Marine Corps Officially Adopts M4 Carbine

[Artful]

http://kitup.military.com/2015/10/marine-corps-officially-adopts.html


The U.S. Marine Corps has officially adopted the M4 carbine to replace the M16.
An official confirmed to Military.com on Tuesday that Commandant Gen. Robert Neller has approved the decision, which follows similar moves by the U.S. Army (http://www.military.com/Community/Home/0,14700,ARMY,00.html) and Special Operations Command (http://www.military.com/special-operations).
Many Marines already have the M4, which has been issued to the select members of the service for about a decade.
The weapon’s shorter barrel, compact size and lighter weight make it ideal in tight quarters such as urban operations.
As my colleague, Matthew Cox has reported (http://kitup.military.com/2015/07/marines-leaders-finally-embrace.html), officials this summer signaled their intentions to finally switch out the M16A4, in part because of the M4’s improved accuracy using new 5.56mm rounds.
The transition is expected to be complete by the Sept. 30 end of fiscal 2016.


The Marine Corps may finally follow the U.S. Army and Special Operations Command with its plan to replace its M16s with M4 Carbines.

Marine officials recently announced the service wants to adopt the M4 Carbine to replace its beloved M16A4 for Marine infantry units, according to a source familiar with the effort.

The Army made the same decision in 2009 to replace its M16A4s with the M4. The lightweight weapon’s compact size makes it ideal working in tight quarters such as urban operations.


The M16A4 is 39.6 inches long and weighs about 8.8 pounds. The M4 is 33 inches long with its stock fully extended and 29.75 inches long with the stock retracted. It weighs about 7.5 pounds.

The M4, however, is not new to the Corps. The service has been issuing M4s to select Marines about a decade.

Change is slow. Marine Corps senior leaders have always had an extreme fondness for anything that can double as a club for beating the enemy to death

Read more: http://kitup.military.com/2015/07/marines-leaders-finally-embrace.html#ixzz3pu025wk4
Kit Up!

[oldblinddog]

Change is slow. Marine Corps senior leaders have always had an extreme fondness for anything that can double as a club for beating the enemy to death



Sounds like a good plan to me...

[bruce drake]

Oh, you can buttstroke someone with an M4....But you might bend that aluminum buffer tube the stock is on!

I took to poking Iraqis with the barrel when I had to get that close to them. They got the hint. New rifle, new manual of arms. No problems. We have a very professional Corps of Noncommissioned Officers in the Marines who will Adapt the new Carbine, Improvise new ways to use the Carbine and Overcome any perceived deficiencies of the rifle system.

Bruce

[JeffinNZ]

They'll be grumbling the same way they did when change came from the 03 to the Garand. :bigsmyl2:

[MUSTANG]

A well trained Marine can be deadly with whatever is immediately at hand when required; just ask "E-Tool Smith" (Major General Ray L. Smith). He tried his best to bury that moniker, but history and word of mouth between those who know him keeps it alive.

I would take the M4 over the M16xx; but my personal affinity remains with the M-14/M1a. We will equip the Corps with "Urban Warfare" favorable weapons, then send them in harms way elsewhere. Been the same since the 2nd Marine recruited was told by the first Marine "It was better in the Old Corps".

[Artful]

A well trained Marine can be deadly with whatever is immediately at hand when required; just ask "E-Tool Smith" (Major General Ray L. Smith). He tried his best to bury that moniker, but history and word of mouth between those who know him keeps it alive.

Actually since retiring, MajGen. Smith opened a consulting business, E-tool Enterprises! So he `must have a little fondness of the moniker.

[OptimusPanda]

My (hopefully soon to be) father in law told me when he was in the marines they trained to slash people's throats with the e tool.

[bruce drake]

I'd still prefer to carry a Springfield 03 in 30-06 if I was deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq again!


They'll be grumbling the same way they did when change came from the 03 to the Garand. :bigsmyl2:

[MtGun44]

If I remember the dialog correctly from "We Were Soldiers", Command Sergeant Major
Plumley to Lt. Gen. Moore before going to Vietnam.

Plumley: "Have you seen that new rifle?"
Moore: "Yes, the M16."
Plumley: "Feels like a BB gun. I think I'll stick to my .45."
Moore: "You should get an M16."
Plumley: "If I need one, there will be plenty of them laying on the ground."

Probably similar commentaries by crusty old sergeants about the switch from M16 to M4.

Bill

[Andrew Mason]

actulay, just about every marine in right now hates the M16A4, and the M4's are loved!!
the M16s are refered to as "muskets, due to their long and unwieldy length, and their difficulty of getting in and out of armored vehicles, and the difficulty of having them in a convenient place when in said vehicle.


This is a great decision that the corps has made, and I wish they made it a few years ago when It could have affected me, but oh well.
im glad to see they finnaly did it.

[Love Life]

It's about time. Not only is the M4 much handier for urban operations, it's also handier in vehicles and when using the head.

I remember when the M4 was more of a status symbol for pogy mcpogy pants.

[Lonegun1894]

I guess I'm the odd man out here. Don't get me wrong, I know the M-4 has certain traits that make it better suited to urban operations, and is smaller so more convenient, but I just have a thing for the M-16A2. Something comforting about a more solid feeling stock and a longer barrel with the longer sight radius. Don't get me wrong, I've used both, but would rather keep the old A2. Maybe it's just sentimental... :)

[Larry Gibson]

Lonegun1894

You're not the only "odd man out" here.....I am too. I just haven't said anything because I'm not, wasn't ever or ever want to be a Marine. However, I worked with them numerous times over the years and spent a great deal of 4 years training them in free play training. I also gave them quite a bit of foreign weapons training. I had the opportunity to observe Marines in action getting in and out of all their assorted vehicles while conducting combat training in MOUT, urban and open country training. I've seen just how much "handier" and more effective they are with the M4 vs their M16 A4s.........cut to the chafe.....they aren't any more effective. I will admit they can perhaps dismount a bit easier from a cramped Hummer but that's about it. The Marines will choose what they wish but when it comes to shooting (live fire) those Marines armed with the M16A4 always out shot those Marines armed with the M4s. As an old SF soldier (Wpns, Intel and Operations Sgt) I know the shooting is one hell of a lot more important than the carrying of any weapon. However, the Marines are the Marines........

Frankly most of the Army isn't any better. They also pick soldiers rifles these days not for the actual purpose intended but for the comfort, cost and profit. Look at my avatar and you'll see a skinny me with a 23 lb (dry weight) M60. I never found it heavy or cumbersome in vehicles or the thickest of jungles....know why? Because when the shooting started the M60 worked and worked well.......what is "cover" to 5.56 is only "concealment" to 7.62........When I deployed to Iraq in '04 I could have carried just an M9 or been issued and M4. I said "no thank you" and took an M16A2 although I did mention I'd take an M14 if they had one. That just got me a "deer in the headlight" look........

I never had, nor did any of my soldiers have any problems getting in or out of any vehicle with the M16A2 or with fast and accurate use in urban situations. It's a matter of proper training. I also did better in every CQB course than those with M4s.....usually by a long shot. I also had absolutely no problems hitting the 200 - 300m targets as did most with M4s. All of my soldiers, real REMFs, armed with M16A2s received commendations for their marksmanship abilities during qualification, night fire and the unit live fire courses. At Fort Lewis my REMF unit scored more hits on many courses than did most infantry units, especially those with M4s.

Seems like we would learn......but we don't. When this last war started there were a lot of complaints of the lack of range capability of the M16A2/4 and particularly the M4s which also had a lot of complaints of a lack of stopping power. The solution was to teach soldiers to shoot each target 2 -3 times or more.....good thing the Soldier/Marine can carry 2 - 3 times the ammo, eh.....it's obviously needed. As to the lack of range capability we pulled thousands of M14s out of storage and reissued them. The Soldiers/Marines in theater definitely knew the difference between 5.56 and 7.62 NATO as far as range and hit effectiveness. So what does the grand and glorious leadership do? Why we now give them M4s as standard issue......sure makes sense to me...........:veryconfu

Larry Gibson

Silly me....it just dawned on me why......with the easier to get in and out of vehicles and easier to carry M4s the brass don't have to waste valuable training time on weapons craft and proper tactical mounts and dismounts.. They now have more time for sexual awareness and diversity training...........

[Love Life]

Also, lest we forget, the coming forced integration of females into the infantry...

SECNAV wants new accessions to be 25% female.

[Lonegun1894]

Larry,
I know the feeling, and hope I didn't give the wrong impression. Not a Marine, but a Corpsman who spent all my time in with the USMC. We were taught to use the M16A2, and I carried it instead of the M9, and carried a 7.62x51 of one sort or another every chance I could instead of anything else we had in inventory or could scrounge up.

Love Life,
You bring up yet another point that makes me glad I got out when I did. I don't think I would do very well today with the politics and PC BS I keep hearing about from friends who are still in and in news and sites like this one. I got all the training and experience I could and went home with it, in case it is needed someday.

[Love Life]

Yeah, you definitely have to watch what you say these days. I'd say that 66% of my vocabulary has been declared inappropriate since I first came in. instead of calling hands dirty word skinners, they are now called...simply...hands. A mouth is a mouth and no longer a sort of dumpster. Other little things like that.

When we had our M16A4 rifles with AN/PEQ-2, surefire, garage door opener, and easy bake oven attached to the miles of rails, we longed for the M16A2's lighter weight and slimmer profile. Getting in and out of vehicles was never an issue with the fully decked out M16A4, but the M4 is easier to maneuver. Especially with all the stupid **** attached to our flaks these days. I'd rather cut weight in the body armor department, and slim down the armor itself, than lose capability. However, knowing the Corps, we are not going to cut weight there so we gotta take it where we can get it.

This was my baby... stone cold reliable in all conditions with 2 options of bringing the ruckus.

152362152363152364

Random pic of cool stuff found in the city of love:

152365

[Larry Gibson]

My "insurgents" during training, with a simple SKS, AK and even a rubber knife a time or two, "killed" a lot of Marines not because they couldn't maneuver their M16A4s effectively but because they weren't "maneuvering" their weapons, themselves or both. Either they were slugs because of all the body armor and extraneous equipment or because they were immobile and lost situational awareness trying to turn on sights with dead batteries, change out batteries, figure out which sight to use or weren't adequately or properly trained on the sights.

Had a specialized unit (snipers) who wanted to conduct the lanes training "tactically". Remember this was all free play. I would give them the FRAGO based off the unit's OPORD for the lane. I'd tell them it was their training, if they were trying to execute good tactics I'd not bite them too hard even if they weren't executing them well. I also told them if they stepped on it and played Gomer Pyle they'd get bit hard just as in real combat. I asked them if that was fair and they always agreed it was. The gunny and LT were free to make whatever corrective action they wanted whenever they wanted. I could stop the action anytime if they wanted me to. There was nothing "canned" about it except the scenario they were going into. Everything they did right, wrong or indifferent the villagers and the insurgents would play off of. If they pissed off the villagers then they'd have problems. Seldom had any two units go through the training the same way. It was as realistic as we could make it as we were there not to win the war against them but to facilitate their training on the individual and squad level.

The unit (18 snipers) didn't get 100 meters into the scenario before they had sustained too many casualties to continue.....heck, they were severely pinned down by one insurgent! I asked the gunny if he wanted to re-cock and try it again. I then discussed the "problems" with the tactics they used (actually they didn't use any real infantry tactics). The gunny then had a real "Marine style discussion" (if you know what I mean!) with his troops including the LT. He asked if he could make a change in equipment (they all had on the standard issue BA with all the pouches and do dads). I told him I was there to facilitate his training and he could reconfigure however he wanted. He had them drop their body armor and put their spare mags in their pant cargo pockets. They were stripped down lean and mean and had been reminded that shoot, move and communicate meant to use cover, concealment and good infantry tactics, especially bounding over watch, fire and movement and fire and maneuver. Needless to say they cleaned my insurgents out quicker than any other unit had and only sustained minor non evac casualties. The villagers loved them for "freeing them" and all was well. There was a lesson learned there but I'm sure it was lost on high HQ.

Ran into a couple of those Marines at Lejeune a year later, they had done well in Iraq during the surge and thanked me for the training. They said they had often thought of what we had done and made them do during that training and it paid off for them. Even as snipers they had to clear buildings in urban areas for their hides and the training we gave them was the best they had and they felt it saved Marine lives. Sometimes it all really is worth it.

Larry Gibson

[Love Life]

Eyes, body, weapon. The Marine Corps made a smart move with the Plate Carrier, and giving Commanders the discretion of which level to utilize. I remember testing the MTV back in 2005, and us telling the people that it sucked, was overly heavy, and was created by a boot who needed more molle to hang stupid pouches off of. The result is the Marine Corps got the MTV...

My favorite iteration of body armor to date is the interceptor vest. Throw all your stuff on an LBV and have a good old time. The war fighter has been crippled by the amount of ridiculousness we have to carry. General consensus among those who have to carry the weight is we'd rather roll slick and carry more weapons.

[Artful]

Larry Gibson, Thank You for your dedication and expertise that you shared with those who needed it and the information you pass so freely to those of us here.

[JeffinNZ]

I'd still prefer to carry a Springfield 03 in 30-06 if I was deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq again!

Ya Luddite. How do you manage to sign into the forum. [smilie=s: Anyway, you should be saying a No4 MkII.

[bruce drake]

If you Brits, Ozzies and Kiwis had bothered to put a windage adjustable rear sight on those Enfield No 4s than it would be my first choice. I can do Kentucky Windage quite well but I prefer to dial in the windage for most of my longer shots.

[Combat Diver]

I thought the Marines would just adopt the receiver extension, stock, spring and H6 buffer for this conversion.

http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/IMG_0733_rz.jpg

You'll still have the ballistics of a 20" but be able to shoulder the weapon wearing body armor. Seen these this summer belonging to our 1st Armored Division downrange.


CD

[dkf]

The 5.56 does need every bit of barrel length it can get. Part of the reason why I would have went with a 16" barrel with a midlength gas system. SA little more barrel for a little extra velocity and extra handguard space without a big increase OAL. A 20" barrel even with a carbine stock still tends to be long for inside a vehicle, especially a humvee which does not exactly have ample interior space.

[Bigslug]

If the magic technicians somehow came up with a rifle the size and weight of a Ruger LCP .380 that was accurate to 1000 yards and could destroy tanks, troops would still be ******** that it's too long and too heavy.:rolleyes:

Seeing as hardly anyone since WWI besides snipers has actually bothered to learn or teach RIFLE shooting, the capabilities of a RIFLE are pretty much never used, and the full length M16 barely qualifies as one anyway, the M4 is probably the best option for faking it in time of need.

But there's really no reason not to keep M16's refurbished and in inventory. The guts are all the same and a transition course from one to the other would take what. . .an hour? You can still clear a house with one (or a Garand, or a 91/30, or an SMLE. . .), and when we find ourselves in open combat again opposing troops armed with WWII leftovers, the little SMG version will be a liability.

[Lonegun1894]

If the magic technicians somehow came up with a rifle the size and weight of a Ruger LCP .380 that was accurate to 1000 yards and could destroy tanks, troops would still be ******** that it's too long and too heavy.:rolleyes:

Seeing as hardly anyone since WWI besides snipers has actually bothered to learn or teach RIFLE shooting, the capabilities of a RIFLE are pretty much never used, and the full length M16 barely qualifies as one anyway, the M4 is probably the best option for faking it in time of need.

But there's really no reason not to keep M16's refurbished and in inventory. The guts are all the same and a transition course from one to the other would take what. . .an hour? You can still clear a house with one (or a Garand, or a 91/30, or an SMLE. . .), and when we find ourselves in open combat again opposing troops armed with WWII leftovers, the little SMG version will be a liability.

You and I must not have served with the same Marines. Granted, my unit requirement followed the same qualification standards as the rest of the Corps, but my team spent our own money on ammo and would go through a minimum of 500 rds per week in training after we got off from our regular work hours. Granted, one week it might be through our personal AR-15s (all M16A2 clones, just with a 2 position safety), the next through handguns, the next through shotguns, and whatever else we chose to practice with, but the minimum round count remained the same. What else were we going to spend our money on, women and beer? Not with all the examples we had all around us of guys whose wives had left them and took most of their stuff, including as much of their paychecks as they could get away with.

[45workhorse]

A well trained Marine can be deadly with whatever is immediately at hand when required; just ask "E-Tool Smith" (Major General Ray L. Smith). He tried his best to bury that moniker, but history and word of mouth between those who know him keeps it alive.

I would take the M4 over the M16xx; but my personal affinity remains with the M-14/M1a. We will equip the Corps with "Urban Warfare" favorable weapons, then send them in harms way elsewhere. Been the same since the 2nd Marine recruited was told by the first Marine "It was better in the Old Corps".
You will always be a boot to somebody!!!!

[milrifle]

I was not a career soldier, only spending 4 years during the early 80's, but I'm still partial the A1. The A2 came out just after I got out, but I never liked the feel of the round hand guards. I have an AR-15A1. It's what I was used to and what I still prefer. My son is a Marine veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. He carried the M4 and liked it. He is now a police officer and has an issued M-16A1 that he has allowed me to shoot. That was a lot of fun....except for the darn Red Dot sight. I prefer iron, but I'm not complaining. Been a long time since I fired full auto, so it was fun nonetheless.