|
|
|
|
The Strike Report - August 2011
“The true test of a leader is whether his followers will adhere to his cause volition, enduring the most arduous hardships without being forced to do so, and remaining steadfast in the greatest moment of peril." ~ Xenophon
THE BLACK RIFLE A Little History and Some Thoughts
Eugene Stoner, a designer with Armalite, conceived this weapon in 1957. It was designed to be a light primary infantry weapon weighing approximately 6.5 pounds as compared to the M-14, which weighed almost 11 pounds with a fully loaded magazine and sling. Stoner's weapon was also more controllable during a full auto burst or while shooting a string of semi-auto rounds. In addition, soldiers could carry a lot more ammunition. The M-16 was shooting the light 5.56 round in comparison to the M-14's heavier 7.62 round.
Around 1959, Armalite sells all design documentation, patents, and manufacturing rights to Colt who immediately starts an aggressive campaign promoting the weapon to the military. However, it is not until around 1962 that the US DoD, ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency) requested and purchased 1000 rifles that are later shipped to Special Forces Advisory Units operating in Vietnam for field test and evaluation. Finally, in 1966, the US Government purchases approximately 840,000 rifles for troops involved in the escalating war in Vietnam.
I am well aware of the reputation of the M-16 in the 1960's. As a young Marine in Vietnam in early 1968, I recall my own weapon constantly jamming, even though I had kept it cleaned and well lubricated. In fact, after the first magazine had run through it, the weapon turned into a single shot system, wherein I had to activate the charging handle each time to extract the round fired and to chamber a new one. It was one of the most intense and frustrating experiences of my life.
Supposedly, in 1967 the problems that M-16's were having had all been corrected and these older weapons had been taken out of service, but it was evident by the number of stacked up non-serviceable weapons I saw in a pile one day there were still rifles being issued that should not have been. I was fortunate because I was soon authorized and allowed to carry an M-14. I held on to that weapon until I rotated out of 2/4.
By the time I joined CAP Team 332, in the latter half of 1968, the M-16's being issued functioned extremely well and I do not recall any further serious malfunctions occurring with them. The only problems we really had to watch out for were bad magazines. That is still the weakest part of any auto/semi-auto weapon system, even today.
I have since learned that the corrections made to the M-16's in order to get them right involved the following: giving them a chrome-lined chamber and eventually the bore itself, spec's had changed on the ammunition - it seems an extruded powder had been replaced with a ball powder which caused a different firing sequence as well as heavy fouling. This led to major malfunction with the weapon for soldiers and Marines to deal with in combat. Eventually, the ammunition issues were corrected. Additionally, service personnel also received better functional cleaning equipment and solvents, along with proper instructions on how to maintain and service the weapon. A better recoil system was installed on the rifle and all of these combined together made the M-16 a more reliable service weapon. Unfortunately, its negative reputation was still hanging out there and endured for a while longer.
TODAY'S AR / M4'S
Those of you who know me or have taken training with us, know full well what an advocate I am for the patrol rifle and in my belief that every agency should be armed with them. I am not the only one who feels this way. Two other individuals that are strong advocates for this policy and people I admire are, Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Todd Rassa of the Killology Institute. I am in complete agreement with their assessment concerning their recommendations on the following points:
Grossman's and Todd Rassa's Recommendations:
1. Train every patrol officer in bomb awareness, crowd management, riot control, ballistic shield tactics, team firing drills and other response skills likely to be needed for a mass school takedown. Responsibility for an immediate effective response will most probably fall heavily on street cops, given the activation time for most SWAT teams. 2. Proper equipment needs to be readied. "Patrol rifles are needed now - as many as possible with as much ammunition as possible," Rassas stressed. Also, ballistic shields, helmets and other protective devices for every officer. Have a plan in place to get large amounts of additional ammo to the scene ASAP.
As you know, we have stressed in two different Strike Reports - (January 2009 and January 2010) why US Law Enforcement should be armed with patrol rifles, get proper training and have established response teams to deal with serious incidents, especially an ASR (Active Shooter Response). The world has changed, threats are real, and we must be ready as America's first responders to handle a worse case scenario - ANOTHER TERRORIST ATTACK!
Today's AR's / M-16's / M-4's are an outstanding weapon platform. They come in endless configurations which greatly aid departments and agencies in making either single or multiple selections on weapons to enhance, and meet their mission needs. The quality of materials going into these weapons, new designs, and technological advancements, have ensured that this weapon system will be around for a long, long time, and meeting the service needs of the law enforcement community. In truth, they are still evolving this weapon. Some of the most notable changes that have occurred to make these weapons better have dealt with the gas and recoil systems, better extractors, springs, improvement on barrels and chambers, refinement on parts as to tolerances, and even magazines have vastly been improved for reliability.
One of the other great things that has happened is all the different ancillary tactical equipment that can be mounted on these weapons to give it mission versatility. I am speaking of such things as the Red Dot Systems (RDS) - like AimPoint, EoTech, and Trijicon, to name a few. Rifle Illumination Systems these days (Surefire, Streamlight / Insight Technology as examples) are phenomenal as well as being an absolute essential piece of equipment that should be added to any patrol rifle. Why fight in the dark when you can illuminate your target, identify your target, and determine if you have a threat or not? Lights are so versatile that you can go from a low end product to a high end product when selecting a system, but the important thing is...GET SOME SORT OF LIGHT SYSTEM ON THE WEAPON! With today's technology any agency should be able to spec out a working weapon system that would meet their mission demands and serve their agency well.
PHOTO BELOW: Gives the reader an idea of the different configuations of this weapon platform. The weapons belonged to the students who participated in the Rifle Instructor Course, June 13-17, 2011, at the Denton County Sheriff's Range.
As you can see in this photo there are many options as to design and configuration for this weapon. Note also the varying ancillary equipment from stocks, rear sights, fore-ends, slings, tactical lights, and Red Dot systems. It is a great piece of tactical equipment to meet today's law enforcement demands and officers and department are able to configure the weapon to meet mission specific needs.
JUST AS IMPORTANT: Training and Developing a Proper Combat Mindset
The real commitment to a rifle program is the proper training and combat mindset that must accompany any skills learning. I believe it is something that must be ingrained into any firearms training program. It is just as important as having them understand the parameters of operational guidelines and procedures they must follow in order to maintain program consistency. Here is another thing to consider: What is the point of having an outstanding piece of tactical equipment such as a patrol rifle with all the right equipment attached to it, if the operator does not have the proper skills to utilize it at its maximum efficiency, or the mindset to really fight with it? The answer is: "You have just given this officer a piece of high dollar junk to hold in their hands and nothing more." Training is critical! Training is essential and through the training process you can also help to build combat mindset along with it. You do this by building stressors into the program that the operator can overcome by thinking and working through the process. You can do it by adding challenging but doable drills, and by adding team drills in order to develop a wolf pack mentality. Finally, you do it by being unrelenting in your approach in training by keeping them in the fight mode until all threats have been neutralized, and with no additional threats being detected. Even though the scene may appear to be contained and all suspects are taken care of, a real threat could appear at any time. In fact, in my opinion, this is the most dangerous time for any team. You keep them at this level until the mission is completed and all have safely returned to HQ or their particular agency. You then channel them down slowly through a solid mission debrief. It is this type of intensity with regards to mission focusing that can get them there and keep them there. This is something that instructors should be injecting and emphasizing to their people during training. It trains them to get into an elevated mindset condition and maintain it until the mission is completed.
THE COMPARISON: AK-47 VS. M-16/M-4
There have been several studies done on this with each weapon system having their pluses and minuses as to operational needs. For the most part the general overview goes like this:
THE AK-47
THE M-16 / M4 / AR
As with any weapon system, it is only as good as the operator who is behind it. Training is as essential as anything else you can do. Training refines skills, sharpens the mind and allows one to gain knowledge of the weapon's tactical limitations. You cannot train enough! Which is better? The answer is, "What are your mission needs?"
I have shot and handled both. My personal preference for US Law Enforcement is the AR/M4 weapon system. The AR/M4 rifles are extremely capable and they meet our needs as it pertains to the various services that law enforcement is required to provide and respond to. I know some would disagree and that is their prerogative but that is the choice I would make.
As for our brethren in the military, I believe the design platform for the weapon will remain the same or close to it, but that they will adopt a slightly heavier, better performing cartridge to replace the 5.56. However, for law enforcement, the 5.56 / .223 will work for a long time and serve our operational needs adequately. Again, it is strictly my opinion on the matter.
(Ref. Strike Reports - January 2009 / January 2010) another outstanding report on the use of Patrol Rifles was written by Ryan Richard entitled: "Oakland's Carbine Responders." It is a great report on Oakland California's Police Department and their intense rifle training program as well as other details such as selection process and the actual patrol rifle school that officers must attend and pass. You can find this particular article in Guns & Ammo - "Combat Tactics" magazine (Fall 2009 - volume 7, number two).
RESOURCES:
Guns & Ammo: "AR-15" and "Combat Tactics" World of Guns - Modern Firearms Green Eyes Black Rifles by Kyle Lamb Shooting Times: "The Tactical Operator" SWAT Magazine Killology Institute - Dave Grossman, Todd Rassa Strike International
By:
Jack C. Perritt Executive Director Strike International
________________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
