User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 10:46:25 AM EDT
[#1]
The M4 and A4 are standard-A, meaning that's how the force is going to be trained and supplied. The A2 is being phased out or are having the Modification Work Order applied to bring them to the new standard.
No big deal. Legacy guns in the arms room will be swapped up with a few parts, that's all -- it depends on where your unit falls in the priority list (next to the war, coming back for re-set, or a non-deploying institutional or school unit last). The Army uses something called a "DAMPL," or DA Master Priority List to rank who's first and who's last. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 11:03:19 AM EDT
[#2]
It goes way beyond that too.
ARMY divisions usually get COLTs while independent brigades get FNH I served with2nd ID in Korea & 82nd ABN both had Colts 20th ENG BGD, ft Sherman panama, & ft Polk's OPFOR had been issued FNH's the same for night vision divisions got the best newest stuff earlier in 97 20th eng was still using PVS5s |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 11:29:40 AM EDT
[#3]
Saw M16A2s w/ collapsible stocks late in 2011 in Iraq. Saw fixed stock A2s still in use @ the schoolhouse in Kuwait, 2013.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 11:37:27 AM EDT
[#4]
A whole lot of non-combat units are still issued A2s
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 12:17:33 PM EDT
[#5]
Seems to me the Expert Riflemen should still be issued the M16A2 &/or the M16A4 for certain situations.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 12:37:41 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seems to me the Expert Riflemen should still be issued the M16A2 &/or the M16A4 for certain situations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 12:41:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those 2 rifles do nothing an M-4 can't do, so why carry something that's bigger and heavier? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 12:45:30 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol, here we go. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Those 2 rifles do nothing an M-4 can't do, so why carry something that's bigger and heavier? What's your experience? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 12:49:14 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been issued all 3 at one time or another and couldn't tell any difference in performance between the 3. The M-4 was always smaller, lighter (except for maybe a bare bones A2), and performed when I needed it to. Just my observations on those various platforms. What's your experience? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 12:55:08 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As was I. Boot camp M16A2. Training M16A4 with RCO. Fleet M4 with RCO. The M16A4 was easier to hit targets with. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:03:19 PM EDT
[#11]
I've been issued the M16A1; M16A1 carbine; M16A2; M16A4; commercial 723 and Commando; DEA 9mm SMG; and the M4 Carbine. Shot the SDMR, National Match M16, SPR, and various cats-and-dogs variations, with and without an M203.
The first time we rehearsed break contact drills at the SF ODA level I wondered why the hell I kept getting failures to fire. Kept forgetting the Leg Army specified "Burst" over "Auto." Burst trigger sucks donkey balls. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:06:39 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those 2 rifles do nothing an M-4 can't do, so why carry something that's bigger and heavier? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Seems to me the Expert Riflemen should still be issued the M16A2 &/or the M16A4 for certain situations. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:19:23 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Longer Maximum Effective Range, in the hands of a skilled and trained Rifleman; especially with the A2 sites. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:29:23 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Longer Maximum Effective Range, in the hands of a skilled and trained Rifleman; especially with the A2 sites. Many shooters will get hung up on several myths and or plain ignorance regarding iron sights and use them to a basic yet ineficient level. Couple this with some shooters aging eyes and accuracy can deteriorate quickly. When your hot and tires, dehydrated, i can personally attest that the "focus on the front sight" becomes a struggle as fatigue sets in. Your brain tells the eye to focus but the eye strain causes loss of proper focal point. Contrast this with optical sights which allow you a focused reticle and target, offer a slight advantage to brightness in twilight settings, and feature a bdc which is mapped to the loading, not to mention the magnification which will further inprove your hit percentage. A skilled rifleman will be limited by the A2 hardware, and his skill will be enhanced by using modern hardware and optics. That said, in theory, at unkown ranges, the A4 should have a higher hit percentage due to increased velocity and reduced wind drift. Practically those who have been there and done that dont notice a differencr and weight and maneuverability ranknof higher inportance hence the love for thr carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:31:55 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I noticed many Marines get more hits and better hits with ACOGs than with just irons. I don't think they even teach irons use anymore, other than just a basic lesson on them, it has been a while, though. Perhaps an active Marine will confirm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:33:00 PM EDT
[#16]
I see quite a few M16A2 rifles up here in the Michigan National Guard…. which surprised me. Hit a few ranges last week-end with a MI NG Engineer Battalion, observed quite a few.
Interesting that they were all FN. There were some M16A4 rifles as well…. FN lowers, with a mix of FN and Colt uppers. All of our M4s (Colt) have been rearsenaled. Grey paint slopped on high edges were finish was worn away, even slopped on the barrels themselves. The exterior of the magwells were stamped AA something…. Par the course, the HHC arms room was all M4. The line units still fielding A2 and A4 rifles (along with M4s). 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 1:43:24 PM EDT
[#17]
I think the reason you see Colt over FNs in early units is because of the DAMPL fielding schedules.
Colt had the initial contract. Over the years as older contracts expired or fielding wasn't fast enough (the 2005-2010 surge meant over 50,000 new troops in 35 brigades) the Army let out new-source contracts. Colt was actually making M240s when some of the later M16 and M4 solicitations hit the streets and had no more capacity -- which opened the door to FN and Remington. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 2:04:56 PM EDT
[#18]
To add to the M4 vs. A2/A4 pecker measuring contest….
For the AVERAGE GRUNT, the benefits associated with the size and deployability of the M4 carbine surpasses the comparatively trivial benefits that the A2/A4 may contribute in regard to accuracy. I have never seen a soldier who could qualify expert with an A2/A4 not be able to do so with an M4. I give props to the Marines for training their soldiers to fully understand and field the A2 rear sight (well, they used anyway… I understand that has changed). The Army basically just teaches the soldier how to zero and deploy up to 300 yards, unless they have an opportunity to attend a DMR course. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 2:23:51 PM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
My understanding is most of the Army and Marines have gone to the M4 and M16A4. I know there are still some NG units that have A2s and possibly some units in the rear that have not have the upgrades. Is there any rhyme or reason to this? If so, who is mandated to have the vs. the upgraded platforms? If they still have the A2 in inventory and they are operational, there is no reason to not use them at many different levels, they bought a hell of a lot of those guns over the years. As long as they have been properly maintained there is no reason to shitcan them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 2:35:29 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:For the AVERAGE GRUNT, the benefits associated with the size and deployability of the M4 carbine surpasses the comparatively trivial benefits that the A2/A4 may contribute in regard to accuracy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 3:08:44 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most American GIs don't shoot past 200, but the ACOG gives some a little more confidence. I have mixed feeling on the ACOG. It has its place, but I hated and ditched it when operating (as an Infantry grunt, not an "operator") in urban environments. I didn't care for the short eye relief and couldn't train my eyes to take advantage of the reticle in CQB. I did graduate Sniper TATs and received B4 designator... I do enjoy quality glass. I am huge fan of the M68 series, but I am firm believer that the soldier must be able to qualify with BUIS before screwing around with optics. Optics just muddy the waters when trying to square away soldiers who cannot shoot for shyte. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 4:57:17 PM EDT
[#22]
I'm nearly 50. If you want me to hit the 300 yd target, give me a magnified optic. I like as not won't even see it pop up otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 5:08:46 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm nearly 50. If you want me to hit the 300 yd target, give me a magnified optic. I like as not won't even see it pop up otherwise. 
I did get to take out one of my long range bolt guns yesterday with optics and was surprised, I was still able to hit at a 1000m, but not like I used to be able to... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 5:23:03 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Longer Maximum Effective Range, in the hands of a skilled and trained Rifleman; especially with the A2 sites. The military exists to kill people, not to appeal to silly ideals like "a real rifleman uses iron sights!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 10:39:40 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those 2 rifles do nothing an M-4 can't do, so why carry something that's bigger and heavier? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/28/2017 10:56:06 PM EDT
[#26]
Not ideals, but a backup plan, sir.
Something I figured out about my 3rd day, if not sooner, of my 21+ years of military service; majority of which was in combat arms. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 7:20:49 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sure you're right on your first point, and prolly right on your second; which, if true, is a shame, because AGOGs can go down. Perhaps an active Marine will confirm? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I noticed many Marines get more hits and better hits with ACOGs than with just irons. I don't think they even teach irons use anymore, other than just a basic lesson on them, it has been a while, though. Perhaps an active Marine will confirm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 7:55:18 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As you likely know, Army qualifies out to 300 yards. In reality, past zero and qualification, a large percentage don't shoot at all! I have mixed feeling on the ACOG. It has its place, but I hated and ditched it when operating (as an Infantry grunt, not an "operator") in urban environments. I didn't care for the short eye relief and couldn't train my eyes to take advantage of the reticle in CQB. I did graduate Sniper TATs and received B4 designator... I do enjoy quality glass. I am huge fan of the M68 series, but I am firm believer that the soldier must be able to qualify with BUIS before screwing around with optics. Optics just muddy the waters when trying to square away soldiers who cannot shoot for shyte.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 7:57:04 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If memory serves, most of the Marines here on the forum have posted to the effect that any event significant enough to render the ACOG/RCO hors de combat also did so to the weapon to which it was mounted. Some have even talked about iron sights being disabled when the ACOG wasn't, or the ACOG surviving events that trashed its weapon. ACOG with a piggy back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 8:18:52 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been issued all 3 at one time or another and couldn't tell any difference in performance between the 3. The M-4 was always smaller, lighter (except for maybe a bare bones A2), and performed when I needed it to. Just my observations on those various platforms. What's your experience? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:03:24 AM EDT
[#31]
I'm showing my age to you youngsters!
I used a M16A1 for the first couple of years that I was in before getting the M16A2. The big green machine was just starting to field the M4 right before I got out. I was in Jan 89- Feb 96. The 82nd, 101st and SF started getting the M4 in 94 and they then started issuing them to others (armor crews and M88 crews) in 95. There was at least one NG unit that showed up in Saudi (Desert Shield) with M14 rifles. Now if we are strictly talking iron sights, the A2/A4 will have a little advantage over the M4 due to the longer sight radius. Optics negates that advantage at least in my personal experience. How the Army updates unit equipment makes no sense at all. I was with the 1st Armored Division in Germany from Jan 92- Dec 94. Since we were a forward deployed division, we were supposed to have priority on getting new equipment/parts/supplies. Yet my Bn was still issued 1911 pistols and M3A1 sub guns up until late 92/early 93 before turning those in for the M9. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:11:12 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm sure you're right on your first point, and prolly right on your second; which, if true, is a shame, because AGOGs can go down. Perhaps an active Marine will confirm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:11:38 AM EDT
[#33]
When I was issued an A1....
oops..my bad... wrong weapon.... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:12:33 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the reason you see Colt over FNs in early units is because of the DAMPL fielding schedules. Colt had the initial contract. Over the years as older contracts expired or fielding wasn't fast enough (the 2005-2010 surge meant over 50,000 new troops in 35 brigades) the Army let out new-source contracts. Colt was actually making M240s when some of the later M16 and M4 solicitations hit the streets and had no more capacity -- which opened the door to FN and Remington. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:14:14 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most American GIs don't shoot past 200, but the ACOG gives some a little more confidence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:16:14 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ACOG is bullet proof, (figuratively) I'll give it that. I felt no qualms about not having a BUIS (aside from FSB) while using one. As for the earlier poster not being enamered of it in urban environments, I concur completely with his observation. ACOG with a piggy back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:41:06 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's pretty ideal unless you are in the lucky half for whom the Bindon (sp?) actually works. when it doesn't is usually when you really need it to fucking work. BAC worked for me. Right until it didn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:48:08 AM EDT
[#38]
Topic Moved
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 1:11:52 PM EDT
[#39]
Didn't say that, at all.
Just a back-up plan. Try reading. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 2:10:09 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just say fighting. Its more accurate and less pretentious. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 3:17:10 PM EDT
[#41]
Been in the OR Guard since late '04, never saw an A2, all M4's with CCOs. I started out on a A2 in Basic in the early '90s.
I could qual a little better with an A2/irons than the M4 with irons. However, M4 with CCO is easier than the iron sighted A2. I pick up 2-4 more hits over irons with a CCO and it is easier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 5:09:45 PM EDT
[#42]
While I haven't been over in the box in 6 months. Still saw mixed M4s, M16A2s and M16A4s with various units. Seen 1st AD with some of these summer of 15 in Kuwait heading north.
CD |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 5:36:35 PM EDT
[#43]
at least they got collapsible stocks on them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 5:55:21 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It goes way beyond that too. ARMY divisions usually get COLTs while independent brigades get FNH I served with2nd ID in Korea & 82nd ABN both had Colts 20th ENG BGD, ft Sherman panama, & ft Polk's OPFOR had been issued FNH's the same for night vision divisions got the best newest stuff earlier in 97 20th eng was still using PVS5s |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 9:32:36 PM EDT
[#45]
For my own "operating" (shooting deadly paper targets at the range) I prefer irons. For no good reason. Well, my eyes don't seem to like Red dots very well so far. And ACOGs are expensive, and regular scopes add a lot of weight. So right now I'll stick with irons. And rifle trumps carbine for a crisper sight picture for us getting to be... mature. Well, eyes that are aging.
I got no beef with people in the military using whatever gear makes them quicker and more effective. Totally get that. I will say this, first: I think it might depend on where you are as to how far you're shooting. Seems like a lot of the stuff I see in Afghanistan is dudes shooting a heck of a long way. And regular forces are plopped on a hill tops. Right? Or maybe that's all just SF. I don't know. But seems like they might have to shoot a good poke. And secondly, I still think they should teach irons and not completely bypass them. What if your gun went down and the only thing laying around was an AK and you didn't know how to actually use the irons. Or someone elses gun and for some reason it didn't have an optic. Just seems like a good idea to actually know how to do it. I see a lot of ANA dudes carrying regular ole A2's. Might be the only thing laying around. I would hope not, but I would think it's a possibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 10:24:15 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For my own "operating" (shooting deadly paper targets at the range) I prefer irons. For no good reason. Well, my eyes don't seem to like Red dots very well so far. And ACOGs are expensive, and regular scopes add a lot of weight. So right now I'll stick with irons. And rifle trumps carbine for a crisper sight picture for us getting to be... mature. Well, eyes that are aging. I got no beef with people in the military using whatever gear makes them quicker and more effective. Totally get that. I will say this, first: I think it might depend on where you are as to how far you're shooting. Seems like a lot of the stuff I see in Afghanistan is dudes shooting a heck of a long way. And regular forces are plopped on a hill tops. Right? Or maybe that's all just SF. I don't know. But seems like they might have to shoot a good poke. And secondly, I still think they should teach irons and not completely bypass them. What if your gun went down and the only thing laying around was an AK and you didn't know how to actually use the irons. Or someone elses gun and for some reason it didn't have an optic. Just seems like a good idea to actually know how to do it. I see a lot of ANA dudes carrying regular ole A2's. Might be the only thing laying around. I would hope not, but I would think it's a possibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/29/2017 11:55:38 PM EDT
[#47]
What doesn't? I'm pretty sure I've seen tank crews with AK's in Iraq. Although they'd probably know how to shoot irons and open sights because I think they get M9's with like 1 M4 for the whole tank. Maybe.
But maybe not. I've never been in the military, so maybe you're right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2017 4:13:45 AM EDT
[#48]
I love the internet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2017 8:33:19 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What doesn't? I'm pretty sure I've seen tank crews with AK's in Iraq. Although they'd probably know how to shoot irons and open sights because I think they get M9's with like 1 M4 for the whole tank. Maybe. But maybe not. I've never been in the military, so maybe you're right. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2017 5:46:27 PM EDT
[#50]
I apologize for speaking out of turn. I have done a lot of reading, but I understand that certainly does not make me any kind of expert. You don't seem to be offering anything other than putting me down though. So.... that's not really helpful. Whether you agree or don't agree, I don't think it's a bad thing for people to learn to shoot irons. If you do, that's your perspective. I know a lot of guys at my range are ex military and they feel the same way. And many of them are involved with competition shooting with iron sighted and scoped guns. But a lot of iron sighted shooting going on there. Admittedly, a lot of them are older guys. I'm getting there.
I encouraged my kids to try scoped, red dots and irons and for some reason they tell me they prefer irons. They say they're simpler. Maybe they're weird. I don't know. They seem to hit the target well too. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
