Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 102

Thread: Commandant throws in a plug for the M16A4

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    212
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    TexasAG is on it.

    It is near impossible to have proper shooting form, for fighting, with a A2 stock unless you are one lanky fella. It will blade the hell out of your stance with body armor on. The RCO is difficult to shoot with such a long stock as it requires very short eye relief, and the issues are exacerbated in a dynamic situation where your moving. The rifle is fighting the user as its set up.

    If rifle length..uh..rifles.. can be made to fire reliably (which I am lead to believe they can be as that is what the Canadian Army is running) w/ collapsible stocks...then that is a pretty clear answer. Some skinny extra barrel hanging off the front of the rifle isn't as big a deal as the part that interfaces with the user at the opposite end. In the case of Afghanistan then it may actually be helpful given engagement distances.

    This isn't even an issue of needing to buy new rifles. If they wanted full on M4's...it's only a barrel, gas tube, stock assembly, buffer, and spring away. This isn't hard.

    The Marine brass is simply pimping the gear it's service has...which is par the course in the military. I'm sorry but an M4 doesn't make a shooter less lethal. Its ballistic semantics. But an A2 definitely affects proficiency of a shooter. I am all for ringing out every bit of possible performance from a rifle, but there is a point of diminishing returns. There is no free lunch. To make THIS platform, the AR series platform perform better at distance with M855, you have to make it more awkward and ungainly for CQB fighting. The M4 might be a case of the porridge being too cold, M16 too hot, and a 20'' barrel w/ collapsible stock just right.
    Last edited by RadioActivity; 03-30-10 at 03:14.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    212
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by xrayoneone View Post
    I like what one Marine General said, "How in the hell are you going to cave an enemies skull in with a collapsible plastic stock?"
    Nevermind the silly premise of this as rest assured, you can beat someone to death with a collapsible plastic stock just as well with a fixed plastic stock....But how are you going to butt stroke someone when you are utilizing a sling as any combat serving Soldier or Marine would?

    Muzzle strike. To the sternum. Hard.

    These are the silly premises that rifles and equipment SHOULDN'T be picked on. A stock is either durable enough for combat or it isn't. By default if it can survive the rigors of combat, it can survive being struck against someones head with enthusiasm.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,331
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    I hope that man is made to carry an M16A4 with an ACOG and fully loaded KAC rail system every damn day until he retires or buys his men modern RIFLES.
    "Life is short, but the years are long." - Robert A. Heinlein

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IN
    Posts
    1,854
    Feedback Score
    89 (97%)
    Why not best of both worlds? RECCE Rifles as standard? You get an accurate rifle with a 16in barrel, plus either a fixed stock or collapseable.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    32
    Feedback Score
    0
    All I know is that:
    I hate low caliber guns like the military issues most of us.
    The longest range confirmed sniper kill as of 2006 was with an M4, as per the Army Times.
    My wife hates all of the issued optics except the ACOG on her M4 (she and I disagree on the M4; she loves it).
    And in my current job with the Army, if I'm worried about long range shooting, something has gone so terribly wrong on the job that I'm probably not too worried about long range shooting. Anything they issue me is good enough out to 100 yards.

    edit: I do, however, most certainly want the guys in my unit who are decent shots, to be able to reach out and touch the bad guys wherever they may be...
    Last edited by Taran; 03-30-10 at 09:07.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    213
    Feedback Score
    0
    Interesting premise: A combat weapon has to have an adjustable stock to fit an armored soldier.

    ONLY in the last few years, ONLY for those issued the armor. Up to now, the standard hasn't been armor. Rifle stocks did the job. The majority of shooters outside LEO/MIL don't have armor. They don't need the stocks - but they sure do buy them.

    Expressing the concept that a 14.5" barreled M4 is ballistically equivalent to the 20" M16 leads me to think there are more experienced folks here who can explain that.

    As usual, the real discussion is one of degree, a percentage difference in the performance of a cartridge. It's an intermediate assault rifle, it can be tailored to one end of the spectrum or another. The current trend to shorten it is just that - for vehicular use, urban infrastructure, and CQB. It'll be all sorted out just in time for the next war, which in Afghanistan is turning out to be a bit more open in range, and lacking the built up areas.

    If anything, the General's comment shows the difference in battle philosophy between branches of the armed forces. It's not which is right/wrong, win/lose, it's a matter of which to apply to the current situation. BOTH are needed in the long run.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    4,859
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    The full comment, emphasis mine.

    "Marines like that M4 carbine because it looks cool. Translation: 'My opinion of the rank-and-file Marine is THAT low. I'm an occifer, and I Know Things, man... Things!' And I've had some Marines complain to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff saying 'you know, the officers are getting these things, but we're still having to carry this rifle.' Well, the Marine Corps will always be a rifle Marine Corps. The carbine is an extension of the pistol, not a reduction of a rifle. That was the freakin' M1 Carbine, you @$^&*@#$. It's the 21st @#%#^% Century! And in the Afghanistan scenario where you're shooting long distances you gotta be able to reach out and touch 'em. And a carbine is just not designed to do that." I don't have enough ink in my pen to write about what you don't know about what your Marines and their M4s would be capable of, if only you Old Guard Luddites stop letting the 'traditional' competitive shooters hold sway over the USMC marksmanship program.

    Good god, we're hosed. SO hosed. No wonder we can't get a goddamned thing done for the Marines, the anchorweight behind the institutional inertia is just too big, and it's title is 'Commandant.'

    That's it, stop the Corps. I wanna get off. We're Big Army, now. Slow, plodding, methodical, risk-averse, mired in the past and the Fulda Gap scenario.
    Last edited by JSantoro; 03-30-10 at 10:07.
    Contractor scum, AAV

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Squirrel!
    Posts
    2,156
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by tirod View Post
    If anything, the General's comment shows the difference in battle philosophy between branches of the armed forces. It's not which is right/wrong, win/lose, it's a matter of which to apply to the current situation. BOTH are needed in the long run.
    I agree - This is what I took from the article.
    Last edited by Skyyr; 03-30-10 at 10:44.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    2,081
    Feedback Score
    5 (86%)
    "The carbine is an extension of the pistol, not a reduction of a rifle."

    If the M4s were using handgun calibers, I would agree with this, but since they are using the same ammo, not so much. I suppose a 20" barrel would be better for long range shooting, but then again, lots of things would be better than an M16 for long range shooting...would he favor issuing the Marines only with 24" bolt action .308s? After all, they are riflemen first...

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    273
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Marine Commandant = idiot

    Dustin

Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •