TexasCHLforum.com

I first read this article over the week end and have been giving considerable thought to what it says. I think that there may be several causes for the problems that were experienced by the M4 and also the M249.

“The platoon-sized unit of U.S. soldiers and about two dozen Afghan troops was shooting back with such intensity the barrels on their weapons turned white hot.”

No way, no how. Barrels will get hot enough to burn like a branding iron and especially at night will glow a dull red, but never white.

Everyone that shoots an M4 knows about the maintenance issues that come from a direct gas system, when you shoot the M4; it gets fouled after several hundred rounds. But that does not explain why the SAW was also inoperable. The M249 SAW has a gas piston system like the Garand and M14. The SAW is also issued with 2 barrels and it takes 30 seconds to change barrels.

I had a long talk with a little buddy that lives down the street who served 2 tours in Iraq and 1tour in Afghanistan. He carried the M4 and of course his squad had a SAW. His first thought was a maintenance problem. He said that the guys that stay in one place without running patrols tend to get real sloppy with weapon maintenance. And because they were in a fixed position, there is no explanation why all SAW’s did not have the extra barrels at the ready and located with the weapons.

The other question that I have is the ammo. Current issue is the 62gr steel penetrator. I wonder if it is up to specs and who makes it. Have we outsourced ammo like we have other things or is it all still made by Lake City. The only thing that the 2 weapons in question share is the same ammo. Other than that they are entirely different weapon systems with no shared parts.

Thoughts?