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

[JD09]

Listen chief, you dont know what your talking about. I dont know your resume or what you have, or more importantly haven't done. How many SOF forces have you worked with?

Why do you denigrate people's opinions when you even admit you dont know their experience or background? You do this constantly on these boards, prefacing your posts with these kinds of statements. So you opine as fact something you know nothing about? You come across like you are so full of yourself that it blinds you to your own ignorance.

 

[USMA-82]

In comparison to you, Martlet is much better trained, he is an active duty non commissioned officer in the Army. The guy is technically and technically proficient, he may not be a metallurgist, or mechanical engineer but knows what the f*** hes talking about.

Listen Chief:

YOU have no idea what my background is, what my level of training is, or anything else about me. I did spend 10 years active duty in the Army, and I have done a bit of training since then. My information on firearms being used in country is from classmates from West Point who are currently there, and through sources within my current employment with the Department of Homeland Security.

I don't claim to be a firearms expert, and I'm certainly not a mechanical engineer, but I think I do know what I'm talking about, and MY friends believe that as well.

Your turn, slick.

 

[flintoid]

If one looks at a slow motion film of the AK while firing, there's an extraordinary amount of flex in the entire system - which likely gives it a lot of it's notorious accuracy problems.

not that any of these add anything or prove anything, but you got me looking at youtube, and there's some pretty sweet vids out there. I thought I'd share-

AK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sNDTdKQNVU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCF_XoIlNSE

ar-15

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7iPcWjDAvw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qimTiyydec

 

[KMM696]

... Unless you have current, real world experience I really dont care what you have to say. Being a mechanical engineer isnt the same as being one that uses a weapon to protect their lives and goes to combat with it. Laboratory tests etc, your not doing it. ....

So, you, the user, aren't willing to talk to the mechanical engineer because they're not a user? By implication, if you won't provide feedback to the design team on the real world operation of the weapon system, or point out where their developmental and operational testing falls short of actual field conditions, how do you think that the system under consideration will ever improve??

I understand how difficult it can be to get feedback from the field on systems operation that hasn't been filtered through the chain of command, across a couple .mil/.gov agencies and finally out to the production contractors, where it no longer resembles the original observations. The program management office I work with has been very careful to keep at least a few current or former systems users on staff and on location, so the contractor or DoD engineering staff can just walk in and ask how the system works or is used in the field, and not get the sanitized answer. I remember how hard it was to push technical problems up that hill, and now that I'm on the other side of the ridge, I'm appalled at how little information makes it down from the field.

I am convinced, though, that if the end user refuses to talk to anyone about weapons system shortcomings and improvements except other users, in the end the group hurt the most by this will be the user.

 

[P2A]

Listen Chief:

YOU have no idea what my background is, what my level of training is, or anything else about me. I did spend 10 years active duty in the Army, and I have done a bit of training since then. My information on firearms being used in country is from classmates from West Point who are currently there, and through sources within my current employment with the Department of Homeland Security.

I don't claim to be a firearms expert, and I'm certainly not a mechanical engineer, but I think I do know what I'm talking about, and MY friends believe that as well.

Your turn, slick.

Easy scooter, like I said I didnt read your resume. By virtue of doing it, and seeing them side by side, it isnt superior. I mean If you like going to combat with a subpar weapon that is inaccurate and has its own issues thats cool. The M-16 based system is by no means the end all be all. But beats the hell out of comblok weaponry in allot of cases. I like to hit what Im shooting at reliably, and MY friends enjoy that also. THEY happen to like the M4, yes there are better systems but what we have is a world better than our adversary's. If it is infact better yall at DHS should switch over. My information on weapons and what I post on here is first hand. That is where I draw my information from. Happen to know what I talk about or when I make a point now yes you professionally have done your time, Youve been there so it surprises me that you think what we have is garbage and try and fight with a fellow soldier, like Martlet. My original posting was in regards to one that hasnt done it, a engineer that wanted to shit talk " those young guys, they dont know". Your opinion may be one that is professional but I know the Army doesnt think highly of the AK either, nor do MY friends.

In regards to two other posts,

JD09- Your entitled to your opinion. Sorry to upset you. At the end of the day this is an online forum, people tend to argue over the stupidest things they they happen to have no first hand knowledge of and pretend to have a triple canopy and know all, so tough shit if one wants to argue and they dont like a response.

KMM696- I have taken part in weapons development and reviewing/ testing equipment. To be honest allot of the time I am greatly disappointed in the feedback we get from our feedback. I understand your point, I have never seen it first hand and developments/ fielding I have been a part of the end user has done their part. It is usually much higher than the end user the final decision that gets made, allot of times without taking the end user's input into account.

 

[JD09]

1st in regards to the article, there is no evidence that weapons malfunction was the direct or indirect cause of the deaths of any US soldiers in this specific engagement. It is a determination that cannot be gleaned from the information given.

That being said, I think the M4 is an excellent patrol weapon. My M16a4 served me very well for that purpose. For extended periods of time enduring combat conditions, I think it does not quite excel there.

If one would look at the combat conditions that soldiers faced throughout the 20th century, given the choice of an M4 or an AK74, my personal choice would be an AK74. Personally I think the two weapons are close to equal, each having minor advantages over the other.

I ask myself based on my experience which would I have preferred in the conditions soldiers endured at the Somme, at Bastogne, Normandy, in the Italian campaign, Iwo, the environmental conditions that the Russian and German soldiers faced outside Moscow in fall/winter 1941 and in the Chosin Resevoir. Which weapon between the 2 would Merrill's Marauders have chosen? (laugh but they operated in far more harsher and adverse conditions than any SOF group I know of in recent history). This is an introspective and speculative question, as veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan have not experienced the same environmental and supply conditions in combat for the same extended periods of time that many soldiers in the 20th century faced. But it is a reality one really should take into consideration.

Maybe you say "Jd we don't fight wars like that anymore". Wars of attrition in extended periods of time in horrendous environmental conditions and a happy uninterrupted supply line. Yes and I hope for our soldiers sake we don't again. But that is also in many ways making an assumption that we will never fight a war again without Phillipino Launderers, Pakistani Chefs and SUV's as combat vehicles.

In the end its a personal choice and opinion. It is just my opinion that THE basic weapon of a combat infantryman should not require that if criteria A, B, C, E, F...ad nauseum are met it will serve him well and be effective.

Personally I really cringe at some of the logic presented here. Statements that infer if you take a well trained soldier and replace his M4 with an Ak74 he has all of a sudden magically turned into less effective soldier or even an amateur.

 

[USMA-82]

Your opinion may be one that is professional but I know the Army doesnt think highly of the AK either, nor do MY friends.

OK, let's agree to disagree.

Peace, brother.

*

 

[P2A]

OK, let's agree to disagree.

Peace, brother.

*

Fair enough, be safe.

 

[Martlet]

Personally I really cringe at some of the logic presented here. Statements that infer if you take a well trained soldier and replace his M4 with an Ak74 he has all of a sudden magically turned into less effective soldier or even an amateur.

It's not magic. When you provide someone with an inferior tool, they become less effective. If you took away their M4 and gave them a stick, they'd also be less effective.

 

[cekim]

Just spit-ballin' here, but does anyone think that a fluted or semi-fluted bolt carrier may help the AR platform to run a little better?

The BCG on the AR has only small contact rails on 4 sides (which only run about 1/3rd the length of the BCG)... The rest of the carrier never touches anything...

I don't have detailed failure analysis to draw from, but just a thumb wag at it from an engineering perspective, I'd hazard a guess that the problem is the locking mechanism and heat accumulated because of DI blowing hot gas back (under extreme sustained FA fire - I've done a C-mag dump with rapid SA and my rifle said "thank you sir may I have another")

In short, the carrier, I strongly suspect, isn't the problem so much as the heat causing interference/warping/expansion of the locking lugs and potentially sand/debris in that same spot...

So fluting the carrier wouldn't do anything...

 

[Rob Boudrie]

So, you, the user, aren't willing to talk to the mechanical engineer because they're not a user?

This is getting dangerously close to a thread in which we start debating if non-operators have valid opinions and knowledge - something that historically results in moderator deletion of posts (probably because someone's ox is getting gored).

 

[cekim]

This is getting dangerously close to a thread in which we start debating if non-operators have valid opinions and knowledge - something that historically results in moderator deletion of posts (probably because someone's ox is getting gored).

My barrel is 20" - how long is yours?

 

[JD09]

It's not magic. When you provide someone with an inferior tool, they become less effective. If you took away their M4 and gave them a stick, they'd also be less effective.

What experience do you have with an Ak 74 to claim its an inferior tool? What aspects of the weapon system back your claim? And please elaborate beyond the "its inaccurate" and the M4 is so accurate routine.

 

[Martlet]

Being inaccurate isn't a problem to you.

 

[P2A]

What experience do you have with an Ak 74 to claim its an inferior tool? What aspects of the weapon system back your claim? And please elaborate beyond the "its inaccurate" routine.

Its a cheap low tolerance weapon in a different caliber than the AK47, it is still not nearly as accurate as an M4 and reliability while may be increased isnt far surpassing a M4 that is properly cared for. Its an AK just 5.45x39, ohh has a different compensator? Still the same weapon.

 

[JD09]

Its a cheap low tolerance weapon in a different caliber than the AK47, it is still not nearly as accurate as an M4 and reliability while may be increased isnt far surpassing a M4 that is properly cared for. Its an AK just 5.45x39, ohh has a different compensator? Still the same weapon.

What are the standards of difference in MOA accuracy between an M4 and an Ak74?

This is like people who compare M14's to FAL's. Can you make the M14 more accurate? Yes. Are the MOA standards of the actual issue combat weapons that much different? No.

 

[JD09]

Being inaccurate isn't a problem to you.

In ground pounding adrenaline rush I am getting my ass shot at heat of the moment combat do you really think a soldier can tell the difference between 3 moa and 4.5 moa? These are carbines. They will each hit a man sized target at 3-350 meters just fine if the shooter does his job.

I wonder if Russian Soldiers get "alibi's" in their weapons qual.

Also, have we really lost the concept of fire and maneuver?

 

[P2A]

What are the standards of difference in MOA accuracy between an M4 and an Ak74?

This is like people who compare M14's to FAL's. Can you make the M14 more accurate? Yes. Are the MOA standards of the actual issue combat weapons that much different? No.

To be honest I dont know. I dont think there is a defined standard for combloc weaponry. As a rule of thumb an AK is about half as accurate as a M4, or minus depending on the manufacture. Due to crude manufacturing and the design there is no way to really "accurize" a AK. It is what it is. Its a crude, cheap weapon made for the lowest common denominator. I dont know what to tell you, they arnt this unstoppable superior machine. The only plus to the 74 is a better chambering. What it comes down to is with a M4 you have an accurate reliable system, the AK is a crapshoot, it lacks accuracy ergonomics etc. The difference is when you have someone shooting at you, you want to be able to put them down, they only way to do that is it hit them, take that as you will.

 

[Martlet]

In ground pounding adrenaline rush I am getting my ass shot at heat of the moment combat do you really think a soldier can tell the difference between 3 moa and 4.5 moa? These are carbines. They will each hit a man sized target at 3-350 meters just fine if the shooter does his job.


Have we really lost the concept of fire and maneuver?

Which are you speaking of? 74 or 47? 74 is much preferable to the 47 with the decreased recoil and improved accuracy. It's still not an M4. Nobody is saying, at least I'm not, that it's an ineffective weapon. I'm just saying the M4 is superior in combat.

 

[Kalahari]

The easy solution is to have both . Which I actually have heard of.. Not being military, I have no idea how accurate those statements were though.

 

[RI_John]

Everyone agreeing to disagree left me unsatisfied. I wanted a definitive answer, so I went ahead and asked Chuck which weapon he'd take into combat?

This is what he said:

That was of no help whatsoever.

 

[KMM696]

KMM696- I have taken part in weapons development and reviewing/ testing equipment. To be honest allot of the time I am greatly disappointed in the feedback we get from our feedback. I understand your point, I have never seen it first hand and developments/ fielding I have been a part of the end user has done their part. It is usually much higher than the end user the final decision that gets made, allot of times without taking the end user's input into account.

That feedback loop is a big problem in all DoD procurement, not just in small arms. I'm finding it's just as difficult to effectively communicate from production back to the field as it was for me when I was the field guy trying to get through to production. Avionics then, fire control now, and though a lot of the names have changed, the beauracracy acts the same, and it's always frustrating. Part of the problem is that I went from USAF to a Navy program, so I no longer know the terminology or players to talk to. Luckily, the PM office has a couple Navy field guys I can ask, and after the obligatory Air Force joke, can steer me the right way. The most effective field/production conversations I can remember were all completely informal, outside normal communications, and occurred only because of dumb luck.

What really bothers me are the people in this business that don't understand that there is an end user, somwhere out on the pointy end, who doesn't care about production quotas, contracting, or Federal Acquisition Regulations, but just wants the damn thing to work, most of the time, and be easy to fix when it doesn't.

Those people should move on to making toilet paper, digital alarm clocks or anything else that doesn't involve lives, fortunes or sacred honor.

 

[terraformer]

The BCG on the AR has only small contact rails on 4 sides (which only run about 1/3rd the length of the BCG)... The rest of the carrier never touches anything...

I don't have detailed failure analysis to draw from, but just a thumb wag at it from an engineering perspective, I'd hazard a guess that the problem is the locking mechanism and heat accumulated because of DI blowing hot gas back (under extreme sustained FA fire - I've done a C-mag dump with rapid SA and my rifle said "thank you sir may I have another")

In short, the carrier, I strongly suspect, isn't the problem so much as the heat causing interference/warping/expansion of the locking lugs and potentially sand/debris in that same spot...

So fluting the carrier wouldn't do anything...

it would do something actually. It would make it lighter. And that will screw up the action if you don't adjust the spring accordingly.

This is getting dangerously close to a thread in which we start debating if non-operators have valid opinions and knowledge - something that historically results in moderator deletion of posts (probably because someone's ox is getting gored).

we are way beyond dangerously close. The best conversation on any topic would be one where no ones background is known an their statements must live or die based on supporting facts. This is not one of those for sure.

My barrel is 20" - how long is yours?

My barrel is so small you could play ring toss with cheerios on it and proud of it baby.

 

[JD09]

Which are you speaking of? 74 or 47? 74 is much preferable to the 47 with the decreased recoil and improved accuracy. It's still not an M4. Nobody is saying, at least I'm not, that it's an ineffective weapon. I'm just saying the M4 is superior in combat.

Ak74. In all of my posts AK74. My question to you is what makes the M4 more superior to the AK 74 in combat? What apart from the "increased" accuracy and how much "increased" accuracy are you getting between an M4 and an Ak-74?

How about this. The M16a4 (and a2) in my experience is more accurate and reliable than an M4. Does that mean that the M4 is an inferior weapon? Are we issuing our soldiers inferior weapons by issuing them M4's?

 

[Martlet]

Ak74. In all of my posts AK74. My question to you is what makes the M4 more superior to the AK 74 in combat? What apart from the "increased" accuracy and how much "increased" accuracy are you getting between an M4 and an Ak-74?

You keep saying "apart from". That's a key reason. Apart from no engine, this is a great car. It makes no sense.

How about this. The M16a4 (and a2) in my experience is more accurate and reliable than an M4. Does that mean that the M4 is an inferior weapon? Are we issuing our soldiers inferior weapons by issuing them M4's?

Huh? It's designed for a different use. Some aspects are sacrificed for others. Where are you fighting? CQB? Which weapon would be more effective?

The M4 is a carbine. The M16 is a rifle.

 

[ochmude]

You keep saying "apart from". That's a key reason. Apart from no engine, this is a great car. It makes no sense.



Huh? It's designed for a different use. Some aspects are sacrificed for others. Where are you fighting? CQB? Which weapon would be more effective?

The M4 is a carbine. The M16 is a rifle.

That for damned sure. I carried a M16A4 in Iraq and was on a convoy security team. Almost hung myself a couple of times trying to rapidly dismount the humvee when that 3 foot long thing got caught up in the door. Might as well be carrying a fricken 91/30.

 

[JD09]

You keep saying "apart from". That's a key reason. Apart from no engine, this is a great car. It makes no sense.

Your hyperbole comparing AK74's to a "stick" and "no engine" just makes you sound exactly like the AK people who call the M4 an unreliable jammomatic.

Yup I say "apart from" because while you claim its "a key reason" (actually your only stated reason) you cannot define parameters of the key reason because you don't know. You have no idea how much more accurate the M4 is vs the Ak74. So as you cannot or will not define that basic bar you set I seek some solid criteria with which you have knowledge and you have none.

Huh? It's designed for a different use. Some aspects are sacrificed for others. Where are you fighting? CQB? Which weapon would be more effective?

Designed for a different use? Really? I never swapped my M16A4 for an M4 nor did guys in my Troop swap their M4's regardless of our mission. MTOE does not allot for your ephinay, but please tell the DOD.

Why the "huh?" My representation is the same logic you happily applying to the M4 is better than the Ak74 discussion. Accuracy. Yet apply the same criteria to an M16 and M4 and I get a "huh?"

I told you where I was fighting...the Somme, Normandy (Beaches Bocages and the Towns), Bastogne, House to House in Berlin, the Chosin Resevoir. Your parameters seem very limited.

 

[Martlet]

Your hyperbole comparing AK74's to a "stick" and "no engine" just makes you sound exactly like the AK people who call the M4 an unreliable jammomatic.

Yup I say "apart from" because while you claim its "a key reason" (actually your only stated reason) you cannot define parameters of the key reason because you don't know. You have no idea how much more accurate the M4 is vs the Ak74. So as you cannot or will not define that basic bar you set I seek some solid criteria with which you have knowledge and you have none.




Designed for a different use? Really? I never swapped my M16A4 for an M4 nor did guys in my Troop swap their M4's regardless of our mission. MTOE does not allot for your ephinay, but please tell the DOD.

Why the "huh?" My representation is the same logic you happily applying to the M4 is better than the Ak74 discussion. Accuracy. Yet apply the same criteria to an M16 and M4 and I get a "huh?"

I told you where I was fighting...the Somme, Normandy (Beaches Bocages and the Towns), Bastogne, House to House in Berlin, the Chosin Resevoir. Your parameters seem very limited.

You make no sense. Your rush to AK 74 fanboism lacks logic. Who cares how much more accurate? You replace the point with the details as though they matter. Your representation is not relevant. You're comparing different weapon classes. If you can't understand even that most basic fact, then I understand why you're lost.

Just because you swapped out a rifle for a carbine doesn't mean they were built for the same purpose. It just means they can be overlapped. I've used a butter knife as a screwdriver. That doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job.

 

[Coyote33]

I often wonder what would happen if our guys were all shooting AK's, would we still be hearing about failures?

I think we would, machine failures are going to happen, especially in an environment like Afghanistan or Iraq, things break, moving parts fail, no matter how well kept.

Are AK's that good? We never hear the other side complaining about failures, so maybe they are, or maybe it's because the dead tell no tales.

Good questions. The Russians were there before us. I bet they have some stories and some studies somewhere.

I was reading the S&W brochure the other day, and they were talking about their new AR15 with the piston mechanism. It said they are cleaner, cooler, and more reliable. This is what came to mind as soon as I started reading this article. I wonder if there will be an M5 to replace the M4, and it will be a piston operated gun.

Here's a "Thank You!" to all who serve or have served out country.


Edit to add: Wow. I read all the other posts following this one from Mike S. to which I replied. Please don't bother to reply to mine. It is what it is, and was only as of reading that far into this mess. Nevertheless, S&W DOES claim they are cleaner, cooler, and more reliable, all of which are presumably a good thing.

 

[jasons]

I've used a butter knife as a screwdriver. That doesn't mean it's the best tool for the job.

Depends on the screw.