edit. BTW High Speed Cruise is correct; Lynch was injured in a traffic accident prior to her capture....she never fired a round.

The Winning Photo for July,
ThePitbullofLove's Soviet gear
Please visit our forum sponsors
| About this site |
|---|
| C&R Dealer Links | General Related Links |
| The Member's Map | The Gun Control Forum |
Due to the main focus of this site on the collecting and shooting
of C&R and military surplus firearms in their collectible original configurations,
sporterising topics will not be permitted in these fourms.
Thankyou,
ParallaxBill
Parallax's Trader Boards
See the new location at the bottom of the forum list
**Membership applications no longer required to post but you still must be registered.**
No dealers please!
Back in Production, New and Improved
Darrell's Scout Mount Page & Forum
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
eagle7 |
|||
|
Don't blame the Pfc Lynch debacle on the M16. The problem with the "blonde's" unit was that there was a lack of leadership at every level.
There was a DA investigation of the fiasco and one of the findings was that weapons cleaning/maintenance was a very low priority task. All of the unit's
weapons were in poor shape - to include crew served machineguns. Like many support units at that time, the officer and NCO leaders were still in the
"peacetime mode". Besides fielding weapons that were dirty, damaged, and in a few cases assembled incorrectly, that transportation unit had maps they
didn't know how to read, GPSs that were non-mission capable, and SINCGARS radios that were not working or had incorrect cipher "fills". In other
words, they couldn't fight, didn't know where they were or where they were going, and couldn't talk to anybody......a great recipe for failure
especially when you wander into enemy territory. IIRC, the company commander was held responsible.....I recall the phrase "dereliction of duty" was
used to describe his performance. BTW, when the Iraqis attacked his unit, the good captain ran off "to get help". All of this was kept "hush,
hush" in the spririt of sparing the Army any more embarrassment. The media's breathless reporting of the initial "firefight" and
"daring rescue" of the female PFC were nothing more than a smokescreen.
edit. BTW High Speed Cruise is correct; Lynch was injured in a traffic accident prior to her capture....she never fired a round.
Last Edited By: eagle7
10/23/08 04:08 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
dou 44 |
|||
|
i do not know about the a4 because i never carried one but we had trouble with the a3 jamming even if it did not have sand in it, a1-had its problems but i
liked it better .i never did get to like the 3 rnd burst.
|
|||
bhp9 |
|||
|
Quote:
Don't blame the Pfc Lynch debacle on the M16. The problem with the "blonde's" unit was that there was a lack of leadership at every level. There was a DA investigation of the fiasco and one of the findings was that weapons cleaning/maintenance was a very low priority task. Reply: No amount of excuses will cancel out the unvarnished truth. The M16's did not work that day and the AK47's did. Since both types of weapons had not been maintained this shows how inferior the M16 is to the AK47. |
|||
Jeremy2171 |
|||
|
Well we didn't get the Iraq Army report of how many AKs jammed that day but I can assure you they jam and can be a POS just like any other weapon. I've
been on the firing line and had more AKs jam than M16s/M4s.
There was a complete lack of preventative maintenance on her units weapons...there was a lack of training...and a lack of leadership. The one 50cal was brand new and unloaded when recovered by Weapons Co, 1stBn 2ndMarines. That 50cal was used later that day when one of their 50cals went down...it ran like a top for the rest of the war until they had to give it back to the Army. My M4 never failed in 14 months of Iraqi sand....as a matter of fact I was lucky and had two M4s....my one "range" gun was not cleaned for the last 9 months and was ran dry (no lube) with one stoppage due to a bad mag. My range gun was fired every week and had near to 10,000 rounds put through it in my time there. A dirty AK with dirty/damaged mags will jam just like an M16/M4 will. If there had been "any" PM done on the Lynch convoys weapons they would have performed much better.....but for all intents and purposes her convoys fate was sealed when they drove through the Marines forward lines into the Iraqi rear area.....the M16s working or not wouldn't have saved them...... |
|||
ParallaxBill |
|||
|
Thanks for the facts based on your own experiences Jeremy. I trust your experience over the rumors and hearsay any day. We all appreciate your knowledgeable
input.
BTW, hope to see you at the Charlotte match come Nov. 29 if you can make it.
Parallax
Lee Enfield Collector's Society member #3 Mauser Shooter's Association member #17 Forum administrator for the Carolina C&R Shooting & Collecting Club, |
|||
Mountain Doctor |
|||
ParallaxBill wrote: Copy that Bill |
|||
eagle7 |
|||
|
My M16A2 never failed me during my three months in Iraq (March - June 2003) because I cleaned it EVERYDAY, and inspected my magazines for function . I
didn't hear of any failures of M16s or M4s in my unit, or with any M16A2/M4s of the guys attached to us, because we took weapons maintenance seriously.
When we established a base of operations in East Baghdad, I was tasked with securing all captured weapons and ammunition. I can honestly tell you that many of
the assorted AK47s, AKMs, AKMSs, and RPKs (all Kalashnikov design) were in sorry shape after constant use, abuse, and neglect. Some were victims of Iraqi
bubbas that did home gunsmithing on them. When we starting rearming the Iraqi police forces and paramilitary units I QCed every AK that was issued, to include
test firing some of them. At least 10% were junked out because they were total crap. That added up to about 60 weapons scrapped out. We had a joke about the
Iraqis and the maintenance of their weapons; we used to say that there must have been only one cleaning kit issued to the entire Iraqi Army. Their ammo quality
was variable too. The Eastern European made 7.62x39 was good stuff, but any ammo with arabic headstamp markings was crap.....a lot of duds and underpowered
rounds. I was shooting a captured Russian SKS once, and twice had to punch out bullets wedged in the bore from underpowered cartridges. Imagine what would have
happened to an Iraqi using this ammo in an AK that he was firing on automatic. I don't know if this ammo was Iraqi, Syrian, Egyptian, or Jordanian made,
but it was crap.....I wouldn't want to stake my life on it. BTW, the arabic stamp 9mm Luger ammo was crap too.
The M16 family of weapons has taken a lot of heat for reliability, and it was richly deserved with the M16s issued in the mid-1960s. Many of the initial problems were due to cost cutting shortcuts in it's manufacture (like no forward assist to manually push the bolt into the locked position), and the misconception that it didn't require cleaning in the field (this idea came from the "deep thinkers" at the Pentagon). I guess the old saying "the first impression is a lasting impression" applies to the M16. The only functional fault of the M16 is that a double feed jam is a son of a gun to clear....but the only times I've seen this happen was on Basic Training rifle ranges |
|||
7GREEN |
|||
|
I still don't trust the M-16 and its clones due to its welded up gas system. The M-14-like the M-1-has a gas system that CAN be cleaned by the user and
is not sensitive to "changes in powder"-in war you often have to use what industry can provide, not what you'd like.
I found the story about the weapons in Jessica Lynch's unit being in poor shape. I recall a post by a board member and veterand of the Coed Army wherein he complained of a female armorer who let his unit's weapons fall into bad shape-but she was promoted anyway. My AD days are long behind me but I do remember that in Germany you cleaned your weapon whenever you returned it to the Arms Room, whether it was after an FTX, Guard Duty, whatever. I have heard in the Clinton Era Army weapons became like the family silver-brought out so rarely that no one had any real familiarity with it, when they needed it, it required a lot of work to make it presentable And Lynch's CO CDR "ran off to get help". At Mylai Medina sent the troops ahead under Calley while he stayed back at the LZ to "coordinate support." Nothing new there. |
|||
maxima2 |
|||
bhp9 wrote:
I don't think the military will have the money to field a new rifle for quite a while, but we'll see.
|
|||
derGewehr98 |
How about... | ||
|
the Mosin-Nagant 91/30 or 44 and variants? They are robust, easy to operate, does not seem to break and they are CHEAP!
Ammo isn't too badly priced either. Surplus, of course. Seriously, any replacement needs to be tested thoroughly and objectively under as many battlefield conditions by the very men and women that will depend on them for their lives. Then we should obtain the license to manufacture the weapon system here. We may have to import our oil but it would be a crying shame to have to import our weapons. Sorry, I'll get off my soap box now. |
|||
Mountain Doctor |
|||
|
I am very strong in my opinion that we should definitely not be importing our weapons. The same applies to the raw materials of war. I have read, and I'm
not sure if it's completely correct, that this country no longer produce is its own steel of adequate quality for high-grade weapons. I believe that this
material is currently coming from overseas, Japan in particular. Again, I cannot completely verify this, but if it is the case, I find it totally unacceptable.
Another raw material of war, that we rarely seem to consider in this way, is oil. I say, anywhere in this country, or off of our shores, where there is so much
a puddle of oil, there should be a drilling rig.
|
|||
eagle7 |
|||
|
Mountain Doctor, we no longer produce steel in any volume. During the 1970s and 1980s the governments of Japan and South Korea massively subsidized their steel
industries, thereby underpricing American steel and putting our foundries out of business. They also did the same thing in the ship building industry.
Here is a reality check for everyone. There will be NO replacement for the M4/M16A2 family of weapons in the foreseeable future. Depending how this election goes, there is an excellent possibility that the DoD will be facing massive budget cuts to pay for more financial bailouts, "free" health care, more government bureaucracies, etc..... If the generals and admirals have any money left in the Defense budget, it will go to strategic weapon development, not a new battle rifle. In the eyes of the the Pentagon's higher hierarchy (both military and civilian), the M16A2/M4s are "good enough for government work". Specialized units may get better small arms, but that will be a drop in the bucket. Look at American history. The Great Depression put the brakes on American small arms procurement for over a decade. The M1 Garand was developed over a ten year time span (1926 - 1936), and although it was formally adopted in '36 the Marines still carrying M1903 Spgflds on Guadalcanal in late 1942. The M16 is the M1903 of the 21 Century....good enough until the USA faces a fight for it's national survival. In my years in the military I have seen one M16 replacement after another appear with much fanfare, only to quietly disappear down the "memory hole". Starting in the mid-1980s different assault rifle prototypes were written up in glowing terms in publications like Army Times, Soldier Magazine, Popular Mechanics, American Rifleman, etc... I remember a HK assault rifle that fired caseless ammo. Then there was a modular weapon prototype that could be transformed from an assault rifle to a light machine gun, to a smg, or to a sniper rifle by swapping out components. Back around 2002 there was the "Land Warrior" contraption with video cameras, thermal sights, and every other gimmick that was supposed to be the future of small arms. I also remember an assault rifle that had a semiautomatic magazine fed rifle grenade barrel slung under the rifle barrel (it was 20mm IIRC). The reality was that I qualified in basic with a M16A1, and finished my career twenty years later carrying a M16A2. I read an article in the latest Army Times about the new replacement for the M249 SAW. That is a good thing because I was never impressed with the durability or reliability of the old squad automatic weapon. IMO the parts were too small and fragile....FN downscaled the parts too much from their 7.62Nato squad weapons. The replacement of the SAW reminds me of the replacement of the ragged out old M60mg with the FN M240B......a change that was long needed. |
|||
jjk308 |
|||
|
Here's an April 2007 article on the Tavor and some comments, many rebutting the belief that it's reliable.
http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003408.html I've also found it interesting that most complaints are about the M4 carbine, and that the USMC doesn't seem to have any problems with its full length M16A4s. I'd bet the problem is in care of the weapons, the M4 often being issued to support units. Anyone who wants to go back to the M14 should be required to pack it and a full combat load of as many rounds of 7.62 as are normally carried for the M16 and see how they feel about it after a few days. |
|||
Smokepole50 |
|||
|
I wish you guys could shoot my 6.5 Grendel with its 16" barrel. It is IMO exactly what the M16 needs. It is an even more impressive round out of a 20 inch
barrel. The big plus is it only requires a barrel, bolt and new mag to convert any M4 or M16 out there. IMO it is a much better bullet wieght and bullet design
choice with only a few less rounds in the magazine. The 6.8 SPC offers the same ease of conversion but less all around performance. It is a no brainer as I see
it. Just stop making so much 5.56 ammo and start producing Grendel ammo and Grendel barrel/bolt/mags. When a M16 or M4 come in for a new barrel convert it to
Grendel. When you get enough converted start issueing them to whole battallions.
Smokepole50 |
|||