"Well, sir, we lost that fight because we were able to carry just way too much ammo in to it" - said no combat grunt, ever.
==============================================
And that AK-12. I laughed and laughed at the Russians when they started a program to "modernize" and "improve upon" their last generation AK, the AK-74. The AK-74M family probably were improvements, and they should have left well enough alone with them, but those wacky Russians, they just had to keep tweaking and messing with it, and kept going until they broke it altogether...
Then China came out with their new combat rifle (and a new round for it), and I laughed and laughed - that's a boondoggle that they'll never get past, and still they keep painting it in glowing terms. The reality is, it is probably the best rifle China has ever fielded - from the perspective of the enemies that want to kill Chinese troops, without being killed BY them. The PLA might as well issue each soldier a broom handle, and send them off to war with it.
Now, not to be outdone by foreigners, the US Army has decided to screw with a rifle that has been working for decades, and invent a new round for that one, too, with what are to me predictable results... but I ain't laughing this time, because now it's our own troops asses on the line and hanging in the balance of General Stupidity - I think he's about a 4-star general.
Here's an idea, one which Army procurement will certainly ignore - if you're going to improve something, it's a good idea to, you know, make improvements in it rather than break it.
Improvements to the M4 might include going back to the "pencil profile" barrels. Those heavy barrels are useless, and require that stupid cutout ring on the barrel in case a guy wants to mount a grenade launcher on it. You'll never convince me that the cutouts don't have an adverse effect on accuracy - when you've got pressure running down a barrel, and it suddenly encounters less resistance at the cutout, I don't see how that could possible fail to induce accuracy-killing barrel whip.
Getting rid of the heavy barrels in favor of a pencil profile barrel would eliminate that. It would also eliminate about a pound of weight, some thing that would be appreciated by the average, already overloaded, grunt. Furthermore, hte smaller diameter barrels would have to give up their heat quicker, since there is less material to hold in heat. Sure, they might heat up faster, but by the same token, they'll cool down faster, too.
My AR has a heavy barrel. It was the best I could find - they make civilian models for chairborne commandos, and all of the chairborne commandos hear on YouTube that you've got to have a heavy barrel, so that's what they buy. Since that is what they buy, that is what the manufacturers make.
The chairborne commandos don't have to slog that heavy bitch across hill and dale, day in and day out. If they ever do, they'll be cursing YouTube I bet.
Thankfully, mine doesn't have that stupid grenade launcher cutout. I'm not likely to ever try to mount one anyhow, and I don't need that weak spot in the barrel. If it had the cutout, like 98% of the rest of the AR's that were in that store, I'd have just not bought it. Why waste the money? I'd have just gotten a wrist-rocket slingshot instead.
Still, I'm in the market for a Colt model 653 or 654 upper receiver to replace this upper with, if you know where to find one. My old ass would appreciate that pound less to carry.
Oh - and if they just HAVE to have those heavy barrels, flute the damned things. Fluting will lighten them and at the same time make them stiffer, while not losing the perceived advantages of the heavy barrel. Fluting would also provide more surface area to the barrel to promote heat dissipation.
It's science.
.
.
==============================================
And that AK-12. I laughed and laughed at the Russians when they started a program to "modernize" and "improve upon" their last generation AK, the AK-74. The AK-74M family probably were improvements, and they should have left well enough alone with them, but those wacky Russians, they just had to keep tweaking and messing with it, and kept going until they broke it altogether...
Then China came out with their new combat rifle (and a new round for it), and I laughed and laughed - that's a boondoggle that they'll never get past, and still they keep painting it in glowing terms. The reality is, it is probably the best rifle China has ever fielded - from the perspective of the enemies that want to kill Chinese troops, without being killed BY them. The PLA might as well issue each soldier a broom handle, and send them off to war with it.
Now, not to be outdone by foreigners, the US Army has decided to screw with a rifle that has been working for decades, and invent a new round for that one, too, with what are to me predictable results... but I ain't laughing this time, because now it's our own troops asses on the line and hanging in the balance of General Stupidity - I think he's about a 4-star general.
Here's an idea, one which Army procurement will certainly ignore - if you're going to improve something, it's a good idea to, you know, make improvements in it rather than break it.
Improvements to the M4 might include going back to the "pencil profile" barrels. Those heavy barrels are useless, and require that stupid cutout ring on the barrel in case a guy wants to mount a grenade launcher on it. You'll never convince me that the cutouts don't have an adverse effect on accuracy - when you've got pressure running down a barrel, and it suddenly encounters less resistance at the cutout, I don't see how that could possible fail to induce accuracy-killing barrel whip.
Getting rid of the heavy barrels in favor of a pencil profile barrel would eliminate that. It would also eliminate about a pound of weight, some thing that would be appreciated by the average, already overloaded, grunt. Furthermore, hte smaller diameter barrels would have to give up their heat quicker, since there is less material to hold in heat. Sure, they might heat up faster, but by the same token, they'll cool down faster, too.
My AR has a heavy barrel. It was the best I could find - they make civilian models for chairborne commandos, and all of the chairborne commandos hear on YouTube that you've got to have a heavy barrel, so that's what they buy. Since that is what they buy, that is what the manufacturers make.
The chairborne commandos don't have to slog that heavy bitch across hill and dale, day in and day out. If they ever do, they'll be cursing YouTube I bet.
Thankfully, mine doesn't have that stupid grenade launcher cutout. I'm not likely to ever try to mount one anyhow, and I don't need that weak spot in the barrel. If it had the cutout, like 98% of the rest of the AR's that were in that store, I'd have just not bought it. Why waste the money? I'd have just gotten a wrist-rocket slingshot instead.
Still, I'm in the market for a Colt model 653 or 654 upper receiver to replace this upper with, if you know where to find one. My old ass would appreciate that pound less to carry.
Oh - and if they just HAVE to have those heavy barrels, flute the damned things. Fluting will lighten them and at the same time make them stiffer, while not losing the perceived advantages of the heavy barrel. Fluting would also provide more surface area to the barrel to promote heat dissipation.
It's science.
.
.
“Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books. For to you kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are but toys of the moment, to be overturned with the flick of a finger.”
― Gordon R. Dickson, Tactics of Mistake
― Gordon R. Dickson, Tactics of Mistake