Did Weapons Fail U.S. Troops During Afghanistan Assault?

Status
Not open for further replies.
So many shooters today are in love with the AR and talk about it's great accuracy and how the 5.56 "really isn't under powered', but the rifle DOES need far more maintanence than it should under combat conditions and is prone to failure at the time it is needed most.
Politics and economics have been it's beat allies for 30+ years.
I have learned to love the AK and Galil and trust them completely.
Granted the AR has a slight advantage in accuracy but I KNOW that AK is going to go bang when I need it.
Our troops do NOT have the best.
 
Worst nightmare.

I never had to go to war with my M-16 (thank God,) but as a range NCO on the MCAS Yuma rifle range I saw literally millions of rounds go down range. It was not uncommon to a half dozen (at least) alibi-worthy malfunctions per day (alibi-worthy meaning not the shooter's fault.)

Let's see - 4 relays (minimum, usually more like 5 or 6) times 30 shooters time 50 rounds each = 6000 rounds per day. Conservative estimate of about 6 alibi-worthy malfunctions = 0.1% failure rate. Sure a 0.1% failure rate doesn't seem like a lot, but that's in training with well maintained weapons that get checked into the armory every night....

The M9 (Beretta 92FS) wasn't much better. That open slide is a gunk magnet.
 
I'll say upfront that I have never served in the military. My experience with military style weapons has been limited to civilian versions. Even the heaviest range trip isn't going to equal the demands or conditions that a service rifle sees. I also know that my AR's like to be run wet. Running them wet also attracts dirt and crud. In a sandy environment I would think that would increase the chances of a stoppage.

My AR's are remarkably reliable under the conditions that I use them. I'm usually not betting my life on the rifle(s) going bang each and every time. I'd like to hear from some Veterans regarding the issue of reliability.

I know this topic has been argued before and I'm sure it will be argued ad infinitum. Having said that, if you're a vet, were you confident that the weapons you were issued were reliable under combat conditions? Did you have any experiences that reinforced your opinion or cause you to change your mind?

(Full story below, in case you're behind a firewall or can't access the article)

WASHINGTON – In the chaos of an early morning assault on a remote U.S. outpost in eastern Afghanistan, Staff Sgt. Erich Phillips' M4 carbine quit firing as militant forces surrounded the base. The machine gun he grabbed after tossing the rifle aside didn't work either.

When the battle in the small village of Wanat ended, nine U.S. soldiers lay dead and 27 more were wounded. A detailed study of the attack by a military historian found that weapons failed repeatedly at a "critical moment" during the firefight on July 13, 2008, putting the outnumbered American troops at risk of being overrun by nearly 200 insurgents.

Which raises the question: Eight years into the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, do U.S. armed forces have the best guns money can buy?

Despite the military's insistence that they do, a small but vocal number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq has complained that the standard-issue M4 rifles need too much maintenance and jam at the worst possible times.

A week ago, eight U.S. troops were killed at a base near Kamdesh, a town near Wanat. There's no immediate evidence of weapons failures at Kamdesh, but the circumstances were eerily similar to the Wanat battle: insurgents stormed an isolated stronghold manned by American forces stretched thin by the demands of war.

Army Col. Wayne Shanks, a military spokesman in Afghanistan, said a review of the battle at Kamdesh is under way. "It is too early to make any assumptions regarding what did or didn't work correctly," he said.

Complaints about the weapons the troops carry, especially the M4, aren't new. Army officials say that when properly cleaned and maintained, the M4 is a quality weapon that can pump out more than 3,000 rounds before any failures occur.

The M4 is a shorter, lighter version of the M16, which made its debut during the Vietnam war. Roughly 500,000 M4s are in service, making it the rifle troops on the front lines trust with their lives.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a leading critic of the M4, said Thursday the Army needs to move quickly to acquire a combat rifle suited for the extreme conditions U.S. troops are fighting in.

U.S. special operations forces, with their own acquisition budget and the latitude to buy gear the other military branches can't, already are replacing their M4s with a new rifle.

"The M4 has served us well but it's not as good as it needs to be," Coburn said.

Battlefield surveys show that nearly 90 percent of soldiers are satisfied with their M4s, according to Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, head of the Army office that buys soldier gear. Still, the rifle is continually being improved to make it even more reliable and lethal.

Fuller said he's received no official reports of flawed weapons performance at Wanat. "Until it showed up in the news, I was surprised to hear about all this," he said.

The study by Douglas Cubbison of the Army Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., hasn't been publicly released. Copies of the study have been leaked to news organizations and are circulating on the Internet.

Cubbison's study is based on an earlier Army investigation and interviews with soldiers who survived the attack at Wanat. He describes a well-coordinated attack by a highly skilled enemy that unleashed a withering barrage with AK-47 automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades.

The soldiers said their weapons were meticulously cared for and routinely inspected by commanders. But still the weapons had breakdowns, especially when the rifles were on full automatic, which allows hundreds of bullets to be fired a minute.

The platoon-sized unit of U.S. soldiers and about two dozen Afghan troops was shooting back with such intensity the barrels on their weapons turned white hot. The high rate of fire appears to have put a number of weapons out of commission, even though the guns are tested and built to operate in extreme conditions.

Cpl. Jonathan Ayers and Spc. Chris McKaig were firing their M4s from a position the soldiers called the "Crow's Nest." The pair would pop up together from cover, fire half a dozen rounds and then drop back down.

On one of these trips up, Ayers was killed instantly by an enemy round. McKaig soon had problems with his M4, which carries a 30-round magazine.

"My weapon was overheating," McKaig said, according to Cubbison's report. "I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had only been about a half hour or so into the fight. I couldn't charge my weapon and put another round in because it was too hot, so I got mad and threw my weapon down."

The soldiers also had trouble with their M249 machine guns, a larger weapon than the M4 that can shoot up to 750 rounds per minute.

Cpl. Jason Bogar fired approximately 600 rounds from his M-249 before the weapon overheated and jammed the weapon.

Bogar was killed during the firefight, but no one saw how he died, according to the report.
 
I am a little confused. The soldier is po'd that it was overheating after firing 12 magazines. Well, yeah, it is going to be pretty hot after that. I would assume that the gas feedback mechanism is not helping much either, as it blasts hot gas back toward the chamber.

Not sure what can be done about that except for adding some sort of heat sink fins to the barrel, or carrying interchangeable barrels like they do for machine guns. If it were me, I would have a few canteens of water available for cooling the barrel.
 
Not sure what can be done about that except for adding some sort of heat sink fins to the barrel, or carrying interchangeable barrels like they do for machine guns. If it were me, I would have a few canteens of water available for cooling the barrel.

If it were you? If you know better than the guys there why dont you join them.
 
I am a little confused. The soldier is po'd that it was overheating after firing 12 magazines. Well, yeah, it is going to be pretty hot after that. I would assume that the gas feedback mechanism is not helping much either, as it blasts hot gas back toward the chamber.

Not sure what can be done about that except for adding some sort of heat sink fins to the barrel, or carrying interchangeable barrels like they do for machine guns. If it were me, I would have a few canteens of water available for cooling the barrel.

12 mags in 30 minutes is only about 12 rounds per minute. In a firefight, that's not very much. That's the point really - if the rifle can't deal with being in a short firefight it's probably not a very good rifle to give to guys that will be in firefights.

What to do? Not sure. Maybe an AK-style piston system is part of the answer.
 
So many shooters today are in love with the AR and talk about it's great accuracy and how the 5.56 "really isn't under powered', but the rifle DOES need far more maintanence than it should under combat conditions and is prone to failure at the time it is needed most.
Politics and economics have been it's beat allies for 30+ years.
I have learned to love the AK and Galil and trust them completely.
Granted the AR has a slight advantage in accuracy but I KNOW that AK is going to go bang when I need it.
Our troops do NOT have the best.

The M-16 based system is a good system, if properly cared for and the end user is up on their preventative maintenance. Properly cleaning, and lubing the weapon with a quality lube (not soaking it in CLP) will infinitely improve its reliability. I have always been lucky with my M4s, never any real issues. Yes they do exist, especially if the weapon isnt properly cared for. As I suspect is part of the issue in this story. The M249 and M9 are both pieces of shit, period. In the broad scheme of things there are better systems, and alternatives out there. I think the best, most economical option out there that has been looked at is swapping the upper out with a piston upper, like that on the 416. The 416 got great reviews in country, the only downside I saw was the increased weight. The issue is purely political with the next generation of weapons fielding. In the scheme of things, the cost to field uppers for the M4s in use now wouldnt be much more than the cost of a couple M1A2 tanks in reality. Every Soldier and Marine do not need an enhanced M4 but the actual warfighter does.
 
The problem with the weapons mentioned in this story is due to the barrels overheating. Not exactly a new phenomenon when fighting with weapons that fire bullets.

"The platoon-sized unit of U.S. soldiers and about two dozen Afghan troops was shooting back with such intensity the barrels on their weapons turned white hot. The high rate of fire appears to have put a number of weapons out of commission, even though the guns are tested and built to operate in extreme conditions."


I'm not sure what the story is here other than a tragedy that some of our own died.

Maybe the story should be about how they couldn't call in pre-emptive strikes and indirect fire to kill the enemy before they got close enough to deliver that kind of attack, not about barrels melting under the stress of hundreds of rounds fired.
 
I was never happy wth the gas system. Venting powder gases into the reciever is not a good idea.

Another problem may lie in the M4 design. The lighter the weapon, generally speaking, the faster it heats up. Guns designed for sustained automatic fire tend to be more solidly built and heavier. With these failures in mind, the military should carefully consider the needs of our troops in the field. This may require a design that provides more reliability under extended periods of full auto fire at the expense of portability. This may not be as easy as it sounds as our troops in the field are already heavily burdened.
 
"My weapon was overheating," McKaig said, according to Cubbison's report. "I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had only been about a half hour or so into the fight. I couldn't charge my weapon and put another round in because it was too hot, so I got mad and threw my weapon down."

If this is true you are only talking 12 rounds per/min, if that is causing weapons to overheat to the point were they fail and soldiers are dieing something is wrong. I don't know maybe it is an isolated incident, I am no expert on the combat history of the M4 nor it's barrel performance under sustained fire.
 
So many shooters today are in love with the AR and talk about it's great accuracy and how the 5.56 "really isn't under powered', but the rifle DOES need far more maintanence than it should under combat conditions and is prone to failure at the time it is needed most.
Politics and economics have been it's beat allies for 30+ years.
I have learned to love the AK and Galil and trust them completely.
Granted the AR has a slight advantage in accuracy but I KNOW that AK is going to go bang when I need it.
Our troops do NOT have the best.

I have spoken with quite a few guys who have used the platform in all manner of locals, and they were generally happy with the rifle. Perfect? Of course not, but not one true "been there done that" type I know from the various Tip O The Spear units had anything negative to say about it. Now, the rnd it shoots is another matter: some felt it did the job, some felt something with a little more thump would be better.
 
If this is true you are only talking 12 rounds per/min, if that is causing weapons to overheat to the point were they fail and soldiers are dieing something is wrong. I don't know maybe it is an isolated incident, I am no expert on the combat history of the M4 nor it's barrel performance under sustained fire.

I have had my bushmaster so hot that I sat it down for a while, and I generally only bring ~3 mags to the range, so a lot of time spent reloading in between shooting. The thing that struck me was that the barrel stays hot for a long time after it heats up. And I am using civy ammo, not the extra powder in the mil spec stuff. Is the slightly longer cartridge of the mil ammo the problem here? More prone to jamming?
 
I have had my bushmaster so hot that I sat it down for a while, and I generally only bring ~3 mags to the range, so a lot of time spent reloading in between shooting. The thing that struck me was that the barrel stays hot for a long time after it heats up. And I am using civy ammo, not the extra powder in the mil spec stuff. Is the slightly longer cartridge of the mil ammo the problem here? More prone to jamming?

Cpl. Jason Bogar put 600 rnds through his gun, in (I assume...) a fairly short period of time on full auto. That must make for one hell of a hot gun. RIP Cpl. Bogar [sad2]
 
If it were you? If you know better than the guys there why dont you join them.

This kind of sarcasm does not help your point, whatever your point is. [rolleyes]

And yes, we know you are some kind of shit hot HSLD type. We don't care.
 
These men are just youngins. They probably don't know spit about metalurgy. I would hope that in their training somewhere they were taught what to do about overheating barrels. I know in WWII, many a soldier pissed inside of the browning water cooling shroud after he ran out of water in a fire fight.
 
In my opinion, DI is an inherently flawed concept compared with the other options we have. I'm not saying we should have LS piston style weapons like the AK, but if we could field an SS piston rifle, I think US troops would be in much better shape.
 
The FM says that the thing is capable of 12 -15 rnds of sustained fire / minute so I seriously doubt that they were all space out at that cadence if the thing turned white hot and croaked on him.

I suspect that as long as there are weapons, soldiers will utilize them beyond their limits and complain about them. Some legitimate complaints, and some not so legitimate.

B
 
These men are just youngins. They probably don't know spit about metalurgy. I would hope that in their training somewhere they were taught what to do about overheating barrels. I know in WWII, many a soldier pissed inside of the browning water cooling shroud after he ran out of water in a fire fight.

I know they must know nothing about what their doing. You really should head over and train them, make hardened professionals out of them. Possibly carry all the extra water for them too.

This kind of sarcasm does not help your point, whatever your point is. [rolleyes]

And yes, we know you are some kind of shit hot HSLD type. We don't care.

Jose, we all know your a badass, if someone wants to criticize those serving then they may be able to contribute, I was serious. Dont get all butthurt.
 
My two pennies here.

I cringed when I saw that headline. The story wasn't much better.

For four years, I repaired weapons of all kinds for soldiers. I worked in support of Intel, INF and commo brigades. I literally repaired thousands and thousands of M16s, M4s, M9s, M203s etc.

I took my job very seriously knowing that lives depended on those weapons. I wanted my rifle to work if I needed to be in a firefight and I sure as hell wanted all weapons leaving my shop to be serviceable.

You can only do so much with the equipment given. If proper maintenance on all levels took place, then only over exerting the weapons themselves would cause wide spread malfunctions.

It really bothers me to think that a life might be lost due to a piece of equipment not being maintained.
 
I still contend that a wet rag draped over the barrel, and a little water poured into the chamber, BEFORE the barrel turned white hot, might have made a pretty big difference!

Plenty of access to over half of the barrel steel.

I thought if you got water in the barrel, it would explode. It says so in the Army FM.

Do you think that SS barrels would have held up better than the chromed barrels they were using? (What if the 600 rounds was spent in 15 minutes instead of 30 as reported? - A very, very hot barrel and action)
 
Is it just me or does 12 to 15 seem REALLY low?



GROUND PRECAUTIONARY MESSAGE
ACALA #97-03
DATE: R 051413Z NOV 96
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED (1nn)
SUBJECT: GROUND PRECAUTIONARY MESSAGE (GPM), 97-03 5.56MM M4A1 CARBINE

1. DISTRIBUTION: {MENU} THIS IS A GROUND PRECAUTIONARY MESSAGE THAT HAS NOT BEEN TRANSMITTED TO SUBORDINATE UNITS. SOCOM COMMANDERS WILL IMMEDIATELY RETRANSMIT THIS MESSAGE TO ALL SUBORDINATE UNITS, ACTIVITIES
OR ELEMENTS AFFECTED OR CONCERNED. RETRANSMITTAL SHALL REFERENCE THIS MESSAGE. SOCOM COMMANDERS WILL VERIFY RECEIPT WHEN RETRANSMITTING THIS MESSAGE BY SENDING AN INFO COPY OF THE RETRANSMITTAL TO DIRECTOR,
TACOM-ACALA, AMSTA-AC-ASIR, ROCK ISLAND, IL.

2. PROBLEM DISCUSSION:

A. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM: SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF COOK-OFFS, IN AND OUT OF BATTERY, AS WELL AS BURST BARRELS, HAVE OCCURRED WITH THE 5.56MM M4A1 CARBINE. THESE INCIDENTS HAVE RESULTED IN INJURIES TO WEAPON USERS. THESE INCIDENTS RESULT FROM FIRING NUMEROUS ROUNDS WITHIN A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME WITHOUT ADEQUATE COOLING.

(1) COOK-OFFS OCCUR WHEN A LIVE ROUND IS LEFT IN THE CHAMBER OR IN CONTACT WITH THE CHAMBER OF A HOT WEAPON AND HEATS TO THE POINT THAT THE PROPELLANT IS IGNITED.

(A) SUSTAINED FIRING OF THE M16 SERIES RIFLES OR M4 SERIES CARBINES WILL RAPIDLY RAISE THE TEMPERATURE OF THE BARREL TO A CRITICAL POINT.

(B) FIRING 140 ROUNDS, RAPIDLY AND CONTINUOUSLY, WILL RAISE THE TEMPERATURE OF THE BARREL TO THE COOK-OFF POINT. AT THIS TEMPERATURE, ANY LIVE ROUND REMAINING IN THE CHAMBER FOR ANY REASON MAY COOK-OFF (DETONATE) IN AS SHORT A PERIOD AS 10 SECONDS.

(C) WHEN THE WEAPON HAS REACHED THE COOK-OFF POINT (OR TEMPERATURE) A ROUND SHOULD NOT BE LEFT IN THE CHAMBER FOR ANY LENGTHY PERIOD OF TIME. THE WEAPON SHOULD BE CLEARED AND THE BOLT LOCKED TO THE REAR TO ALLOW COOL
DOWN.

(D) SUSTAINED RATE OF FIRE FOR THE M16 SERIES RIFLES AND M4 SERIES CARBINES IS 12-15 ROUNDS PER MINUTE. THIS IS THE ACTUAL RATE OF FIRE THAT A WEAPON CAN CONTINUE TO BE FIRED FOR AN Indefinite LENGTH OF TIME WITHOUT SERIOUS OVERHEATING.

(E) THE SUSTAINED RATE OF FIRE SHOULD NEVER BE EXCEEDED EXCEPT UNDER CIRCUMSTANCES OF EXTREME URGENCY. (NOTE: A HOT WEAPON TAKES APPROXIMATELY 30 MINUTES TO COOL TO AMBIENT TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS).

(F) THE USER'S MANUAL (TM 9-1005-319-10) FOR THE M16 SERIES RIFLE AND M4/M4A1 CARBINE STATES, "THAT IF A MISFIRE OCCURS IN A HOT WEAPON, REMOVE THE ROUND FAST (WITHIN TEN SECONDS). IF THE ROUND CANNOT BE REMOVED
WITHIN TEN SECONDS, REMOVE THE MAGAZINE FROM THE WEAPON, POINT THE WEAPON IN A SAFE DIRECTION AND WAIT FOR 15 MINUTES."

(G) CAUTION SHOULD BE TAKEN BY THE USERS TO KEEP THEIR FACE AWAY FROM THE EJECTION PORT WHILE CLEARING A HOT WEAPON.

(2) COOK-OFFS OUT OF BATTERY RESULT FROM A ROUND WHICH COOKS OFF WHEN THE BOLT IS NOT LOCKED OR A ROUND WHICH COOKS OFF AS THE USER IS TRYING TO CLEAR THE WEAPON.

(3) BURST BARRELS RESULT WHEN THE WEAPONS ARE FIRED UNDER VERY EXTREME FIRING SCHEDULES AND THE BARREL TEMPERATURE EXCEEDS 1360 DEGREES FAHRENHEIT. WHEN THE BARREL REACHES THESE EXTREME TEMPERATURES, THE BARREL STEEL WEAKENS TO THE POINT THAT THE HIGH PRESSURE GASES BURST THROUGH THE SIDE OF THE BARREL APPROXIMATELY 4 INCHES IN FRONT OF THE CHAMBER. THIS CONDITION CAN RESULT IN SERIOUS INJURY.

B. PARTS, ASSEMBLY, OR COMPONENTS TO BE INSPECTED: NA

3. USER ACTIONS. {MENU}

A. TASK OR INSPECTION SUSPENSE DATE (IF APPLICABLE): N/A

B. REPORTING COMPLIANCE SUSPENSE DATE: N/A

C. INSPECTION PROCEDURES: N/A

D. CORRECTION PROCEDURES: RANGE PERSONNEL AND USERS SHOULD AVOID EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM AND SUSTAINED RATES OF FIRE DESCRIBED IN THE USER'S MANUAL FOR THE M16 SERIES RIFLES AND M4 SERIES CARBINE. USERS SHOULD BE TRAINED ON
THE CAUSES AND HAZARDS OF COOK-OFF. BETWEEN FIRING SCHEDULES, ADEQUATE WEAPON COOLING TIME SHOULD BE ALLOWED.
 
I thought if you got water in the barrel, it would explode. It says so in the Army FM.

Do you think that SS barrels would have held up better than the chromed barrels they were using? (What if the 600 rounds was spent in 15 minutes instead of 30 as reported? - A very, very hot barrel and action)

If I'm not mistaken, SS does not dissipate heat as fast as the chrome moly barrels now in use.
 
The M4 weapons system is popular among 90% of the soldiers that used it, according to the last article i saw about this carbine, which was today.

Unfortunately, when soldiers are forced to switch their M4 systems role from rifleman tasks to that of a light/medium machine gun, they are going to run into some problems after a while.
I just wish the soldiers getting overran had more M240B's. Those are excellent weapons and very popular among soldiers.
 
The current AR platform, even in it's "enhanced" configuration, has shown problems when subjected to extended burst and automatic fire. These guys were in a protracted engagement and did NOT have the option of disengaging the enemy and performing "proper maintanence and lubrication" as required. The opposition forces pressing them were armed with weapons that do not require such attention. If a weapon is issued to troops going into a combat theater the thing should be expected to perform without calling for "time out" so you can service your rifle. My Metalurgy 101 always taught me that quenching hot steel in water leads to cracking & deformation. Not two things I'd want to introduce into something my life was dependent on. Having spent several years responsible for the care & feeding of Vulcans and minis that was something we specificly did not do. But that was 30+ years ago, maybe the laws of physics have been amended since my day. I have taken two 100 rd drums and a dozen or so 40 rd mags and bump fired a Yugo M70 thru every one of them in an extremely short period and the gun never jammed, failed to fire/feed/eject or in any way malfunction. The rifle could not be held with out a mechanics hot glove and even that was getting uncomfortable. Try as I might, I was also unable to get the wood hand guard to ignite as I've seen a few other do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom