testtest

What Really Went Wrong With the M16 in Vietnam

Here though they took a fundamentally sound design, then specified a different powder type than the designer had intended, resulting in much more dirt/crud ( which on this design is blown directly into the action)in the weapon. You compound this by not initially issuing cleaning gear . Troops initially told the weapon does not need to be cleaned. Plus the design doesn’t not include a method to push a round into the chamber if it fouls . What could possibly go wrong?
 
Shibadog said:
Here though they took a fundamentally sound design, then specified a different powder type than the designer had intended, resulting in much more dirt/crud ( which on this design is blown directly into the action)in the weapon. You compound this by not initially issuing cleaning gear . Troops initially told the weapon does not need to be cleaned. Plus the design doesn’t not include a method to push a round into the chamber if it fouls . What could possibly go wrong?
Click to expand...
Yep, this exactly. A fine example of what happens when the bean counters choose your weapons and ammo.
 
I read a good history of the US Ordinance a few years ago. Amazing stuff. Like “during the Civil War ALL Union troops could have been equipped with lever action repeaters (Henry and Spencer) before the end of 1863-didn’t happen because those in charge said they’d “waste” ammunition”🙄. Like the Army issued the Trapdoor Springfields following the war (even though the HAD thousands of Spencer’s and Henry’s in inventory. Consequently at Little BigHorn Custer’s men carried the Springfield, yet on the battlefield they have found a lot of .44 Rimfire, 56/50 Spencer and .44 WCF cartridge cases. The Indians were better armed than the army. Trapdoor still in use by National Guard troops in the Spanish American war….M! Garand designed around .276 Peterson in the 1920’s (10 rd en bloc clip)Rejected because we had too much 30-06 ammo in storage, was redesigned for the ‘06. Like 7.62 forced on our allies in NATO even though recoil made it difficult to control in full auto…. And then there’s the whole M-16 debacle. As originally designed the 16 has a very slow twist barrel. Result was a barely stabilized bullet. Consequently the bullet upset easily when it struck and caused damage all out of proportion to its size. That worked great, BUT it wouldn’t penetrate body armor as desired. Consequently they changed rifling to a very fast twist, overstabilizing the bullet. Now it penetrates as desired but it’s lethality is markedly less. Your tax $$ at work.
 
Chrome lining the barrel and chamber was a huge improvement.

I fired many thousands of rounds through AR rifles starting with M16's in 1970 and ranging through M4's. I have always meticulously cleaned my guns and have never needed a forward assist. They come out of a long firing session filthy dirty inside but still operate. However, based on my knowledge of the operation of direct impingement systems, I have settled on a piston driven AR (SIG 516 Carbon Fiber) for my primary AR rifle. I have run that rifle through several instructor courses and it runs trouble free. It just runs much cleaner.
 
HayesGreener said:
Chrome lining the barrel and chamber was a huge improvement.

I fired many thousands of rounds through AR rifles starting with M16's in 1970 and ranging through M4's. I have always meticulously cleaned my guns and have never needed a forward assist. They come out of a long firing session filthy dirty inside but still operate. However, based on my knowledge of the operation of direct impingement systems, I have settled on a piston driven AR (SIG 516 Carbon Fiber) for my primary AR rifle. I have run that rifle through several instructor courses and it runs trouble free. It just runs much cleaner.
Click to expand...
Nobody ever needs a forward assist until they do 😂
 
HayesGreener said:
Chrome lining the barrel and chamber was a huge improvement.

I fired many thousands of rounds through AR rifles starting with M16's in 1970 and ranging through M4's. I have always meticulously cleaned my guns and have never needed a forward assist. They come out of a long firing session filthy dirty inside but still operate. However, based on my knowledge of the operation of direct impingement systems, I have settled on a piston driven AR (SIG 516 Carbon Fiber) for my primary AR rifle. I have run that rifle through several instructor courses and it runs trouble free. It just runs much cleaner.
Click to expand...
That plus using the correct type of powder made the AR quite reliable. The powder used in initial testing worked great. The stuff the military switched to… not so much. Once they went back to the stuff Stoner intended to use, problem basically resolved.
 
Yea, the Govt should have cancelled it since it likely wouldn't have amounted to anything ;)

But, as indicated above messing around with the original specs, and rushing it into service without the proper kit and training for it caused alot of problems in use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top