I wish he would elaborate on that.The 5.56 [caliber] SCAR was a failure from the viewpoint of the men,
Huh?He said its 5.56-caliber bullet is too small and the gas-piston firing system is prone to stoppage. He said better weapons — the German Heckler-Koch G36 and Russian AK-74 (a version of the venerable AK-47) — use superior firing systems.
I read it on the Internet. Must be true.:-DI agree with you CPTdaz. I had to reread that part over and over again becuase it doesn't make sense and there is not enough explanations behind the quotes. The whole article is just a bunch of he said that and this and sounds like a gossip/political article rather than informative explanation on the faults of the M4/M16 rifle and the needs of the current military.
I agree. A lot of BS in that article. The M4 is fine. Yes, I like the Scar better but there is nothing terribly wrong with the M4. Every weapon system ever designed has some people spouting off that it is a piece of crap. You have to take these articles with a grain of salt.This article is a total hit piece by a rag of a newspaper that is full propaganda or just plain wrong and misleading information.
The M16 at it's start had it's issues, and that was rectified. If you do your research there where nay sayers and issues with the M1 Garand when it was adopted and it has been credited with helping to win WWII.
The problem with the M4/M16/M9 or any U.S. military small arms is a lack of proper and routine maintenance at a unit and above level, magazines treated like gold and not replaced when needed, cleaning to the point of damaging said system, lack of proper lubrication, and a whole bunch of urban myth and wives tales (i.e. internet) that are perpetuated by Drill Sergeants, NCO's, and Jedi Mall Ninjas.
There is nothing wrong with the M16/M4 platform and there has been a **** ton of dead bad guys from the platform, it has it's strengths and weakness just like any other weapons platform. The person behind the trigger needs to know this and take it into account.
And the whole notion that 5.56 is not an effective round is pure BS, it all boils down to one thing, shot placement!!!!! There are 3 ways to kill a man, head shot, heart shot, or he bleeds out; if you fail to properly hit the first two then you need to reapply more accuraly placed bullets until he stops or dies.
Based on my 25+ years training and experience in the military and law enforcement, I have seen a lot of dead folks.
A good majority of those dead folks where from gunshot wounds and quite a few of those people were shot with a .22lr and were dead before they hit the ground.
I have also seen guys shot with "man stoppers", like the 45 ACP, and lived to tell the tale. You know that 230 grain projectile that can pick-up a 200 pound man and throw him through a window or "take his arm clean off", regardless of that pesky thing called the law of physics.
But don't listen to me or the internet or the media, do your own research and ask folks in the know.