| Rifle, 5.56 mm, M16 | |
|---|---|
 From top to bottom: M16A1, M16A2, M4A1, M16A4 | |
| Type | Assault rifle |
| Place of origin |  United States |
| Service history | |
| In service | 1963–Present |
| Used by | See Users |
| Wars | Vietnam War–Present |
| Production history | |
| Designer | |
| Designed | 1957 |
| Manufacturer | |
| Produced | 1960–Present |
| Number built | ~8 million [2] |
| Variants | See Variants |
| Specifications (M16A2) | |
| Weight | 7.8 lb (3.5 kg) (unloaded) 8.79 lb (4.0 kg) (loaded) |
| Length | 39.625 in (1,010 mm) |
| Barrel length | 20 in (508 mm) |
| | |
| Cartridge | 5.56x45mm NATO |
| Action | Gas-operated, rotating bolt |
| Rate of fire | 12-15 rounds/min sustained, 45-60 rounds/min semi-automatic, & 700–950 rounds/min cyclic |
| Muzzle velocity | 3,110 ft/s (948 m/s) [3] |
| Effective range | 550 Meters (point target), 800 Meters (area target) |
| Feed system | Various STANAG magazines |
M16 rifle
The M16 (more formally Rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm, M16) is the United States military designation for the AR-15 rifle. Colt purchased the rights to the AR-15 from ArmaLite and currently uses that designation only for semi-automatic versions of the rifle. The M16 rifle fires the 5.56x45mm cartridge and can produce massive wounding and hydrostatic shock effects when the bullet impacts at high velocity and yaws in tissue leading to fragmentation and rapid transfer of energy.[4][5][6]The M16 entered United States Army service as the M16 and was put into action for jungle warfare in South Vietnam in 1963,[7] becoming the standard U.S. rifle of the Vietnam War by 1969,[8] replacing the M14 rifle in that role. The U.S. Army retained the M14 in CONUS, Europe, and South Korea until 1970. Since the Vietnam War, the M16 rifle family has been the primary infantry rifle of the U.S. military. With its variants, it has been in use by 15 NATO countries, and is the most produced firearm in its caliber.
Introduction
The M16 is a lightweight, 5.56 mm, air-cooled, gas-operated, magazine-fed assault rifle, with a rotating bolt, actuated by direct impingement gas operation. The rifle is made of steel, 7075 aluminum alloy, composite plastics and polymer materials.The U.S. Air Force's rifle, the M16, and the United States Marine Corps and Army rifle, the XM16E1, were the first versions of the M16 rifle fielded. Soon, the U.S. Army standardized the XM16E1 as the M16A1 rifle, an M16 with a forward assist feature requested by the Army. All of the early versions were chambered to fire the M193/M196 cartridge in the semi-automatic and the automatic firing modes. This occurred in the early 1960s, with the Army issuing it in late 1964.[9] Commercial AR-15s were first issued to Special Forces troops in spring of 1964.[10]
The M16A3 rifle is an M16A2 rifle with an M16A1's fire control group (semi-automatic fire, automatic fire) used only by the U.S. Navy.
The M16A4 rifle was standard issue for the United States Marine Corps in Operation Iraqi Freedom; it replaced the M16A2 in front line units. In the U.S. Army the M16A2 rifle is being supplemented with two rifle models, the M16A4 and the M4 carbine as the standard issue assault rifle. The M16A4 has a flat-top receiver developed for the M4 carbine, a handguard with four Picatinny rails for mounting a sight, laser, night vision device, forward handgrip, removable handle, or a flashlight.
The M16 rifle is principally manufactured by Colt and Fabrique Nationale de Herstal (under a U.S. military contract since 1988 by FNH-USA; currently in production since 1991, primarily M16A2, A3, and A4), with variants made elsewhere in the world. Versions for the U.S. military have also been made by H & R Firearms[11] General Motors Hydramatic Division[12] and most recently by Sabre Defence.[13] Semi-automatic versions of the AR-15 are popular recreational shooting rifles, with versions manufactured by other small and large manufacturers in the U.S.[14]
[edit] History
[edit] Summary
The M16A3 is a fully-automatic variant of the M16A2, issued within the United States Navy. The M16A2 is currently being supplemented by the M16A4, which incorporates the flattop receiver unit developed for the M4 carbine, and Picatinny rail system. M16A2s are still in stock with the U.S. Army and Marine Corps, but are used primarily by reserve and National Guard units as well as by the U.S. Air Force.[citation needed]
The M16 rifle design, including variant or modified version of it such as the Armalite/Colt AR-15 series, AAI M15 rifle; AP74; EAC J-15; SGW XM15A; any 22-caliber rimfire variant, including the Mitchell M16A-1/22, Mitchell M16/22, Mitchell CAR-15/22, and AP74 Auto Rifle, is a prohibited and restricted weapon in Canada.[16]
[edit] Project SALVO
The conclusion was that most combat takes place at short range. In a highly mobile war, combat teams ran into each other largely by surprise; and the team with the higher firepower tended to win. They also found that the chance of being hit in combat was essentially random; accurate "aiming" made little difference because the targets no longer sat still. The number one predictor of casualties was the total number of bullets fired.[17] Other studies of behavior in battle revealed that many U.S. infantrymen (as many as 2/3) never actually fired their rifles in combat. By contrast, soldiers armed with rapid fire weapons were much more likely to have fired their weapons in battle.[18] These conclusions suggested that infantry should be equipped with a fully-automatic rifle of some sort in order to increase the actual firepower of regular soldiers. It was also clear, however, that such weapons dramatically increased ammunition use and in order for a rifleman to be able to carry enough ammunition for a firefight they would have to carry something much lighter.
Existing rifles met none of these criteria. Although it appeared the new 7.62 mm T44 (precursor to the M14) would increase the rate of fire, its heavy 7.62 mm NATO cartridge made carrying significant quantities of ammunition difficult. Moreover, the length and weight of the weapon made it unsuitable for short range combat situations often found in jungle and urban combat or mechanized warfare, where a smaller and lighter weapon could be brought to bear faster.
A new study, Project SALVO, was set up to try to find a weapon design suited to real-world combat. Running between 1953 and 1957 in two phases, SALVO eventually suggested that a weapon firing four rounds into a 20-inch (508 mm) area would double the hit probability of existing semi-automatic weapons.
In the second phase, SALVO II, several experimental weapons concepts were tested. Irwin Barr of AAI Corporation introduced a series of flechette weapons, starting with a shotgun shell containing 32 darts and ending with single-round flechette "rifles". Winchester and Springfield Armory offered multi-barrel weapons, while ORO's own design used two .22, .25 or .27 caliber bullets loaded into a single .308 Winchester or .30-06 cartridge.
[edit] Eugene Stoner
In 1954, Eugene Stoner of the newly-formed ArmaLite helped develop the 7.62 mm AR-10. Springfield's T44 and similar entries were conventional rifles using wood for the "furniture" and otherwise built entirely of steel using mostly forged and machined parts. ArmaLite was founded specifically to bring the latest in designs and alloys to firearms design, and Stoner felt he could easily beat the other offerings.
The AR-10's receiver was made of forged and milled aluminium alloy instead of steel. The barrel was mated to the receiver by a separate hardened steel extension to which the bolt locked. This allowed a lightweight aluminum receiver to be used while still maintaining a steel-on-steel lockup. The bolt was operated by high-pressure combustion gases taken from a hole in the middle of the barrel directly through a tube above the barrel to a cylinder created in the bolt carrier with the bolt carrier itself acting as a piston. Traditional rifles located this cylinder and piston close to the gas vent. The stock and grips were made of a glass-reinforced plastic shell over a rigid foam plastic core. The muzzle brake was fabricated from titanium. Over Stoner's objections, various experimental composite and 'Sullaloy' aluminum barrels were fitted to some AR-10 prototypes by ArmaLite's president, George Sullivan. The Sullaloy barrel was made entirely of heat-treated aluminum, while the composite barrels used aluminum extruded over a thin stainless steel liner.
Meanwhile the layout of the weapon itself was also somewhat different. Previous designs generally placed the sights directly on the barrel, using a bend in the stock to align the sights at eye level while transferring the recoil down to the shoulder. This meant that the weapon tended to rise when fired making it very difficult to control during fully-automatic fire. The ArmaLite team used a solution previously used on weapons such as the German FG 42 and Johnson light machine gun; they located the barrel in line with the stock, well below eye level, and raised the sights to eye level. The rear sight was built into a carrying handle over the receiver.
Despite being over 2 lb (0.9 kg) lighter than the competition, the AR-10 offered significantly greater accuracy and recoil control. Two prototype rifles were delivered to the U.S. Army's Springfield Armory for testing late in 1956. At this time, the U.S. armed forces were already two years into a service rifle evaluation program, and the AR-10 was a newcomer with respect to older, more fully-developed designs. Over Stoner's continued objections, George Sullivan had insisted that both prototypes be fitted with composite aluminum/steel barrels. Shortly after a composite barrel burst on one prototype in 1957, the AR-10 was rejected. The AR-10 was later produced by a Dutch firm, Artillerie Inrichtingen, and saw limited but successful military service with several foreign nations such as Sudan, Guatemala, and Portugal. Portugal deployed a number of AR-10s for use by its airborne (Caçadores Pára-quedista) battalions, and the rifle saw considerable combat service in Portugal's counter-insurgency campaigns in Angola and Mozambique.[20] Some AR-10 rifles were still in service with airborne forces serving during the withdrawal from Portuguese Timor in 1975.
[edit] CONARC
In 1957, a copy of Gustafson's funding request from 1955 found its way into the hands of General Willard G. Wyman, commander of the U.S. Continental Army Command. He immediately put together a team to develop a .223 caliber (5.56 mm) weapon for testing. Their finalized request called for a select-fire weapon of 6 pounds (2.7 kg) when loaded with 20 rounds of ammunition. The bullet had to penetrate a standard U.S. steel helmet, body armor, or a 0.135 inch (3.4 mm) steel plate and retain a velocity in excess of the speed of sound at 500 yards (460 m), while equaling or exceeding the "wounding" ability of the .30 Carbine.[17][21]Wyman had seen the AR-10 in an earlier demonstration, and impressed by its performance he personally suggested that ArmaLite enter a weapon for testing using a 5.56 mm cartridge designed by Winchester.[17] Their first design, using conventional layout and wooden furniture, proved to be too light. When combined with a conventional stock, recoil was excessive in fully automatic fire. Their second design was simply a scaled-down AR-10, and immediately proved much more controllable. Winchester entered a design based loosely on their M1 carbine, and Earle Harvey of Springfield attempted to enter a design, but was overruled by his superiors at Springfield, who refused to divert resources from the T44.
During testing in March 1958, rainwater caused the barrels of both the ArmaLite and Winchester rifles to burst, causing the Army to once again press for a larger round, this time at .258 in (6.6 mm). Nevertheless, they suggested continued testing for cold-weather suitability in Alaska. Stoner was later asked to fly in to replace several parts, and when he arrived he found the rifles had been improperly reassembled. When he returned he was surprised to learn that they too had rejected the design even before he had arrived; their report also endorsed the .258 in (6.6 mm) round. After reading these reports, General Maxwell Taylor became dead-set against the design, and pressed for continued production of the M14.
Not all the reports were negative. In a series of mock-combat situations testing the AR-15, M14 and AK-47, the Army found that the AR-15's small size and light weight allowed it to be brought to bear much more quickly, just as CONARC had suggested. Their final conclusion was that an 8-man team equipped with the AR-15 would have the same firepower as a current 11-man team armed with the M14.
At this point, Fairchild had spent $1.45 million in development expenses, and wished to divest itself of its small-arms business. Fairchild sold production rights for the AR-15 to Colt Firearms in December 1959, for only $75,000 cash and a 4.5% royalty on subsequent sales. In 1960, ArmaLite was reorganized, and Stoner left the company.
[edit] M16 adoption
Curtis LeMay viewed a demonstration of the AR-15 in July 1960. In the summer of 1961, General LeMay had been promoted to the position of USAF Chief of Staff, and requested an order of 80,000 AR-15s for the U.S. Air Force.[22] However under the recommendation of General Maxwell D. Taylor, who advised the Commander in Chief that having two different calibers within the military system at the same time would be problematic, President Kennedy turned down the request.[22] However, Advanced Research Projects Agency, which had been created in 1958 in response to the Soviet Sputnik program, embarked on project AGILE in the spring of 1961. AGILE's priority mission was to devise inventive fixes to the communist problem in South Vietnam.[23] In October 1961, William Godel, a senior man at ARPA, sent 10 AR-15s to South Vietnam to let the allies test them. The reception was enthusiastic, and in 1962 another 1,000 AR-15s were sent to South Vietnam.[24] Special Operations units and advisers working with the South Vietnamese troops filed battlefield reports lavishly praising the AR-15 and the stopping effectiveness of the 5.56 mm cartridge, and pressed for its adoption. However, what no one knew, except the men directly using the AR-15s in Vietnam, were the devastating kills[25] made by the new rifle, photographs of which, showing enemy casualties made by the .223 (5.56 mm) bullet remained classified into the 1980s.[25]The damage caused by the .223 (5.56mm) "varmint"[25] bullet was easily accounted for. Standard U.S. rifles generally had 12 inch rifling twists inside their barrels (one complete bullet rotation within 12 inches), whereas the AR-15, as designed by Stoner, was to have a 1 in 14 inch rifling twist, as rapid spraying of projectiles at close range would be the norm rather than long range accuracy. However Colt, with its antiquated equipment, had made some of the AR-15s with up to 18 inches per total bullet rotation,[26] thus creating a bullet's flight to wobble while en route to target. The impact of these projectiles on human flesh created horrible wounds; as well as very few prisoners of war.[27]
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara now had two conflicting views: the ARPA report favoring the AR-15 and the Pentagon's position on the M14. Even President John F. Kennedy expressed concern, so McNamara ordered Secretary of the Army Cyrus Vance to test the M14, the AR-15 and the AK-47. The Army's test report stated only the M14 was suitable for Army use, but Vance wondered about the impartiality of those conducting the tests. He ordered the Army Inspector General to investigate the testing methods used, who reported that the testers showed favor to the M14.
In November 1963, McNamara approved the Army's order of 85,000 XM16E1s for jungle warfare operations;[28] and to appease General LeMay, the Air Force was granted an order for another 19,000 M16s.[17][29] Meanwhile, the Army carried out another project, the Small Arms Weapons Systems, on general infantry firearm needs in the immediate future. They recommended the immediate adoption of the weapon. Later that year the Air Force officially accepted their first batch as the United States Rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm, M16.
The Army immediately began to issue the XM16E1 (re-named M16A1 on its adoption) to infantry units but the rifle was initially delivered without adequate cleaning supplies or instructions. When the M16 reached Vietnam with U.S. troops in March 1965, reports of jamming and malfunctions in combat began to surface. Although the M14 featured a chrome-lined barrel and chamber to resist corrosion in combat conditions, neither the bore nor the chamber of the M16/XM16E1 was chrome-lined. Several documented accounts of troops killed by enemy fire with jammed rifles broken-down for cleaning eventually brought a Congressional investigation.[30]
| “ | We left with 72 men in our platoon and came back with 19, Believe it or not, you know what killed most of us? Our own rifle. Practically every one of our dead was found with his [M16] torn down next to him where he had been trying to fix it. - Marine Corps Rifleman, Vietnam.[30] | ” |
On February 28, 1967, the XM16E1 was standardized as the M16A1. Major revisions to the design followed. The rifle was given a chrome-lined chamber (and later, the entire bore) to eliminate corrosion and stuck cartridges, and the rifle's recoil mechanism was re-designed to accommodate Army-issued 5.56 mm ammunition. Rifle cleaning tools and powder solvents/lubricants were issued. Intensive training programs in weapons cleaning were instituted, and a comic book style manual was circulated among the troops to demonstrate proper maintenance.[17] The reliability problems of the M16 diminished quickly, although the rifle's reputation continued to suffer.[17]
According to a February 1968 Department of Defense report the M16 rifle achieved widespread acceptance by U.S. troops in Vietnam. Only 38 of 2100 individuals queried wanted to replace the M16 with another weapon. Of those 38, 35 wanted the CAR-15 (a shorter version of the M16) instead.[32]
[edit] NATO standards
By the middle of the 1970s, other armies were also looking at an M16-style weapon. A NATO standardization effort soon started, and tests of various rounds were carried out starting in 1977. The U.S. offered their original design, the M193, with no modifications, but there were concerns about its penetration in the face of the wider introduction of body armor. The British offered a modified 5.56 mm round, using a longer and thinner bullet of 4.85 mm. The round had somewhat better ballistics and considerably better penetration, able to reach 600 m and meet their requirements for a squad automatic weapon (light machine gun). The Germans proposed a new 4.7 mm caseless round, which was considerably lighter while offering similar ballistics to the original U.S. design. However, there was distrust in the caseless system due to the possibility of cook off. A final design was offered by the Belgians. Their SS109 round was based on the U.S. cartridge but included a new bullet design, with the same 5.56 mm caliber, but with a small steel tip added to improve penetration.
Testing soon showed that the British and Belgian designs were roughly equal, both outperforming the original U.S. design. In order to get full performance from tracer versions of the SS109, however, barrels would have to use different rifling. Existing 1:12 inch (or 1:300mm) twist barrels reduced the effective range of the SS109 to 90 meters due to lack of stability. While the ideal twist rate for the SS109 projectile is 1:9 inch/1:229mm, a 1:7 inch/1:180mm twist rate was chosen to stabilize the much longer L110 tracer. This tracer was designed to complement the SS109's ballistic performance. The M196 tracer (complement to the M193 ball round) had a burn-out range of 450 meters where the L110 tracer was bright to 800 meters. In the end the Belgian round was chosen. The U.S. Marine Corps was first to adopt the round with the M16A2, introduced in 1982. This was to become the standard U.S. military rifle. The NATO 5.56x45mm standard ammunition produced for U.S. forces is designated M855 for the ball round using an SS109 type projectile and M856 for the tracer using the L110 type projectile.
The M16 series has four main versions: M16A1, M16A2, M16A3, and M16A4. Total worldwide production of M16-style weapons since the design's inception has been approximately 8 million.[2]
[edit] Design
One distinctive ergonomic feature is a plastic or metal stock directly behind the action, which contains a recoil spring.[34] This serves the dual function of operating spring and recoil buffer.[34] The stock being in line with the bore reduces muzzle rise, especially during automatic fire. Because recoil does not significantly shift the point of aim, faster follow-up shots are possible and user fatigue is reduced.
Another distinctive ergonomic feature is a carrying handle on top of the receiver, with an integrated rear sight assembly and charging handle. This design is a by-product of the original design where the carry handle served to protect the charging handle and mount a scope.[34] In practice, the handle is rarely used to carry the weapon and doing so is expressly prohibited in many military organizations, as it is considered unsafe.[citation needed] Holding the weapon by the pistol grip provides quicker response time and better "muzzle awareness," while a shoulder sling provides a more convenient option when response time is not a concern.[citation needed] More importantly, with the sight plane 2.5 in (63.5 mm) over the bore, the M16 has an inherent parallax problem that can be confounding to shooters. At closer ranges (typically inside 15–20 meters), the shooter must aim high in order to place shots where desired.
Newer models have a "flattop" upper receiver with a Picatinny rail, to which the user can attach either a conventional sighting system or numerous optical devices such as night vision scopes.
The M16 utilizes direct impingement gas operation; energy from high-pressure gas tapped from a non-adjustable port built into the front sight assembly actuates the moving parts in the weapon. Combustion gases travel via a gas tube above the barrel directly into a chamber in the bolt carrier behind the bolt itself, pushing the carrier away from the bolt. This reduces the number of moving parts by eliminating the need for a separate piston and cylinder and it provides better performance in rapid fire by keeping reciprocating masses on the same axis as the bore.[citation needed]
The primary criticism of direct impingement is that fouling and debris from expended gunpowder is blown directly into the breech. As the superheated combustion gas travels down the tube, it expands and cools. This cooling causes vaporized matter to condense as it cools depositing a much greater volume of solids into the operating components of the action. The increased fouling can cause malfunctions if the rifle is not cleaned as frequently as should be. The amount of sooting deposits tends to vary with powder specification, caliber, and gas port design.
No comments:
Post a Comment