US Army rifles going semi-auto now?

[SpaceBadger]

My stepson just completed Basic Training, and had two days of passes (one on-post, one off) before shipping out to AIT. During one of our conversations, he mentioned that the rifle he trained on (M-4 rather than M-16) did not have full-auto or burst settings, only semi-auto w a light trigger. He explained that the Army is trying to limit the instances of soldiers just holding down the trigger until the magazine is empty, and said that with the light trigger pull they can fire almost as fast as on auto, but w more control.

I had not heard of this before, and wondered if it is a change in doctrine, or maybe something only used in training but not combat (although Cody said this was taught to them as the way their rifles would be used in combat). Also, his MOS will be technical, not infantry, so maybe that makes a difference as he will not be expected to use his rifle daily except in emergency.

Anybody know the scoop on this?


(PS: He learned his shooting well enough to earn his Basic Marksman badge! )

 

[HG_B]

I had not heard of this before, and wondered if it is a change in doctrine, or maybe something only used in training but not combat (although Cody said this was taught to them as the way their rifles would be used in combat). Also, his MOS will be technical, not infantry, so maybe that makes a difference as he will not be expected to use his rifle daily except in emergency.

Anybody know the scoop on this?

They lied to him. They are going to single & 3 burst settings.

 

[JimMarn]

I hadn't heard that one. I know from watching the military channel that 3 round bursts and single shot semi-auto was put into rifles several years ago. The concern was waste of ammo.

But, from the watching of WW2, etc. documentaries, some of the infantry fired high volumes of rounds to keep the enemy heads down while a small unit moved around and took them from the flank.

Technical wouldn't matter as enemies get behind the lines. Anyone has to be able to defend an area.

 

[Higgipedia]

They lied to him. They are going to single & 3 burst settings.

Yeah, pretty much since the 1980s and the M16A2, the whole M16/M4 family has been safe-semi-burst.

I didn't know anyone in my nine years of being in the airborne/special operations world that ever used burst, anyway. The huge gain in accuracy of semi made up for the slight drop in speed compared to burst.

 

[SpaceBadger]

Thanks, guys.

So really, the only difference now between a civilian AR-15 and a military M-16 is the lack of burst setting?

 

[HG_B]

Thanks, guys.

So really, the only difference now between a civilian AR-15 and a military M-16 is the lack of burst setting?

I don't know. Mine if full auto. Same with my M-2 carbine.

 

[SpaceBadger]

Technical wouldn't matter as enemies get behind the lines. Anyone has to be able to defend an area.

Oh, yeah. He was taught the M-4, M-60, SAW (M-249??), and various grenades in Basic. Also some tactical stuff as in moving through buildings and outdoor terrain, obstacles, etc. But now he will go to 20 weeks of AIT to learn networks and electronics, as opposed to someone in infantry who would get more combat training (actually I believe infantry now just combines Basic and AIT into one long course rather than dividing into two).

 

[Hesperos]

From my experience a few years ago, it was single and burst. During training, we were not permitted to use anything other than single due to competency concerns: Why allow inexperienced shooters to fire multiple rounds if they can't hit with a single one? From my understanding the more competent units were given the rifles with full auto capability.

 

[sabredog]

Thanks, guys.

So really, the only difference now between a civilian AR-15 and a military M-16 is the lack of burst setting?

Yes and no.

A civilian AR-15 (Armalite Rifle - 15) now is what the original M-16 came from so long as you are talking about the full-length rifle. Originally it was made to be a civilian semi-auto sporter rifle but nobody bought it. The select fire capability made it into the military grade M-16 and the Army made it famous. As a civilian you can own an M-16 with full autofire capability so long as you live in a state that allows it and you pay the federal ATF fees and fill out the Class 3 license paperwork. Otherwise your AR will look like an M-16 but be semi-auto.

An M4 is shorter (the military real M4 has a 14" or even 12" barrel), different ramp cuts, a lighter barrel, and various other tweaks. It has cutouts on the barrel to attach a grenade launcher to. It has select fire for burst. Its handier for the sort of built up environments the military is engaged in these days. Reputedly, anyway, but I've heard differing opinions form friends coming back from the wars. I think a lot of those complaints may have more to do with the weapons being used a lot more than expected in environments that required a more robust design.

The civilian M4 (or "M-forgery" as it is sometimes called) is merely a short-barreled carbine (16" is the legal length - anything shorter needs that tax stamp from the ATF) that is semi-automatic. Sometimes the barrel is shorter than 16" but the pinned and welded on (it has to be for this cheat to fly) flash hider gets is to the 16" length by adding an extra inch or two. The barrel cut-outs for the grenade launcher are there, and sometimes the same ramp cutouts as a real M4 as well. It will look like an M4, but unless you have the Class 3 license and live in the right state it won't really be an M4.

But they are handier than a full rifle length AR-15 when clearing buildings and all which is why this is what the LEOs use. To get the best of both worlds I have an AR lower with three matched uppers in full 20" rifle length (.308 cal) with the match barrel and scope for distance precision shooting, a 14" .40SW upper for close in shooting, and the 5.56 cal 16" M4 style upper for everything in between (both carbine uppers have iron and reflex sights). So you can see the platform's real strength is it's easy adaptability.

Hmmm....I guess that is a sufficiently pedantic answer. You may kick me now and throw cabbages.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

speaking as a serving soldier in the British army.

we are taught to use semi-auto fire almost all the time. I, personally, can count the number of times I have fired my rifle full auto, live or blank, on my fingers with several to spare.

however, the L-85A2 (aka the SA-80, the standard British assault rifle) is full auto capable, and we use that ability in certain, clearly defined situations, like the front man in a room assault.

 

[Higgipedia]

however, the L-85A2 (aka the SA-80, the standard British assault rifle) is full auto capable, and we use that ability in certain, clearly defined situations, like the front man in a room assault.

...or any episode of "Ultimate Force" :file_21:

 

[aramis]

Thanks, guys.

So really, the only difference now between a civilian AR-15 and a military M-16 is the lack of burst setting?

Not quite, but pretty close. Depending on age of weapon, the M-16 might still have a full auto sere that simply cannot be switched to full auto due to a weld. Further, the current M-16 upper receivers have changed slightly to accomodate the sight mounts, but that UR is available for AR-15's, too. (So are aftermarket seres for full auto.)

I've heard from several unofficial sources that burst is going the way of the dodo... but nothing official. Use of the single shot rifles in basic training is no surprise to me, and I've heard it from several others.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

...or any episode of "Ultimate Force" :file_21:

the SAS don't use L-85s, they use a Canadian built M-4. the L-85 isn't ally enough for them


on a serious note, I must point out that while we are taught to fire our standard rifles on semi-auto, we still have plenty of full auto firepower in the section, with Minimi and GPMG machine guns (known in American service as the M249 and they M240, respectively), which are used to lay down the, suppressing fire while the rest of the section moves.

 

[sabredog]

Not quite, but pretty close. Depending on age of weapon, the M-16 might still have a full auto sere that simply cannot be switched to full auto due to a weld. Further, the current M-16 upper receivers have changed slightly to accomodate the sight mounts, but that UR is available for AR-15's, too. (So are aftermarket seres for full auto.)

You will also need to swap out the bolt carrier - the automatic or burst modes require a different configuration. But those, along with new trigger groups if needed, are commercially available. As much as anything AR related is available these days, times being what they are. :nonono:

 

[Garyius2003]

There are two different types of US military lowers, one is full auto and one is three round burst. The three round burst can be converted to full, but not vice versa.

The semi auto only version uses a slightly different lower (which can be converted by a decent gunsmith or machinist shop), and a different bolt carrier (ditto, but it is cheaper and easier to use an auto carrier).

There is a third version of semi auto only to full auto, but it involves a piece of metal cut, punched and bent by a good to very good tinsmith, the above mentioned auto carrier, and a willingness to go to federal prison.

 

[RatPatrol]

Yes and no.

[clip]

Hmmm....I guess that is a sufficiently pedantic answer. You may kick me now and throw cabbages.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye30b3TL5wI

also Travis Haley was also the CEO for Magpul a few yrs

 

[RatPatrol]

There are two different types of US military lowers, one is full auto and one is three round burst. The three round burst can be converted to full, but not vice versa.

when I was in Korea in 1988 I took a long look the K-1 / K-2
[K-2 has a collapse-able stock - the one I looked at had a skeleton-ized stock not the fold over] - this was back in the 80's I maybe wrong about the stock

anyway the weapon appeared to have

Safe - 9
Semi - 12
FA - 3
3rnd burst - 6

which I thought was great ....
.... they kept FA when the US was moving to 3 rnd Burst

 

[sabredog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye30b3TL5wI

also Travis Haley was also the CEO for Magpul a few yrs

And.....???

 

[epicenter00]

My stepson just completed Basic Training, and had two days of passes (one on-post, one off) before shipping out to AIT. During one of our conversations, he mentioned that the rifle he trained on (M-4 rather than M-16) did not have full-auto or burst settings, only semi-auto w a light trigger. He explained that the Army is trying to limit the instances of soldiers just holding down the trigger until the magazine is empty, and said that with the light trigger pull they can fire almost as fast as on auto, but w more control.

Yes, it's a change in doctrine. The US and I believe a lot (if not most) NATO allies are moving away from "firepower over everything" and have been for a while, moving towards "just enough force, precisely applied."

I'm not sure when it began, I think it began before Iraq II. There's all kinds of benefits to semi-auto to hear it. It encourages the troops to aim, which also allows things for better confirmation of the target and so on. So there's less "accidentally shooting someone/something you didn't want to shoot" stuff going on. Apparently Iraqis could identify which side was doing the shooting, not by identifying the sound of the guns, but how the guns were fired. Americans typically start with a big boom (like a cannon or missile) hitting the target, then some seconds later, the troops move in to assault with the rapid "pop pop pop" of rapid semi-auto fire. The local militias were "long burst on full auto."

 

[Khan Trav]

This is a good demonstration of AR-15s being fired in semi-auto mode. There is at least one rifle that is not an AR but still cool short video with a good soundtrack. I have an AR15 but I seriously doubt I ever looked that cool when shooting it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KihAwNn-zoM


Also Sabredog, what type of magazines do you use for the 40 cal ar?