Marksmen issued better rifles in Afghanistan

[H2O MAN]

TACOM M14EBRs in Afghanistan (http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/03/army_m14_032210w/)


“It’s a very precise weapon system,” said Spc. Andrew McMeley, a squad designated marksman serving in
Afghanistan with B Company, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry Regiment. “All the improvements on it are fantastic.”
.

[walsallfc]

nice looking rifle

[Lazy Lob]

Does it come with broadband?

[Reaper17]

@ H20 Man: just curious as to your feedback comparing the M14 EBR/MK 14 Mod 1 to the M110/MK 11 Mod 0, 1. (I see that you're the man when it comes to the M14)

[Peanut]

It's the Multicam, not the rifle.

That one was for all my airsofters out there. Tis' all in good taste.

[Balnk]

MultiCam for the WIN!

[rgjbloke]

Good old 7.62. And that's not a knock against 5.56 before anybody say's oh oh, here we go again.

[Jaeger07]

That stock does not look comfortable...

Edit: It does however have a nifty cheek-bar... Still: Not sure if want!


BTW out of curiosity: Whats the thingy on the back of his helmet?

[Balnk]

It's an Infrared flasher. An infantryman's IFF.

[dacanadianbomb]

Looks like a MS2000 strobe light.

[H2O MAN]

@ H20 Man: just curious as to your feedback comparing the M14 EBR/MK 14 Mod 1 to the M110/MK 11 Mod 0, 1. (I see that you're the man when it comes to the M14)
I have no personal experience with the M110/MK 11 Mod 0, 1, but I have been told by people that do have first hand experience and I have read that the M110 is unreliable. As for the M14 modernization program... it has been extremely successful. Even though the very first batch of Crane built MK14 Mod 1 and TACOM M14EBR-RI rifles did have some issues that were resolved quickly it can be said that the MK14s Mod 0 & 1, MK14 SEI Mod 0, TACOM M14EBR-RI and M21A5/Crazy Horse rifles are a huge success.

[sexyhamburger]

Hasn't the EBR been in use now for awhile? Or were they just being field-tested and this is the real deal?

[Reaper17]

Interesting to hear all that H20. Thanks for the reply. What a wonderful beast it is, in use since about '57 and still kicking ass today.

[H2O MAN]

Hasn't the EBR been in use now for awhile? Or were they just being field-tested and this is the real deal?

The first ones were issued in 2004, but the funded modernization program that the M14EBR-RI came from is about two years old.

Interesting side story: I had my MK14 SEI Crazy Horse Mod 0 before the NAVY SEALs got theirs...

[Roy Batty]

A'stan 2008/2009

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn243/CanadianSig/PICT00072-3.jpg

[goat89]

^Borrowed it from a Yank? How was it?

[Roy Batty]

Just like any loaner you get from the dealer....try to run the bag off it and see if you can blow the transmission......


p-)...Just Fu*king around...It's a nice rifle from what little experiance I have.


I would love to build one of my own (on a Norinco frame)....if getting gun parts from the US wasn't such a bitch lately.....



I would like to have seen the same thing done with our FNs had they been stored properly when taken out of service...rather than the shabby treatment they recieved before thier eventual destruction.

[dlat83]

Is there a standard optics package or do they vary per unit ? Great piece of equipment (second that on the adjust. cheek piece). Thanks for pics..

[trunk_munkey28]

A'stan 2008/2009

http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn243/CanadianSig/PICT00072-3.jpg
We get it, you're cooler than us.

[Roy Batty]

Lol.........My mom says so.......

[Migs]

Another new rifle?

[sgt_G]

Another new rifle?

nah just a tricked out old one

[SOD]

Another old reworked rifle.
Ya beat me to it Sarge_G
oh yeah the upgrades-$3,000.
The Armytimes article:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/03/army_m14_032210w/

[Panchito12]

Aaaaah, M14's, a real battle rifle.




Marksmen issued better rifles in Afghanistan

By Matthew Cox - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Mar 23, 2010 19:54:27 EDT


The Army is doubling the number of 7.62mm weapons in the infantry squad, increasing soldiers’ long-range killing power in the wide-open expanses of Afghanistan.
Since the beginning of the war, a typical nine-man infantry squad has included a single squad-designated marksman, armed with a surplus M14 rifle for engaging the enemy beyond the 300-meter range of M4s and M16s.
Today, squads are deploying to Afghanistan with two SDMs, each armed with the M14 Enhanced Battle Rifle, a modernized version of the Vietnam War-era weapon that’s accurate out to 800 meters.
“It’s a very precise weapon system,” said Spc. Andrew McMeley, a squad designated marksman serving in Afghanistan with B Company, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry Regiment. “All the improvements on it are fantastic.”
The EBR features a standard M14 barrel, plus a receiver and trigger assembly that’s fitted with a Sage International adjustable aluminum stock, a Leopold 3.5x10 power scope and Harris bipod legs.
“Units have been requesting this capability for a while,” said Maj. Elliott Caggins, assistant product manager for Sniper Weapons. “It provides more shootability than the old weapon.”
The Army began building 5,000 of these modernized M14s early last year in response to the growing need of infantry squads operating in Afghanistan to engage enemy fighters at longer ranges.
“Comments from returning noncommissioned officers and officers reveal that about 50 percent of engagements occur past 300 meters,” Maj. Thomas Ehrhart wrote in his Nov. 30 position paper “Increasing Small Arms Lethality in Afghanistan: Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer” at the School of Advanced Military Studies at the Army’s Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan.
Many engagements extend out to 800 meters, weapons officials maintain. The shift to these longer-range engagements is forcing the Army to rethink 5.56mm focus in the squad.
“We are looking at 7.62mm in the squad,” said Col. Doug Tamilio, who runs Project Manager Soldier Weapons. “We have always had a policy in a nine-man squad that we would keep 5.56mm flat across that.
“The fight in Afghanistan is showing us that 7.62mm, in certain aspects, is needed and required.”
The idea of supplanting the 5.56mm round in the squad will surely add fuel to soldier criticisms that the 5.56mm is ineffective for today’s battlefield.
Special Operations Command has already adopted this concept with its fielding of a 5.56mm and a 7.62mm version of the Special Operations Combat Assault Rifle.
Despite concerns over the increased weight of the 7.62mm ammunition, Tamilio said, “I think we are starting to think of a mix” of 5.56mm and 7.62mm within the squad.
As a short-term solution, “we have given them EBR14s — two per squad” until the Army develops a standardized squad-designated marksman rifle.
The squad-marksman role was hatched during development of Stryker brigades. Placing specialized shooters in these highly mobile, rapid-deployment units bolsters an individual squad’s precision-shooting capability when snipers are otherwise unavailable.
Infantry units deploying to Afghanistan and Iraq, whose missions in many ways have been expeditionary, have embraced the idea of a precision shooter at the squad level since late 2002.
The EBR effort also illustrates how the M14 has continued to evolve after its brief eight years of service when the M16 replaced it in 1965 as the Army’s standard infantry rifle. Patterned after the popular M1 Garand of World War II and the Korean War, the M14’s robust design features a gas operating rod system, wood stock and 20-round magazine. A more accurate version of the M14 — dubbed the M21 — served as the Army’s official sniper rifle from 1975 until 1988. The M21 featured a more accurate, match-grade, barrel.
The M14 didn’t see widespread conventional use until current combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The M14s, equipped with various commercial optics, have proven highly effective at extending the killing range of the infantry squad. Despite the M14’s popularity, units have been calling for a more modernized design.
The EBR concept, which was first used in 2004 by Navy SEALs, features a rigid, aircraft-grade aluminum chassis that secures the barrel more effectively, helping to increase accuracy, Caggins said. It’s equipped with a Picatinny rail system for mounting lasers, lights and other accessories. There’s also a removable Kydex hand guard that protects the shooter’s nonfiring hand from heat buildup during rapid firing.
The folding stock can be adjusted to different lengths and also has a multiple-position cheek rest for different shooter preferences. This is one of McMeley’s favorite features on the EBR.
“The adjustable cheek piece makes it to where, in a quick reflex situation, when you have a target of opportunity, you can just slap your face up against it and get the same spot on your cheek every single time,” he said. “All this adjustability makes the EBR more comfortable to shoot.”
The EBR also has a M16/M4-style pistol grip.
Weapons officials include a three-day new equipment training program when the EBRs are delivered to a unit. The program includes two days of classroom instruction and one day on the range.
Despite its improved design, the EBR isn’t perfect, weapons officials said. It’s just under 15 pounds unloaded, compared with the standard M14’s unloaded weight of 9 pounds. An unloaded M4 weighs just 6.5 pounds.
“We are looking at making it a little lighter,” Caggins said.
The EBR’s more complex design also makes it difficult to maintain, said Sgt. Paul Bullock, another SDM in B Company.
“The only thing I dislike is that you have to go through so much just to take it apart,” Bullock said.
With the older M14, “You just pull a few things and you’ve got it apart. With this one, you’ve got to take apart seven or eight different screws … I’ve spent a ridiculous amount of time pulling it apart and putting it back together. But, the weapon system doesn’t get as dirty as the original so you don’t have to worry about it as much.”
It’s not cheap to produce, either — EBRs cost about $3,000 each.
But weapons officials view the EBR as just another step toward the Army selecting a standardized SDM rifle.
Fort Benning, Ga., officials are working on a requirement for the SDM rifle that should be ready sometime next year, Tamilio said.
Beginning this spring, Benning officials will assess different optics and different weapon systems and try to figure out what is the optimal solution for a squad-designated marksman: what works and what doesn’t work, Tamilio said.
For now, units deploying to the combat zone can request M14 EBRs by submitting an operational needs statement to Army’s office of the G-3, Caggins said.
Currently, the Army has issued about 3,750 of the 5,000 EBRs being built, he said. Units return the EBRs to the Army when they come back from deployment. The weapons are then reissued to other units.
While there is no set deadline for units to submit an ONS before a deployment, Caggins said, “earlier is always better.”
“We haven’t had a problem getting them the weapons before they deploy,” he said. “It’s a relatively quick process.”

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Very interesting.

I've thought about purchasing an EBR.

Apparently effective, but that thing has all the aesthetic appeal of a pipe wrench.

Hey, I'm just focusing on what important :)

[wildcat]

I like how it looks, I think they want to drop some weight of the rifle. if and when I get my Springfield M1A1, I want to customize it that way.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

I like how it looks, I think they want to drop some weight of the rifle. if and when I get my Springfield M1A1, I want to customize it that way.

I know, I know, but put maybe just a itty bitty bit of wood on that specimen.

Probably wouldn't handle harsh treatment well, though.

I give in, sir, you are correct.

[Ought Six]

It is both as ugly and as beautiful as an A-10, for much the same reasons.

[martinexsquaddie]

I think uk forces are going the right way buying someing new rather than trying to turn any SLRs left into a SDR. at $3000 a rifle doubt your saving anything from starting from scrtach

[Kunal Biswas]

http://www.armytimes.com/xml/news/2010/03/army_m14_032210w/032210at_mtnwolf168_800.JPG

Looks Cool!!

Btw, Why don't British forces use old gold FAL, Its a good rifle specially long ranges in desert ??

[asch]

they have their reasons, i suppose.

[martinexsquaddie]

we gave most of them to serria leonnie or scarpped hence all the US part kits. so none left.
While you could take an decent quality SLR and with a lot of work turn it into a DMR capable of good shooting at 800metres probably easier to start fresh a fulton armoury tricked out rifle comes in at $3500 retail.
who's betting the armourers are going take one worn out m14 $3000 and chuck old m14 in the parts bin and handing over a brand new built rifle:)

[H2O MAN]

we gave most of them to serria leonnie or scarpped hence all the US part kits. so none left.
While you could take an decent quality SLR and with a lot of work turn it into a DMR capable of good shooting at 800metres probably easier to start fresh a fulton armoury tricked out rifle comes in at $3500 retail.
who's betting the armourers are going take one worn out m14 $3000 and chuck old m14 in the parts bin and handing over a brand new built rifle:)

All of the M14s converted into M14EBRs by TACOM RI were either brand new or like new (refitted) long before the modernization program was conceived. TACOM has a stash of about 80,000 new M14s to draw from. Also, the Fulton clone is over priced and not even close to meeting military standards.

[martinexsquaddie]

I bow to your vastly superior knowledge if you have a vast stockpile of new rifles makes sense the M14 is a fine base for making a SDR the SLR not so and most were worn out to start with.

[brainplay]

It is both as ugly and as beautiful as an A-10, for much the same reasons.

A-10 is alot easier to maintain than the EBR though.

It's an interim solution as many people keep saying. Mostly it's been pushed by nostalgia and higher brass not understanding what other options are available within the NSN nomenclature. Ironically the Army is pushing for more while the Marines are pushing for less and replacing those with the Mk-11's and 12's (M39 looks to be the last m14 based platform in the USMC system when all is said and done).

The M110 isn't an option right now despite the bugs having been worked out. Despite superior ergonomics, accuracy, and less weight at 8k per rifle, optics, suppressor, and extras i.e full kit, it's not a cheap alternative. Likewise it's designated as a Sniper rifle, not a Designated Marksman rifle.


I like how it looks, I think they want to drop some weight of the rifle.

They can't. The EBR stock still has to rely on the trigger group securing the receiver in place. They need some hefty material in there to act as a pseudo pressure bedding to hold it's accuracy in check. You can go with lighter versions but those aren't meant for anything other than a square range. Accuracy retention in a hostile environment has always been a huge issue with the M14 series. So the guys who get it have to contend with hauling a 17lb rifle (when optics attached) plus ammo.


You want to know the most ironic part here? Once the SCAR-H comes online fully and adds a new lightweight, under $5k non-custom 7.62NATO gun to the system, the chances that the M14 EBR's end up in a dark corner of any armor rusting away are pretty good much like they did after Vietnam.

[H2O MAN]

Once the SCAR-H comes online fully ...

From what I hear and what I'm told, the SCAR-H continues to have reliability issues and tends to beat itself up rather quickly in full auto.
I guess a new, lightweight, short barreled select fire 7.62 NATO rifle is just not a good idea.

The ironic part of this discussion is that it looks like the modernized M14 will continue to serve for many years to come.

[brainplay]

From what I hear and what I'm told, the SCAR-H continues to have reliability issues and tends to beat itself up rather quickly in full auto.
I guess a new, lightweight, short barreled select fire 7.62 NATO rifle is just not a good idea.

The ironic part of this discussion is that it looks like the modernized M14 will continue to serve for many years to come.

That was with the CQB version which funny enough ran into the same timing problem that M4's with 10-12inch barrels had run into. But then why would you even bring up a CQB variant in a DRM discussion? SCAR-L's both standard and long have already been issued. SCAR-H will be online behind that.

Seriously Rex, this M14 obsession is unhealthy for you.

[H2O MAN]

Brain, my health is just fine and the future looks bright.

Yes, the SCAR-L is working just fine, but I'm told the H has it's issues no matter how long or short the barrel is.

[Catch22]

Any reliable sources on the nature of these "issues"? We tried to dig into this matter before purchasing SCAR-L's and it turned to be some rather un-specific hearsay. "Our" SCARs-L (Euro version with B&T muzzle break instead of AAC) function flawlessly so far. Now we get the same signals about H version, and they are to be purchased soon for the teams esp for the DRM role.

[H2O MAN]

I never heard about any issues with the SCAR-L and I hope whatever issues they have
with the select fire H are not present in the semi-auto/civilian H because I want one.

[brainplay]

Any reliable sources on the nature of these "issues"? We tried to dig into this matter before purchasing SCAR-L's and it turned to be some rather un-specific hearsay. "Our" SCARs-L (Euro version with B&T muzzle break instead of AAC) function flawlessly so far. Now we get the same signals about H version, and they are to be purchased soon for the teams esp for the DRM role.

SCAR-L works fine. There are some threads at M4Carbine.net and Lightfighter.com about issued and civilian versions. No issues there. SCAR-H CQB had issues with timing in full auto and burst modes in addition to screws backing out of the receiver. The timing issue happens with alot of short barrel rifles and requires some gas block/port and piston tweaking. Screws backing out is a common problem that shows up in many 7.62NATO rifles. The ARMS mount for the M14 is a perfect example (although the entire rifles is a perfect example of falling apart over time). This is solved by better quality screws and upping the torque used when driving them in. Remember than screws on many newer issued rifles use precise torque wrenches that "break" their grip when you hit the exact torque. Civilian models come with the new wrenches. I kinda wish car mechanics had those for my car tire lug nuts instead of using an impact which I'll never get off unless I stand on the thing.

Hey Catch22, when you get them post the results. There isn't much info on the DMR version out there. Mostly the CQB and standard right now.

[H2O MAN]

I'm happy that the M14EBR-RI is available for our troops to use right now.
Someday a newfangled, whizzbang super rifle will be made available, but
the troops needed something right away and the M14EBR-RI is that rifle.

[Dominique]

Aaaaah, M14's, a real battle rifle.

Paragraph breaks are your friend. ;) Any chance you could repost the article, with some breaks. My old eyes would really appreciate it.

[H2O MAN]

The M14EBR-RI is both accurate and reliable... if only the ARMY would spend more time
teaching marksmanship skills that would take advantage of the EBRs capabilities...

[11 Bravo]

EBR... as I said in an earlier post.. bit of an overpriced joke. It's a stopgap solution on the cheapside. For a 17 lb rifle to be considered awesome...I beg to disagree. YOu could get a nice bull barrel 308 bolt rifle for a fraction of the price with better range and performance with none of the M14's quirks.

[H2O MAN]

Yep, you've said that twice now.

[11 Bravo]

let's go for three...c'mon now !.

[martinexsquaddie]

the m14 was there and could be updated.
the Britis have gone for this http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=975170
at about $5000 a rifle and 12lb all up
you really don't want a bolt action in a squad

[Kunal Biswas]

117307

nice!

...................