The US military’s efforts to upgrade its infantry arsenal appeared to get a boost last week, when a group of senators questioned two retired generals about the need for the change and the delays hindering it.
Both the US Army and the Marine Corps are reportedly looking to replace the M4/M16 rifle platform, in use in various forms since the 1960s, as well as the 5.56 mm caliber bullet, in response to concerns about their effectiveness on the battlefield.
The M4, and the M16 before it, is “a terribly flawed weapon,” retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales told a Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on May 17. Scales said any improvements that could be made would only be marginal, due to shortcomings in the weapon’s operating system.
The range and stopping power of the M4 and the 5.56 mm round are both seen as underperforming their competitors. Studies have found that the 5.56 mm round is less lethal at the range of a typical firefight in Afghanistan during the US military’s more than 15 years there.
“Does the current M4 bullet penetrate current body armor on our adversaries?” Sen. Angus King asked Scales, who replied that it did not. “Isn’t that the end of discussion?” King asked.
Read the whole story from Business Insider.
Featured image courtesy of U.S. Marine Corps
MG Scales (RET) describes problems with the procurement process being long and arduous for achieving a better rifle. US SOCOM broke the code on commercial off the shelf procurement in 2001/2002 with the procurement of the Raytheon MultiBand Multi-Mission Radio. Lacking RDTE funds to follow the normal procurement cycle, the PEO for Communications and Intelligence systems decided to do a commercial off the shelf buy. The buy was unusual in that there was no actual product available. The PEO was aware of existing technology capabilities and determined the effort to field a system meeting operational requirements was a packaging requirement rather than developing new technology. A request for proposal of a commercial off the shelf product was released with the specification that bidders had to provide a product ready for 1st Article Testing and fielding if the won the bid. Regulations at the time allowed COTS items to be tested using Procurement of which the PEO had plenty. Raytheon won the contract. The PEO received a Defense Acquisition Award. IMO this process should be used for individual and crew served weapons. We know where we are on the technology curve, just tell bidders to come to the table with a test item meeting operational requirements ready for testing and fielding.