Why US is still employing M16/M4?

Question

After all the complaints, field experiences (not reliable, easy to be jammed), why US has been so slow to replace the assault riffle?
M16 was really dissapointed in Nam, Afgan, Iraq..and now M4 is comming.
reported that it's really easy to be over-heated, easy to be jammed...
Heard about Delta boys has been using HK416, considered as very reliable weapons already..

Why it's so slow?
soldiers are dying out there

Answer 1

It comes down to money.

Also, the M4 series of weapon is reliable...jam is something which goes on toast. A weapon can inccur a stoppage or malfunction. A stoppage is a break in the cycle of operations because of several factors...a mafunction is when something breaks.

The M16 was a problem early in Vietnam because it was sold to Uncle Sugar as maintenance free...its a gas operate weapon requiring periodic cleaning. The Vietnam era weapons were more deadly than the current weapon. Without going too far off your question...the old guns had 1 twist in 12 inch barrel, the new weapons have 1 twist in 7 inch barrel...this means bullets fired from the older weapons were unstable and would tumble and yaw when striking flesh or other object. However, the new bullets just hit something and keep going, like a dart. If a dart hits you in the lungs, you will die without medical attention but the bad guys can keep shooting.

This is the problem with the 5.56 round, and going to a 14.5 inch barrel on the M4 excerbates the problem of velocity and stopping power.

The max sustained rate of fire for the M4 is 12-15 RPM, max semi auto is 45 RPM, and max burst is 90 RPM. The weapons propensity to overheat is not an issue, I';ve fired 300-400 rounds as fast as I could before the weapon overheated enough to cook off. The barrel got hot enough to make the handguards soft, but the weapon still funtioned.

I am unsure who you heard from that SOCOM was using the HK416...its possible, but large scale contracts are not out yet for that weapon.

Im an Air Force Cop and carry a weapon almost every day...in the AOR I would prefer a 7.62 weapon...but the M4 is as good as HK416 or XM8 for me.

Answer 2

I am Active Duty Air Force in Security Forces. I carry an M4 every day and have never had a problem with it. Jams very rarely and has never over heated. I think it is a great replacement to the M16 in that it is almsot the exact same weapon, except lighter, more compact, and a few other minor differences.

The real answer to your question is that if you really want to see faster advancements in weaponry of the US Military, we need to increase Military spending.

Now before everyone freaks out, and starts complaining about how much we have spent on this war already, read what the what a bill is actually for, and it will tell you if it is going towards operations, or equipment and supplies or what not.

Theres not too much money to go around, i know, but if advancement is what you want, that is all that is holding us back.

Answer 3

So0ldiers are dieing mostly from bombs and not bullets. The death cause is about 33% accidents, 52% bombs and 15% bullets. Any simi-auto or automatic has the possibility of the cartridge jamming. I haven't seen any soldiers in their blogs or news stories complaining about their M-16s or M-14s. Those rifles have been greatly modified since their first start.

Some of the reasons why the bullet is such a low caliber, is because a person can carry more ammo, the bullet is more accurate and the recoil is less when it's on the burst setting.

Delta Force is an anti-terrorist hostage rescue force.

The FBI tried the M5/10 (basically a .45 cal sub machine gun) and didn't like it. They probably couldn't stand the recoil when shooting three round bursts.

Answer 4

What's very interesting is that whenever a question of this type is posed anywhere, there will be a group of people who will say all the benefits and profits will go to Japan and leaves an impression that all this is a giant ploy to decieve American public. I am not at all surprised if the person asking this question intended the discussion to deterirate to this point and it was the purpose of the question. While there is a small element of truth in this argument, it is entirely missing a huge portion where it will actually benefit the American society. Firstly, most employees are American citizens. They get a stable employment where perhaps not much have existed before. Let's not forget, we do have more workers than jobs at the moment and has been like this for many years.... Secondly, as this type of large factories employ thousands of employees, a local community will form and hopefully thrive, where as perhaps it was a sparsely populated area before. Thirdly, these factories will require suppliers to supply many compnents which will spawn a huge secondary line of factories just to supply these companies which also employ people. Let's also not forget local, state, and Federal tax these company will be paying as these factories are setup as an American company (owned by Japanese company) Now, ask yourself.... if this were a GM factory, will US government and all local government get any MORE benefit? How about people of the area? One of the facts many people overlook is that US made "Japanese" cars contain very little compnents that were actually shipped from Japan. (mainly the engine and transmission) Most of them are actually locally sourced. When in doublt, look at the stickers on the car. It will give you the percentage of parts' origin. Lastly, for those who object, what would you propose? The fact has been positive that people will continue to buy Toyota products....

Answer 5

that is absolutley ludacrous. the m4 is not an unreliable weapon at all. i am over in iraq right now and the only thing that makes any weapon unreliable is the moron who operates it. i have never had an m4 jam or overheat. if you use the proper lubrication and clean it well, there will never be an issue with an m4. its fast, accurate, and extremely reliable. anytime you hear about the M4 being unreliable its because the person usiing it either didnt clean it well or used the wrong type of lubrication for the environment we're in

Answer 6

Because the govt. bought so many of them just to keep Colt in business. The old M-14s are being refurbished and reissued in small numbers. I've noticed a lot of troops are carrying some other guns and less M-16s, which is good. The .223/5.56 is a varmint round, not a bullet needed to stop unconventional warriors with. The Geneva Convention does not apply when fighting terrorists. They are not a conventional army and should be fought with strong hard hitting .30 cal. weapons.

Answer 7

the hk is a room cleaing weapon its effective range is almost as short as a pistol. it has a short barrel so that you don't see the gun as it gets close to a room in the ready position.

on the other hand the m16 can hit a man easily at 500 yards or a larger object at up to 800 yards

if its overoild or not kept clean it jams so in that repsect the ak is better for long term action, although it does not have the range of the 16

Answer 8

I could be wrong, but isn't the XM8 supposed to replace the M16? Anyway the M16 is modern compared to what we were using in the Navy, we still used M14's.

Answer 9

Funding for the Hechler and Koch weapon was post-poned... so our guys are stuck with what they have. And, yes, the H&K weapon is supposed to be a far superior weapon.

My husband's weapon has been an M4 for two years now.

Answer 10

Actually, I'd take an M-14 any day over an M-16.