Why dosent the military adopt new primary weapons?
December 22nd, 2009 by eranio
The primary weapon for the army is a M16 pretty common. Its old still reliable and has great accuarcy but isnt it time to get a upgrade? It just might be the cost of the contract or something. Thanks peeps.
Oh yeah the m4 sorry im just a little sleepy today.
Good point with the computer, Nice simile, I never thought of that.
Posted in military weapons
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
They do up grade, but when you are buying them by the millions you can not afford to go out and buy the lastest and greatest every year.
It’s most cost effective to make a major upgrade every 15-20 years.
A perfect example is that you do not go out and but a new computer everytime a better one comes out. Same idea on a larger scale.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Its the M4, and there is a new M2 supposed to be coming out soon as well. Its supposed to have less recoil, weigh less, and not get so hot.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
It has been updated. We are on the A4 version of the M16. In the 1990′s we added the M249 SAW. In the 2000′s we replaced the M60 with the M240B.
We upgraded the M1 Tank to M1A2 in the 1990s.
The F22 is coming online.
We updated the F14 with the F18 Super Hornets.
Congress is the biggest reason why we keep models for so long. They like to keep jobs in thier districts.
Upgrades happen all the time
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Because the current weapon works just fine. It’s durable, accurate, and adaptable to different scenarios.
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
well I don’t know about the other branches, but I do know the army might be upgrading soon, we are under contract with colt to stay with the m16/m4, however at the end of 2009 our contract goes up, so you might see something new within the next few years
December 22nd, 2009 at 8:03 pm
The M4 and M16 series has been upgraded many times. The sights, adaptability and accuracy are excellent. Don’t fix what’s not broken.