and I've often wondered if it's still in service.
RogerinTPA
06-26-12, 20:34
I'm based there (home on R&R). I don't know if it's such a great idea. I've lost count at the number of times I've been flagged or literally 'hit' by weapons carried by USAF personnel, with their 3 point slings and no optic A2s. None are carried on the flight line except for SPs, and folks transiting back and forth to the BX, DFAC or living area. I see it as a training issue (lack of). As far as the GUUs, I've seen some that are damn near silver in color. Honestly, they are museum pieces and don't know why they're still in service.
Some parts of the AF continue to spaz at Bagram, where the Army 2-button running the show insists all personnel be armed at all times.
It's much better now that it was 5-6 years ago, when you still had Squadron and Group Commanders trying to buck the order and not trusting their personnel to be able to safely carry firearms full time.
Nightvisionary
06-27-12, 03:56
I never did understand that. Back in Somalia (Blackhawk Down episode), I was amazed that there were so many unarmed Airmen. An AF O-5 stated that AF personnel were not used to carrying a weapon, especially a loaded one.:rolleyes:
That's exactly the way it should be. If the average airman is anything like the average sailor I don't want to be near one with a loaded weapon. They are technicians not soldiers.
That's exactly the way it should be. If the average airman is anything like the average sailor I don't want to be near one with a loaded weapon. They are technicians not soldiers.
I seen enough Army Warrants and "RLO's" screw up at a clearing barrel to wonder if anyone is really trained.
My unit took "GUU's" to Afghanistan early on. We had flat-top upper's though. We also had one lower that (supposedly) was traced back to the VN war.
Why get rid of a rifle if it works? I know that it can suck for the Arms Room, but cost-wise I can get more/faster if all I have to buy are uppers and accessories.
That's exactly the way it should be. If the average airman is anything like the average sailor I don't want to be near one with a loaded weapon. They are technicians not soldiers.
Not soldiers, airmen. We were the first in Kigali, Rwanda, with our ancient GAU-5's providing our own security while bringing in much needed supplies for starving people. Finally, the Army sent in some good folks to help give us some security, 2 WEEKS later. Much appreciated. Silly Army "rules" like no alcohol, must wear a shirt or hat, ect., not so much. We ignored them anyway. Invented drink called Kigali Gator Juice. :D
Then after watching polished C-130 land, Army officers disembarked, salute each other, give each other a medal, then take off. On ground time? About 15 minutes.
Army then left about 2 WEEKS before we did.
Remember, unless you jump in, ect., Air Force Mobility Flights (now known as Combat Readiness Units) are usually first in and last out.
Most shithole countries I have the pleasure of being in, I never saw any Army personnel.
PortDawg
437th Mobility Flight
Not an expert, but if it still works good like an AR is suppose to, then why bother wasting money to replace it?
This was at the range today with an Air Force LTC it is a M16 lower, M16-A2 upper, M4 barrel and stock. They call it the Goo, he said the armorer called it Frankenstein.
12621
12622
GUU-5P should have a 1:7 pencil barrel, not an M-4 profile unless someone changed something in the last year.
When I deployed to Iraq in 2004, my issued rifle was a AR-15A-1 full auto complete with a 3-prong flash hider, triangle handguards and a flat delta ring...also got 3 20-round mags. When the AF guys (me) went from Baghdad (BIAP) to Balad, first thing we did was to hand over our rifles for storage. Only AF armed folks were OSI and Security Forces folks. Funny part, my orders specifically said I was not allowed in any of the Stans' due to my rifle being full auto. Only those with 3-rd burst could deploy there.
When I deployed to Iraq in 2004, my issued rifle was a AR-15A-1 full auto complete with a 3-prong flash hider, triangle handguards and a flat delta ring...also got 3 20-round mags. When the AF guys (me) went from Baghdad (BIAP) to Balad, first thing we did was to hand over our rifles for storage. Only AF armed folks were OSI and Security Forces folks. Funny part, my orders specifically said I was not allowed in any of the Stans' due to my rifle being full auto. Only those with 3-rd burst could deploy there.
There were/are plenty of "full-auto" rifles running around the Stans.
I'd like to see those orders.
There were/are plenty of "full-auto" rifles running around the Stans.
I'd like to see those orders.
I can only imagine who ever wrote those orders misunderstood the ROE and Law of Land Warfare.
Cool GUU. Never heard of the others either.
ffhounddog
06-29-12, 10:36
Kinda a clone of my GUU-5P. I just wanted it to be the best shooter possible.
GUU-5P clone to 16 inches with a middy barrel.
My first M4 in the Air force was a GUU-5P after 9/11. I liked it but I was not a gun guy until after my first deployment so I did not know what I did not know. Now in the Army so a M4 is just right for me.
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c68/ffhounddog/IMG_20120608_184150.jpg
justin_247
06-29-12, 15:49
There were/are plenty of "full-auto" rifles running around the Stans.
I'd like to see those orders.
I second that.
Most orders I've seen nowadays specify either M-16A2 or M-4 w/ M68, and don't go much further than it.
Not that I feel the need to prove myself to people I have no connection with...but when I find my old orders, I'll post the section that spells it out. At the time, I thought it was interesting to be that specific on where you would go, based solely on the mechanics of a rifle. This was 2004...not last week.
OK I will not say how many Army folks dropped and ND'd there rifles in Dessert storm if you all stop bashing my fellow Airman.:D In my 24 years I carried quite alot for a Maintence guy. Probably cause I volunteered for those hairy missions! And I took weapons training dead seriously!:D
The Air Force does not like to give Airmen weapons for some reason or another. The only place I was allowed to carry a rifle around, mind you I was a avionics specialist, not a security type, was Kunsan AB, South Korea. They handed out M-16's during exercises to most of the base personnel, because it was assumed the North Koreans would attempt to storm the base in the outset of any hostilities with infiltrators from the air and sea. Of course, we had to hand them in at the end of the exercises for storage back in the armory.
All of the M-16's were early types, slab-sided, no forward assist, full automatic, and some had triangular handguards. Most had the full birdcage FH although a few three prongs were out there. I never saw any M4 or XM-177 type carbines until I returned to the US in early 1994.
Out of curiosity, why does the Air Force use aircraft gun designations on its small arms? Why doesn't the Air Force use the Army reference system?
ChuckTShoes
07-01-12, 12:45
Out of curiosity, why does the Air Force use aircraft gun designations on its small arms? Why doesn't the Air Force use the Army reference system?
It may sound silly, but I would wager the answer to that question isn't any more complicated than "because we are not the damn Army. We are the Air Force." I too was an avionics guy (F-16) and the only time I touched a weapon was on one day during BMT at Lackland. Of course, that was during the Clinton administration and we didn't even requalify before deploying to Kuwait for a rotation.
justin_247
07-01-12, 13:22
The Air Force does not like to give Airmen weapons for some reason or another. The only place I was allowed to carry a rifle around, mind you I was a avionics specialist, not a security type, was Kunsan AB, South Korea. They handed out M-16's during exercises to most of the base personnel, because it was assumed the North Koreans would attempt to storm the base in the outset of any hostilities with infiltrators from the air and sea. Of course, we had to hand them in at the end of the exercises for storage back in the armory.
All of the M-16's were early types, slab-sided, no forward assist, full automatic, and some had triangular handguards. Most had the full birdcage FH although a few three prongs were out there. I never saw any M4 or XM-177 type carbines until I returned to the US in early 1994.
Out of curiosity, why does the Air Force use aircraft gun designations on its small arms? Why doesn't the Air Force use the Army reference system?
This is interesting, if only because it's so different from the situation at Osan. Our M-16s had brand new upper receivers on them with round handguards and forward assists. The lowers were the same as yours - old, full automatic, but still in very good condition.
HackerF15E
07-01-12, 17:54
The sad part is that, even after 6-9 years of USAF folks being forced to be armed up at some locations downrange, Big Blue is still only barely more firearms literate than they were prior to 9/11.
A buddy of mine who recently went through OTS related that he actually had a little M4 training prior to a mock deployment...that's at least an improvement from when I went through ROTC 20 years ago, in which we barely touched M9s and never even saw M-16s.
Although there is legitimate operational reasoning behind why most USAF folks don't have much experience with small arms, unfortunately this pragmatic approach ignores the baseline reality that even the Air Force is fundamentally still an armed service. At a FOB (or even a MOB), everyone who is there is vulnerable to attack and part of the bases' defense.
I definitely think there needs to be a far greater baseline emphasis on small arms training and familiarization in the USAF.
The sad part is that, even after 6-9 years of USAF folks being forced to be armed up at some locations downrange, Big Blue is still only barely more firearms literate than they were prior to 9/11.
A buddy of mine who recently went through OTS related that he actually had a little M4 training prior to a mock deployment...that's at least an improvement from when I went through ROTC 20 years ago, in which we barely touched M9s and never even saw M-16s.
Although there is legitimate operational reasoning behind why most USAF folks don't have much experience with small arms, unfortunately this pragmatic approach ignores the baseline reality that even the Air Force is fundamentally still an armed service. At a FOB (or even a MOB), everyone who is there is vulnerable to attack and part of the bases' defense.
I definitely think there needs to be a far greater baseline emphasis on small arms training and familiarization in the USAF.
And what do you think is the reply from the career fields when efforts are made to increase weapons training???
HackerF15E
07-01-12, 18:19
And what do you think is the reply from the career fields when efforts are made to increase weapons training???
Well, of course there's pushback.
At one point, there was pushback against idiotic training like the 4-hours of CBTs on how to use my new...old...government travel card. But today that kind of stuff is seen as the norm.
I'd sure as hell rather have spent 4 hours with my squadronmates on the range shooting instead of clicking through slides and "learning" that I still can't use the GTC to buy drinks at the bar or dances at the strip club.
It will take a massive shift in mentality to take back the "chair force", but since "everyone is a warrior", maybe we can start putting our money where our Airman's Creed is and actually start being trained like warriors.
This is interesting, if only because it's so different from the situation at Osan. Our M-16s had brand new upper receivers on them with round handguards and forward assists. The lowers were the same as yours - old, full automatic, but still in very good condition.
I was there in 1993-94, 80th FS (Juvats) was your tour much later? Maybe they phased out the early M16 uppers? Most of our M16s did have the round handguards, but they had no forward assists and original M16 sights.
I was there in 1993-94, 80th FS (Juvats) was your tour much later? Maybe they phased out the early M16 uppers? Most of our M16s did have the round handguards, but they had no forward assists and original M16 sights.
They were M16A2 mod kits.
hotrodder636
07-01-12, 21:14
That's exactly the way it should be. If the average airman is anything like the average sailor I don't want to be near one with a loaded weapon. They are technicians not soldiers.
Not all sailors are incompetent with a firearm.
HackerF15E
07-01-12, 21:42
Not all sailors are incompetent with a firearm.
He said "the average sailor".
BrigandTwoFour
07-01-12, 22:08
The sad part is that, even after 6-9 years of USAF folks being forced to be armed up at some locations downrange, Big Blue is still only barely more firearms literate than they were prior to 9/11.
A buddy of mine who recently went through OTS related that he actually had a little M4 training prior to a mock deployment...that's at least an improvement from when I went through ROTC 20 years ago, in which we barely touched M9s and never even saw M-16s.
Although there is legitimate operational reasoning behind why most USAF folks don't have much experience with small arms, unfortunately this pragmatic approach ignores the baseline reality that even the Air Force is fundamentally still an armed service. At a FOB (or even a MOB), everyone who is there is vulnerable to attack and part of the bases' defense.
I definitely think there needs to be a far greater baseline emphasis on small arms training and familiarization in the USAF.
It hasn't changed. I finished ROTC in '06, we fired exactly 32 rounds through an M9 during a fam fire session in 2004. I haven't touched a USAF issued weapon ever since (except for fondling the 240Bs and such that the cops would keep at the missile alert facilities). I've had enough friends get surprise deployments from my career field (13S) and had pitiful training before being handed a weapon and put on a plane. One of those guys was an O4 who had the honor of riding in a truck with a Marine to determine if a town was friendly or hostile- they determined that by driving up to the town and seeing if they were shot at.
I decided long ago that if I was to be proficient in arms, then it was my responsibility to seek out training and procure my own weapons to practice with.
FWIW, all the cops and missile field security at my base (which deals in nuclear weapons) appear to have current issue M4s, M68s, and assorted LMG weaponry for small arms.
hotrodder636
07-02-12, 12:45
He said "the average sailor".
I realize this. As I was a sailor and an Electronics Technician, I found it humorous. Thank you for the enlightenment though.
HackerF15E
07-02-12, 17:49
I realize this. As I was a sailor and an Electronics Technician, I found it humorous. Thank you for the enlightenment though.
Well, he never claimed that "all sailors are incompetent with a firearm". So...I found your negation of that statement equally as enlightening.
That's exactly the way it should be. If the average airman is anything like the average sailor I don't want to be near one with a loaded weapon. They are technicians not soldiers. I don't know about sailor's but for the era I was in the AF, your spot on.
The sad part is that, even after 6-9 years of USAF folks being forced to be armed up at some locations downrange, Big Blue is still only barely more firearms literate than they were prior to 9/11.
A buddy of mine who recently went through OTS related that he actually had a little M4 training prior to a mock deployment...that's at least an improvement from when I went through ROTC 20 years ago, in which we barely touched M9s and never even saw M-16s.
Although there is legitimate operational reasoning behind why most USAF folks don't have much experience with small arms, unfortunately this pragmatic approach ignores the baseline reality that even the Air Force is fundamentally still an armed service. At a FOB (or even a MOB), everyone who is there is vulnerable to attack and part of the bases' defense.
I definitely think there needs to be a far greater baseline emphasis on small arms training and familiarization in the USAF. When I went through AF basic(1968)we of course had to qualify and that was the end of it. In my orders for Vietnam I had to report for M16 training before leaving. The day I went it was pouring rain, the range was underwater and we spent the day cleaning the weapons we never fired. Several weeks after arriving at Da Nang I again had to report for M16 training. When I asked, I was told that the training I received in the states was useless. So we all took the weapons we were handed, climbed into the back of a "deuce and a half" and off to some place they deemed Ok to shoot. There was a box about 2ft square and 2ft deep loaded with loose rounds. We were told to load the 20rd magazine with 10rds and of course pointed toward a distant hillside(no targets)to fire when ever we were ready. 10rds semi, 10rds auto. After that we pretty much emptied the box full of loose ammo and went back. Handed back the weapons and our training was over. The entire year I was over there I never actually saw the weapon I was issued when I arrived. Anytime there was an alert, we were just hustled off to the area where the weapons were stored, they would hand us a cloth bandoleer with 5 loaded 20rd mags and a weapon. When it was all over we just handed everything back and went on about our business. As an Aircraft Mechanic I had no real Combat training, but I was very familiar with firearms, so for me it was pretty much just a real kick blazing away. But I only got to do it once.
Even if the air force did give us more training on firearms it wouldn't make much of a difference since we have to wear a reflective belt (glowing target) 24/7 when deployed to any of the shithole locations.
On the other end of the spectrum there are tier-1 AF units too. The requirement is to train with weapons at least quarterly, which is additional to the AF's annual or semi annual qual course most are referring to here. This included the M4 and M9, plus whatever special weapons your unit may have, ie shotguns, MP5s, 44mag revolver, 1911 and so on. This does not include handling time with running small unit tactics, static line and HALO training, etc. Result is you fire 2-3 weapons 6 times a year minimum, plus tote and haul your primary weapons around on training events, falling out of airplanes, sleeping on the ground, or guarding them in transit mode going to and fro.
I recall my old gau5 had a skinny barrel, carry handle, no rails. Super light and easy to place rounds with the 223 ammo. They took it away and installed the NATO 556 barrel (and new "roll mark"). It was a very different animal and I was not happy with my beloved GAU anymore. A short time later the real M4 came along finally, we got the rails with lasers, optics, 203 attachment. A new world with added tools and options.
Even if the air force did give us more training on firearms it wouldn't make much of a difference since we have to wear a reflective belt (glowing target) 24/7 when deployed to any of the shithole locations.My how things have changed. We just had to work under really bright lights at night. Everything on the uniforms was in "Black" and no one wore the original issue stuff after we got the new issue. Even now where I work,(Fedex) I strip all that reflective crap off everything I can and that's here in Los Angeles(LAX). You have my sympathy.
ChuckTShoes
09-01-12, 21:08
Even if the air force did give us more training on firearms it wouldn't make much of a difference since we have to wear a reflective belt (glowing target) 24/7 when deployed to any of the shithole locations.
Reflective belts save lives!
Heavy Metal
09-01-12, 21:29
That lower has been refinished once. It has been-rearsenaled.
HackerF15E
09-02-12, 10:15
On the other end of the spectrum there are tier-1 AF units too.
By definition, no.
There are SOF forces, but not Tier 1 SOF in the USAF.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.