Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “First M16 Rifles in the Vietnam War” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/first-m16-rifles-in-the-vietnam-war/.
First M16 Rifles in the Vietnam War
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Annihilator
Hellion
Good read, thanks Mike!Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “First M16 Rifles in the Vietnam War” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/first-m16-rifles-in-the-vietnam-war/.
. A walk down memory lane.Dchiefransom
Alpha
Is it true the Army messed with the ammunition enough that engineers had to change aspects of the action?
The Night Rider
Hellcat
It's weird to me that everybody hated the M16 and now all of a sudden it's to go to.
I wonder if it would have been a better rifle if it had a slightly heavier bullet or a slightly larger caliber bullet.
I wonder if it would have been a better rifle if it had a slightly heavier bullet or a slightly larger caliber bullet.
D
Deleted member
Guest
If Robert McNamera wasn’t so cheap and listened to the engineers, the US death toll in Vietnam would have been far lower.
I carried the XM16E1, then later the XM177E2 (Colt 629) in the Central Highlands in 67-68. Both were trusted enough to bet your life on. Keep it clean and it worked every time. That dumb move by the Ordnance Dept. to switch to ball powder from Stoner's suggested stick powder got a lot of guys killed ... just to save some money.
Smiledon#57
Operator
As a young lad, I slept many a night with the M-16a1.
Today, I have that in a more modern version and I also have the AR-10.
Today, I have that in a more modern version and I also have the AR-10.
To me it seemed more urban tuner mill stuff with fokks trying to kill it. A great friend from the Air Guard whem I got out of active was 3rd Marines in Vietnam said the M16 was a great rifle and worked fine.
The thing that kept us from winning super quick was McNamara and party micro managing. Can’t prove it but believe that is why LeMay retired. Had they allowed the F105s to take out Migs and Mig airfields instead or passing them up and sis the air campaign with B52’s they did at Linebacker II. In 2 weeks they had NV tapping out.
I was stationed at a B52 base in the 80’s and a few of our commanders were guests of the Hanoi Hilton and they were only shot down because the senior leaders were incompetent. Had yjen start a turn right after bomb release instead of flying straight for several miles. When they turned theor ECM antenna was facing the wrong way and couldn’t deflect SAM signals. Flying straight they xoukd on the B52 G anyway
But that’s another topic
HayesGreener
Ronin
Agreed! He was a gun guy for sure. I did many protection details in OSI in the 70's. Gen LeMay would show up at various functions. We were briefed that he was always armed with his 1911 and that if anything happened he would probably pull it and get in the fight.
Here is an older late 1950’s PPC shoot with General LeMay, notice the PPC targets and that one hand stance of that era!
Attachments
Doom
Alpha
There is at least one glaring error in this article. The original M16s did not use 5.56x45 NATO ammunition. The ammunition was designated 5.56 and fired a 55 gn FMJ through a 12 twist barrel. (Some of the test rifles sent to Viet Nam were 14 Twist). The 5.56x45 NATO round was developed and accepted for NATO use around 1981 with the 62gn SS109 bullet. The 5.56x45 NATO chamber is different that the original M16 chamber.Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “First M16 Rifles in the Vietnam War” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/first-m16-rifles-in-the-vietnam-war/.
It may have seemed “all of a sudden” but it was a long road to acceptance. And it’s still not there for some.
But most of theirs were Mattels, I hear.
That is a great observation and point.
I will add the slower twist rate is what lead to the bullet being unstable and yha whole “tumbling” was a byproduct not so MF a by design. New round they had some learning left to do.
While most here know this I explained the twist rate with the early M16’s as throwing a football. The more spin you put on it the more stable it is. Les’s spin it looks like an gyro bullets do a same thing until you find a sweet spot
USMC6094
Professional
Teething troubles aside, the M16s issues were brought on by the Gubment.
Seems the grunt carrying the thing didn't mean anything to the bureaucrat changing the powder the ammo was loaded with..
And don't forget that the 16 was touted as a "no cleaning required" replacement for the M14......
Whatever it's beginngs, the M16 has evolved into a sound, proven weapons system.
Seems the grunt carrying the thing didn't mean anything to the bureaucrat changing the powder the ammo was loaded with..
And don't forget that the 16 was touted as a "no cleaning required" replacement for the M14......
Whatever it's beginngs, the M16 has evolved into a sound, proven weapons system.
While true almost every piece of military gear gets oversold I would put some blame of Troops as well. Many bent barrels using them to torque “open” the bands on C Rats and ammo pallets.
We all have seen this. You leave some folks (especially Military and Corrections) alone for 5 minutes with an anvil and a sponge and when you come back the anvil is broke and nobody saw nothin!
IMO, should have been in a .308.......but no one asked me!
Switched to a powder NOT specified for 5.56. Result was extra burnt residue being dumped into the action via the direct impingement system. Result was jams and malfunctions (and dead GI’s). Solutions were (1) forward assist and (2) change to the type of powder originally spec’s be Gene Stoner.