Printable View
This has been discussed at length on several forums. These guys were under supplied in an undermanned FOB in a really crappy location (in a small valley) and were heavily out numbered. The malfunctions came from extreme bbl temperatures. Soldiers died because of bad planning, not because of the M4.
One thing I noticed in my time in the military (AF): preventative maintenance other than cleaning seems to be non-existent. Weapons and mags tend to be used until something fails, then they are replaced or repaired. These weapons are supposed to be serviced and parts replaced according to a maintenance schedule. If that was actually followed I imagine many of these failures could be prevented. I had an M16 issued to me once with a bolt catch so worn the slightest bump to the weapon would allow the bolt to release. And any weapon with a glowing barrel has been pushed to its limit and will fail, I don't care how well maintained it is. As OgenRwot said, those guys died because someone in charge fucked up.
The biggest POS in the US arsenal right now is the M249 SAW. Damn that thing damn it to hell.
When I was in the Marines we had some early versions of the m-60 still. The trigger group was held on with two pins. They fell out quite often and depending on how you were humping those pigs the trigger group would fall off unnoticed. To operate the weapon we just slam fired it and twisted the ammo belt to jam the runaway to stop shooting.
I also carried early versions of the SAW M-249. I kept it as clean as I could and it still had lots of issues. I am sure most have been worked out but they were wide ranging. Falure to feed from m-16 mags. torn cases jamming the weapon, the feed tray would jam often, links would fail to clear the ejection port and would cause failure to feed.
Both the 60 and 249 if shot to cherry red would fuse the barrel to the reciver if you didnt remove the barrel while it was still cherry red. we used and sometimes had to abuse our weapons. I remember once I needed an m-60 to remain running so we were squirting clp onto the ammo belt hoping it would help to provide some lube to the weapon as it got super hot. I know/knew it was not smart but it was what we did.
The m-16 A3's some of us were issued were so bad that they rattled (huge gaps between the upper and lower recivers) They were junk rifles. Still I managed to shoot expert with one. We learned to make due with little. The guys serving now have it so much better.
We did see improvments during shield/storm. Mostly from the Army stuff we stole to replace our junk. (thanks Army!) I think the m-4 is a good weapon. I would like to see a return to a 308 for the service rifle. I doubt it will ever happen.
Another concern I have is all the optics now being used. I wonder how many weapons using optics are battle zeroed on the iron sights?
Here's some second hand info. A friend of mine from high school and still is a friend joined the army and has been to Iraq twice.
He said that the Special Forces guys carry whatever they want. He seen them regularly with AKs. He also said that they were allowed to leave base whenever they wanted. Wore those man dresses that the Iraq civilians wore and grew beards.
Sounded to me like they probably wanted to blend in more than they found the AK more reliable than the M4.
My buddy was a mechanic and had an AK stripped and stashed away in different tool boxes. They threatened them enough before coming back about bringing things back that he thought better and got rid of it. I did get some Iraq money from him with Husseien face on it...pretty cool to have. Also gave my wife some pressed flowers from one of his palaces.
I'm gonna come off as extremely baised towards the Marines, so no offense to the Army guys. I served in the infantry in the Marines and did two tours in Iraq. A couple points why I think the M4 and M-249SAW failed in the Said name firefight we are talking about. Iraq and Afghanistan both have extreme weather conditions that blow sand and grit into weapons on a daily basis. That is why you give each weapon a brush off everyday and oil and lube the weapon everytime you leave the wire. Another factor with the M4 would be the magizines the same issues occur with sand buildup. We were told on a regular basis to remove the rounds from our magizines and clean the mags then put them back into the mags to ensure the magizines were clean and could be trusted in the event of a firefight. I don't know if this technique was followed or not, It makes me lean towards not. Comparing the Army's gear to the Marines gear was laughable because they always had better gear and guns than us. I believe the failure on the M4, and SAW was operator error and now a manufacturer flaw in weaponery. In my experience both weapons mentioned work great if oiled and lubed correctly, with the exception of an occasional jam with the SAW wich can be cleared easily with a trained operator. Just my two cents. Casey USMC 02-06
Not true. During the pre-invasion, AK's were encouraged in USASOC as the M4 is a tell tale sign of US or Isralei forces. For handguns, we were issued.40 High Powers or 9 mm CZ 75's. Then again, that was USASOC, not regular army. They are still allowed the choice of firearms provided that you remain proficient with it and the armoror signs off on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
To fix the problems with the M4, you are 100% correct. It is the loose nut behind the handle (the operator). Oil, especially CLP, cooks off when the gun heats up, leaving it dry. You have to use a thicker oil or grease to keep the gun running. Larry Vickers gave me a tube of MillComm TW 25-B and that stuff is amazing. He got it approved for all of us in USASOC. It doesn't cook off, and it doesn't collect dirt. I've used it ever since. The gun doesn't need to be fully cleaned every day, just properly lubed. As Larry Vickers is known for saying, "your gun will run clean and wet, and dirty and wet, but will eventually fail if dry (clean or dirty)."
An AR is better oiled. I think the gas system is the weak point of it and the piston conversions are the answer.
OK, you got me there. SOCOM did/does allow a lot of latitude in weapons selection to match the mission. I would counter the reason for the weapons change for SOCOM personnel isn't the reason of this discussion and therefore not really relevant. The SOCOM weapons change is/was to reduce/negate the tactics, techniques, and practices (TTPs) signature of it's personnel, and has nothing to do with mechanical difficulties. I will also state this practice essentially disappeared and was unauthorized (unless prior approval from the OIF SOF commander based on mission requirements was granted) after the first 18 months of the war. For the most part, the majority of SOF I worked with were carrying M-4's. There was a ton of modification allowed on their weapons, but I would figure 80-90% of them started out with with the current issued versions of the M-4/M-16 platforms. The mass majority of weapon change to AK's and the various pistols stemmed from SOF counterintelligence gathering missions.Quote:
Originally Posted by coloccw
The counterintelligence (CI) structure was a total F'ed up mess in the beginning of the war. Most of the CI info the SOF was using to target bad-guys with was being self-gathered. The CI mission finally got on track, and the necessity for the SOF units to be self-reliant in this area drastically disappeared. There were/are still times when this mission is being handled by SOF (operations in the Fallujah area come to mind) , but more and more they have learned it's adventageous to pull in trained CI gatherers (and train them as part of the SOF team) adding them to the team instead of training one of their own. Ironically, this philosophy led SOCOM to request CI support from the mainstream troops. SOCOM, being a joint command and could request this support from any of the four branches, requested the CI agents from the USAF.
Oops, I'm rambling... I have more info on this. Let me know if you want to hear any more as I've gone completely 'left turn' from the topic. I lived this stuff from the CI side.
No info needed, I was there (the USASOC side).