Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41

Thread: Did Weapons Fail U.S. Troops During Afghanistan Assault?

  1. #1

    Default Did Weapons Fail U.S. Troops During Afghanistan Assault?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,563883,00.html

    Did Weapons Fail U.S. Troops During Afghanistan Assault?

    Sunday , October 11, 2009

    WASHINGTON —

    In the chaos of an early morning assault on a remote U.S. outpost in eastern Afghanistan, Staff Sgt. Erich Phillips' M4 carbine quit firing as militant forces surrounded the base. The machine gun he grabbed after tossing the rifle aside didn't work either.

    When the battle in the small village of Wanat ended, nine U.S. soldiers lay dead and 27 more were wounded. A detailed study of the attack by a military historian found that weapons failed repeatedly at a "critical moment" during the firefight on July 13, 2008, putting the outnumbered American troops at risk of being overrun by nearly 200 insurgents.

    Which raises the question: Eight years into the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, do U.S. armed forces have the best guns money can buy?

    Despite the military's insistence that they do, a small but vocal number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq has complained that the standard-issue M4 rifles need too much maintenance and jam at the worst possible times.

    A week ago, eight U.S. troops were killed at a base near Kamdesh, a town near Wanat. There's no immediate evidence of weapons failures at Kamdesh, but the circumstances were eerily similar to the Wanat battle: insurgents stormed an isolated stronghold manned by American forces stretched thin by the demands of war.

    Army Col. Wayne Shanks, a military spokesman in Afghanistan, said a review of the battle at Kamdesh is under way. "It is too early to make any assumptions regarding what did or didn't work correctly," he said.

    Complaints about the weapons the troops carry, especially the M4, aren't new. Army officials say that when properly cleaned and maintained, the M4 is a quality weapon that can pump out more than 3,000 rounds before any failures occur.

    The M4 is a shorter, lighter version of the M16, which made its debut during the Vietnam war. Roughly 500,000 M4s are in service, making it the rifle troops on the front lines trust with their lives.

    Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a leading critic of the M4, said Thursday the Army needs to move quickly to acquire a combat rifle suited for the extreme conditions U.S. troops are fighting in.

    U.S. special operations forces, with their own acquisition budget and the latitude to buy gear the other military branches can't, already are replacing their M4s with a new rifle.

    "The M4 has served us well but it's not as good as it needs to be," Coburn said.

    Battlefield surveys show that nearly 90 percent of soldiers are satisfied with their M4s, according to Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, head of the Army office that buys soldier gear. Still, the rifle is continually being improved to make it even more reliable and lethal.

    Fuller said he's received no official reports of flawed weapons performance at Wanat. "Until it showed up in the news, I was surprised to hear about all this," he said.

    The study by Douglas Cubbison of the Army Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., hasn't been publicly released. Copies of the study have been leaked to news organizations and are circulating on the Internet.

    Cubbison's study is based on an earlier Army investigation and interviews with soldiers who survived the attack at Wanat. He describes a well-coordinated attack by a highly skilled enemy that unleashed a withering barrage with AK-47 automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades.

    The soldiers said their weapons were meticulously cared for and routinely inspected by commanders. But still the weapons had breakdowns, especially when the rifles were on full automatic, which allows hundreds of bullets to be fired a minute.

    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. The high rate of fire appears to have put a number of weapons out of commission, even though the guns are tested and built to operate in extreme conditions.

    Cpl. Jonathan Ayers and Spc. Chris McKaig were firing their M4s from a position the soldiers called the "Crow's Nest." The pair would pop up together from cover, fire half a dozen rounds and then drop back down.

    On one of these trips up, Ayers was killed instantly by an enemy round. McKaig soon had problems with his M4, which carries a 30-round magazine.

    "My weapon was overheating," McKaig said, according to Cubbison's report. "I had shot about 12 magazines by this point already and it had only been about a half hour or so into the fight. I couldn't charge my weapon and put another round in because it was too hot, so I got mad and threw my weapon down."

    The soldiers also had trouble with their M249 machine guns, a larger weapon than the M4 that can shoot up to 750 rounds per minute.

    Cpl. Jason Bogar fired approximately 600 rounds from his M-249 before the weapon overheated and jammed the weapon.

    Bogar was killed during the firefight, but no one saw how he died, according to the report.
    D.M.T.Tof D. www.artofcombat.com


  2. #2
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    The M 16 and it deriviatives (M4) are extremely adequate unless you are put in a position such as those guys were in. When it is abused to the maximum by a combat situation (these guys had no choice), it is prone to failure. The U.S. military is way over due for a replacement. I know I never carried one if I could beg borrow or steal something else. ANd that was over a period approximately 30 years!!!!
    Last edited by Pal334; 10-12-2009 at 07:27 AM. Reason: punctuation
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  3. #3
    Lumpy chair made me do it oly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    1,059

    Default

    My M16A1 jammed all of the time and then they issued me an M16A2 that never jammed, with my experience with the A1 my confidence with the A2 was none.
    A mouse ate a hole in my lumpy chair.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NEW ORLEANS, LA.
    Posts
    869

    Default

    Coburn said, "The weapon has served us well...". This media outlet states that 90% of the troops are happy with the weapon (last I hear it was more like 95%). The DOD is also satisfied with the M-4 and has shelved any plans for change because of test done with other weapons with similar results. ANY weapon will overheat with hundreds of rounds fired in a short period of time, so that is NO ill reflection of the weapon. I have personally carried and abused several M-4's for years and have been happy with the weapon's performance and reliability. I know many combat veterans ,my father included, and few ,if any, complain about the M-4/M-16 platform. Keep it reasonably clean, like EVERYTHING else, and it runs....and runs WELL! You will get reports that a bowling ball "Is not round enough" if you ask enough people. All of a sudden the few bad reports are the Law that the "object" is judged by. I say, "Bullsh*t"! In SWAT training, in The Instructor's Academy, and in Police Sniper training, Ive had mine covered over with sand, in mud, submerged in filthy canal water, thrown to the ground in CQB training, and flat out abused. IT WORKS PERIOD! Don't drink the Cool Aide people. The media needs "horror" stories for ratings. People want to hear all the bad crap they can and the media monoplizes on the "dirty laundry" mentality. Our boys are well armed, NO MATTER WHO tells you different. Now someone is gonna say something about "Politics" and governmental decisions. I again say, "Bullsh*t". Do you really think for the last 46 years the US Military would still be using this platform if it didn't work. The US Military used the 1911 .45 for 75 yrs before it was replaced. You know why? IT WORKED. The US Military does not go about changing things because of a few bad reports when they know better. This battle proven rifle is second globally only to the AK47 for shear numbers issued. There are 88 plus, yes "88" plus countries that field this rifle in one capacity or another. I think that says it all. Best.
    Last edited by glockcop; 10-12-2009 at 10:40 AM.

  5. #5
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Tsk, tsk. I prefer Crystal Light over Koolaid. Agreed the M-16 series is adequate and is probably one of , if not the best Military standard issue rifles in the world. That being said, it is time to change. If you are able to keep an M-16 type weapon cleaned, it serves well. In the circumstance described, that is not possible and results in a fairly consistent failure rate. Hmmm, a few reports of this type? I think any one with any real experience would be familiar with this fairly consistent report of jamming under extreme heavy usage for oh so many years. Technology has progressed to the point that there are alternatives that would be better suited to our troops. They deserve the "cutting edge" and I actually think that the HK 416 is that edge. Someday we will see.
    Now someone is gonna say something about "Politics" and governmental decisions.And believe me when I say, if I thought that, I would say that.:
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NEW ORLEANS, LA.
    Posts
    869

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pal334 View Post
    Tsk, tsk. I prefer Crystal Light over Koolaid. Agreed the M-16 series is adequate and is probably one of , if not the best Military standard issue rifles in the world. That being said, it is time to change. If you are able to keep an M-16 type weapon cleaned, it serves well. In the circumstance described, that is not possible and results in a fairly consistent failure rate. Hmmm, a few reports of this type? I think any one with any real experience would be familiar with this fairly consistent report of jamming under extreme heavy usage for oh so many years. Technology has progressed to the point that there are alternatives that would be better suited to our troops. They deserve the "cutting edge" and I actually think that the HK 416 is that edge. Someday we will see.
    Now someone is gonna say something about "Politics" and governmental decisions.And believe me when I say, if I thought that, I would say that.:
    Reasonably clean like Everything else is the point. My experience with it in terrible conditions has been great. "Anyone with any real experience"....That would be "ME" amognst others who have had great performance out of it. Remember the media and "dirty laudry". You are well old enough to know not to believe everthing you read. It works PERIOD! 8 million plus m-16 rifles say so. We can go all day round for round but I know what I know . And Oh my God!! Mr. 1911 talking about "technological advancements''. Well, welcome to the 21st centry, Brother . I promise, I will not say anything about a Glock this time . I like the H&K 416 for a possible alternative battle rifle too. Stay safe.

  7. #7
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    You are well old enough to know not to believe everthing you read. I guess you are right, 2 years in, Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, then there was Somolia, and the current dust up in the Sand box probably does make me rely on written reports over my experience. Technology is not mutually exclusive to reliabilty and that is the goal.

    "Anyone with any real experience"....I guess you are correct, multiple years of experience in weapons training does cap multiple decades of field use.

    Let the reader decide what they will
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  8. #8
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    oops, I think I reposted your post Glock. I got distracted here. Error on my part
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NEW ORLEANS, LA.
    Posts
    869

    Default

    No problem, Pal. I already deleated the error. Ladies and gentelman, I give you Mr. "Technology"....Previously known as Mr. "1911" . Sort of a "The artist previously known as Prince" thing. Hahaahahaha! Ya know I'm just playing with ya. Take care, Brother.
    Last edited by glockcop; 10-12-2009 at 11:29 AM.

  10. #10
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glockcop View Post
    No problem, Pal. I already deleated the error. Ladies and gentelman, I give you Mr. "Technology"....Previously known as Mr. "1911" . Sort of a "The artist previously known as Prince" thing. Hahaahahaha! Ya know I'm just playing with ya. Take care, Brother.
    Next you will be expecting me to give up the mule for one of those automobiles
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  11. #11
    Senior Member tacticalguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Bend, Washington
    Posts
    222

    Default

    i think this is an example of why some soldiers try to pick up an ak-47 and dump their issue weapons while overseas so that they can use an Ak, (which hardly ever jams) instead of their issue weapon.
    Prepared enough.

  12. #12
    Senior Member SARKY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Oakland, CA
    Posts
    2,636

    Default

    The 2 things I have never liked about the M-16/M-4 are 1: the round it fires and 2: the gas impingment system. The .223 is rated as a varmint round (that is the 4 legged kind not the 2 legged kind) and why would I purposely dump hot crap into my action and still expect in not to heat up or gunk up??
    I know what hunts you.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NEW ORLEANS, LA.
    Posts
    869

    Default

    AGAIN!! 8 million M-16 rifles in "88" plus countries say different. Do ya get it yet, huh ? I swear, the skulls are gettin thicker and the ears are gettin smaller around here. Just joking yall. Put your AK's away. No need for violence. Sarky, did you know that the Swiss wanted that "varment round" taken out of NATO service when it was first fielded because it worked "TOO WELL". That is a fact, Brother. The killing ability of that ultra high velocity round was the class room example of hydrostatic shock and super large permanent wound cavity. It just mangled the enemy way too much for the Swiss' liking. Take it to the bank. I recall the account of a Nam vet who stated that he hit a VC is the upper arm with one of those varment rounds and the result was a totally defleshed humerus. Yep, just bone attaching his forearm to his body. I call that impressive for a prarie dog rifle. For the record, that VC expired rather quickly from immediate massive hemmorage according to the Vet. Yes, with 45 grain soft points it is "rated" as a varment round. In 64 gr FMJ it is a combat round, and a good one too. Now, let the games begin .Yall be safe.
    Last edited by glockcop; 10-13-2009 at 01:52 AM.

  14. #14
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glockcop View Post
    AGAIN!! 8 million M-16 rifles in "88" plus countries say different. Do ya get it yet, huh ? I swear, the skulls are gettin thicker and the ears are gettin smaller around here. Just joking yall. Put your AK's away. No need for violence. Sarky, did you know that the Swiss wanted that "varment round" taken out of NATO service when it was first fielded because it worked "TOO WELL". That is a fact, Brother. The killing ability of that ultra high velocity round was the class room example of hydrostatic shock and super large permanent wound cavity. It just mangled the enemy way too much for the Swiss' liking. Take it to the bank. I recall the account of a Nam vet who stated that he hit a VC is the upper arm with one of those varment rounds and the result was a totally defleshed humerus. Yep, just bone attaching his forearm to his body. I call that impressive for a prarie dog rifle. For the record, that VC expired rather quickly from immediate massive hemmorage according to the Vet. Yes, with 45 grain soft points it is "rated" as a varment round. In 64 gr FMJ it is a combat round, and a good one too. Now, let the games begin .Yall be safe.
    Sighing. I try not to read those reports. Just saying from an eye ball to eyeball advantage have seen more than one miscreant run for substantial distances with two in the chest and one was running so fast, we had a heck of a time catching him before he bled out. Can't offer any other such stories on other rifle calibers (7.62 seemed to always terminate hostilites). So speaking in absolutes does not necessarily further the discussion. Provided for whatever information the reader may take from it.

    I swear, the skulls are gettin thicker Yup, hardly ever need a helmet anymore
    Last edited by Pal334; 10-13-2009 at 07:36 AM. Reason: spelling and end sentence and more spelling :(
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  15. #15
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Just some background, gathered from field users a small sampling, if you are interested, Google will give you more of both sides of the discussion.
    If the reader is making a decision, he / she can decide if controlled tests or Field experience is more helpful. Personally I prefer the opinions of the dirty booted, grimy faced GI.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1778197/posts
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1692346.shtml
    http://www.democraticunderground.com...ss=389x4279340
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  16. #16
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    58,806

    Default

    I don't know about this stuff one way or the other. No experience, no studies. Nothing other than what I read. I'm sure politics plays a huge role in it, too. However...

    From all accounts I've read, the M1A/M14 in 7.62 seems to be a valued weapon by just about anyone that used it. Curious to me that we didn't utilize that platform as the basis of a new weapon when the M16 was first developed. The SOCOM seems to be well received so it certainly was/is doable and I would think at far less cost.
    Tracks Across the High Plains...Death on the Bombay Line...A Touch of Death and Mayhem...Dead Rock...The Griswald Mine Boys...All On Amazon Books.

  17. #17
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Rick, you are right, there are tons of the M14s in the inventory, and some units are issuing them to Designated Marksmen. I would think they would be especially helpful in AFghanistan (never been there myself), where it would appear that alot of the hostilities are at long range. As I understand it, one of the big motivators for the smaller platform was the weapons weight and the weight of the ammunition. All are good reasons, at least intially.
    One of the happiest campers I saw in the sandbox was carrying a SOCOM 16. The best of all worlds, relatively short, powerful round. Still had the weight issue, but he dealt with it.
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  18. #18
    Hall Monitor Pal334's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    Pics of both SOCOM 16 and M 14
    Last edited by Pal334; 08-07-2010 at 05:46 PM.
    .45 ACP Because shooting twice is silly... The avatar says it all,.45 because there isn't a.46

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs6a...eature=related

  19. #19
    Senior Member Ole WV Coot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Southern WV , raised in Eastern KY up a holler
    Posts
    2,668

    Default For What It's Worth

    Quote Originally Posted by Pal334 View Post
    Rick, you are right, there are tons of the M14s in the inventory, and some units are issuing them to Designated Marksmen. I would think they would be especially helpful in AFghanistan (never been there myself), where it would appear that alot of the hostilities are at long range. As I understand it, one of the big motivators for the smaller platform was the weapons weight and the weight of the ammunition. All are good reasons, at least intially.
    One of the happiest campers I saw in the sandbox was carrying a SOCOM 16. The best of all worlds, relatively short, powerful round. Still had the weight issue, but he dealt with it.
    PAL we and others know that some draftees could care less in the '60s about weapons, sleeping on duty, stoned etc. The only idiot proof(almost) weapon was the AK. I always keep firearms clean and knives sharp, didn't have any problems and although the draft is gone you always get a few misfits that make a lot of noise. I slept with a S&W Mod 60 and it served well. Officers just dropping by to have it on their record, carrying nice, shiny $500 Bowie knives and fancy '45s presented by dear ole dad. It came down to the man behind the weapon in most instances, nothing is 100% reliable and I wouldn't hesitate to pick up an AK or anything if I needed it. That's a personal observation and everyone will have a different one depending where they were, you would know more than me after my time. Regular NVA were kinda like trying to whip a dog in his own backyard.
    Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he's too old
    to fight... he'll just kill you.

  20. #20
    Administrator Rick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Central Indiana
    Posts
    58,806

    Default

    They answered that way based on the fact that you took out the trophy case, the old lady in the next lane and consistently throw gutter balls. Perhaps the cause of the problem has been mis-identified but you have to start somewhere.

    You should buy a Bersa .45
    Tracks Across the High Plains...Death on the Bombay Line...A Touch of Death and Mayhem...Dead Rock...The Griswald Mine Boys...All On Amazon Books.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •