Thread: M4's fail in combat

As I've been observing basic trainees (cadet perk) I've actually seen more recent implementation of marksmanship.

"Every Soldier a Rifleman"

Used to be something I've only heard Marines say.

Originally Posted by shootin&strummin

I saw this earlier today too. That must have been one mofo of a firefight.

When you read Marcus Lutrell's book you realize how tough the M-14 (or at least the SOCOM one he had) is. His went through some shizzle to say the least.

My question would be why haven't we heard much about the M4 failing until this? Is this really a push for the SCAR? Conspiracy theory ??????

Marcus used an accurized M4/SPR for the mission. In the book, it sounds like he is describing an SPR, but most of the photos on the net seem to show him with a suppressed M4 (Not Mk18) with an ACOG.

Originally Posted by SGT.Cap

"My weapon was overheating," McKaig said, according to Cubbison's report. "I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had only been about a half hour or so into the fight. I couldn't charge my weapon and put another round in because it was too hot, so I got mad and threw my weapon down."

Twelve mags full auto/burst in under half an hour will cause almost any weapon system to overheat and jam. I'm sorry but the problem is not in the weapon its in the operator. They are running outside the limits for sustained fire and this is what happens. Any rifle will do this under these conditions.

Aimed controlled fire at a rapid/riflemens cadence (one round every 2-3 seconds) would have saved lives and prevented this. Again I say this was a training issue. If these guys could have hit their target at reasonable distances, they wouldnt have been doing mag dumps and overheating their rifles.

RIP. I hope this is a leason to the Army. CQB is important but so is marksmanship. They have forgone the latter resently and its showing.

I agree with Cap. At this ROF, weapons will overheat and there will be failures. Some other problem areas that may have contributed:

• Poor cleaning or lack thereof- Also lack lubrication which is vital when the weapon gets that hot.
• Maintenance-There is an illuminating thread on M4C about broken bolts. The consensus from some of the experts is that the M4 should have the bolt replaced at every 4k-10K rounds depending on the level of usage. This is not being done in most line units and parts get replaced as damage is discovered or when the fail (too late if in a firefight).
• Carbine length gas system- The carbine length gas system is more violent and puts more stress on the bolt than a mid or rifle length system. Note that Iraq and Afghanistan are the first major conflicts we have fought with the M4 carbine in general issue as opposed to the M16 series with rifle length gas systems and lower port pressures.
• Bad magazines-Magazines are expendable and should be replaced when damaged or significantly worn, but the chain of command never seems to get this through their heads.
• Training ammo- Supposedly the new frangible ammo is very high pressure and may be to blame for a spike in bolt failures.

Check out this blog.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...4-controversy/

Even a Mini14 will fil at that ROF.

hmmmm. If you do the math. 12 thirty round mags = 360
divided by 30 min = 12 rounds / minute which is one round every 5 seconds... Doesn't his fall well above the one round every 2-3 seconds riflemens cadence? What am I missing?

Originally Posted by jmccann

hmmmm. If you do the math. 12 thirty round mags = 360
divided by 30 min = 12 rounds / minute which is one round every 5 seconds... Doesn't his fall well above the one round every 2-3 seconds riflemens cadence? What am I missing?

A firefight that lasts "about 30 minutes" is probably actually half that. Time seems to stand still under stress. They mention burst fire specificly.

I'm betting the estimate of 30 minutes is high and the 12 mags estimate is low.

So what we have here is an old scapegoat problem.


When the M4's seize up for the same reasons that ANY weapon seizes up, people automatically think of the M16's history with jams, mud, and sand, and say that it's the problem.


I honestly trust the Stoner platform to be robust enough.

I have to agree with Cap. We need to train RIFLEMEN and not rely on overwhelming firepower. We need to train folks to hit what they aim at.