2006-08-18 08:19:15 · 13 answers · asked by anonymous 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Does it work well? If so, why replace it. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" kind of thing.
Just take the F-16 fighter. It's still being used, and have been used for the last 35 years.
2006-08-18 08:25:57 · answer #1 · answered by amg503 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not for awhile and it depends. Part of the reason for the M-16's low caliper is to wound people so that they are taken off the battlefield with the help of people which can take three or four people off the battlefield at once (one wounded and 2 or three helpers). This works in a very few places. It does not work in Arab countries where they just leave their fighting wounded for the Americans to fix (which ends up taking Americans off the battlefield). They need to move up to a .30 Cal or 9 mm round. Maybe the M-1 or the Mp5 would be better weapons in these areas.
2006-08-18 16:05:25 · answer #2 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not in the immediate future; they have only after a half century worked (most) of the bugs out of the system. They finally adopted a squad level machine gun (the M249, the Squad Automatic Weapon, or SAW for short) that uses the same cartridge and weighs less than the boat anchor heavy M60 machine gun. Besides, the people in charge at the Pentagon have more important things on their minds(?) like redesigning the service's dress uniforms. To give perspective, during WWII there were six million under arms, not counting reserves, in all services; today the number even counting reserves is right at two million, yet we have 30% more generals and admirals today. Taking care of the soldier must take a back seat to taking care of one's career.
2006-08-18 17:32:38 · answer #3 · answered by batteredwhiteknight 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
currently the m16 is giving way to the M4 which most soldiers seem to prefer. i believe by 2008/2009 the military will switch over to their new prototype X22 i think it's called. it the one that can be changed into various different configurations like a compact entry weapon, long range assault rifle or medium range snioper rifle. this will go hand in hand with the land warrior setup they should have in place by around that same time
2006-08-18 15:26:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Next 2 years.
2006-08-18 15:24:17 · answer #5 · answered by helixburger 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
OICW system is supposed to be adopted before 2010 i believe which will phase out both the M16 and the M4
http://www.wandererverse.com/Wanderer/Armory/mundane/OICW_4.jpg
theres a picture
2006-08-18 19:06:33 · answer #6 · answered by Michael B 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
when somebody designs a rifle that's improvements over the M16 are worth the extra cost.
BTW, the XM8 and the OICW programs were both cancelled.
2006-08-18 17:45:02 · answer #7 · answered by Incorrectly Political 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not for awhile, the M-16A2, M-4 are both durable & reliable rifles. And in the hands of a Marine, they are very deadly weapons
2006-08-21 20:43:56 · answer #8 · answered by Ghost_Target 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not until we develop something better, such as a caseless battle rifle or something along the lines of the OICW which was cancelled.
2006-08-18 16:04:52 · answer #9 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The sooner the better - we need a heavier caliber, especially for those Afghani tribesmen - those guys just DO NOT want to go down!
2006-08-18 15:27:59 · answer #10 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋