The M-16

Asher · March 28, 2003, 21:45

I've heard from some people that the M-16 isn't the greatest weapon in the world, and I am somewhat surprised to hear that it's still very widely used in today's troops in Iraq.

Can any of you military people explain to me why the M-16 is still in use, why is it good/bad, and what alternatives are there?

Kontiki · March 28, 2003, 21:52

The M-16 is one of the older assault rifles in use, but there have been several upgrade programs on it over the years, so it's still a top-notch weapon. There may be slightly better rifles available, but not dramatically so. The US military (don't know which branch, or if it was a DoD thing) did explore other options but wanted a rifle that could achieve a 100% (IIRC) improvement in accuracy. The "contenders" failed to achieve this benchmark, so they didn't go ahead with it.

As for alternatives, there are so many, it would be impossible to mention here. A great site is http://world.guns.ru/ Check out the assault rifles section.

MichaeltheGreat · March 28, 2003, 21:54

The M4 carbine variant is probably in equally wide use, or pretty close. The reason the M16 is still in use is because it's cheap, it's fairly lightweight, Colt and other contractors have good lobbyists, and we spend more time on pie in the sky toys than basics. Nobody wants a better rifle, at least nobody in the procurement business - they want phasers if they're going to replace the M-16.

As for better replacements, the Swiss FASS 90 (SG 550 by Sig Sauer), the Austrian Steyr AUG, or the Israeli IMI Tavor series all kick ass over the M-16, although all require a bit more maintenance in the field.

Asher · March 28, 2003, 21:56

Steyr AUG was my weapon-of-choice back when I played Counter-Strike. Very accurate and powerful.

Zopperoni · March 28, 2003, 21:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Asher
and what alternatives are there?

AK-47

Promethus · March 28, 2003, 22:09

Asher

Look Here http://mwilson.hypermart.net/views/guns/m16.html

DinoDoc · March 29, 2003, 01:55

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
they want phasers

Wouldn't you?

MichaeltheGreat · March 29, 2003, 02:11

Well, yeah, but not if I couldn't have anything better than the M16A2 until I got them.

DinoDoc · March 29, 2003, 02:15

Ok. I'll make an on topic post now. How would you rate the potential of the OICW at replacing the M-16?

Alinestra Covelia · March 29, 2003, 02:20

And does the FNP90 count as a contender or is cross-calibre comparison not allowed?

MichaeltheGreat · March 29, 2003, 02:26

None. The ****ing thing is too heavy, and requires too much maintenance. It will likely be adopted for specialist use, like you may break down a squad to have a SAW man as a fire team leader, and an OICW man as a fire team leader, but I don't see it being more than a one weapon per squad sort of thing, with the exception that it would be available as needed for SOF use.

Alinestra - cross caliber comparison is always valid from a ballistic standpoint, but not very valid from a possibility of procurement standpoint. 5.56 mm is too entrenched in US and NATO use to readily go away, especially with the M249 SAW replacing the M60 as the common heavy weapon for infantry squads. A big selling point of the SAW was commonality of caliber.

Jon Miller · March 29, 2003, 02:51

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc

Wouldn't you?

ever read any Gordon Dickson?

Jon Mller

Gatekeeper · March 29, 2003, 03:26

MtG:

Seriously: Are the eggheads even close to developing some sort of hand-held energy/beam-based weapon to either complement or replace projectile weapons such as the M-16? You'd think they'd be able to start miniaturizing some of these lasers (and powering them up) that they 've had since, what?, the 1960s.

Gatekeeper

KrazyHorse · March 29, 2003, 03:43

You can make a portable laser that'll output a couple of watts in a tight beam (I've used em). Enough to burn a hole through someone's body...

Three problems:

a) What's your power source?
b) Why? A bullet's as (or more) destructive.
c) I'd be cautious about using it extensively for more than a couple of minutes. Without a hell of a big heat sink the surface will be melting in a bit.

Anything stronger than that (say a portable tank-killer) is more problematic. You're talking industrial laser cutters at that point. Which aren't portable and which chew up a hell of a lot of energy on the input side.

KrazyHorse · March 29, 2003, 03:47

Oh, and the laser will **** up more often than a projectile weapon.

Smudge the lens and see what happens...

Jon Miller · March 29, 2003, 04:03

that was (sort of) the point of Gordon Dickson

he predicted that all the advance stuff would have more advance countermeasures

Jon Miller

The Mad Monk · March 29, 2003, 04:10

You can tell it's swell, it's Mattel!

Ned · March 29, 2003, 04:55

what we need is a rifle that incorporates GPS technology to sight the weapon.

Az · March 29, 2003, 05:07

Reminds me of that "Beverly Hills Cop" rifle/Stereo/Microwave thingee.

FrustratedPoet · March 29, 2003, 06:32

Some crucial info about the M16:

Quote:

The M16 route starts in the south at the A1(m) with the existing Peterborough A605 southern bypass renamed to the A16. It continues north as the M16 until reaching the M17, whose route it shares until branching off to form a west of Boston route (it works out not to share and dual the railway origin road that is the A16 now because of the way eastward travelling traffic would branch on to this road - the alternative is junctions to the A52 via Hubberts Bridge). The M16 opens up eastern Lincolnshire and its resorts and market towns, but is an alternative route north for national traffic.

Oh .... were you talking about the gun? Damn.

Sikander · March 29, 2003, 06:44

"This just in....Apparantly someone with an M-16 has just opened up in eastern Lincolnshire. More details as they emerge..."

Paul Hanson · March 29, 2003, 07:53

Hang on...there are no motorways in Lincolnshire! You lie!

KrazyHorse · March 30, 2003, 00:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
what we need is a rifle that incorporates GPS technology to sight the weapon.

GPS is no good to less than a metre.

Skanky Burns · March 30, 2003, 00:53

If the enemy were really fat...

KrazyHorse · March 30, 2003, 00:57

It would be easier to have a direct targetting system on the weapon (shortwave radar?)

They probably already are testing that sort of stuff on AT weaponry. Wouldn't be too hard to do (pulling this out of my ass)

Oerdin · March 30, 2003, 01:09

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
As for better replacements, the Swiss FASS 90 (SG 550 by Sig Sauer), the Austrian Steyr AUG, or the Israeli IMI Tavor series all kick ass over the M-16, although all require a bit more maintenance in the field.

The Steyr AUG is used by several neutral countries like Ireland and is popular because it is cheap and lighter then an M-16 or AK-47. The problem is the magazine is feed into the stock behand the trigger housing so when soldiers are firing from the prone, unsupported position the magazine often rests on the ground. This often results in misfeeds which cause the rifle to jam.

The Sig Sauer and IMI both are excellent rifles but the tend to be more expensive then your average M-16. Personally, I would like take a mini M-14 (excellent sniper rifle plus it is light weight and can still lay down impressive surpressing fire) or SAW. The problem with the SAW is it is made by FN ( large French defense contractor) and has a reputation for being a very delicate weapon. When it is working though it is highly accurate and is very versitile (can use either magazine or belt feed; single, semi, or full auto with a built in bipod).

The Mad Monk · March 30, 2003, 03:57

The problem with the SAW is it is made by FN ( large French defense contractor) and has a reputation for being a very delicate weapon.

Why does this not surprise me? (

)

MichaeltheGreat · March 30, 2003, 04:59

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
The problem with the SAW is it is made by FN ( large French defense contractor) and has a reputation for being a very delicate weapon.

Why does this not surprise me? (

)

It should surprise you.

FN is a Belgian company, not French, based in Herstal, Belgium, and back in 1898, it entered into a design collaboration with John Browning, so a lot of FN's, Colt's and Browning's design history is intermingled.

The M249 SAW is produced in Columbia, SC, USA, by the FNMI subsidiary. All LMG's tend to be delicate weapons, because of the very complex design requirements. The M63 Stoner, which is a classic LMG design from Eugene Stoner, was rejected for service except by the SEAL establishment, due to it's maintainability problems with normal troops.