Why a replacement for M16 family is doubtfull
#5
hm2 clark Wrote:Wern't the same arguments used to keep from replacing the M14?

No. The M14 was just barely entering initial production when it was tested against the ArmaLite AR15 in 1958. Soldiers and Marines were still using M1 Garands and M1 Carbines at the time.

When the prototype AR15's blew away the M14, even specially selected M14's by the Army Ordnance Corps (who developed it), the report was buried and the AR15 and Springfield .224 Infantry Rifles were deemed unfit for military service.

The AR15 proved more accurate, 3 times as reliable, obviously lighter, easier for recruits to use and learn, easier to field-strip, with way more firepower for weight than the M14. There was an entrenched camp in the CONARC board that was determined to see the AR15 fail, but there was also a very real need for new rifles to be fielded to the services, so production of the M14 still made sense since the AR15 wasn't ready for production by any means in 1958.

After the Office Chief of Ordnance tried to kill the AR15 with their games, Fairchild (parent co. of ArmaLite) saw no more reason to pursue the design because they felt it was dead as a military weapon, despite its actual performance success. The Powell Board and General Maxwell Taylor, Army Chief of Staff, officially declared the M14 "the only rifle suitable for Army use" after it was out-performed by the AR15. General Taylor forbade the Army from anymore purchasing of .224" caliber weapons for testing.

There was a Balitmore-based firm called Cooper-Macdonald who brokered the deal between Colt and Fairchild for the sale of the AR15 and AR10 designs, with a lump sum of $75,000 and 4.5% royalty. Colt paid Cooper-Macdonald $250,000 + 1% royalty for brokering the deal, because Cooper-Macdonald already had orders in Southeast Asia, and they were already handling the Dutch AR10 licensing.

Colt actually started tooling up to produce the Colt AR10A, and spent $100,000 on said tooling, thinking they could sell the AR10A as a 7.62 NATO standard service rifle.

Quote:In his testimony before the Ichord subcommittee, Bobby Macdonald later related the events surrounding his introduction to the AR-15 as follows:

"But it was the finest, most foolproof weapon I have ever seen in my life.. .Well, when I got back to Singapore I cabled Colt who
had already spent $100,000 tooling up for the AR-10. I cabled
them to stop it and go to full out on the AR-15, because it was obvious that what everybody else had always thought about this [7.62mm] NATO round."
From The Black Rifle R. Blake Stevens * Edward C. Ezell

[Image: ar-10a.jpg]

Colt Started producing their first model 01, the Colt Model 601 AR15, and sending them to Malaysia in 1959. Orders to Australia, Burma, Malaya, Philippines, and Thailand followed shortly thereafter.

The US Air Force, who still procured their small arms through/with the Army, turned down the M14 "light rifle" due to its ungainly bulk/weight, and were still using M2 carbines, which the Army stopped carrying spare parts for. This is the historical backdrop to the famous watermelon shoot on July 4th, 1960, with USAF General Curtis LeMay, at Richard Boutelle's birthday party, where LeMay blasted 2 watermelons at 50yds and 150yds, both of which reacted explosively to the AR15.

3 Colt Model 601 AR15's were sent to Lackland AFB for evaluation in replacing the M2 carbines. Before the 1960 July 4th watermelon event, Colt sent a request to the Army Ordnance Board for re-evaluation of the AR15, but were immediately turned down by Dr. Carten, stating there was no military application for such a weapon, only to be blindsided by the USAF request through the Pentagon for exactly the same evaluations, to be run concurrently with several AR10's for the Dutch.

The AR15's recorded performance in those tests was exceptional, with unusually tight 10rd groups, high reliability, ease of use, etc. The scoped rifle records experienced mean averages of 1.1" groups at 100yds across several rifles, firing 10rd groups, which is difficult to believe without the test results to back them up.

The Air Force requested to purchase the AR15 at least 3 times, to include directly involving President Kennedy himself in the matter, and the SEALs jumped on-board for requesting AR15's through normal channels as well (while buying as many as they could with other funds outside the normal procurement channels).

[Image: 42475x1.jpg]

The British SAS were using the AR15 early on, most likely through the Malaya contract rifles, but who knows how they actually obtained them. They were Colt Model 601's based on photos of SAS in Borneo in 1963.

[Image: IMG_0759.jpg]

As Vietnam heated up, more Congressional authorization for defense funding turned on, and the AR15 was eventually given the green light, as Special Forces, Airborne, and Airmobile units hungrily sought after the lightweight system.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Why a replacement for M16 family is doubtfull - by hm2 clark - 09-27-2013, 10:40 PM
Why a replacement for M16 family is doubtfull - by LRRPF52 - 09-28-2013, 02:57 AM
Why a replacement for M16 family is doubtfull - by Trooper - 09-28-2013, 04:11 AM
Why a replacement for M16 family is doubtfull - by LRRPF52 - 09-28-2013, 04:39 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)