Posted on Jul 27, 2015
Marine brass endorses infantry plan to ditch M16 for M4. Long overdue?
23.4K
107
78
11
11
0
Marine leaders have made the momentous recommendation to ditch the iconic M16 in favor of the M4 carbine as the new universal weapon for infantrymen.
The recommendation to swap the venerated rifle that has served as the grunt's primary implement of war since Vietnam now sits on the commandant's desk, pending his final review and a decision. But, the swap appears imminent and if approved will relegate the M16 to a support role. It follows a similar shift already underway in the Army.
With the endorsement of several major commands already supporting the switch — including Marine Corps Combat Development Command; Combat Development and Integration; Plans, Policies and Operations; Marine Corps Systems Command; and Installations and Logistics — final word is possible in weeks or months.
"The proposal to replace the M16A4 with the M4 within infantry battalions is currently under consideration at Headquarters Marine Corps," according to a jointly written response from the commands provided by Maj. Anton Semelroth, a Marine spokesman in Quantico, Virginia.
The change would be welcomed by infantrymen who say the M16A4 was too long and unwieldy for close-quarters battle in Iraq or vehicle-borne operations in Afghanistan. They tout the M4 for its weight savings, improved mobility and collapsible butt stock, allowing the rifle to be tailored for smaller Marines or those wearing body armor.
"I would have to say my gut reaction is it's the right choice and will do a lot of good for the guys in the infantry," said Sgt. Nathan West, an explosive ordnance technician with 8th Engineer Support Battalion, who carried an M4 on dismounted patrols and vehicle-borne operations during two deployments to Afghanistan as an anti-tank missileman.
"The M4 is a great weapons system that has done everything I have ever asked of it," he added.
The proposed switch also gets the thumbs up from senior marksmen such as the 1st Marine Division gunner, Chief Warrant Officer 5 Vince Kyzer.
"The carbine is a great weapon system for its time," he said. "...It will increase the war fighter's lethality and mobility."
Ultimately, if the move to the M4 is approved by Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford, the M16 would be used exclusively by support personnel in communities like logistics or admin. Once approved, the swap could happen as fast as unit armories can issue weapons because the 17,000 M4s needed to outfit infantrymen who don't already use one are in the current inventory, said Barb Hamby, a Systems Command spokeswoman. Thus, officials described the move as an "improved capability for the infantry at no additional cost."
Wider adoption of the M4 is part of an overall small-arms modernization strategy that will look at incremental improvements, based on existing technologies as funding becomes available, according to a Marine official who said more details will likely be revealed in the months ahead.
For now, here is what Marines need to know about the infantry's next likely weapon of choice — the M4 carbine.
The call for a compact weapon
The M4 makes maneuvering in tight urban spaces easier with a 14.5-inch barrel and an overall length that is about 10 inches shorter than the M16A4, in a package that is a pound lighter at just over six.
No fight illustrated the need for a smaller primary weapon during ferocious close-quarters combat better than Operation Phantom Fury in November 2004, when Marines fought to wrest control of Fallujah from Iraqi insurgents, sometimes going hand-to-hand.
Rounding corners and getting on target in small rooms was difficult, leading to use of a tactic called "short-stocking," when a Marine places his rifle stock over his shoulder – instead of securely against the chest and cants his weapon45-degrees so he can still use his optics. It helps in maneuvering, but compromises recoil management and follow-up shots.
"We were taught to short stock around tight corners when we got to our platoon for deployment — it was something unofficial," said Ryan Innis, a former scout sniper with 2nd Reconnaissance Battalion, who left the service as a sergeant in 2013 after serving on the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit's anti-piracy raid force near East Africa.
Innis trained for shipboard operations — the closest of close-quarters combat — and said he was fortunate to be issued the M4 because the weapon's shorter length proved better for tight spaces.
"I would definitely agree the M4 is the way to go," he said.
The longer M16 was also challenging when hopping in and out of vehicles in full battle rattle, said West, who made his second deployment to Afghanistan in 2012 with 3rd Battalion, 9th Marines, as part of a vehicle-borne combined anti-armor team.
"Anytime you operate out of a vehicle, something compact makes life easier, especially when you need to get out quickly and engage [the] enemy," he said.
Even when he conducted dismounted patrols on his first Afghanistan deployment in 2011 with 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, the M4 he was issued helped in clearing compounds, jumping walls and crossing deep ditches, he said.
West never wanted to go back to the M16 because of the weight savings alone.
He said he started his first deployment carrying an M16A4; a Thor radio-controlled bomb jammer, a metal detector, and ammo for an M240 machine gun.
"There was even a time carrying an M32 grenade launcher, so you can see the amount of weight we were carrying at that time," he said. "Anything that takes weight off and keeps guys from getting tired so they are more aware of things around them is good. It is just a little less weight and just as effective of a weapon."
That is what the Marine Corps found when it began testing the ballistics of its infantry rifles and carbines using their improved M318 Mod 0 Special Operations Science and Technology round.
"The Marine Corps conducted an evaluation of its individual weapons (M4, M27 and M16A4), with specific focus on comparing accuracy, shift of impact and trajectory with improved ammunition, and determined the M4's overall performance compares favorably with that of the M27 IAR, the most accurate weapon in the squad," according to the written responses provided by Semelroth.
Negligible drawbacks
There are a few minor drawbacks to adopting the M4, but infantrymen seem to agree those are insignificant compared to the advantages.
Both Innis and West said trading in the M16's 20-inch barrel for the M4's 14.5-inch barrel does sacrifice some muzzle velocity, which translates into a slightly shorter effective range — although Colt markets both with an effective range of about 650 yards. But that isn't a significant concern given the closer ranges at which Marines and soldiers commonly engage enemy in modern warfare.
To strike the enemy beyond the range of the M4 or even the M16, each Marine fire team already has an M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle, which in semi-auto with its free-floating barrel and precision trigger also now doubles as the designated marksman's rifle. It's a role that will no longer be filled by the Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle, a match-grade M16 with a scope.
When the M27 can't get the job done, combined arms doctrine means indirect fire and air assets are just a radio call away, West said.
"As far as accuracy, there is not an effect," he added, saying a longer rifle only really matters when using iron sights.
Greater distance between a weapon's front and rear sights, known as sight radius, makes a weapon easier to aim. But that doesn't apply with the Rifle Combat Optic that the Marine Corps began using in 2005. The RCO is a type of reflex sight with which a Marine only needs to ensure the reticle is on target without regard for sight alignment.
When asked if the Marine Corps is making the right move, preeminent firearms expert Larry Vickers gave a resounding yes.
"I'm the first one to subscribe to this," Vickers said of the M4's increasing popularity as the preferred option for modern combat.
The M4's profile got a boost when the Army, which adopted the M4 in 1994 for special operations, began issuing it more broadly to deploying infantry.
Vickers, a retired master sergeant who served 15 years in the Army's 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment – Delta, commonly known as Delta Force, dismissed arguments against the carbine based on its shorter effective range, saying nearly all real-world infantry engagements happen inside 200 yards.
"Some argue beyond that the M4 carbine lacks effectiveness versus the M16, but the M16 is like driving a sports car with a six-cylinder engine," he said, because it is limited by the same small 5.56mm cartridge as the M4. "You can shoot 400 to 500 yards away, but you are still shooting a 5.56."
A longer barrel would make sense with a heavier hitting round like the .308, but unless Marines are given a larger caliber Vickers said the M4 is "bringing so much more to the table."
"It is the world's gold standard," he said.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/07/27/marine-officials-endorse-infantry-plan--ditch-m16--m4/30145257/
The recommendation to swap the venerated rifle that has served as the grunt's primary implement of war since Vietnam now sits on the commandant's desk, pending his final review and a decision. But, the swap appears imminent and if approved will relegate the M16 to a support role. It follows a similar shift already underway in the Army.
With the endorsement of several major commands already supporting the switch — including Marine Corps Combat Development Command; Combat Development and Integration; Plans, Policies and Operations; Marine Corps Systems Command; and Installations and Logistics — final word is possible in weeks or months.
"The proposal to replace the M16A4 with the M4 within infantry battalions is currently under consideration at Headquarters Marine Corps," according to a jointly written response from the commands provided by Maj. Anton Semelroth, a Marine spokesman in Quantico, Virginia.
The change would be welcomed by infantrymen who say the M16A4 was too long and unwieldy for close-quarters battle in Iraq or vehicle-borne operations in Afghanistan. They tout the M4 for its weight savings, improved mobility and collapsible butt stock, allowing the rifle to be tailored for smaller Marines or those wearing body armor.
"I would have to say my gut reaction is it's the right choice and will do a lot of good for the guys in the infantry," said Sgt. Nathan West, an explosive ordnance technician with 8th Engineer Support Battalion, who carried an M4 on dismounted patrols and vehicle-borne operations during two deployments to Afghanistan as an anti-tank missileman.
"The M4 is a great weapons system that has done everything I have ever asked of it," he added.
The proposed switch also gets the thumbs up from senior marksmen such as the 1st Marine Division gunner, Chief Warrant Officer 5 Vince Kyzer.
"The carbine is a great weapon system for its time," he said. "...It will increase the war fighter's lethality and mobility."
Ultimately, if the move to the M4 is approved by Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford, the M16 would be used exclusively by support personnel in communities like logistics or admin. Once approved, the swap could happen as fast as unit armories can issue weapons because the 17,000 M4s needed to outfit infantrymen who don't already use one are in the current inventory, said Barb Hamby, a Systems Command spokeswoman. Thus, officials described the move as an "improved capability for the infantry at no additional cost."
Wider adoption of the M4 is part of an overall small-arms modernization strategy that will look at incremental improvements, based on existing technologies as funding becomes available, according to a Marine official who said more details will likely be revealed in the months ahead.
For now, here is what Marines need to know about the infantry's next likely weapon of choice — the M4 carbine.
The call for a compact weapon
The M4 makes maneuvering in tight urban spaces easier with a 14.5-inch barrel and an overall length that is about 10 inches shorter than the M16A4, in a package that is a pound lighter at just over six.
No fight illustrated the need for a smaller primary weapon during ferocious close-quarters combat better than Operation Phantom Fury in November 2004, when Marines fought to wrest control of Fallujah from Iraqi insurgents, sometimes going hand-to-hand.
Rounding corners and getting on target in small rooms was difficult, leading to use of a tactic called "short-stocking," when a Marine places his rifle stock over his shoulder – instead of securely against the chest and cants his weapon45-degrees so he can still use his optics. It helps in maneuvering, but compromises recoil management and follow-up shots.
"We were taught to short stock around tight corners when we got to our platoon for deployment — it was something unofficial," said Ryan Innis, a former scout sniper with 2nd Reconnaissance Battalion, who left the service as a sergeant in 2013 after serving on the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit's anti-piracy raid force near East Africa.
Innis trained for shipboard operations — the closest of close-quarters combat — and said he was fortunate to be issued the M4 because the weapon's shorter length proved better for tight spaces.
"I would definitely agree the M4 is the way to go," he said.
The longer M16 was also challenging when hopping in and out of vehicles in full battle rattle, said West, who made his second deployment to Afghanistan in 2012 with 3rd Battalion, 9th Marines, as part of a vehicle-borne combined anti-armor team.
"Anytime you operate out of a vehicle, something compact makes life easier, especially when you need to get out quickly and engage [the] enemy," he said.
Even when he conducted dismounted patrols on his first Afghanistan deployment in 2011 with 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, the M4 he was issued helped in clearing compounds, jumping walls and crossing deep ditches, he said.
West never wanted to go back to the M16 because of the weight savings alone.
He said he started his first deployment carrying an M16A4; a Thor radio-controlled bomb jammer, a metal detector, and ammo for an M240 machine gun.
"There was even a time carrying an M32 grenade launcher, so you can see the amount of weight we were carrying at that time," he said. "Anything that takes weight off and keeps guys from getting tired so they are more aware of things around them is good. It is just a little less weight and just as effective of a weapon."
That is what the Marine Corps found when it began testing the ballistics of its infantry rifles and carbines using their improved M318 Mod 0 Special Operations Science and Technology round.
"The Marine Corps conducted an evaluation of its individual weapons (M4, M27 and M16A4), with specific focus on comparing accuracy, shift of impact and trajectory with improved ammunition, and determined the M4's overall performance compares favorably with that of the M27 IAR, the most accurate weapon in the squad," according to the written responses provided by Semelroth.
Negligible drawbacks
There are a few minor drawbacks to adopting the M4, but infantrymen seem to agree those are insignificant compared to the advantages.
Both Innis and West said trading in the M16's 20-inch barrel for the M4's 14.5-inch barrel does sacrifice some muzzle velocity, which translates into a slightly shorter effective range — although Colt markets both with an effective range of about 650 yards. But that isn't a significant concern given the closer ranges at which Marines and soldiers commonly engage enemy in modern warfare.
To strike the enemy beyond the range of the M4 or even the M16, each Marine fire team already has an M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle, which in semi-auto with its free-floating barrel and precision trigger also now doubles as the designated marksman's rifle. It's a role that will no longer be filled by the Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle, a match-grade M16 with a scope.
When the M27 can't get the job done, combined arms doctrine means indirect fire and air assets are just a radio call away, West said.
"As far as accuracy, there is not an effect," he added, saying a longer rifle only really matters when using iron sights.
Greater distance between a weapon's front and rear sights, known as sight radius, makes a weapon easier to aim. But that doesn't apply with the Rifle Combat Optic that the Marine Corps began using in 2005. The RCO is a type of reflex sight with which a Marine only needs to ensure the reticle is on target without regard for sight alignment.
When asked if the Marine Corps is making the right move, preeminent firearms expert Larry Vickers gave a resounding yes.
"I'm the first one to subscribe to this," Vickers said of the M4's increasing popularity as the preferred option for modern combat.
The M4's profile got a boost when the Army, which adopted the M4 in 1994 for special operations, began issuing it more broadly to deploying infantry.
Vickers, a retired master sergeant who served 15 years in the Army's 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment – Delta, commonly known as Delta Force, dismissed arguments against the carbine based on its shorter effective range, saying nearly all real-world infantry engagements happen inside 200 yards.
"Some argue beyond that the M4 carbine lacks effectiveness versus the M16, but the M16 is like driving a sports car with a six-cylinder engine," he said, because it is limited by the same small 5.56mm cartridge as the M4. "You can shoot 400 to 500 yards away, but you are still shooting a 5.56."
A longer barrel would make sense with a heavier hitting round like the .308, but unless Marines are given a larger caliber Vickers said the M4 is "bringing so much more to the table."
"It is the world's gold standard," he said.
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2015/07/27/marine-officials-endorse-infantry-plan--ditch-m16--m4/30145257/
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 26
It will be interesting to see how long distance marksmanship will trend.
(7)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
"Vickers, a retired master sergeant who served 15 years in the Army's 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment – Delta, commonly known as Delta Force, dismissed arguments against the carbine based on its shorter effective range, saying nearly all real-world infantry engagements happen inside 200 yards."
This is a quote from the article.
This is a quote from the article.
(4)
(0)
Sgt Jerami Ballard
The effective range of the M4 that is stated in our manuals was made under the concept that a shorter barrel automatically means a markedly shorter range. No actual fact finding was done to create this number, merely on paper math. This would be true with slower moving (i.e. subsonic) rounds but at the velocity and the stabilization our rounds experience there is no substantial difference in accuracy out to 800yds. In ranges excess of that, yes but you're not using an M4 an a DM rifle anyway. 5.56mm is a superbly accurate round out to 800yds no matter if it's shot from a 14in barrel or a 20in barrel.
I'm more curious as to whether this change affects the drill field and what will be it's reaction as drilling with an M4 is laughable and was the reason we didn't officially adopt it years back.
I'm more curious as to whether this change affects the drill field and what will be it's reaction as drilling with an M4 is laughable and was the reason we didn't officially adopt it years back.
(2)
(0)
LTC Paul Labrador
The issue with range is terminal effect. Yes an M4 will shoot almost as far as a full sized M16....but because the standard M855 round is very velocity sensitive, the terminal effect is going to be diminished due to the velocity loss. This can be mitigated by using better ammo.
(3)
(0)
GySgt (Join to see)
As far as qualification goes, I haven't shot over 240 with an M4, but I still make the low 230's. As far as longer range shots in combat, the M4 does just fine at 300 yards, beyond that, it's pretty hard to even see anyone in any sort of veg.
(1)
(0)
Too bad some variation of the M-14 can't come back to the fore. It was the product of a 20 year development program. And guys, the Emperor has no clothes on this - we never should have adopted a 5.56mm weapon at all. The attached pic is of me with my trusty M-14 rifle number 1071205. I am the skinny lance coolie in the center.
Walt
Walt
(4)
(0)
Capt Lance Gallardo
The 5.56 is going on a 40 year age cycle. Modern scientific studies on the ballistic co-efficiencies seems to show that the 6.5 MM Grendel offers greater lethality at greater distances than even the most improved 5.56 MM SOST round. The Air force is blowing billions and billions on an unproven airframe (F-35)(How DOD’s $1.5 Trillion F-35 Broke the Air Force?), and Soldiers and Marines on the ground can't get the best rifle with the best bullet that the last 40 years of advances in modern ballistics have developed. My analogy is simple, this is the Armaments equivalent of Commandant Charles Krulak looking at Marines running around in the 1997 with WWII era tech leather boots and snap together canvass shelter halves, when the rest of America has Gortex lined boots and light weight water proof tents that are deployable in 30 seconds, and anatomically support weight bearing packs (1998 "We must continue our commitment to "equip the man" vice "man the equipment." Thanks to the support of the Congress, our most important "weapon system" -- the individual Marine -- is now receiving the new infantry combat boot, the second generation cold weather clothing system (ECWCS), the Modular, Lightweight, Load-carrying Equipment (MOLLE) system, and the new combat tent. Continuing support for these individual clothing and equipment programs is critical." STATEMENT OF
GENERAL CHARLES C. KRULAK
COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
BEFORE THE
SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
ON 29 SEPTEMBER 1998
CONCERNING POSTURE ).
http://fas.org/man/congress/1998/980929ck.htm
It only takes a Commandant like Gen. Charles Krulak with enough steel in his spine to say, "if the Army can blow billions and billions trying to replace the Bradley Fighting vehicle (and to date no success) See: http://www.army-technology.com/features/featurethe-us-armys-armoured-vehicle-conundrum-4369690/,"
Surely the Marine Corps can afford to spend a Billion or Two, to make the switch over to a better combat rifle that shoots a modern bullet, and has greater lethality both in short range and longer ranges, and is more accurate at distance. While supply and inventory are considerations, I do not think that such considerations should be paramount for a Ground Combat Oriented Armed service that holds itself out as an Elite Service (and one that is relatively small). The transition could be made gradually with half of a typical Marine Infantry squad armed with the newer rifles and 6.5 Ammo, and half with the Legacy M-4s and their 5.56 Ammo.
GENERAL CHARLES C. KRULAK
COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
BEFORE THE
SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
ON 29 SEPTEMBER 1998
CONCERNING POSTURE ).
http://fas.org/man/congress/1998/980929ck.htm
It only takes a Commandant like Gen. Charles Krulak with enough steel in his spine to say, "if the Army can blow billions and billions trying to replace the Bradley Fighting vehicle (and to date no success) See: http://www.army-technology.com/features/featurethe-us-armys-armoured-vehicle-conundrum-4369690/,"
Surely the Marine Corps can afford to spend a Billion or Two, to make the switch over to a better combat rifle that shoots a modern bullet, and has greater lethality both in short range and longer ranges, and is more accurate at distance. While supply and inventory are considerations, I do not think that such considerations should be paramount for a Ground Combat Oriented Armed service that holds itself out as an Elite Service (and one that is relatively small). The transition could be made gradually with half of a typical Marine Infantry squad armed with the newer rifles and 6.5 Ammo, and half with the Legacy M-4s and their 5.56 Ammo.
(0)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
Being on sea duty we only ever got to fire the M-14's off the back of the ship when we were at sea. Strictly a fam-fire. I was issued an M-16A1 in boot camp and ITS. So I had never fired an M-14. They have got quite a kick until you get used to them.
(1)
(0)
GySgt (Join to see)
I use the M14 for matches, and had one early on as a "DMR", while I'm a big fan of 7.62, 5.56 will do the job just fine. I've personally never had a problem knocking people down with 5.56, nor have I had any issues with any variant of Mr Stoner's design.
I also miss my old jungle boots..........
I also miss my old jungle boots..........
(0)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
Back in the day, one of the Army FMs on MOUT said not to bother trying to shoot 5.56mm through walls. Use your M-60 MG's -- which sorta dates it, but the concept is the same. 7.62mm goes through walls much better than 5.56mm.
Walt
Walt
(0)
(0)
This is great news. Now let's ditch that combat 2 point sling and we'll be in business!
(4)
(0)
1LT (Join to see)
Nothing like getting hit in the balls and knees with your weapon while you're doing anything with your hands...
(0)
(0)
Read This Next