View Single Post
Old March 20, 2000, 01:40 PM   #22
Edmund Rowe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 1998
Location: Warner Robins, GA USA
Posts: 351
M-16s in Gulf War: I heard that way before the fighting started that troops found they had to clean them often and dry lube helped since wet oil tended to attract the dusty sand.

Once the shooting started I never heard of any problems. Of course, with all that time to prep with BUFFs, arty, A-10s, F-111s etc. and the attack supported with MBTs, Bradleys, and whatnot it was pretty tough to get a rifle into action most of the time.

Back in Grenada I heard the Ranger's appraisal of their M-16s was, "When we shot the Cubans they fell down."

Note that I hear there is a world of difference between the M-16A1 and the M-16A2. One Marine I knew who was involved in the transition described them as "Different as night and day." Culver makes a good point that the M-16A2 is almost as heavy as an M-14 but with the downgrade in bullet performance.

I've heard a lot of the nightmare stories of the early M-16s. UGH. The transition was apparently rammed down the grunts' throats overnight with hardly a day of training on the new rifles.

According to the book, "The Black Rifle" a big part of the problem was the -16 was billed as "self-cleaning". I dunno what it is about US military procurement but there seems to be an unwritten rule on overselling the products merits. Back in the 60s-70s the F-15 fighter was billed as "never needing depot overhaul." Guess what I did for 8 years?? F-15 depot overhaul Engineering!! I hear similar "no depot maintenance" claims on stuff like the F-22 and the Comanche and I roll my eyes.

Also, Peter G. Kokalis (SOF small arms editor) has said repeatedly that just about ALL new military small arms have early problems. Even the M1 Garand had them. Unfortunately, it seems our military is set up so that our teething problems are 10 times worse than what they could/should be.

Culver's article on the IMR/ball powder/chamber problem of early M-16s is the best I've seen on the subject.

The future? Fortunately it seems that most of the world's militaries are going to micro-caliber performance, so for the most part grunts will all be in the same ballistic disadvantage. i.e. everyone will have about 200-300 yards effective range. Might be very good news for the sniper community.

The USMC may be on the right track with their Designated Marksman concept putting some 7.62 NATO riflemen back in each squad.

Edmund
Edmund Rowe is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.02998 seconds with 8 queries