PDA

View Full Version : CBSnews short slde show on M4 possible replacement


GasPiston
02-21-2011, 10:41 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-205_162-10006737.html?tag=page

UserM4
02-21-2011, 10:49 PM
Tell that to Pat Rogers.

smittty
02-21-2011, 10:54 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-205_162-10006737.html?tag=page


March 30, can't wait to see what happens. They could upgrade to the AK, maybe converted Saiga's LOL.

billgato
02-22-2011, 5:19 AM
It would be nice to see the army adopting the 6.8 mm SPC cartridge in a rifle with the piston system.

dieselpower
02-22-2011, 7:55 AM
Old news. We fought and still fight about this topic monthly. I was once firmly in the "M4s forever" camp, Citing all weapon systems have issues. I have since talked to dozens more Vets about life on the battlefield with the M16 family. The M16 family is great for us, its great for the common civilian , great for LEA and even in a SHTF / ITEOTWAWKI situation. Its not for Military unit trying to assault an enemy. You have different objectives, different resources and different philosophy.

1) LEO are not doing 30 days in a sandbox firing 100 - 600 rounds every 2 days without armory support..never going to happen.

2) LEO do not "hunt" criminals for days on end without support. I talked to one guy at the VA who told me 5 out of 20 M4A1s were dead causing the unit to turn around and run away. They humped 2 hours back out of mountain canyons to a support post to fix their weapons. It was 10 out of 20, but many guys carried extra parts and they got 5 of the 10 guns running. This was about 5 days into a "hunt", where they were engaging Taliban everyday. On one of those days they had to retreat, regroup, fix weapons and decide to keep retreating says a lot.

3) My civilian needs will never get this bad. Even hiking across the US after a SHTF, I am not "hunting" for trouble. I have spare parts, and my abuse on those parts doesn't come close to combat abuse. After an abusive range day, I know my firearm has a higher chance of failure since I just beat the poop out of it. I have an entire LPK waiting to see what breaks. I can sit in my nice safe house and completely disassemble my gun, inspect every part and... WTH..change it if it looks weird.

4) I am rarely (if ever) going to place myself in a situation where 5.56 will not be the best choice for killing a human. I am not Hunting humans in a mountain range expecting to have firefights at 500+ yards. There is almost no fantasy I can think of where I will be doing this. Let me repeat before the mall ninjas post situation where I will...FANTASY isn't real life. I will not be doing it with my AR15 Carbine...as an individual. Even in a fantasy SHTF situation where I must cross the Rocky Mountains in sneakers and a LaRue Ballcap I am not going to be hunting humans. I will be carefully avoiding them. I have 200 rounds on me...FOREVER...thats it, NO MORE. I can't go pulling the trigger thinking I will find more. I have to operate under the assumption I will never find any ammo.

The US Military does need a better weapon system. The M16 Family is good, but in the year 2011, we can do better for them. The only thing that stops us is $$. Equipping 100,000 troops cost a buttload...we don't have that. The best we can do now is re-issue M14s to troops hunting the enemy in adverse conditions where the M16 family isn't working out. In fact this maybe the best choice over buying a new fancy weapon system we have not fielded before and have no idea what to expect.

Sky_DiveR
02-22-2011, 8:12 AM
I didn't know that the M4/M16 platform was that bad out in the field. Is this a single incident or a common occurrence? Is it because of the age of the weapon in general, is being used way past it's prime? Being an armorer, what would be the average lifespan of the M4/M16 platform before it is no longer usable?

Outta Control
02-22-2011, 8:20 AM
What would be the price to equip our soldiers with the best battle weapon? One Abraham tank? A single Drone Predator? If it is long overdue to upgrade a tool for the foot soldiers, then give 'em the best they can "keep in the fight". Too much military funds go to support assets. Maybe the Pentagon or some military decision makers should watch shows like Future Weapons. :)

CK_32
02-22-2011, 8:21 AM
Hahaha the XM25 isnt even a rifle........


:rofl:

Pryde
02-22-2011, 8:45 AM
LOL at M14s
Yea, Lets stop issuing accurate flat top 5.56 guns and instead issue inaccurate 50 year old guns where you can't mount optics unless you buy a rail system that costs more than an m4, weighs twice as much, and uses ammo that weighs three times as much. What a great idea.

Let me guess, you never had to hump a SAW, a 240 or an A-gunner bag before?

Omega13device
02-22-2011, 8:58 AM
2) LEO do not "hunt" criminals for days on end without support. I talked to one guy at the VA who told me 5 out of 20 M4A1s were dead causing the unit to turn around and run away. They humped 2 hours back out of mountain canyons to a support post to fix their weapons. It was 10 out of 20, but many guys carried extra parts and they got 5 of the 10 guns running. This was about 5 days into a "hunt", where they were engaging Taliban everyday. On one of those days they had to retreat, regroup, fix weapons and decide to keep retreating says a lot.

Do you know exactly what the problems were? How old were the rifles and the parts that failed? You'd have to answer these questions in order to understand if this is a weapons system failure or a logistical failure (weapons maintenance).

Anecdotes like this are problematic because they lack sufficient facts or background to support any conclusions. Anyone can come up with an anecdote to support their point of view.

dieselpower
02-22-2011, 2:31 PM
LOL at M14s
Yea, Lets stop issuing accurate flat top 5.56 guns and instead issue inaccurate 50 year old guns where you can't mount optics unless you buy a rail system that costs more than an m4, weighs twice as much, and uses ammo that weighs three times as much. What a great idea.

Let me guess, you never had to hump a SAW, a 240 or an A-gunner bag before?

Do you know exactly what the problems were? How old were the rifles and the parts that failed? You'd have to answer these questions in order to understand if this is a weapons system failure or a logistical failure (weapons maintenance).

Anecdotes like this are problematic because they lack sufficient facts or background to support any conclusions. Anyone can come up with an anecdote to support their point of view.

I was going to ignore these comments, since it was just me saying it....... then the mailman came and I read my new issue of American Rifleman....

LOL... if you get the magazine and read it, you know why I am laughing.

I swear on my mothers grave, I wrote my comments on re-issuing the M14 BEFORE I got the mail, or read the news. Seems the top brass is listening to what the guys in the field are saying.

MrPlink
02-22-2011, 2:36 PM
Hahaha the XM25 isnt even a rifle........


:rofl:

beat me to it, and how awsome would it be if it became the primary service "rifle"
:D

and Diesel, stop killing mall ninja fantasies, its bad for the sport :p

smittty
02-22-2011, 3:37 PM
I was going to ignore these comments, since it was just me saying it....... then the mailman came and I read my new issue of American Rifleman....

LOL... if you get the magazine and read it, you know why I am laughing.

I swear on my mothers grave, I wrote my comments on re-issuing the M14 BEFORE I got the mail, or read the news. Seems the top brass is listening to what the guys in the field are saying.

M14's aren't cheap either. I was joking about issuing AK's but if yuo ask the guys in the sand, AR or AK? I wonder which would get more votes.

Maybe we should ask Greece to give back some that $38 billion so we could buy our guys some rifles. I joke about this too because money doesn't seem to be the problem. Our government prints it and spends it like it's toilet paper.

I think it's a contractual issue + politics + I believe our government really doesn't care about our us and our troops.

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 4:17 PM
The M16 has served our military well over the years, however- I think it's time for an upgrade. The article (from post #1) said that 19% of soldiers had a jam with their rifle in a fire fight....WTF????? that IS scary.

I know that when I shot alot of rounds in my M16 in the Marines it got dirty as hell. From what have read about the piston rifles they are much cleaner and thus less malfunctions. seems like a pretty easy decision- get better , newer up to date rifles for our soldiers. Also, the Kalashnikov rifle has been extremely reliable and is a piston system. Why not go with a piston system so they can have a more reliable, cleaner weapon in the field.

Bottom line is our government needs to step up to the plate and make "the change" for the better for our troops.

SureShot241
02-22-2011, 4:27 PM
The M16 has served our military well over the years, however- I think it's time for an upgrade. The article (from post #1) said that 19% of soldiers had a jam with their rifle in a fire fight....WTF????? that IS scary.

I know that when I shot alot of rounds in my M16 in the Marines it got dirty as hell. From what have read about the piston rifles they are much cleaner and thus less malfunctions. seems like a pretty easy decision- get better , newer up to date rifles for our soldiers. Also, the Kalashnikov rifle has been extremely reliable and is a piston system. Why not go with a piston system so they can have a more reliable, cleaner weapon in the field.

Bottom line is our government needs to step up to the plate and make "the change" for the better for our troops.

The "jam" could just be a faulty round or a double feed issue. ANY gun jams once or twice.

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 4:35 PM
The "jam" could just be a faulty round or a double feed issue. ANY gun jams once or twice.

Jamming once or twice is normal- I agree, however these guys are shooting hundreds of rounds. 19% jams is NOT acceptable. especially in a firefight that's pretty scary.

SureShot241
02-22-2011, 4:42 PM
Jamming once or twice is normal- I agree, however these guys are shooting hundreds of rounds. 19% jams is NOT acceptable. especially in a firefight that's pretty scary.

I completely agree, my point though is it doesnt say what jams are being found. They could just be counting simple usage jams.

RRichie09
02-22-2011, 4:52 PM
Jamming once or twice is normal- I agree, however these guys are shooting hundreds of rounds. 19% jams is NOT acceptable. especially in a firefight that's pretty scary.

You interpreting the stats incorrectly. It doesn't mean it jams 19% of the time or when there is a fire fight 19% of the rifles jammed. It just means during their entire tour 19% of the soliders had jams in one or more occassions. If one or two jams are normal than 100% of the soliders would have experienced jams.


What would be a more useful statistic would be how many jams were encountered over the number of rounds fired.


That's a lot of Jam in my post!

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 4:52 PM
I completely agree, my point though is it doesnt say what jams are being found. They could just be counting simple usage jams.

I would bet that 75%+ of the jams are from a dirty weapon from firing rounds, sand, etc.... I remember cleaning my bolt after firing a lot of rounds out in the desert and the carbon/sand combo was literally "caked" on the bolt carrier group. Thats not easy to clean/ keep clean in that type of environment.

tiger222
02-22-2011, 4:53 PM
That is a worthless slide show put together by idiots.

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 4:54 PM
You interpreting the stats incorrectly. It doesn't mean it jams 19% of the time or when there is a fire fight 19% of the rifles jammed. It just means during their entire tour 19% of the soliders had jams in one or more occassions. If one or two jams are normal than 100% of the soliders would have experienced jams.


What would be a more useful statistic would be how many jams were encountered over the number of rounds fired.


That's a lot of Jam in my post!

I guess I read it incorrectly- but still, 19% of the soldiers had jams is alot. This is almost 20% of our soldiers in a combat situation.

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 4:55 PM
That is a worthless slide show put together by idiots.

Hard to disagree with that statement. Most of the time the media has no idea what they are talking about.

rero360
02-22-2011, 4:56 PM
I've fired 10s of thousands of rounds through numerous M16s and M4s over the last decade, firing hundreds of rounds at times, the only malfunctions I personally have ever had was the result of blanks, I've never had an issue with live ammo. All the malfunctions I've seen by others with live ammo was due to bad magazines.

Now having said that, I wouldn't mind a better round, say 6.5 or 6.8, but I certainly don't feel under gunned with the 5.56.

smittty
02-22-2011, 4:58 PM
Bottom line is our government needs to step up to the plate and make "the change" for the better for our troops.

That is one of the most hated sayings from 2010...step up to the plate! C'mon dude, you can do better.

Uxi
02-22-2011, 5:00 PM
I think 416-style piston uppers/conversions/upgrades would be better for reliability, but don't really see a move to 6.8 as necessary for standard infantry.

RRichie09
02-22-2011, 5:02 PM
I guess I read it incorrectly- but still, 19% of the soldiers had jams is alot. This is almost 20% of our soldiers in a combat situation.

If a solider was involved in a 100 firefights and only experienced one jam, is this good or bad? If every solider was involved in 100 fire fights and each only had one jam then once again we're back at 100% jams.

My point was not whether or not the number of jams were high or low. My point was that the statistic doesn't give us enough information to make any kind of judgement in this case. It's media magic. Beware of the statistic.

Cato
02-22-2011, 5:09 PM
I wonder if the standard issue rifle really means much anymore? At least with our military we can provide our troops with endless cleaning gear and other weapons support to keep ANY rifle running. Do American riflemen even shoot it out at distance with skilled advisaries anymore? Or, do airstrikes or snipers do most of the killing nowadays? Would Sadam Hussein or Noriega have beat us at the beaches if our soldiers were carrying M1 Garands or mini 14s?

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 5:28 PM
If a solider was involved in a 100 firefights and only experienced one jam, is this good or bad? If every solider was involved in 100 fire fights and each only had one jam then once again we're back at 100% jams.

My point was not whether or not the number of jams were high or low. My point was that the statistic doesn't give us enough information to make any kind of judgement in this case. It's media magic. Beware of the statistic.

I see your point. however, I still have alot of friends still in the marines and alot of them have had issues with the m16 jamming because of the carbon/sand buildup so fast.

Uxi
02-22-2011, 5:28 PM
I wonder if the standard issue rifle really means much anymore? At least with our military we can provide our troops with endless cleaning gear and other weapons support to keep ANY rifle running. Do American riflemen even shoot it out at distance with skilled advisaries anymore? Or, do airstrikes or snipers do most of the killing nowadays? Would Sadam Hussein or Noriega have beat us at the beaches if our soldiers were carrying M1 Garands or mini 14s?



lol uh yes, we still shoot it out at distance... skill of the adversary being not nearly as relevant as their determination to try and kill Americans. Artillery used to do the most killing this century, but I'm sure airstrikes have taken up some of that... Saddam and Noriega would still have been beaten, but we'd have most likely taken alot more casualties if we were still using WW2 equipment (if not attrition warfare strategy).

SoCalG
02-22-2011, 5:29 PM
That is one of the most hated sayings from 2010...step up to the plate! C'mon dude, you can do better.

give a new guy a break :D

RRichie09
02-22-2011, 5:32 PM
I see your point. however, I still have alot of friends still in the marines and alot of them have had issues with the m16 jamming because of the carbon/sand buildup so fast.

Well, you would be the authority on that. I'm just a civilian with ZERO combat experience. :D

Just wanted to point out that bit on statistics like a big fat know it all haha.

I've read other articles on the shortcomings of the M16/M4 but have yet to see anyone suggest a solution. Maybe we'll have one after March 30th.

WDE91
02-22-2011, 5:46 PM
hmm lets bring in those m1 garands from South Korea
.30-06 ought to send some haji's to their maker

Solidsnake87
02-22-2011, 6:06 PM
I just had a friend return from Afghanistan. He is in the Air Force and was stationed in a joint Air Force/Marine Corps base over there somewhere. His primary job is arming planes but that changed one night when the base was ambushed. The enemy thought they were breaking in on the supposedly "weaker" Air Force side of the base........I bet they were in for quite a surprise when they discovered they broke into the Marine side. In any event, my buddy was asleep in his rack when his CO ran in and ordered everybody to prepare for a fight.

He told me the nervousness of the situation scared him enough but his weapon jammed on him several times during the course of the firefight. He told me that they were all using the A1 version of the M16 :eek: Luckily the ambush was put down.

I asked him if troops are allowed to replace parts periodically or replace heavily used (seemingly damaged) parts. His answer kinda scared me......NO. Troops are not allowed to replace anything till it breaks and it did not sound like they could carry spares. He basically said that somebody higher up decides that parts should last so long and cost $$$, so you use it till it breaks.

While stories like these have placed me on the "Give them a newer and better rifle" boat, if soldiers are denied the ability to periodically replace damaged and worn parts (or even to simply carry spares), then the problem of a "problem gun" will repeat itself with any fresh new design that emerges.

rero360
02-22-2011, 6:51 PM
I just had a friend return from Afghanistan. He is in the Air Force and was stationed in a joint Air Force/Marine Corps base over there somewhere. His primary job is arming planes but that changed one night when the base was ambushed. The enemy thought they were breaking in on the supposedly "weaker" Air Force side of the base........I bet they were in for quite a surprise when they discovered they broke into the Marine side. In any event, my buddy was asleep in his rack when his CO ran in and ordered everybody to prepare for a fight.

He told me the nervousness of the situation scared him enough but his weapon jammed on him several times during the course of the firefight. He told me that they were all using the A1 version of the M16 :eek: Luckily the ambush was put down.

I asked him if troops are allowed to replace parts periodically or replace heavily used (seemingly damaged) parts. His answer kinda scared me......NO. Troops are not allowed to replace anything till it breaks and it did not sound like they could carry spares. He basically said that somebody higher up decides that parts should last so long and cost $$$, so you use it till it breaks.

While stories like these have placed me on the "Give them a newer and better rifle" boat, if soldiers are denied the ability to periodically replace damaged and worn parts (or even to simply carry spares), then the problem of a "problem gun" will repeat itself with any fresh new design that emerges.

Can't really use the experience of an Air Force individual using a 40 year old rifle (I would have fired his CoC for not giving them proper equipment) as an example. That simply does not compare to the experiences of Infantry and other Combat Arms soldiers who are using much much newer rifles. When I went over to Iraq, we received our M4s from the factory about 2 months before we went to Dix for MOB.

Solidsnake87
02-22-2011, 7:07 PM
Can't really use the experience of an Air Force individual using a 40 year old rifle (I would have fired his CoC for not giving them proper equipment) as an example. That simply does not compare to the experiences of Infantry and other Combat Arms soldiers who are using much much newer rifles. When I went over to Iraq, we received our M4s from the factory about 2 months before we went to Dix for MOB.

I understand your point, but it does not refute the facts I presented. The military is still using out dated and overly worn equipment. Regardless of it (in this case)being an A1, replacing whatever the "problem" parts happened to be might have changed the situation.

RobGR
02-22-2011, 7:19 PM
In light of some of what has been said, here is a great article with first hand accounts of the incredible and the most extreme fighting conditions being seen in Afghanistan.

This is about Chosen Company in Wanat in the Waygal Valley, where their OP was almost completely overrun with several brave soldiers KIA. A must read story from the Stars & Stripes (http://www.stripes.com/news/soldiers-recount-deadly-attack-on-afghanistan-outpost-1.81141). I think in that environment and under such circumstances, pretty much any battle rifle would fail.


If anyone has any other specific accounts that discuss weapons failures in our present theaters of engagement, please post them as it's seems to be rare to find that type of info.


-

CK_32
02-22-2011, 7:27 PM
beat me to it, and how awsome would it be if it became the primary service "rifle"
:D

and Diesel, stop killing mall ninja fantasies, its bad for the sport :p

Hahahaha an air burst weapon for a service rifle. That country would be town a new a** hole.. And friendly fire will then need to be changed to platoon fire lol

Thats just ridiculous...

Im still shocked and amazed even after the attack on Remington people think the news knows a sh*ts p*ss about what they are talking about.


EDIT: Sorry I have a dirty mouth ;) Its ok I took my orbits gum. So were good.

CK_32
02-22-2011, 7:28 PM
http://i47.tinypic.com/2nut40k.jpg

Sadly this is probably posted on the news board for every station. In case a new war turn out and they have to cover a live story. They'll have a cheat sheet.

RobGR
02-22-2011, 7:44 PM
Ah, finally found this too. A lot of interesting reading about the Battle of Wanat : http://www.cgsc.edu/carl/download/csipubs/Wanat.pdf (please note that this is a PDF doc that will have to be downloaded to your computer to be viewed)

A "thankyou" to FUNBABY for posting this in an older thread of mine about the documentary RESTREPO.

Skip to page 219 for a more detailed account of the weapons failures, though you could probably start on page 215 to get a better understanding of the chapter.



-

SureShot241
02-22-2011, 7:47 PM
http://i47.tinypic.com/2nut40k.jpg

Sadly this is probably posted on the news board for every station. In case a new war turn out and they have to cover a live story. They'll have a cheat sheet.

hahahahaha fail

Anchors
02-22-2011, 8:56 PM
I have been thinking more about this.
The M16 is great. No problems. Nothing better about a newer design really. Tried and true. Guys in service can already take it apart with their eyes closed.
Simple. Cheap. 5.56 is enough for any human target (regardless of conflicting reports, ballistics confirms this).

But then I think about Iraq/Afghanistan and the conditions Soldiers and Marines (some Navy and Air Force) have faced there and it seems like it might be time for a change of some kind.
Maybe a new round all together.
Something light and fast like 5.56, but with a little more devastation/penetration.

Idk though. I'm no combat or ballistics expert.

Plus think of all those cheap, surplus AR parts kits shipped straight to your door. All you have to do is score a $99 receiver on top of one. :D

resident-shooter
02-22-2011, 9:00 PM
AK with stanag mags and good grips :D

kAnJii
02-22-2011, 10:30 PM
#5 Robinson XCR....sweeet!!!

Average Joe American
02-22-2011, 11:11 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koW5Q6y_iCc

thrillhouse700
02-22-2011, 11:23 PM
Seeing 6.8 go into mass mass mass military style production would be enough to push me into that caliber :)

Anchors
02-22-2011, 11:40 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koW5Q6y_iCc

Wow! He almost hits that other guy in his squad.
That &*^* is seriously nuts.

HK Dave
02-22-2011, 11:44 PM
Seeing 6.8 go into mass mass mass military style production would be enough to push me into that caliber :)

If the military adopted the 6.8, if a bunch of manufacturers started making rounds in 6.8, i'd be all over it too. I'd prefer 6.5 grendel but well... i think 5.56 will be around for a long while to come.

Max008
02-23-2011, 12:13 AM
Can't really use the experience of an Air Force individual using a 40 year old rifle (I would have fired his CoC for not giving them proper equipment) as an example. That simply does not compare to the experiences of Infantry and other Combat Arms soldiers who are using much much newer rifles. When I went over to Iraq, we received our M4s from the factory about 2 months before we went to Dix for MOB.

Same here we were issued new M-4's and saws with collapsable stocks and short barrels. BTW 1st army blows..... Freezing *** New Jersey!!

Nathan Krynn
02-23-2011, 4:12 AM
This has been talked to death another thread.

1) Unless the new weapon can show vast improvement over the upgraded M4 then they wont change.
2) Unless it is cheaper then the upgraded M4 then they won't change.
3) Unless NATO changed the STANAG and all of NATO switches small arms calibers which most countries cant afford to even debate about, that wont change as then our service men and women can't share ammo.
4) These trials happen every few years and its just a dog and pony show, remember the .45 trials a few years ago.

billgato
02-23-2011, 6:12 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koW5Q6y_iCc

In the first two instances, the shooter reuses the same magazine that might have contributed to the malfunctions.

In the final example, the M-4 being used is a direct impingement system. How does that prove that DI systems are in no need of improvement?

BTW, who taught the Marine in the first clip how to operate the M-4? He is using his firing hand to pull the charging handle and operate the mag release? I thought he might have been left-handed, but he clearly is not.

dieselpower
02-23-2011, 7:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koW5Q6y_iCc

That first guy has not been shown how to operate the M4. I actually think they gave him a known malfunctioning weapon to screw with him.

The second guy was using a suppressor, and full auto, that will cause problems and is a good example why SF units need and use other weapon systems.

The last clip is a good example of what I said, there is a lot of times in the field the weapons are abused for long periods. They will jam. The magazines will get abused, the action is bone dry and the firearm has not had a good looking over for weeks.

NONE of this effects a civilian or LEO. We have the advantage of never being in that soup nor the job of hunting for , and finding trouble 10 days in a row without rest.

1) The desert conditions of war has proven the M16 family of firearms is only 80% reliable [in those conditions]. Many other firearms have the same trouble, even the AK family. The M9 pistol is near 25%. Soldiers have told me it is nearly impossible to fire off a full magazine with a M9 [in those conditions].

2) The long range mountain firefights seen in Afghanistan [500 yards and beyond], have proven the NATO 5.56x45 from 55gr up to 80gr fired from a 1:7 twist, does not have the stopping power needed against a thickly clothed humans. While the projectile has the accuracy and stopping power in theory, in actual use it does not come into play. Even 80gr projectiles are tossed around on the cross winds. The distance so great, the common clothing worn is thick and layered these limit the penetration and fragmentation designed into the round.

So the military now issues modified M14s with magnified optics to be carried along side a M4A1.

As for the M4A1's 80% reliability rate...troops need to be trained to pay closer attention to their magazines and immediate action drills.

Average Joe American
02-27-2011, 10:54 PM
In the first two instances, the shooter reuses the same magazine that might have contributed to the malfunctions.

In the final example, the M-4 being used is a direct impingement system. How does that prove that DI systems are in no need of improvement?

BTW, who taught the Marine in the first clip how to operate the M-4? He is using his firing hand to pull the charging handle and operate the mag release? I thought he might have been left-handed, but he clearly is not.

I know. I was actually being sarcastic. The video was made for a guy that told me that d.i systems dont need to be improved on because they work just fine even with no oil. He said all malfunctions are magazine related and never fouling in the chamber or fouling under the extractor and that oil rarely burns off under 3 round burst fire.