Mainsail
Member
National Journal
May 6, 2006
Issues & Ideas
The M-16 Soldiers On
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.
Since World War II, the American war machine has excelled at high technology. Today it boasts stealth fighters, cruise missiles, and 60-ton tanks that can shrug off cannon shells. But in the narrow alleys and dark rooms where no machine can go, the U.S. military still relies on young men with rifles, the same centuries-old "weapons system" used by its less formidable adversaries. And since 1945, 80 percent of Americans killed in action have been infantry.
"The money's gone into the big platforms, like fighters and ships," said retired Marine Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper. "But wait a minute: This is not our Achilles' heel. Our Achilles' heel is infantry casualties. It's changing, but there's this World War II mentality -- the dumb grunts, you give them a rifle, a pair of boots, and a bayonet. We haven't put the money into infantry equipment until quite recently."
Since 2003, items such as body armor, telescopic gun sights, and handheld radios that were once reserved for elite units have become commonplace for individual soldiers. (See NJ, 4/22/06, p. 32.) But amid all of the changes in the infantry, one thing remains, remarkably, the same: the weapons they carry. The heaviest portable weapons, the M-240 and M-249 light machine guns, entered service in the 1980s. The standard M-16 rifle has been in use since 1964.
"We have the same weapons in 2006 that were grossly inadequate in Vietnam," fumed retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, who won a Silver Star there in 1969. "Meanwhile, we've been through three generations of fighter planes. There are many, many weapons on the market right now better than the M-16. Why don't we just buy the dang things?"
The M-16 is one of the most bitterly debated firearms in U.S. history. Although the first M-16s misfired regularly in muddy, humid Vietnam, those maintenance problems were largely fixed by later models and better training. But since the 1960s, an intractable and emotional argument has raged over the rifle's relatively small-caliber bullet: just 5.56 millimeters in diameter, compared with the 7.62 standard of its predecessor, the M-14, and the world's most common rifle, the Russian AK-47.
"In every war we've fought using this thing, we've had people complain about the lethality," said retired Marine Maj. Anthony Milavic. A Vietnam veteran who became a small-arms activist, Milavic has accumulated report after report of enemies surviving multiple hits from American M-16s, from Ia Drang in 1965 ("Even after being hit several times in the chest, many continued firing and moving for several more steps ... ") to Ramadi in 2003 ("An insurgent was struck in the torso by [seven] rounds.... He continued to fire his AK-47 and mortally wounded Master Sgt. Kevin N. Morehead [and] Sgt. 1st Class William M. Bennett").
"It's primarily anecdotal," Maj. Glenn Dean, chief of small arms for the Army's Directorate of Combat Development at Fort Benning, Ga., says of such reports. "Soldiers have survived wounds by 7.62 rifles, too. You only get an instantaneous kill if you hit the brain."
The Army's Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey is conducting its most extensive tests of different bullets since 1990, when an M-16 replacement program called the Advanced Combat Rifle was canceled. Milavic says that an interim report revealed that the Army's own testers found the 5.56 to be far inferior to larger calibers. The military's experts reply that they are hardly finished with their research -- and that most of their data so far are only on alternative forms of the 5.56, which has been redesigned since Vietnam.
"We have conducted an initial study on the 5.56, and from there we are going to conduct additional analysis to determine if other calibers are better," said Col. Robert Radcliffe, director of combat development at Fort Benning. "Clearly, bigger is going to have more destructive power -- but there are limits to what soldiers can carry. It's all about balance."
The primary argument for the 5.56 round, in the 1960s and today, is weight: the lighter the ammunition, the more one man can carry. And quantity matters because most shots fired in the heat of battle miss: Some studies estimate that an average of 50,000 rounds are fired for every casualty.
Since World War I, in fact, most rifle fire has been covering fire, aimed only at keeping the enemy's head down, while heavy weapons such as machine guns, mortars, and howitzers do most of the killing. But in Iraq, concern for civilian casualties has driven U.S. forces away from artillery barrages and "suppressive fire" and toward training infantry riflemen to use sophisticated scopes once reserved for snipers. Interestingly, both snipers and squad marksmen often prefer weapons with the same 7.62 caliber as the old M-14.
The military is testing a radically new weapon meant to combine a sniper's accuracy with explosive power: the XM-25, a rifle-like launcher for 25-millimeter mini-grenades. A built-in laser range finder feeds precise targeting data into each shell's computerized fuse, priming it to detonate not on impact but in midair -- in theory, just over the heads of enemy troops sheltered from regular rifles in trenches or behind walls. It would be especially suited for fighting guerrillas in cities, as in Iraq. But on any battlefield, the "air bursting" technology would represent the biggest innovation in infantry weapons since the machine guns of the First World War.
"We have this great technology that's out there; it's not like it's in the lab," said Lt. Col. Kevin Stoddard, a product manager at Picatinny. But Fort Benning -- whose Directorate of Combat Development must officially certify that a new technology is militarily necessary before it can be bought in quantity for the troops -- hasn't given the green light for a new infantry weapon.
The stumbling block, said Dean, the small-arms chief, is the weight of both the weapons themselves and their ammunition. Even small grenades are much heavier than bullets. And unlike current grenade launchers -- shorter-range and less accurate than the air bursters, but compact enough to clip onto a rifle barrel -- the XM-25 is still so big that an infantryman would have to carry it instead of a rifle, effectively disarming him at ranges too close for explosive shells. Research to make the XM-25 lighter continues, but it is expected to remain a specialist's weapon, and not a replacement for the M-16.
Picatinny was working on an M-16 replacement, the XM-8 -- based on a 5.56-caliber rifle made by Germany's Heckler and Koch -- but that project has been suspended indefinitely. "With a fixed number of dollars to spend, it wasn't a big enough return on investment," Dean said. Instead, the military is focusing limited funding on better gun sights and lighter components for existing weapons.
So the trend is toward less bulk, not more power. Troops in Iraq report that their favored weapon is the M-4, a cut-down version of the M-16 whose shorter barrel makes it less accurate at long range but easier to use in close quarters, such as fighting inside houses or from moving vehicles.
For the long run, the Army is studying advanced polymers for gun components and cartridge cases. An experimental "plastic" M-249, with 600 bullets, weighs half as much as the metal ones used today. But the necessary testing, let alone retooling of factories, Dean said, puts any large-scale fielding of such weapons "10 years out" -- around the 50th anniversary of the M-16.
What's in a Weapon?
The U.S. has used the same rifle for more than 40 years, the M-16 -- upgraded several times but still often criticized as underpowered next to its bulkier rival, the AK-47, used by insurgents from Vietnam to Iraq. High-tech replacements like the XM-25 show promise, but their complexity and bulk remain a barrier.
Comparing calibers -- The bigger the projectile, the more damage it can do -- but the less ammunition troops can carry.
M-16: The standard U.S. rifle since 1964, designed for portability, not power. Length (inches): 39.6, Unloaded Weight (lbs): 7.5, Magazine (rounds): 30, Range (meters): 600
AK-47: The world's most common rifle, a rugged Russian design. Length (inches): 34.2, Unloaded Weight (lbs): 9.5, Magazine (rounds): 30, Range (meters): 400
XM-25: Experimental weapon that fires high-tech, and heavy, explosive shells. Length (inches): "less than 30", Unloaded Weight (lbs): 14, Magazine (rounds): 4, Range (meters): 500
SOURCE: U.S. Army
May 6, 2006
Issues & Ideas
The M-16 Soldiers On
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr.
Since World War II, the American war machine has excelled at high technology. Today it boasts stealth fighters, cruise missiles, and 60-ton tanks that can shrug off cannon shells. But in the narrow alleys and dark rooms where no machine can go, the U.S. military still relies on young men with rifles, the same centuries-old "weapons system" used by its less formidable adversaries. And since 1945, 80 percent of Americans killed in action have been infantry.
"The money's gone into the big platforms, like fighters and ships," said retired Marine Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper. "But wait a minute: This is not our Achilles' heel. Our Achilles' heel is infantry casualties. It's changing, but there's this World War II mentality -- the dumb grunts, you give them a rifle, a pair of boots, and a bayonet. We haven't put the money into infantry equipment until quite recently."
Since 2003, items such as body armor, telescopic gun sights, and handheld radios that were once reserved for elite units have become commonplace for individual soldiers. (See NJ, 4/22/06, p. 32.) But amid all of the changes in the infantry, one thing remains, remarkably, the same: the weapons they carry. The heaviest portable weapons, the M-240 and M-249 light machine guns, entered service in the 1980s. The standard M-16 rifle has been in use since 1964.
"We have the same weapons in 2006 that were grossly inadequate in Vietnam," fumed retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, who won a Silver Star there in 1969. "Meanwhile, we've been through three generations of fighter planes. There are many, many weapons on the market right now better than the M-16. Why don't we just buy the dang things?"
The M-16 is one of the most bitterly debated firearms in U.S. history. Although the first M-16s misfired regularly in muddy, humid Vietnam, those maintenance problems were largely fixed by later models and better training. But since the 1960s, an intractable and emotional argument has raged over the rifle's relatively small-caliber bullet: just 5.56 millimeters in diameter, compared with the 7.62 standard of its predecessor, the M-14, and the world's most common rifle, the Russian AK-47.
"In every war we've fought using this thing, we've had people complain about the lethality," said retired Marine Maj. Anthony Milavic. A Vietnam veteran who became a small-arms activist, Milavic has accumulated report after report of enemies surviving multiple hits from American M-16s, from Ia Drang in 1965 ("Even after being hit several times in the chest, many continued firing and moving for several more steps ... ") to Ramadi in 2003 ("An insurgent was struck in the torso by [seven] rounds.... He continued to fire his AK-47 and mortally wounded Master Sgt. Kevin N. Morehead [and] Sgt. 1st Class William M. Bennett").
"It's primarily anecdotal," Maj. Glenn Dean, chief of small arms for the Army's Directorate of Combat Development at Fort Benning, Ga., says of such reports. "Soldiers have survived wounds by 7.62 rifles, too. You only get an instantaneous kill if you hit the brain."
The Army's Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey is conducting its most extensive tests of different bullets since 1990, when an M-16 replacement program called the Advanced Combat Rifle was canceled. Milavic says that an interim report revealed that the Army's own testers found the 5.56 to be far inferior to larger calibers. The military's experts reply that they are hardly finished with their research -- and that most of their data so far are only on alternative forms of the 5.56, which has been redesigned since Vietnam.
"We have conducted an initial study on the 5.56, and from there we are going to conduct additional analysis to determine if other calibers are better," said Col. Robert Radcliffe, director of combat development at Fort Benning. "Clearly, bigger is going to have more destructive power -- but there are limits to what soldiers can carry. It's all about balance."
The primary argument for the 5.56 round, in the 1960s and today, is weight: the lighter the ammunition, the more one man can carry. And quantity matters because most shots fired in the heat of battle miss: Some studies estimate that an average of 50,000 rounds are fired for every casualty.
Since World War I, in fact, most rifle fire has been covering fire, aimed only at keeping the enemy's head down, while heavy weapons such as machine guns, mortars, and howitzers do most of the killing. But in Iraq, concern for civilian casualties has driven U.S. forces away from artillery barrages and "suppressive fire" and toward training infantry riflemen to use sophisticated scopes once reserved for snipers. Interestingly, both snipers and squad marksmen often prefer weapons with the same 7.62 caliber as the old M-14.
The military is testing a radically new weapon meant to combine a sniper's accuracy with explosive power: the XM-25, a rifle-like launcher for 25-millimeter mini-grenades. A built-in laser range finder feeds precise targeting data into each shell's computerized fuse, priming it to detonate not on impact but in midair -- in theory, just over the heads of enemy troops sheltered from regular rifles in trenches or behind walls. It would be especially suited for fighting guerrillas in cities, as in Iraq. But on any battlefield, the "air bursting" technology would represent the biggest innovation in infantry weapons since the machine guns of the First World War.
"We have this great technology that's out there; it's not like it's in the lab," said Lt. Col. Kevin Stoddard, a product manager at Picatinny. But Fort Benning -- whose Directorate of Combat Development must officially certify that a new technology is militarily necessary before it can be bought in quantity for the troops -- hasn't given the green light for a new infantry weapon.
The stumbling block, said Dean, the small-arms chief, is the weight of both the weapons themselves and their ammunition. Even small grenades are much heavier than bullets. And unlike current grenade launchers -- shorter-range and less accurate than the air bursters, but compact enough to clip onto a rifle barrel -- the XM-25 is still so big that an infantryman would have to carry it instead of a rifle, effectively disarming him at ranges too close for explosive shells. Research to make the XM-25 lighter continues, but it is expected to remain a specialist's weapon, and not a replacement for the M-16.
Picatinny was working on an M-16 replacement, the XM-8 -- based on a 5.56-caliber rifle made by Germany's Heckler and Koch -- but that project has been suspended indefinitely. "With a fixed number of dollars to spend, it wasn't a big enough return on investment," Dean said. Instead, the military is focusing limited funding on better gun sights and lighter components for existing weapons.
So the trend is toward less bulk, not more power. Troops in Iraq report that their favored weapon is the M-4, a cut-down version of the M-16 whose shorter barrel makes it less accurate at long range but easier to use in close quarters, such as fighting inside houses or from moving vehicles.
For the long run, the Army is studying advanced polymers for gun components and cartridge cases. An experimental "plastic" M-249, with 600 bullets, weighs half as much as the metal ones used today. But the necessary testing, let alone retooling of factories, Dean said, puts any large-scale fielding of such weapons "10 years out" -- around the 50th anniversary of the M-16.
What's in a Weapon?
The U.S. has used the same rifle for more than 40 years, the M-16 -- upgraded several times but still often criticized as underpowered next to its bulkier rival, the AK-47, used by insurgents from Vietnam to Iraq. High-tech replacements like the XM-25 show promise, but their complexity and bulk remain a barrier.
Comparing calibers -- The bigger the projectile, the more damage it can do -- but the less ammunition troops can carry.
M-16: The standard U.S. rifle since 1964, designed for portability, not power. Length (inches): 39.6, Unloaded Weight (lbs): 7.5, Magazine (rounds): 30, Range (meters): 600
AK-47: The world's most common rifle, a rugged Russian design. Length (inches): 34.2, Unloaded Weight (lbs): 9.5, Magazine (rounds): 30, Range (meters): 400
XM-25: Experimental weapon that fires high-tech, and heavy, explosive shells. Length (inches): "less than 30", Unloaded Weight (lbs): 14, Magazine (rounds): 4, Range (meters): 500
SOURCE: U.S. Army
