WASHINGTON – Since the Vietnam War soldiers have fought with the M16 rifle and its little brother, the M4, as their main weapon, but that may change soon as the Army steps up its search for a replacement.
In August, the Army posted a “Request For Information” to find out what industry has to offer as a successor to the M4. The military has looked at alternatives in the past, and some specialized units such as Delta Force have already retired the M4 in favor of other, newer weapons.
On Nov. 13, the Army will hold an industry day to determine what state of the art weapons contractors have to offer. It will also allow contractors to “more freely address the questions that were posed in the request for information,” said Richard Audette, deputy project manager for PEO Soldier Weapons, the unit of the Army responsible for weapons procurement.
At Fort Benning, Ga, the U.S. Army Infantry School is drafting a new set of requirements, expected to be published in May or June, that will spell out what the branch is looking for in a new carbine.
After the arms industry has a better idea what the Army wants, companies will be able to start pitching their weapons in an open competition, tentatively scheduled to begin next summer.
The Request For Information is also notable because, for the first time, the Army says it is open to any caliber of weapon, greatly expanding the number of guns available for competition.
The M16 and M4 use the 5.56 mm round which is smaller and, some complain, has less stopping power than the 7.62 mm round used by weapons such as the AK-47.
Though open to the possibility of a new caliber weapon, officials at PEO Soldier said that a change from the 5.56 mm round would have to demonstrate a “revolutionary operational benefit.” The Infantry School’s requirement will nail down exactly what a revolutionary benefit means, but Audette said that the military produces a billion rounds of 5.56 mm ammunition a year so the benefit would have to offset the costs of changing ammunition factories.
The Army won’t release the names of those who will attend the industry day, but representatives from Colt, Barrett, Heckler & Koch and FN-Herstel have all said they’d be in the Washington area to show off their wares.
The sheer size of the Army’s purchasing power makes any change a big deal. The branch purchases more than 100,000 M4s a year at a cost of $178 million, and has 400,000 in service.
Why replace the M4?
Most soldiers -- 92 percent in a recent survey -- say they are content with the M4, a carbine, essentially a shorter version of the M16 rifle. Its truncated barrel provides greater maneuverability in close quarters combat such as the urban environments soldiers face today in places like Baghdad. So why change it?
The weapon, in use for more than 40 years, has a number of problems, which are addressed by newer guns. The M4 tends to jam at a much higher rate than newer weapons -- in a 2007 dust test the weapon jammed four to seven times the rate of the competition.
Colt, manufacturer of the M4, says that if the weapons are meticulously maintained and cleaned on a regular basis, jams can be kept to a minimum. However, many of the new firearms operating systems require less maintenance to achieve the same effect.
The new requirements will offer a full list of the M4’s shortcomings, but right now the Army unit PEO Soldier is looking for increased accuracy and increased reliability as key points to address.
Complicating things for Colt, the technical package for the M4 becomes government property, meaning the Army can license another gunmaker to produce the weapon for less, though the military may end up renegotiating with Colt. Since it will take at least two to three years to start buying replacements for the M4 and a decade before the weapon is phased out, the fate of the M4 contract remains an important point.
In addition to replacing the M4, the Army might also be looking to change its main subcompact weapon -- essentially a really short machine gun -- which is used mostly by aircraft pilots who need a high degree of maneuverability inside a cockpit.
Many of the newer weapons are modular systems, meaning that a single weapon can change into a few different guns by adding a shorter or longer barrel and removing the buttstock.
Barbara Muldowney, deputy manager for individual weapons at PEO Soldier, said a modular system is a selling point from the Army’s perspective.
“If we can find a weapon that could do two things with a few changes then obviously we’re getting a two for one,” she said.
What’s the fate of the XM8?
One of the alternatives out there is the XM8, developed by the German gunmaker Heckler & Koch, which worked closely with the Army on developing that weapon.
The project was cancelled in 2005 for reasons that are not entirely clear. Officials at H&K cited politics; however, PEO Soldier said the XM8 was put on hold because the Army lacked a requirement for a new weapon at the time.
Now that it is shopping around for something new, the Army is open to the XM8. However, Audette said it is up to H&K to make the first move, something the company said it plans to do.