Spec Ops De-fanged

Ordinarily I am a big pr US army guy but today is one of those day when they done did some thing stupid. the army times just broke the story
what you may ask? well it was an Open secret that US army Asymmetric warfare fighters were packing up there M4A1's and unpacking HK 416's based on the improved capabilities and reliability that was until the Army leadership who has been pro Colt caught wind. the fought back by Demanding the delta force fighters turn in the HK416's and pick up the discarded Colts. Delta fought back but lost and now is armed with the M4 not the M4A1. Now then lets do a quick specks check

M4A1
is a fully automatic Safe- Semi- Automatic. colt manufactured carbine firring the 5.56mm rounds. it is equipped with the SOPMOD Rail system, same as the M4 modular weapon system. the trigger group is the only real difference between M4 and M4A1 that trigger can be upgraded with a waver by a Knights armament cooperation automatic trigger which is a better trigger. it uses the Direct gas impingement system and all the other issues associated with the M4/M16/AR15 series rifles are still there

HK416
Uses the Short stroke gas piston system developed by HK, an improved Sopmod rail, better Safe- Semi- Automatic trigger group improved cold hammer forged barrel and massively improved reliability and service life well not costing much more ans still using all the same options.

M4 Modular Weapons system
Safe- Semi- 3 round burst fire trigger that to be honest is a P.O.S. and is not replaceable because no one produces a 3round trigger pack and if you installed a KAC trigger the army would bring you up for modifying there weapon and changing it from a M4 to a M4A1! , direct gas impingement system, the same rail system and other add on's that the SOPMOD kit gets.

Is it just Me or Is the Army command out of there damned skulls?!
the US NAVY DEVGRU by contrast are still using HK416's

Are you suggesting US military decision makers judgement has been seriously compromised by powerful businessman.

How dare you!! (SARCASM Alert)

Reminds me of the Dragon armor issue.

Corruption is not confined just to third world and developing states. It has been said many times 'everyone has their price' e.g presents, money and my favourite women. Or blackmail resulting from inappropriate contact with a women. John McCain rings a bell!?

More force to my first observation (above post). Heres a selection of article. Generally article explains why the army is failing to buy better weapons for infantry who unlike Airforce and Navy is on the frontline in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Army, the carbine's heaviest user, is outfitting all its front-line combat units with M4s. The Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and special operations forces also carry M4s. So do U.S. law enforcement agencies and militaries in many NATO countries.

More than $300 million has been spent on 221,000 of the carbines over the past two years alone. And the Defense Department is asking Congress to provide another $230 million for 136,000 more.

Click to expand...

Also Afghan and Iraqi armies are being given M 16s. So Colt has an interest to maintain their lead position.

The M4 is a fine weapon when it is properly maintained, and is supplied with reliable components. However, troops in the field are not properly maintaining their machines, and the fact that the issued magazines are extremely worn out and should have been replaced, you see a increase in problems.

The question boils down to this:
Is the HK416 a better system - yes I believe it is a better system. However, I do not believe the upgrade is worth replacing functioning weapons with. It does not make sense to toss perfectly working weapons, and setting up a new, distinct supply chain.

It seems to me that the M4 and H&K 416 costs about the same. If the H&K is more reliable, then perhaps that's the gun you should send your boys out with. The existing inventory of M4's can still be deployed to other units, and gradually phased out. But the decision has already been made so it's kinda pointless now.

Many countries still use AK's, because, well, when you pull the trigger, it fires -- even after being dragged through mud, sand, and dust.

adeptitus said:

It seems to me that the M4 and H&K 416 costs about the same. If the H&K is more reliable, then perhaps that's the gun you should send your boys out with. The existing inventory of M4's can still be deployed to other units, and gradually phased out. But the decision has already been made so it's kinda pointless now.

Many countries still use AK's, because, well, when you pull the trigger, it fires -- even after being dragged through mud, sand, and dust.

Click to expand...

You will need to establish a whole new supply chain to handle any new weapons introduced. It isn't as easy as saying 'that weapon looks good, we should buy it'.

Furthermore, one needs to look away from the acquisition price. Acquisition price is only a very small amount in equipment evaluation. One can liken acquisition to be like a iceberg; acquisition or construction cost is the tip of the iceberg in terms of the overall costs of a piece of equipment. Spare parts, repairs, training, software and hardware upgrades, even disposal, contribute to the total life cycle cost of a piece of equipment.

You have good points Pointblank in regards operation and maintenance costs.

The people who favour changing the weapon in the United states argue "why settle for less when it comes to the lives of our soldiers". You cannot argue that overall it will cost more to give the soldiers the better rifle. In summary you cannot overlook this arguement due to this tends to be a very convincing one. Would you, if you were a politician or M4 manufacturer state this in public?

Heres a good example in Iraq. The army and marines have replaced alot of hummers with vehicles designed to better resist the roadside bomb, at the cost of tactical mobility. Does not make military snce when fighting a conventional military like the PLA, but it has been done. The US military is now slower and consumes more fuel plus inducting new equipment that compromises operations and logistics like your picture illustrates.

Admittedly, I have leanings towards the FN SCAR (and personal inclinations towards the 7.62 mm version), but when all is said and done, the old M-16 stocks are, well, old, and have been partially replaced by the M-4 which in turn is wearing out earlier than usual due to wartime use. As existing small arms stocks in Armies that use the M-16 and M-4 (and some other 5.56 weapons) will need to be at least partially, even wholly, replaced within a decade or so, if not sooner, it makes some sense to embark on a wholesale replacement program. As Pointblank points out, this would be a substantial undertaking; but as it will have to be done in the not-so-distant future anyway, perhaps now is as good a time as any. It's not like military budgets are going to get any bigger in the future. So whether a new small arms is tp be a vastly improved mod of the M-16/M-4 series, the M-416, the FN SCAR, or whatever, it's really time to get on with it; SOF seem to be taking a real shine to the FN SCAR of course, and maybe that's an indicator of where the Regular Army should be looking.

when speaking of the HK416 one thing that needs to be remembered is that it unlike FN Scar or XM8 comes not just as a brand new rifle but also a refit kit for the current systems. it can use the same tigger ( yuck ) barrel although the new one is better. lower, butstock and most of the tooling.

One thing that needs to be mentioned is that in June 2009 the US Army m4 contract Runs out. Colt is beeing kept alive via that contract meaning that the political Blood will be boiling if Colt Fails to get a renewal.
testing and expreience is causeing the Army to demand changes to the M4 even now. Plans are that the current sustem will be receiving new Cold hammer forged barrels and magazines, but as the modifications continue the price is going to go up too.