So politicians think they know more than the military about guns now?
Basically Congress wants to spend millions of possibly even billions on dollars on new guns even though our own military is saying thats a crap idea since our guns are just fine right now and the new stuff arent that great either.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24229068
Tagged with: billions • congress • crap • guns • msnbc • new stuff
Filed under: military guns
You are possibly misunderstanding what this article is saying.
Colt has had the contract forever, and it’s up for renewal.
The military is still looking into the possibility of switching to another weapon, such as the HK416 or an FN made weapon.
Alot of testing has gone on in the past few years, and the M4 is still fairly reliable.
Until a new weapon is agreed upon, they will have to renew the contract to replace ones that are beyond their service life, and replace damaged ones.
They have to renew it, until they find a suitable replacement.
That’s ridiculous. That’s not a choice for a bureaucrat. The M4 is an awesome weapon, and I’ve heard plenty of soldiers say so. If there’s something wrong with the contract, have it renegotiated.
If they are going to replace it, it better be with the Barrett M468 or the HK416.
politicians get money from companies to order their crap.
the M16 started life as the civilian AR15. it worked great. then the politicians wanted everybody and their brother to be paid to make changes, so the millitary got a weapon that wouldnt work in the heat, humidity or dirt.
i forget the name of the movie, but it was about an air force officer being assigned to oversee the army testing of the Bradly fighting vehicle, true story and funny as hell.
the army wanted a tank, couldnt get one approved, so they added a gun to the Bradly, it drew fire, but didnt have the armor.
the marines wanted it to float, so they spend several billion throwing it overboard, and losing several prototypes, trying to get it to float.
to prove that it would not explode when it got hit by weapons, they shot at it. with the fuel tanks filled with water and the ammo filled with sand.
the air force officer bought sheep, put them inside, and shot it with real ammo to prove soldiers would die.
the army stole his dead sheep.
"The guy killing the enemy with this gun loves it," says Keys, a former Marine Corps general who was awarded the Navy Cross for battlefield valor in Vietnam. "I’m not going to stand here and disparage the senator, but I think he’s wrong."
Too bad, however, that Congress is in charge, not the military. This is nothing more than trying to spook Colt in lowering its cost per rifle by threatening to go elsewhere.
However, only 89% were happy with the rifle’s performance in combat. To me, that should be 99%! (After all, you can’t please everyone.)
Somebody is promising some politicians a lot of money for buying their rifle.
That’s how the military gets stuck with a lot of trash.
Anybody else remember the Ontos,the Gamma Goat or Viet Nam era Flak Jacket?
How about the Sgt. York anti-aircraft gun?
Congress needs to get out of the way and let the military buy what it needs.
First give the military a few samples to break and make improvements on.
The M16 and M4 carbine are a nightmare in sandy dusty conditions, like where we are fighting right now.
Financially, refitting existing M16/M4 lower receivers with the H&K HK416 is probably the most cost efficient way to go. It resolves all the major problems the M16 has.
The only advantage I can see with going with FN SCAR is if you want to move up to 7.62 over 5.56 cartridges.
It’s not entirely up to the politicians. Politicians come and go but the members of the US Defense Staff are always there and the inevitable "men in grey suits" the civil service advisors to the politicians who don’t change when one congressman or senator loses his seat.
The process of awarding a contract calls for close co-operation between the Pentagon, Congress and Senate. Soldiers will trial new weapons and opinions will be bounced around. Cost is a factor and will be taken into consideration. The end result is inevitably a load of grumbling soldiers however because soldiers hate change and even if you gave them a point and fire ray gun they’ll still say they preferred their M16 or whatever. Take a look at the British Army. They changed from the L1A1 SLR to the Enfield SA 80 L85A1) and it was (and is) a superb weapon. It had a number of little teething problems which were sorted out within a couple of years but to this day you’ll still find old soldiers grumbing that the SLR was a much better rifle – and they’ll still cite the minor faults which were eradicated in the L85A2 10 years ago or more.