Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

The Small Arms Thread, Part 8: 2018; ICSR to be replaced by US Army with interim 15mm Revolver Cannon.


Khand-e

Recommended Posts

Ten-step process to getting shitty DMRs:

 

 

1. M14 is adopted on the pressure of NIHers, gravelbellies, and drill sergeants.

2. This results in the biggest scandal to that point in US small arms history, and one of the largest ever in US defense history, and the SecDef publicly condemning the rifle and the M14 program.

3. Following this is the cancellation of the M14 and the hasty and somewhat naive adoption of the AR-15.

4. This results in the new biggest scandal in US small arms history, getting loads of people killed thanks to both the Army not being as competent as Ford Motor Company, and McNamara not understanding that the Army is not anywhere near as competent as Ford Motor Company.

5. The M14 lobby has a huge "I told you so moment" that they never deserved to get.

6. In the 1970s and 1980s, 5.56mm carbines are the hot new thing. M14 manufacturers need a way to market their obsolete rifles to the masses, so they invent the term "battle rifle" and the myth that the M14 is super accurate. This was probably born from the original AR-15 models prior to the M16A2, which had simpler sights that didn't allow for the sort of Camp Perry type shooting the gravelbellies were used to, as well as the M14's continuing use in matches. This myth is ironic, because the US Army Marksmanship Unit famously trounced the USMC after it started using the M16A2 in matches, and the Marines quickly followed suit.

7. Before and during this period, the USMC accurizes M14s to become the M21 SWS, due to no other existing weapons of this type. It should be noted that the accurizing process and maintenance for the M21 was very labor-intensive, as the M14 was never designed to be a precision weapon and is poorly suited to it.

8. With the GWOT, these myths intensify as controversy surrounding the M16A2/M4 increases, especially with the 507th MC/Jessica Lynch incident.

9. SOCOM, in need of new 7.62x51mm DMRs and with few available options, creates the Mk. 14 EBR from existing M14s. Like the M21s, these were laboriously accurized. The Marine Corps also has the M39 as a parallel development, based on the M14 DMR.

10. Army desk jockeys get the brilliant idea to bring old M14s out of storage and slapping Smith Enterprises chassis onto them without substantially accurizing them. As a result, the Army fields thousands of rifles that are essentially no more accurate than a stock M14, but hey, they look like EBRs so they must be good. Trials prove these rifles to be substantially less accurate than even basic M16s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory the M14's White gas system could provide less twisting load on the barrel, but it does not look to me that it's designed in such a way that it actually does.  The Yugoslavian M76 DMR has a similar piston design; there's a hole in the side of the piston that the gas flows through, and thence out the front of the piston to act on it.

 

If the gas block that the piston reacts against were mounted to the handguard, and the gas supplied to it by a tube or block fitted such that the piston resting against the gas block did not torque the barrel, the barrel would be as free of twisting and harmonic disturbance as a direct impingement gun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW:  The M21 SWS was a Vietnam-era project from the Army Marksmanship Unit.  The USMC Scout-Snipers were rocking their Winchester Model 70 in .30-06 and then the Remington M40 in 7.62x51mm.  The USMC didn't start their M14 DMR builds until the mid/late 1990s.  The only other competitor for the USMC DMR solicitation was the HK MSG90A1.

If I remember correctly, the M25 SWS was an unofficial USASOC program that started after the Army's adoption of the Remington M24 SWS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In theory the M14's White gas system could provide less twisting load on the barrel, but it does not look to me that it's designed in such a way that it actually does.  The Yugoslavian M76 DMR has a similar piston design; there's a hole in the side of the piston that the gas flows through, and thence out the front of the piston to act on it.

 

If the gas block that the piston reacts against were mounted to the handguard, and the gas supplied to it by a tube or block fitted such that the piston resting against the gas block did not torque the barrel, the barrel would be as free of twisting and harmonic disturbance as a direct impingement gun.

 

It was mainly a way to reduce peak unlocking velocity and to give a "smoother" actuation.

In practice it was not much of an improvement over what the Garand used. 

 

IIRC , Steven's book on the M-14 included a section showing the ordinance studies demonstrating the lack of any real superiority, but so much time and money was invested into the White system, it was carried on with .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was mainly a way to reduce peak unlocking velocity and to give a "smoother" actuation.

In practice it was not much of an improvement over what the Garand used. 

 

IIRC , Steven's book on the M-14 included a section showing the ordnance studies demonstrating the lack of any real superiority, but so much time and money was invested into the White system, it was carried on with .

I suspect Ordnance was grasping upon the promise of a self-adjusting gas system.  Manual gas adjustments are prone to abuse by squaddies who insist upon "turning it up to eleven" to get the highest possible cyclic rate, reliability and durability be damned.  This is why the M240B and M249 in US service will no longer have barrels with adjustable gas blocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect Ordnance was grasping upon the promise of a self-adjusting gas system.  Manual gas adjustments are prone to abuse by squaddies who insist upon "turning it up to eleven" to get the highest possible cyclic rate, reliability and durability be damned.  This is why the M240 and M249 in US service no longer have barrels with adjustable gas blocks.

The last batch of 249 and 240 tubes I owned , you basically had "clean", "filthy and not wanting to work" and "Oh shit I turned it too far" for choices in the regs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...