Army Get Your Gun

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS RECENTLY reported that several congressmen and senators are looking into the renewal of Colt Defense's sole-source contract for the manufacture of the M4 Carbine, the most widely-used personal weapon in the U.S. Army. Derived from the M16 assault rife, the M4 retains the same firing mechanism and uses the same 5.56 x 45mm cartridge as the M16, but has a much shorter barrel, making it lighter and easier to carry inside a Humvee or armored personnel carrier. On the other hand, the shorter barrel reduces the muzzle velocity, hence the range and lethality of the weapon. As we reported earlier, there have been complaints from the field going back as far as the 1991 "Black Hawk Down" incident in Mogadishu that the M4 lacks "stopping power"--the ability to bring down a man with something other than a hit to the head or the heart--particularly when the enemy is hopped up on drugs (as is frequently the case in places like Somalia, Iraq, and Afghanistan). In addition, the gun is somewhat more prone to jamming than similar weapons due to its direct gas injection action, and requires frequent and scrupulous cleaning (which can be a problem in dusty climates like Iraq). Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), usually a strong supporter of the military, is one of those who believes the Army is getting a raw deal: "What we have here is a fat contractor in Colt who has gotten very rich off our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Coburn and other critics point to the age of the basic technology of the M4 (the M16 was first introduced in 1965), as well as its high unit cost ($1500 per carbine) relative to other military assault rifles. He thinks the Army can do better. The Army disagrees, pointing to good reviews from the field (do they read the same mail, one wonders?), as well as the fact that any alternative rifle would take time to test, validate, and procure in large numbers. Army officials argue that the costs of switching now would outweigh any marginal benefits. Col. John Radcliffe of the Army Infantry Center responded to Coburn's criticsm, noting, "There is not a weapon that is significantly better than the M4."

That's open to dispute, as gun nuts all over the country will attest. For some time, a number of experts have pointed out that the design of the M16 and all its derivatives, including the M4, is now quite dated. Looking at weapons used in other countries, such as the Austrian Styr AUG, the French FN-MAS, the British Enfield L85A2, and most recently the Chinese Type 95, all use what is called a "bullpup configuration," in which the receiver mechanism and magazine are built into the stock of the weapon, behind the trigger (as opposed to the more conventional layout, in which the receiver and magazine are in front of the trigger). This allows the use of a full-length barrel while keeping the overall length of the weapon short. Thus, the problems of range and lethality inherent in the M4 design are avoided.

The bullpup configuration is not new--the Enfield L85, for instance, is derived from the U.S. Armalite AR-18 assault rifle and has been around for almost two decades. Yet the U.S. military never considered adopting a bullpup assault rifle, instead opting to cut down the barrel of the rifle it already had, resulting in an inferior weapon.

This is not a new situation. The U.S. Army's ordnance corps has always been extremely conservative--some might say hidebound--when it comes to technological innovation. Going back to the Civil War, the Union Army's Chief of Ordnance was steadfastly opposed to the adoption of breach-loading rifles on the grounds that they were too expensive and, with their higher rate of fire, would cause soldiers to waste their fire and risk running out of ammunition. Later in the war, he opposed the introduction of repeating rifles on the same ground. Only direct intervention by President Lincoln allowed the Army to acquire modern weapons such as the Sharps breachloader or the Spencer and Henry repeating rifles. After the war, in a return to type, the Army recalled all its repeating rifles and instead issued the troops with old Springfield muzzle-loading rifled muskets and carbines converted to breachloaders. To see how well this worked out, ask George Armstrong Custer's 7th U.S. Cavalry, which was seriously outgunned by the Sioux and Cheyenne at the Little Bighorn (where about a third of the Indians had Henry and Winchester repeaters).