USMC unveils small arms Modernization intentions

1st_Battalion_3rd_Marines_near_Marja-1024x686

It’s nothing new to hear about various plans or queries from the USMC into future small arms programs, but the Marine Corps Times (which actually isn’t associated with the Marine Corps at all) has come out with an article illustrating some of the points that Quantico is looking for in infantry small arms development. Notice I titled this as “intentions” and not “plans” because most of this is still at the proof of concept stage, and certainly not at an RFI yet. Certainly one of the biggest changes to our inventory is the switch to the lighter M4 carbine to replace the M16A4, and that is almost cemented. However, this is a look at some of the other small arms ideas.

Painting rifles is nothing new at all to the infantry. Scout Sniper platoons have been spray painting or “Bo-flauging” as it is known in the community, since the Vietnam era or so. Personally I think any R & D into “special paint” that has “wavelengths invisible to the naked eye” is a almost an absurd notion and seems to come from the desk of someone who hasn’t spent enough time in the field. Regular spray paint works absolutely fine, Sniper platoons and Recon have no issues with it. Usually you’ll paint a rifle for a specific environment, using materials from that environment (pine in woodland, sticks/twigs in desert, etc..). After a while, the paint wears down, you tape up all the essential parts, use some paint thinner to scrape it off, and you repaint it the same style or a different one. All that needs to happen is for the idea of approving unit commanders to allow this within their battalions.

However, adding suppressors aren’t a new idea at all and while they’re a good one, I think the headache would almost not be worth it. This goes along with my philosophy on gear. Take something like the Magpul angled foregrip. Sure, the thing works wonders when shooting, etc… But an Infantry Marine doesn’t spend most of his time shooting, he spends it sleeping, walking, standing post, and going on working parties. Where is the use of an angled foregrip in standing 8 hours of post? If the optimal use of the thing is in shooting, and that grunt only spends maybe 3 percent or less time on a deployment actually firing his weapon, then I would argue that the whole thing is negated. I’d apply that to suppressors as well. If their only value is in a gun fight, then the rest of time we’re going to have Marines constantly worrying about losing serialized gear, dropping it somewhere, etc… In addition to it being another pound to worry about. Maybe if we had a squad’s worth of them at the platoon level, and say that squad is being used in a flanking movement or on a satellite patrol where not revealing their position is crucial to mission success, then sure, we can issue it out for that patrol. Or if a company is going to be in a MOUT situation, they would absolutely be worth it. But in the mean time I’d rather have that extra pound be a thermal optic, or better GPS systems.

The Corps is considering allowing camouflage painted rifles for every Marine and suppressors for rifle squads, Woodburn said. It’s part of an effort to help Marines blend into their surroundings and communicate better. The moves could also give every Marine an “operator” look, although both initiatives are just now being researched.

Driving the effort is the idea to bring rifles in line with the rest of Marine gear. While millions of dollars have been spent developing and fielding Marine Pattern digital camouflage in desert and woodland color schemes, Marines still carry black rifles with a distinctly mechanical shape.

A near-term fix could give commanders the authority to allow Marines to paint their rifles to match the environment to which they’re deploying, Woodburn said. It is something many civilian hunters and members of elite units like Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command already do. The Army has also authorized the move since 2010, when the service recognized the need for better concealment in Afghanistan.

Some achieve the effect with commercial spray paints, while taking care to properly mask optics and other sensitive parts of a rifle. However, Woodburn said the Marine Corps is working with the Office of Naval Research to develop something that can withstand high temperatures and possibly provide other benefits, like concealment in the non-visible spectrum. That would match efforts already underway to develop camouflage uniforms that can be concealed across the electromagnetic spectrum, preventing the enemy from spotting Marines through optics that pick up on wavelengths invisible to the naked eye

More importantly though, Woodburn said, is that they [suppressors] improve command and control within an infantry unit. That is especially important indoors, where the cacophony of a squad clearing rooms can be disorienting and make it nearly impossible to use verbal communications.

.

Some good cross examples of painting on different M40A5s

Some good cross examples of painting on different M40A5s

Plans for an M2A1 are in the mix, with new tripods, barrels that don’t require headspace and timing, and semi polymer ammunition. Most of this technology is or has been out for a while, but typical Marine Corps takes eons over the other services to get it.

For now, Marines will still have to use a gauge to set the headspace and timing whenever they change a barrel. But by late fiscal 2016, upgraded M2A1s will hit the fleet. Full fielding to replace every ground-mounted M2 will be completed by late 2018.

The conversion kit will also include a new flash hider that reduces muzzle flash by 50 percent. That will be a welcome relief, particularly for gunners during nighttime engagements when blinding muzzle flash can make it difficult to see targets through night vision goggles.

Long-time research efforts into polymer ammunition could also soon yield new lightweight ammunition for the M2. The move could allow Marines to carry 40 percent more ammunition at the same weight they carry now.

In recent months, the Marine Corps completed testing of polymer-cased ammunition that uses extremely durable plastics to form the cartridge’s case in place of traditional brass.

 

The rest of the article goes on to highlight the current switch to M4s, and plans for the new pistol that tie in with the Army’s competition. Unfortunately, I think the downturn of the article is that some of these changes have been wanted for a while, and others are almost a fantasy that can’t meet reality. Polymer ammunition or at least semi polymer casings still have a good ways to go before being anywhere near ready for military adoption. M2 machine guns without the need to manually headspace and time have also been around for a bit, it’s just that the service doesn’t want to commit the resources to acquire them. Seeing some of these changes take place would be fantastic, but reality is a whole other monster.

Polymer casings, still a long way to go in development.

Polymer casings, still a long way to go in development.



Miles V

Former Infantry Marine, and currently studying at Indiana University. I’ve written for Small Arms Review and Small Arms Defense Journal, and have had a teenie tiny photo that appeared in GQ. Specifically, I’m very interested in small arms history, development, and Military/LE usage within the Middle East, and Central Asia.

If you want to reach out, let me know about an error I’ve made, something I can add to the post, or just talk guns and how much Grunts love naps, hit me up at miles@tfb.tv


Advertisement

  • iowaclass

    It is passing strange, on first glance, how no military has made extensive use of sound suppressors. There must be a darned good reason.

    Having experienced the physical shock of hearing gunfire at a range without ear muffs, I can barely imagine what it must be like in a battle, with 20 or so rifle-caliber weapons being fired at the same time in close proximity with no ear protection. One’s ears must ring for hours after. (And what if it’s urban fighting and you are inside a building? Good grief.)

    • powerwiz

      You tune it out, other things take over and you get quite used to it. Now throw in choppers over head laying down chain gun fire, and other forms of ordinance going off. Through all of that picture a enemy determined to kill your butt and you have not eaten in quite a while. Meanwhile your team is moving as a organized force.

      That was Fallujah and perhaps coming to a neighborhood near you one day.

      Semper Fi.

      • iowaclass

        Do you know if there has been any study of whether soldiers in combat suffer permanent hearing loss? I know it’s not the “main thing” on anybody’s mind, but in the aggregate, it would be a very real harm.

        • powerwiz

          How it works is when you enter any branch you have a baseline physical, hearing etc. Everything is put in your medical record. When you are ready to leave you essentially have the same thing done all over again. If there is a huge difference then you qualify for VA benefits to address that.

          In the case of hearing loss you would receive aid in the form of addressing that be it a hearing aid etc.

          You would be surprised at what your hearing can take. I know guys that work around generators for 20 years never wore anything and simply just hard of hearing.

          • CommonSense23

            A single rifle shot is going to permanently damage your hearing. Suppressors are a good idea.

          • powerwiz

            When shots are being fired at you down range that is the least of your concerns…your buddies and yourself is. Usually after a fire fight to a rush hits you that you survived.

            One reason why hearing protection while it may be carried but hardly used is you lose situational awareness around you. We can sit here and pretend I would do this or that but when the rounds come your way you really never think about issues like that.

            It would be like someone breaking in and me telling them to wait while I put hearing protection on then firing my AR at them.

            Supressors are a great idea but somehow since its not a glorious program probably won’t get traction. I recall when I was in Afghanistan and we had issues getting body armor for Marines at the start and the Commandant and Sgt Major of Marine Corps made a country visit. They were more interested in showing us the new Marine Corp Running suit then addressing our immediate needs. I think suppressors would fall in that realm unfortunately.

          • CommonSense23

            I have had peltors and suppressors issued to me almost my entire career. Hearing protection and suppressors allow you to keep a lot more SA in the middle of a fight, allow you to take far less fire at night, and allow you to keep way better SA before you get into a TIC.

        • 7n6

          Im sure hearing damage is very prevalent. Hard to tune out tinnitus. The money saved on disability and medical costs outweigh the cost of the suppressors in my opinion.

        • billyoblivion

          I did, and I wasn’t even around that much gun fire really. Helos yes. Artillery a bit (reserves), but only went to the range once a year, and used foams most of that.

        • Evan

          Yeah, basically all of us do. About halfway through my deployment, they made us all start carrying ear plugs, but I don’t know anyone who actually used them.

        • The fact that troops *invariably* have hearing losses has been known for centuries. And until fairly recently, the “solution” has been FIDO.

      • Core

        lol true. It’s the mid range noise frequencies that run continously that destroy the hearing range. I’ve been exposed to serious small arms, tank battle, rpgs and mortars, Patriot Missile Batteries launching, and ballistic missile detonation without hearing protection. At times my ears bled on and off for weeks. No significant hearing loss to speak of. Exposure to jet engines and air circulation systems for extended periods of time will ruin your mid range. I think the worst was concussion damage from nearby explosions and missile launches. When working with small arms in confined space such as cement and metal structure you want double hearing protection and goggles. Something like surefire defenders with comms tubes and tactical muffs. A good double lens goggle protects the eyes from concussion, brass, powder blast, and debris.

        • Bill

          Several of my worst (?) training experiences involved shooting inside smallish steel buildings and ship/boat compartments without cans nor doubled-up earpro. I even skip plugs like Surefires and go for the usual disposables, and swap my Pelters or Sordins for some Leights with a NR around 30. I really push for the rubber panels inside shoot houses just for the noise abatement – I don’t know if it actually works , but in principle it should.

          • Core

            You can run a radio tube with surefires and wear a good pair of electronic hearing protection outside. The real tactical muffs are uber expensive but worth it. I’ve never tried the Leigh’s but at $60-100 I don’t imagine they work very well, and probably don’t have good radio compatibility. Last time I checked a good set was $300+ Hopefully your organization can pony up the scratch for military grade hearing pro. Sometimes you have to have “bakesales” to get the chain involved to express the need for better gear. Been there, get creative and don’t forget surplus.

    • Joshua

      A lot of it comes down to cost. Suppressors at the government level are priced similar to civilian prices. So most are double the price of what the government pays for the M4A1, while having a finite life span.

      • HSR47

        The “lifespan” of the typical rifle suppressor is largely dictated by baffle erosion.

        They don’t just suddenly stop working when they reach some fixed round count; Instead, every time you fire a round through them the baffles wear a little bit. This wear tends to be most extreme at the end closest to the end of the barrel. Some factors can accelerate this wear (shorter barrels, more/hotter propellant gasses, high volume of fire over a short period of time, etc.), so the actual useful lifespan of a suppressor can vary widely from the official published/advertised specs.

        Furthermore, even when they’re old and well used, they’ll generally still do a pretty good job, they just won’t do it as well as a new can would.

    • Ben

      The South Koreans use suppressors is training.

      And the Germans have their famous tank suppressor.

  • wedelj1231

    One way to keep suppressors from being “one more thing to lose” is to permanently mount them on barrels.

    • Otm Shooter

      If they are using them regularly, they should remain on the weapon. It would be hard to lose something thats screwed onto the end of your weapon. I doubt many A2 flash hiders go missing.

      • Flounder

        A suppressor is not a flash hider. at least that is what their prices at the gun shop tell me.

        And! suppressors need to be cleaned nicely every now and again.

        • Otm Shooter

          A suppressor is one of the most effective flash hiders on the market. But to clarify, they are both muzzle devices. Centerfire rifle cans (5.56, 7.62, etc) require very little cleaning if any at all. They don’t have issues with lead buildup like rimfire cans. To quote a company that makes suppressors that the military uses:

          “In general, suppressors require very little maintenance. We do not recommend cleaning the baffle stack of any of our centerfire suppressors. Although they may look dirty, the small amount of carbon buildup inside is both normal, and beneficial. It will actually make the suppressor slightly quieter” -Gemtech FAQ’s

          • billyoblivion

            Yeah, but you’re talking about the military here. Cleanliness is next to Generalship.

          • Squirreltakular

            They’re slowly moving away from that bullshit. It took a few decades of dudes scraping their rifles clean to the point of damaging them, but you’re starting to see less emphasis on making sure weapons are “inspection ready”.

          • Yeah, as long as we are enforcing 19th Century cleaning standards (which were based on corrosive ammo, inferior metallurgy, and a lack of corrosion resistant finishes), that’s a problem.

            A modern design suppressor, in a high pressure roun like 5.56mm, truly *is* self cleaning. They *do not* have the same issues as a .22 rimfire suppressor (which are filthy).

            Arguing that we shouldn’t have suppressors because we don’t actually shoot the rifle most of the time is like arguing we shouldn’t equip Marines with optics, because they add weight and cost.

            Suppressors are *very* effective in a combat environment, and are a significant force multiplier – they reduce signature so the gun (and thus, the shooter) cannot be easily localized by sound or flash, they tend to *deceive* the enemy as to where the gun is (the reflections of the supersonic shock wave bouncing off any object it passes are louder than the muzzle report), and they maintain situational awareness for the troops and those around them.

          • billyoblivion

            I happen to mostly agree with you, but I’ve served in the Marines, the Army National Guard and the Air Force Reserve, as well as been a contractor on military/DoD contracts.

            This isn’t about what *should be*, but what is.

            Back when I was a Marine and young we had to remove the undercoating from our firetrucks because it was impossible to get the rust proofing “clean” (when you rubbed your hand on it stuff came off on your hand). So to pass an inspection it had to be removed.

            Dumber than a really dumb thing.

            Look, one of the major blockers to to *Air Force* switching from black leather boots to those green suede thing was that Senior NCOs didn’t like that you couldn’t POLISH them. Yeah, they got overridden by above, and I can’t figure out how that got through the Marine Corps, but again, this is the real world.

            And yes, in a lot of ways even mild suppression would be a win for our troops, and yes running them a little “dirty” would be fine.

          • Phil Hsueh

            This reminds me of a story a friend of mine told me about when he went to LAV school in the Marines. Apparently the Marine Corps LAV school was run out of an Army base and his class was assigned to brand spanking new Army barracks with nice no-wax floors and all. But because Marine Corps (at the time) stated that all floors needed to be waxed, so his NCOIC or OIC told his class to strip floor of its no-wax finish and then wax the floor, because there was no such thing as no-wax floor in that Marine’s mind and regs are regs.

          • Ron

            0313 school has always been at Camp Pendleton

          • Phil Hsueh

            What can I say, it’s his story and if it makes a difference, he was an LAV mechanic and not a proper crewman so that could be why he went to school on an Army base instead of Pendleton.

          • billyoblivion

            Yeah, when I was in the Corps they were just starting to put no-wax tiles in some of the newer barracks. Being Airwing we were a little smarter–we didn’t have to strip them, but we still had to mop (very reasonable) and run a floor buffer over them (not completely irrational) to get them shiny.

          • Ron

            We stopped the white glove treat for weapons a long time ago. Generally most Marine armories just make sure there are no lumps of carbine, plants or rust on the weapon on turn in now.

          • imachinegunstuff

            How recently? I got out about two years and we were still doing dumb levels of cleaning

    • powerwiz

      That would be most ideal. I recall when the Army had there Super Solider program. Marine Corp Systems Command evaluated it and a Marine Colonel remarked that it adds 20-30 pounds on their existing load out so all that would happen is a Lance Corporal (E-3) would remove it bury it and say he lost it lol.

      A suppressor not to much but if it was integrated in then be a whole lot better.

      • Manny Fal

        Remove some barrel and permanently mount a suppressor on it, to decrease weight and length. Although the best solution is the micro suppressor the russians have on their ak74 upgrade kits.

  • Bill

    Remove the paint before repainting a rifle? Madness. I figure the more coats I build up the more operator I am.

    • Beyondbreakeventrading

      Like pine tar on your batting helmet? Old School baby, don’t mess with the Old School.

  • imachinegunstuff

    Hopefully the suppressors will be handled like bayonets, kept in the armory until needed.

    • Can you imagine a squad leader taking everyones suppressors and dumping them in a seabag until the deployment was over? The operator factor would hit an all time low…

      • imachinegunstuff

        Lol I’ve never seen that, but our conex box armory locked them up like they were 1,000 dollar optics. Our DM was issued a suppressor, but was told not to use it because it made him a target. A pop up flare pouch is perfect for carrying a suppressor.

      • imachinegunstuff

        Wait, imagine everyone having to paint their rifles identically. Like even a hair of difference from the platoon sergeant means they have to start over. God, I’m picturing this now and it’s terrible.

        • USMC03Vet

          You know plt sgt would just make a template and have boots mass spray the weapons.

          • Joshua

            Reminds me of that picture PEO released of proper painting scheme for the M4…you know the one with all the blue tape in annoying places meticulous cut and stuff.

    • No, hopefully the suppressors will be *pinned* in place, and considered part of the rifle.

      Whens the last time PVT Snuffy lost his front sight housing?

  • iksnilol

    I keep the suppressor on the gun almost at all times. Doesn’t hurt to have it, aids greatly in shooting, protects the muzzle and may make the gun look more intimidating (if that’s your forte).

    • 11B

      Right, but you’re not a 19 year old grunt whose prone to lose very expensive and serialized gear. Have you been around when a unit loses a serialized piece of equipment? It’s a friggin nightmare. Suppressors are cool but have very limited use in line units.

      • Tom

        I get that equipment is lost and damaged etc. but surely if a 19 year old grunt can be trusted with a full auto rifle and live ammunition he can be trusted with a suppressor. Especially if the later is intended to be used all the time and only removed for cleaning maintenance etc.

        • It would scare you to death if you knew the full extent of what we trust 19 year olds today with…….

          • DonDrapersAcidTrip

            Said every old man through out history

          • anomad101

            You will get there, if you live long enough.

          • DonDrapersAcidTrip

            It apparently doesn’t take long, in my experience once most my peers turned 25-30 they immediately turned into “kids nowadays” old people with no self awareness whatsoever

          • Phillip Cooper

            No, it wouldn’t, having been one of them.

      • Squirreltakular

        A $500-$1000 suppressor is nothing compared to a pair of $15,000 thermal binoculars. They carry those, though.

        • nova3930

          I guarantee that buying in bulk, Uncle Sam doesn’t even pay that for a suppressor. Plus they don’t have to pay the ATF Fun Tax…

          • Joshua

            There not much savings in suppressors when purchased in bulk.

          • nova3930

            I guarantee there is if it’s bid out. Nobody buys in bulk like Uncle Sam does and when you’ve got to win the contract by coming in as low bidder, you take reduced margins and make it up in volume….
            It’s the same way you can’t get an AR that complies with the Colt TDP for <$1000 but when Uncle Sam awarded the last M4 contract, the per rifle price was $650. Buying tens of thousands of something helps a lot…..

          • Joshua

            I know the price of the NT4 is practically retail and a lot of those were purchased.

          • nova3930

            As far as I’m aware the NT4s and most other suppressor purchases up to this point were relatively small lots for “special” units. That’s a different ball game than full up program of record bulk purchases. Those units have a lot of procurement leeway to just go out and buy what they want at whatever price they can negotiate.

      • iksnilol

        Do people lose flash hiders? You have the same risk of losing a suppressor as losing a flash hider. You already have suppressors that attach to the A2 flash hider.

        Do grunts also lose bolt carriers when cleaning their rifles?

        • Joshua

          Did you know the cam pin hole on the bolt didn’t used to staked? It wasnt until a bunch of retards started putting the bolt in backwards that they staked it.

          As for the flash hider…the torque used to apply it make it very hard to remove.

        • Core

          Why serialize? Just put Property of United States Marine Corps and date of manufacture and model number. Find someone who can make them cheap in high quantities. I’m guessing it would require some engineering savvy to make a lightweight simple to produce suppressor.

    • Joshua

      Also increases muzzle velocity.

  • Lance

    @ Miles Vining

    While the USMC time say some BIG General have liked a Army view on the M-4 for all infantry the plan doesn’t have universal support and the USMC commandant has still not signed yet on the issue. Even if they do go “Army Stupid” Many none infantry Marines will stay with the M-16A4 for many more years. Many thought the USMC will go with M-855A1 ball ammo that has not happened yet either thought the time says its almost a reality. SO again don’t always believe the times they thought ICC would give the Marine the SCAR. And the M-4 was going to be dead history forever in America…. they where wrong.

    As for MHS I think its more hype than bite on a real M-9 replacement face it we will stay with 9mm for a long time with Obama going after Russia, NATO will be important again and we must stay with NATO rounds that includes 9x19mm. So if we don’t go to .45 again then there is no point in going to a new pistol. Remember ICC started with a open caliber only to have that ended a few years into the competition when the Army then said it was staying with 5.56mm. We have years before MHS would pick a winner and in the process the Army again will realize the stupidity of this competition, MHS will end up like ICC.

    I think tacti cooler in the Pentagon will keep the waste of millions going. Face it there noting bad about our current weapons and there no foreign weapon far superior to what we have face it Russia still uses primarily the Makarov PM for most troops and China still uses the TT-33 (type 54) for most troops and there new pistol is a DA 9mm pistol the same as a Beretta 92FS. As for Rifles Russia used a AK-74 variant and most of Europe is going to AR based weapons. So why waste time. We need new tanks planes and Subs be about time to shut tacti cooler mouth shut rebuild a large military to win wars not Police actions again.

    Overall despite the hype in the comments section by tacti coolers don’t give into hype. Wait and see.

    • imachinegunstuff

      I spent 5 years as a grunt and every Marine I ever knew wanted an M4. When you are in helicopters, on ship, or in AAVs, the compactness is greatly appreciated.

      • Joshua

        Just ignore lance.

        • Lance

          I can say just ignore Joshua as well

          • st4

            You overestimate the credibility you’ve built for yourself over the years here.

          • Kevin Harron

            Lance and credibility in the same sentence? I don’t buy it.

        • DW

          This line should be right under “Firearms, not Politics”

      • Zebra Dun

        Sure thang, If it’s not what you have and is what the SOCOM/RECON/SEALS carries the grunt will want it to be Tacti-cool.
        It’s the jungle boot rewritten, all stateside troops wanted to be seen in Jungle boots not black leather, they were banned stateside and yet every other Marine bought and wore them.
        Every Marine wanted a boonie hat, yet they were banned stateside every other Marine had one.
        Looking cool is what every 19-21 year old wants regardless of actual use.

        • Bill

          The Rules of Special Operations:
          1: Always Look Cool
          2: Always Know Your Location
          3: If You Don’t Know Your Location, Keep Looking Cool.

        • crackedlenses

          Exactly. Everyone knows that what the SOCOM/RECON/SEALS carry is solely so they can look cool; there is no way that these elite warriors would actually use weapons because they are effective, and perhaps more effective than what the average grunt is using.

          /sarc

        • imachinegunstuff

          Yeah but a weapon isn’t a boonie hat or a pair of boots. I get it your a Nam guy and think everything should have wood furniture, but for the Marine corps mission the M4 simply makes more sense. Especially when you are carrying a M240, an M16, and a Mossberg 500, a bayo and an M9, (My actual weapon EDL at one point) shorter is better.
          The wars are ending for now, and the lessons learned was that war moves rapidly, in trucks, and military trucks are cramped and small. Ships are cramped and small, AAvs are cramped and small, helicopters are cramped and small.
          Believe it or not trying to hit a man sized target at 500 yards who is hiding behind cover and moving is near impossible to do consistently regardless of barrel length. That is where machine guns and DMs come into play. At that range your average rifleman is laying down suppression fire.

    • Zebra Dun

      It’s the camouflage uniforms change and change again applied to weapons.
      It looks tactical and all bad astery even if it isn’t effective.

    • Phillip Cooper

      Needs proofreading and punctuation. C-

  • Beomoose

    The “wavelengths invisible to the naked eye” thing is about night vision scopes. Regular old spray paint is fine for the old MK1 eyeball, but as image intensifiers and even thermal sights/scopes proliferate the paint technology needs to keep up.

    • Otm Shooter

      Yupp. Company’s are working on finishes that reduce the weapons IR signature.

    • However, how far do we want to take this argument? Are we going to start applying this special paint to canteens as well? It’s hard for me to see any validity to it, as long as the technology hasn’t been in use all over the world by more than one or two enemies.

      • ARCNA442

        Well, US uniforms already have a treatment that reduces their infrared signature so something similar for rifles and other equipment is hardly revolutionary. And nightvision technology is already in widespread use across the world (I seem to recall it being used by several Soviet client states as far back as the 1960’s).

      • CommonSense23

        Night Vision and thermals have been used by the Taliban. The tech is proliferating quickly. The funny thing is the US military is already applying this to things like buttons on uniforms.

      • bucherm

        The main selling point of the old “sofa” UCP was that it was far, far less visible to NV systems than multicam or MARPAT. The Army has since obviously reversed it’s preference.

        • Beyondbreakeventrading

          It’s difficult to award a big contract to your cronies unless you reverse what you just have to have every few years.

        • Joshua

          The issue was that for any other situation you stuck out like a sore thumb.

      • LCON

        “Are we going to start applying this special paint to canteens as well?”
        Out of Boot, Does any one Really even use those any more?

        • Squirreltakular

          Yeah. The camelbak is used 99% of the time, but canteens are good for hauling extra water and are the best way to safely drink in a chemical environment. They’ve been on every packing list that I can remember.

          • Evan

            I don’t think I touched a canteen after SOI. Camelbak definitely, and everything other than that was just water bottles in my assault pack.

          • Zebra Dun

            We can study the practical use of camel backs in full MOPP contaminated enviroment or we can issue canteens with MOPP tops.

          • Evan

            They’ve had MOPP tops for Camelbaks since at least 2005.

          • Zebra Dun

            I had serious doubts about the MOPP tops on canteens, a camel-back is just not what I would consider as a MOPP water supply.
            I use them in my activities and find the lid closures leave a lot to be desired when refilling, water leaks out, air leaks in.
            I have a MOPP top Air Force issue camel-back in Air Force camouflage it belonged to my Bro-in-law who used it while deployed it appears to be just a regular camel back no special fittings a simple screw in cap and the same hose my bike riding camel has.
            The long length of drinking tube hanging unsupported is another defect the old MOPP gear had the drinking tube secured inside the gas mask face. Ina more protected position.
            QUERY: Has a camel-back MOPP top ever been successfully used during a Chemical attack simulated I’m sure but an actual attack.?

          • Evan

            In the end, NBC threats aren’t something that most of us are ever going to encounter, and thus carrying bad gear like a canteen instead of good gear like a Camelbak because it might hypothetically be easier to drink with the gas mask that you have back behind the wire at the bottom of your pack is pointless.

          • Zebra Dun

            Wear the canteens on your cartridge belts instead of using the Tacti-cool Camel back.
            I used to wear four canteens on my belt, it was heavy but I had water. I would have appreciated a camel back for sure!
            Bust one canteen and you still got water, bust one camel back and you are out of water.

            How did we go from discussing M-4 carbines to water carrying devices LOL !

            Be that as it may as I said I use a camel back on my bike and horse rides, I carry a canteen on the saddle and a water bottle extra on the bike.

            Perhaps there is a dedicated Camel back issue that is MOPP rated.
            If so use it and be safe I say.

          • Evan

            Nobody wears cartridge belts anymore, you just MOLLE your gear onto your body armor. And the Camelbak nozzle can just be grabbed with your mouth with little to no use of hands, whereas a canteen needs to be removed from the pouch, unscrewed, and lifted up to the mouth. Canteens also slosh loudly when less than full and more than empty. It’s just an obsolete piece of gear that has since been replaced. By the same token, I don’t pine for the return of the PVS-7B NVGs I had, because they were junk and we have better ones now.

          • Zebra Dun

            We were required by regulation to carry a Gas Mask at all times in the field. Many tasks I did required one at all times with Chem/Rad rated filters.
            I have pictures of me with one slung across my hips in every instance I am in Deuce gear.
            I guess times change.

          • Evan

            We were required to carry gas masks once, only nobody told us until we were trying to get into the Camp Fallujah chow hall and some POG Captain threw a fit about us not having them. A gas mask is the singularly most useless piece of equipment we were issued anyway. If you’re already in MOPP4 when you get gassed, it might save you, but short of that, it’s just an obnoxious, bulky false sense of security banging against your leg.

          • Zebra Dun

            Useless until you need it.
            An Uncle with the 9th Inf Riverine stated the NVA hit them with CS gas during an assault and none of them had Masks, disorder ensued.
            Every where I went, when ever we were in the field or on maneuvers while stateside or OCONUS we by rule and regulation had to have those masks. The specifics of some jobs made it mandatory.
            This was the era where a MOPP suit was a gas mask, and Poncho.
            Even aboard ships the sailors had gas masks available for each sailor.
            In Hostile areas, on guard at Posts stateside.
            Regular gas chamber training occurred before each deployment and once per year like clockwork That mask better be in good shape and work or your gas chamber visit would be memorable.
            NBC was a real threat and still is.

            As I said, time and things change, and yet in Syria they are using poison gas of the simplest type, chlorine, ready and available everywhere you find a water sanitation system.
            I’d hate to need one and not have one due to carelessness and bad training.

          • Zebra Dun

            I just asked my Brother about their masks during desert storm, he relates they went over the berm wearing full MOPP except for the booties, gloves and masks which they carried.
            They slept in their masks for fear of the Iraqi’s gassing them while they Lager in for the night the MOPP was woodland green in the desert no less LOL they had Fox units roaming the desert that were picking up traces of mustard from old chemical land mines laid probably during the first world war.
            Perhaps a more professional outfit then and even today practices a better form of MOPP discipline.

          • Evan

            Professionalism and discipline have nothing to do with it. In Desert Storm, we were fighting the Iraqi army, a large (sort of) modern war machine with a track record of using gas. In that case, MOPP gear is a reasonable precaution. In 2005-2006, we were fighting an insurgency without any NBC weapons or the capacity to deliver them. In such a case, carrying around bulky gear of dubious efficacy to counter a nonexistent threat is completely pointless and counterproductive. We also didn’t have Stinger teams from the Air Wing attached to us, because there was no threat from the air. You fight with only what you need to counter any realistic threat, carrying everything but the kitchen sink just weighs you down with equipment you’ll never use. I never kept my poncho in my assault pack in Iraq either, because rain is extremely unlikely. Were I fighting in the jungle, I’d probably want it (Gore-Tex is exponentially better than the ponchos they give us, but I doubt I’d want to wear it in a jungle environment. It’s hot).

          • Robert Kalani Foxworthy

            The gas mask that doesn’t protect against chlorinated gas?

          • kiljoy616

            I though it was funny most people posting here talking so informed did not know this simple fact. Goes to show how little informed so many are. Considering they run in the 10 dollar range its a no brainier canteens are old school with no real purpose in modern survival or combat.

          • The Brigadier

            Camelbacks like all plastics contain phthalates. This is a chemical strengthener for all plastics and it leeches into food and water. Its carcinogenic and regularly kills over a million Americans every year. The plastic industry is already reeling over the continuing rejection of BPA by more and more states and countries. BPA is another strengthener and it too is mutagenic. I have gotten rid of my Camelbacks and replaced them with thin SS ones. A bit heavier, but the steel has no phthalates, BPA, or reactive aluminum to poison me. Its a cruel irony that troops have continued to survive numerous actions with hostiles only to die from their water carriers.

        • Zebra Dun

          I ride a road bike and horses and use the camel backs, yet I also carry a bottle of water and a real live western style blanket covered canteen on the saddle.
          It’s for reserve on the bike and for the saddle mostly just show.
          I still have my issue metal canteen from the 70’s, they issued one plastic and one metal told us to keep the metal and turn in the plastic, mine was made in 1948 and issued in a plastic bag brand new and unused, the plastic one was made in 1968 and was well used.
          I recall thinking, “somewhere there is a huge warehouse filled with WW2 and Korea war canteens that are unused and brand new” then they handed me an entrenching tool with a wooden handle!

      • FarmerB

        Err, yeah, they do – and just about everything else they wear. NIR compliant clothing has been standard fare for years.

      • bob1stshirt

        Miles, the Marines already use a vegetable based dye in the Marpat uniforms. This makes a arise look more like a plant to IR and NVG devices. Without the vegan dye, Marines would stand out like a sore thumb to enemy NVGs.

        Sooooo, canteens, or more accurately the canteen covers, and other gear already has some IR and NVG defeating concealment.

      • Beyondbreakeventrading

        The manufacurers will take this to ridiculous levels. Which would you rather sell, a $7 can of paint, or sell an almost identical can of paint for $37 because it’s super nano tactical ninja paint?
        Snake oil is snake oil.

    • nova3930

      There’s also the issue of hyperspectral imaging over and above IR.

    • n0truscotsman

      If you believe Guy Cramer’s studies (‘If’ being the key word; Im very skeptical myself), then krylon camo paint actually works pretty well for NIR http://www.hyperstealth.com/baseline/

      For most systems that the bad guys might have in service in small numbers, krylon’ing your weapon will work for NIR in the forseeable future. From a practical standpoint, and obeying the basic fieldcraft fundamental of camouflage, all weapons should be painted anyways, even if it is just with a coat of a single, earth-toned color.

      Im curious as to how effective cerakote is for IR suppression.

  • Joshua

    That you for pointing out they are not associated. I haven’t finished reading this but those websites are wrong on things at times.

  • billyoblivion

    “If the optimal use of the thing is in shooting, and that grunt only spends maybe 3 percent or less time on a deployment actually firing his weapon, then I would argue that the whole thing is negated.”

    That’s a REALLY REALLY important 3 percent. Heck, if it was 1/10th of 1 percent, but the whole thing made him twice as effective and got him home alive then the whole thing was utterly worth it.

    “I’d apply that to suppressors as well. If their only value is in a gun fight, then the rest of time we’re going to have Marines constantly worrying about losing serialized gear, dropping it somewhere, etc… In addition to it being another pound to worry about.”

    If it’s properly attached or part of the firearm then this is less an issue. The question is when and where are silenced weapons valuable on the battlefield.

    I can see (and this is typical of “the military is always prepared to fight the last war”) where having suppressed carbines/sbrs would be handy in clearing houses and in high-tempo operations where you’re trying to roll up a chain of problems (take one building, immediately generate actionable intelligence, move take another building rinse, slaughter, repeat) that reducing noise levels would be better both for the operators and for lowering the chances that other parts of the chain will hear and get spooked (or that neighbors will hear and pass word along etc.).

    This is also a matter of the “zero defect mindset” that pervades much of the military, even during combat operations. If you lose crypto gear or keying material while in contact with the op4s, that’s HORRIBLY bad.

    If you lose a silencer it’s “just money”, and if you’re buying a half million of them or so you ought to be get them at around 200 a pop (no pun intended, wait, who am I kidding).

  • Dolphy

    So essentially a fantacist got ahold of a typewriter and wrote a letter to santa.

  • lowell houser

    The infrared paint thing is just stupid. Adding a muzzle brake/QD suppressor combo would be great. Also, go back to 7.62 DMRs. Put the M14s back in the rotation, or buy some SCAR20s or something, just get a squad level long range .30 cal back out there. The scouts should be using .338 lapua, so just adjust the nomenclature to fit the Remington XL action and have the boys at Quantico start building them.

    As for the suppressor, a Gemtech Halo attaches to the existing a A2 flashhider with no tools, and is a breeze to maintain. And in titanium it’s not heavy. So spec them out with all new M4A1 orders and be done with it.

  • Esh325

    Should buy more m27 iars to replace the m16 instead.

    • Joshua

      To expensive and doesn’t offer enough of an upgrade.

      The M27 costs nearly $3,000 a rifle vs the $640 of the M4 and the only thing the M27 offers is a superior barrel.

      • Zebra Dun

        That’s because the M-4 is not worth what an M-27 is, it is a look cool item not a real battle field serious weapon. A PDW instead of a rifle.

        • Joshua

          Uh huh…sorry but the M27 is hardly better than the M4A1. It has a much better barrel and I wish my M4A1 had a HK416 barrel, however the overall package of the HK416 is in no way superior to what can be had on the M4A1 at a fraction of the price.

          According to your other posts you were a soldier in the 70s, I wouldn’t expect you to have any real world use between a current issued M4A1 and a HK416.

          • Zebra Dun

            “Worth more” is what I said Bubba, not better, don’t put words into my mouth, though it is a better rifle and the M-4 is not it is a carbine.

            “According to your other posts you were a soldier in the 70s, I wouldn’t
            expect you to have any real world use between a current issued M4A1 and a
            HK416.”

            Yes I was a Marine Infantry MOS from 17 to 21 years old, but now I am 62 years old and I have fired a lot of different weapons, read a lot of different studies and results about all these weapons.

            My first firearm was a .410 shotgun to hunt rabbits I got on my twelfth birthday.
            My current favorite go to rifle is a Winchester M-94 in .30 WCF.

            I have spoken with family and friends who serve currently or served in Iraq and Afghanistan.

            I base my observations and thoughts of that, not what I did as a teenager growing up in the Marines during the 70’s. Though I was lucky in that I was able to shoot a great many types of weapons modern and WW2 vintage, My Gunny was the best at this.

            I may be old but I ain’t stupid.

            My wheel barrow is now full.

    • Zebra Dun

      Yup, that was and may be the idea eventually when the SOCOM cool look fades.

  • anomad101

    Reinventing the wheel, over and over.

  • USMC03Vet

    Instead of supressors they should just develop and issue some electronic hearing protection instead.

    • Ear pro is a separate item, does nothing for your signature, and runs on batteries.

      A modern sealed suppressor, permanently affixed, has multiple advantages, beyond not pissing off voters who live close enough to complain about the noise from the rifle range. (And yes, it happens. And yes, it *has* caused military range usage limits to be imposed.)

      • Joshua

        Perm attached is a horrible idea.

        • Why? With a modern suppressor, there is no need to *ever* remove it, unless it is damaged and needs to be replaced – just like a flash suppressor or a gas block. PVT Schmuckatelli doesn’t *ever* have to (and, frankly, shouldn’t) disassemble it.

          Hell, some of the best designs are sealed and welded shut and *cannot* be disassembled.

          Screw it on, and pin the damned thing. This isn’t 1934, and this isn’t a Maxim Silencer with replaceable wipes. Nor is it a low pressure suppressor like you’d use for .22LR. You “clean” it by *using* it.

          Let me guess – you jam pipe cleaners in your gas tube, too, don’t you?

          • Oh, and before you say “blank adapting” or “blanks run dirty”? We solved that particular problem back with the M60 and M14. You can design a blank adaptor so that the bore obstructor goes *through* the length of the suppressor, and blocks off at the actual muzzle, before the suppressor.

            Bayonet mounting? Solved over 125 years ago – there is no need to use a muzzle ring bayonet on he suppressor; you can mount a solid bracket to something that isn’t the suppressor. You can even retain the M7/M9/OKC3 M16 interface, if you like.

    • Ron

      The Marine Corps bought 48K sets of electronic hearing protection in 08; the problem is partially a training one in which most Marines in Victor battalions don’t even know what they are, or how to use them and partially an comfort one. Although they are probably the most comfortable sets of electronic hearing pro out there (used them, the Boise and the MSA before), they get unconformable to wear for extended periods of time.

      • Zebra Dun

        I recall with hard of hearing the typical usage of empty cartridge cases as ear plugs.
        Please say again?

    • Zebra Dun

      I believe the idea is to preserve the enemies hearing LOL so they won’t hear the weapon.

  • John May

    Why the hell aren’t Marines allowed to paint their small-arms besides sniper rifles? One of the simplest ideas out there that even Big-Army allows it…and the Marine Corps doesn’t?

    • Ron

      Because it is a “shiny thing” for most people who do it.

    • You mean the same Marine Corps that enforces 19th Century cleaning habits, despite the fact that they actually *damage* weapons?

    • Zebra Dun

      Paint even dull paint is overrated.
      it stinks when heated, shines even if dull and you cannot change color when you move into another area without painting it again.
      Either use bow tape or a bow type sleeve of camo cloth.

  • Ron

    The MC times, AKA the MC Enquirer is not really a reliable source

  • Pete Sheppard

    Wouldn’t the length and weight of an effective suppressor make a (conventional) rifle too clumsy? It might actually help the balance of a bullpup.

    • No, especially if you’re moving to M4 carbines anyway.

      • Pete Sheppard

        Thanks

    • Zebra Dun

      Go to shorter barrel to obtain maneuverability, then add two feet of suppressor which makes it longer and retards maneuverability.
      “D,oH!”

  • I-Heart-Predator

    Where’s the invisible suit thing that blends you into the background? They used one in the movie, “Predator”? You know the one? Is it just too expensive?

  • Dave Meyer

    Replace the A4 with the M-4? Sacrifice the Marine Corps legendary ability to hit at longer ranges for a carbine? Glad I retired in 98′. The problem is, they always want to develope doctrine for the next war by using examples of the last war. It’s bit us in the butt more than once.

    • Zebra Dun

      But, but, but, SOCOM carries them and look way Kool, It’s got Bo-Flage and a snazzy suppressor!
      Hitting the enemy is not the idea I believe, the idea is to impress him to death with gear laden weapons he cannot hear nor see.
      Chesty Wept.

      • Joshua

        Generally the guys who actually use their rifles are the ones you want to follow.

        • Zebra Dun

          No, it’s mostly groundhog day for a full 95% of all troops, Regular and SOCOM.
          Usually if a unit of troops and SOCOM get into a fray they call for Air Strikes, and other various support weapons to take the enemy out.
          Only when they step to deep into the kimchee do they use their PDW’s and then the results are less that spectacular.
          A soldier, Marine and SOCOM needs a Rifle.
          This is just a glorified Tacti-cool pop gun.
          Designed by people who sneak around and hide using stealth to recon or call in above said Air and Arty evading a gun fight like the Ebola plague.
          Their battle cry used to be extract.

          Regulars use their weapons as combat tools operators snoop and Poop.

          • Joshua

            I want to say something, but it just might get me banned from this site.

            So I’ll just say your out of your lane and have no clue what your talking about.

    • Joshua

      Shorter barrels are often more accurate than longer barrels due to rigidity of the shorter barrel. You do sacrifice about 150fps by cutting off that 5.5″ of barrel.

  • Steven Flores

    Security and defense are the only reasons why I read all about weapons. I wish to protect my wife and teach her again with a semi automatic shotgun and pistol. I hate leaving her alone at home, for fear of these home invasions criminals that target women who are alone. I’ve never experienced any problems in the 40 years we have been together. With our kids all grown and gone from the home, I still do worry for her safety.

    • Beyondbreakeventrading

      Get a great dane. That’ll take care of her emotional needs, because they are like kids, and give her time to get to her guns, because they are ferocious.

  • Beyondbreakeventrading

    “Where is the use of an angled foregrip in standing 8 hours of post? If the optimal use of the thing is in shooting, and that grunt only spends maybe 3 percent or less time on a deployment actually firing his weapon, then I would argue that the whole thing is negated.”

    Your logic reminds me of the economist who drowned in a river that was, on average, only 3 feet deep. You can scrimp on a shovel, or a can opener, because there are unlikely to be occassions where those implemnts become critical to your survival. Not so for a firearm, when you need it, you need the best.

  • Zebra Dun

    M-4 Carbine with suppressor painted in camo paint.
    The F-35 approach to small arms.

  • Phillip Cooper

    “Give the Marines an Operator look”
    Seems to go against one of the Rules of Combat: “Don’t look important”

  • nova3930

    “Personally I think any R & D into “special paint” that has “wavelengths invisible to the naked eye” is a almost an absurd notion and seems to come from the desk of someone who hasn’t spent enough time in the field”
    The issue is if we happen to be in a peer state conflict against someone who has access to hyperspectral imaging and the like. Hyperspectral can differentiate different materials even when they’re very well camouflaged optically and thermally. So if you know there are guys toting metal rifles out in the bushes, in a sense you can see through them. This is basically talking about taking camouflage to a whole other level….

    • Phillip Cooper

      You’ve read far too many John Ringo novels…

      • nova3930

        You can do some searching for Army hyperspectral programs. I’ve actually worked some of them 😉

  • Tom Currie

    Well, this article includes an entire paragraph devoted to the single most stupid comment I have ever seen made in any military small arms discussion: “This goes along with my philosophy on gear. Take something like the Magpul angled foregrip. Sure, the thing works wonders when shooting, etc… But an Infantry Marine doesn’t spend most of his time shooting, he spends it sleeping, walking, standing post, and going on working parties. Where
    is the use of an angled foregrip in standing 8 hours of post? If the optimal use of the thing is in shooting, and that grunt only spends maybe 3 percent or less time on a deployment actually firing his weapon, then I would argue that the whole thing is negated.”

    If anyone is foolish enough to accept the premise of this argument, then the only conclusion is that the rifle itself is of no significant use to the rifleman because he uses it “maybe 3 percent of less time on a deployment”!

  • Joshua

    A suppressed M2 would be cool

  • RPK

    Sounds like “employee empowerment” is entering the Corps culture. What is next. Blue digital pattern uniforms for male Marines and then pink camoflauge uniforms for women Marines? Ridiculous! What makes a Marine a Marine is intestinal fortitude. NOT a fancy painted firearm. Gung Ho, Chesty Puller and Semper Fidelis forever!!!

  • Eric B.

    Sad that the Marines are going to a shortened M16 (The M4). The ballistics will suffer even more in an already marginal cartridge.
    The reason that many armed forces went to bull pup rifles is to have a shorter weapon that still has enough barrel length to retain sufficient velocity for the 5.56 NATO cartridge. We need to look hard at adopting the FN SCAR (with NON-reciprocating bolt handle), Remington Defense ACR and even some bull pups for certain tasks that demand a short overall rifle.

    Getting past short barreled, direct impingement rifles to the most advanced piston driven designs is necessary when equipping our armed forces with highly reliable small arms.
    And a corollary to that is finding a cartridge that is ballistically superior to the 5.56 NATO round. Something like the 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel would be a big step forward.

    • NDS

      ACR & SCAR don’t offer any substantial advantage over a proper DI M4. There may be other solutions in the future but they aren’t it, unfortunately. They also will never ditch the reciprocating handle as the SCAR has no other method of forward assist.

      I’ll definitely agree that the shrinking barrel lengths is a shame, as many have learned with the huge engagement distances in Afghanistan. There’s a time and a place for a 10″ 5.56 but shooting some schlub on an adjacent mountain top isn’t it.

      • CommonSense23

        The MK17s currently are being tested with a non reciprocating charging handle.
        The problem with Afghanistan isn’t the guns being used, its the tactics. When patrols are getting ambushed by DSKHs from the opposing mountain top cause they decided to patrol in broad daylight, it doesn’t matter what shoulder fired weapon you have, your being outgunned and outfought.

      • Eric B.

        The “substantial advantage” of an SCAR or ACR over a direct impingement AR is that they not only run much cleaner but keep the bolt area much cooler, avoiding cartridge “cook-off” in long term firing situations. And yes, the 6.5 Grendel, for example, has FAR superior ballistics to even a 7.62 NATO round. Heck, my 6.5 Creedmoor will outshoot a 7.63 NATO every time, even including wind drift, and that’s why it’s used by so many PRS competitors, as is the smaller 6 mm Creedmoor. Both are built on a 7.62/.308 Win. case that runs in all .308/7.62 magazines.

        The SCAR could have a “tipping” or “rocking” forward assist bolt handle to catch the bolt, or a button to depress as my Steyr/AUG does. It’s been done successfully many times with other firearms and there’s no reason FN can’t do it on the SCAR. It’s non-reciprocation now ONLY because SOCOM asked for it. (Amazing! What kind of wisdom is that??)

    • Hospes

      Unfortunately for you, not only does the DOD find what it wants to find. but even on here, there is a man who can take anything and explain why 5.56×45 M4 is always better. Check ‘Not so Special: A Critical View of 6.8’ for a truly epic example

      Be sure to check the comments left by

      Mad_Gorilla
      Brian M
      Dittybopper
      MarylandShooter
      TechnoTriticale
      Fegelein
      toms
      Misha
      dhdoyle
      Kev
      McThag

      • Eric B.

        Yeah “Hospes”, there are always be naysayers despite the ballistics facts, despite better firearms designs, despite current US arms problems. These are the same types that, back in the mid 1860s, felt muzzle loading rifles were still the best to be had. They love their old “muskets”.

  • Eric B.

    OOPS, typo. Should have read “… M240 medium machine gun”

  • Phillip Cooper

    Figured you had. But I was running low on my snark for the morning. 🙂

  • 6.5x55Swedish

    A marine spend less than 0.0001% being penentrated by projectile so why have body armour?

  • Zebra Dun

    July 13 2008 a village near Wanat Afghanistan.
    Nine KIA and twenty seven WIA, Pos almost over run by two hundred Insurgents.

    “A detailed study of the attack by a military historian found that
    weapons failed repeatedly at a “critical moment” during the firefight.”

    Specifically The M-4 Carbine and the M-249 SAW.
    QUOTE: My M-4 had only twelve magazines run through it when it failed to charge and threw it away. The M-249 failed after 600 rounds.

    As it was after the introduction of the M-1 Carbine everyone wanted one until they used it in Combat.

    The M-4 is too light and a carbine.
    The troops may want it, but the troops need a rifle.

  • imachinegunstuff

    It’s not that you can’t trust grunts as a whole, it’s just that one guy in every unit who looses his rifle. Our happened to be a LT who left his rifle leaning against a humvee and drove off in the Middle of the Stan

    • Squirreltakular

      Oh god. How do you… nevermind. You said LT.

      I’m just saying that while you probably can’t weed out the guys that don’t have enough sense to attach their PEQ to their rifle properly, it shouldn’t prohibit everyone else from getting gear that helps them win.

  • missourisam

    A want list for the Marines? What most Marines on the front lines would like to see would be the weapons the Marines now have in storage, but are holding in reserve while the troops in the line of fire are using worn out crap. Also, the other thing most wanted by the troops on the front lines would like to see is a president that would let the military leaders fight a war instead of being micro managed by politicians that have never faced an enemy except on the campaign circuit. Especially they want a commander in chief that was not one of the enemy.

  • louieleblanc1@aol.com

    I over heard a gun salesman in So Cal that Marines are looking to use the SPRINGFIELD XD .45 as their new side arm..Baretta 9mm is Gone..

  • Roha Waha

    Back in 1998 I was painting rifles for a government agency in Tucson AZ , the specifications were to use the military’s existing vehicle paint ” camo colors ” the paint was radar absorbent
    and very toxic when partials were floating in the air. The MSDS actually stated the paint fumes can cause death if breathed in while spraying. I retired USMC in 1997 , I think giving young Marines access to can’s of spray paint will result in multiple UCMJ violations for Silent Contempt tagging !

  • me ohmy

    this is a completely F-TARDED argument.. suppressors LOST??
    how about HEARING loss???? 163db in an enclosed area and you’re worried about an f-ing POUND MORE BATTLE RATTLE??
    YOU EVER HEARD OF SNIVEL KIT AND POGEY BAIT??
    I ALWAYS had a plastic jar of instant coffee, and I ALWAYS had hard candies.
    a full auto hardened can is something I WISHED for while active, and welding on a mounting tab on the can body, with a hole, then safety wiring it on.. it. will. not. fall. off. your. rifle.
    this is about the most asinine reason to not protect you and other snuffies hearing I have EVER heard.
    USMC 3518 86-90

  • Eric B.

    Suppressors are reportedly very effective in squad level firefights IF the enemy does not have them. You can identify their positions very quickly and they have difficulty finding yours.

  • buzzman1

    M-2’s with set head space and timing have been around since the late 70’s. M-2’s seem to last forever so the Army has never invested in buying new. A flash suppressor would be a nice touch but can only wonder what it would look like to be able to tame that beast. At least the military got rid of the original powder many decades ago. In the late 80’s I got to shoot .50 cal ammo manufacture in 1939. pop off a couple of rounds and you couldnt see anything until the smoke cleared.

    The Marines I guess didnt learn from the M-16 A2 fiasco that happened when they let the Army take over the program so they deserve the shafting they will get with other small arms programs. Not to mention having to give up ammo that really works to use the new green ammo.