M-16 Purchase for USMC/USN

[stryker6114]

I do not know if this has been posted already or not. If so, my apologies.

US Navy, Marines Buy M-16 Rifles

02-Jan-2008 15:59 | Permanent Link (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m-16-rifle-purchases-04517/)
Related stories: Contracts - Awards (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/cat/industry/contracts-awards/), Americas - USA (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/cat/geographical-focus/americas-usa/), Guns - Personal Weapons (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/cat/ordnance-guns/guns-personal-weapons/)
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/wp/images/ORD_M-16A4_Marine_Gharma_Iraq.jpg (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/wp/images/ORD_M-16A4_Marine_Gharma_Iraq_lg.jpg) Marine w. M16A4
(click to view full)

The US Army has run into controversy over its plan to replace its existing rifles with M4 carbines, without competition, and despite recent test results (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/) that show significant improvements from other 5.56mm weapons and even an M4 variant in use by US special forces. The US Marines and Navy have been known to use M4s, but it is not their primary battle rifle. The M16A3 is a fully automatic version of the M16A2, and is used by the US Navy. The M16A4 is the standard rifle of the US Marine Corps. Its biggest innovation is replacement of the M-16 family's the well known carrying handle/sight with the MIL-STD-1913 Picatinny rail that lets troops mount and remove a carrying handle, sights, and other useful attachments without specialized tools. Other MIL-STD-1913 rails can be found on the front grips et. al. of the A3s and A4s, where they mount useful items like flashlights, laser pointers, grip pods, et. al.
Unlike the M4 Carbine, which is procured as a sole-source item proprietary to Colt, M-16 production is competed. Contracts are issued based on bid prices from qualifying vendors, with better pricing resulting in proportionately more contracts. This kind of competition may also be part of the reason that the longer, heavier replacement barrels for the M16 cost $100, while spare M4 carbine barrels cost $240.

Contracts & Key Events
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/wp/images/ORD_M-16A4_FN.jpg (http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/wp/images/ORD_M-16A4_FN_lg.jpg) M16A4, FN USA
(click to view full)

Dec 26/07: FN Manufacturing in Columbia, SC received a $33.7 million firm-fixed-price, contract for M16A3 and M16A4 Rifles to support the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps. Work will be performed in Columbia, SC, and is expected to be complete by Dec 31/10. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Web bids were solicited on Sep. 10, 2007, and 9 bids were received by TACOM LCMC in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-08-D-0121).
Dec 26/07: Colt Defense in Hartford, CT received a $15.9 million firm-fixed-price contract for M16A3 and M16A4 Rifles to support the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Marine Corps. Work will be performed in Hartford, CT and is expected to be complete by Dec 13/10. Web bids were solicited on Sept 10/07, and 9 bids were received. by TACOM LCMC in Rock Island, IL (W52H09-08-D-0122).
Additional Readings

Colt – M16 5.56mm Rifle (http://www.colt.com/mil/M16.asp)
FN Manufacturing – M16A4 (http://www.fnmfg.com/products/m16fam/m16a4.htm)
Wikipedia – M16 Rifle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle)

[D.E. Watters]

DID missed a third contract from the same solicitation: W52H09-08-D-0120. Bushmaster received a small contract for US Navy M16A3.

[SupportTheTroops_5]

wow! i never knew the A4 was made by FN and not COLT!
i guess you learn something new every day.

[SGMGSG9]

My finger is going to hurt. But its a good kinda hurt $$$$$

[ren0312]

Is it not a better idea to use 6.8 or 7.62mm rounds because of their higher stopping power as compared to the 5.56mm round, I have heard that one problem with M4s is with their lack of stopping power due to a short barrel, combined with relatively light 5.56mm ammunition.

[Ratamacue]

Is it not a better idea to use 6.8 or 7.62mm rounds because of their higher stopping power as compared to the 5.56mm round, I have heard that one problem with M4s is with their lack of stopping power due to a short barrel, combined with relatively light 5.56mm ammunition.You speak as if it's a simple and trivial matter to change the standard rifle ammunition for a military as large as that of the United States. And there's no way that the Marine Corps would switch to a new ammunition without the Army doing the same--it would be a logistical nightmare.

[Jarhead]

You speak as if it's a simple and trivial matter to change the standard rifle ammunition for a military as large as that of the United States. And there's no way that the Marine Corps would switch to a new ammunition without the Army doing the same--it would be a logistical nightmare.
x2 It would take years to switch

[Andreas]

Is it not a better idea to use 6.8 or 7.62mm rounds because of their higher stopping power as compared to the 5.56mm round, I have heard that one problem with M4s is with their lack of stopping power due to a short barrel, combined with relatively light 5.56mm ammunition.

Not this again.............

[Razvodnik]

Why? The old NATO 7,62x51 is still in use with the US Armed Forces. M14, M60 are using this caliber. The reason of introducing the 5,56 was that it was easier to carry, so the standard soldier could carry more rounds to the battle. You have to remember that in all wars before OIF and OEF the troops were fighting dismounted from the vehicles, they had to carry their complete equipment, sleeping bags, food... with them. So any additional magazine increased the weight to carry! Today there is no problem to pack another ammo box in your Vehicle. You regulary go every night back to your base, so you don´t need to carry heavy weights with you without any reason.

It wouldn´t take only long time to switch, it would also be expensive! Nobody can afford to do this, even the US DOD. Also all other NATO states! I think it will be handled like today, the Marksman will have a 7,62 all others will use 5,56. It worked in Vietnam where you had a large number of targets attacking your outpost, it will work in Iraq where the number of targets are lower.

The only thing that could be done is changing ammo type, they had to increase the power while using the same cartridge. Or mount a shotgun underbarreld on every AR15 rifle. So you had the 12.G for CQB and 5,56 for normal useage.

[JDZ]

Why? The old NATO 7,62x51 is still in use with the US Armed Forces. M14, M60 are using this caliber. The reason of introducing the 5,56 was that it was easier to carry, so the standard soldier could carry more rounds to the battle. You have to remember that in all wars before OIF and OEF the troops were fighting dismounted from the vehicles, they had to carry their complete equipment, sleeping bags, food... with them. So any additional magazine increased the weight to carry! Today there is no problem to pack another ammo box in your Vehicle. You regulary go every night back to your base, so you don´t need to carry heavy weights with you without any reason.

It wouldn´t take only long time to switch, it would also be expensive! Nobody can afford to do this, even the US DOD. Also all other NATO states! I think it will be handled like today, the Marksman will have a 7,62 all others will use 5,56. It worked in Vietnam where you had a large number of targets attacking your outpost, it will work in Iraq where the number of targets are lower.

The only thing that could be done is changing ammo type, they had to increase the power while using the same cartridge. Or mount a shotgun underbarreld on every AR15 rifle. So you had the 12.G for CQB and 5,56 for normal useage.

:roll: M60? Pack another ammo box in your vehicle? No dismounted troops in OIF/ OEF? The combat load is less than in previous conflicts?

[Breiflabb]

Well, m14, m240, SR-25 (and all variants). I guess what he's trying to say is that logistics are way easier now and ammo is easier to transport.

[James]

Next person who beats the dead and skeletal horse a.k.a. "5.56mm sucks and needs to be replaced" is getting banned.

[TacoDelRio]

wow! i never knew the A4 was made by FN and not COLT!
i guess you learn something new every day.

Actually, both. Have used both Colt and FNH M16A4's. The FN's are nice and purple.

[Andreas]

Next person who beats the dead and skeletal horse a.k.a. "5.56mm sucks and needs to be replaced" is getting banned.

**Makes OP at high ground and looks for possible targets***

[SGMGSG9]

Actually, both. Have used both Colt and FNH M16A4's. The FN's are nice and purple.

LOL, I love the purple comment Taco. That's true, there have been issues with phosphating a few years back. I remember a year & a half ago helping pack Daaaarrrrk purple m240B's...16's, 2fourty's, & 249's all are phosphated in the same tanks.

That reminds me Sunday,10:00 P.M. EST., Time Warner Cable Channel 117 (Military Channel) Weaponology will be airing a special on the SAS. They asked us (F.N.M.I.) to do some shooting for there production.You guys be on the look out for a little bald headed dude with killer Go-tee, He'll be the shooter who volunteered when I declined the opportunity. I like my anoniminity just the way it is. B) It sounds like I missed out on some fun though. We will see.

[TacoDelRio]

I always wondered why they were purple. I figured the treatment just wore down from use or something. Thanks for the info, SGMGSG9.

[SGMGSG9]

Let me put it the best way I can, phosphating is a delicate blend of heat & chemical salts. You can't get any kind of contamination during the process....or else you get PSYCHEDELIC M16's dude. B)

[SMGLee]

I have seen Gov't inspector at manufacture with a color chart to make sure the finish it mil-spec...LOL

Just a side note...

the investment group that bought Crystler also bought Bushmaster and DPMS... Interesting how Bushmast all of sudden got a small batch of the M16 contract!! can you say Lobbist?



Next person who beats the dead and skeletal horse a.k.a. "5.56mm sucks and needs to be replaced" is getting banned.

urrrrrrrr...... Never mind

[MikeSierra151]

I dont know about purple, but I was issued a well worn silver FN M-16 in 1997.

[StukaJr]

Parkerized finish will change color, depending on how it's treated after it's pulled out of the tank - I was suggested soaking parts in tub of motor oil as a final step (gives the parkerized finish a hint of green)...

Not sure why phosphate would turn purple though... Liberal fell into the tank?

Fumes are getting to my head p-)

[Hollis]

Bluing salts will turn higher iron content parts a purple.

[SGMGSG9]

I have seen Gov't inspector at manufacture with a color chart to make sure the finish it mil-spec...LOL

Just a side note...

the investment group that bought Crystler also bought Bushmaster and DPMS... Interesting how Bushmast all of sudden got a small batch of the M16 contract!! can you say Lobbist?


Yeah.....we've got 2 Gov't inspectors from DCMA Atlanta. Both of'em are really great folks one lady one man. They've got an office 45 yards up the hall on the left from the range. They come by & watch us from time to time. They too have color charts & ALL kinds of standards for us to follow. Mil-Spec as you put it SMGLee, is the order of the day. We're like Burger King: "ORDER IT YOUR WAY"

I've got some Bushmaster product my self, good stuff great company! I'm glad to hear there getting a piece of the pie. DPMS isn't a bad little company ether. I like there tight tolerances on M-16 receivers & the panthers laser etched on the receivers is really cute too. B)