User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 6:21:24 PM EDT
[#1]
When I got to First Batt, Nov 94, We had both the older CARS, and the M4s, with flattops and removeable carry handles. (Of course, some still had MP5s at that point as I recall.....not in common rifle platoon use though...). Aimpoints were in use, but not common yet, as I recall (This WAS 11 years ago....) got more common as time went on... Never saw a 203 mounted under an M4 til late 90s. Only on the A2 platform. Did see 870s chopped and mounted for breaching though...Paq4s were pretty common. Did have Surefires on ALL weapons, except 240s. (Yes, even my SAW had a Surefire on it. We had the Littons on SAWs and 240s, but 203 gunners still had PVS4s.....
I suppose since we are discussing over a decade ago, this is not an OPSEC issue right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 6:38:34 PM EDT
[#2]
You know, I think I have seen similar threads to this one about umpteen times. It just so happens that awhile back I was fortunate enough to be introduced to one of the guys that was ACTUALLY there. (The real thing, not the movie) He is a resident in my town, and is presently working for ICE. I was introduced to him by the owner of the local funshop and he truly is a great guy. I will see if he is still in this area and ask if it is possible for him to sort this out if he remembers the details. This may take awhile, but I will report back either way. I am sorry, but at present I cannot remember his name and have not personnally watched the movie, but was told he was represented in at least one of the scenes, maybe more, but I would be causing a great disservice to him and you guys to try and identify him at this time. Will try to get back soon, but gunshop is closed 'til Monday.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 7:21:56 PM EDT
[#3]
The thing is, nobody in the army cares what their gun says on the side of it. I started with A1's, many of them said XM on the side, so were they M16s or not, based on what the reciever said? I'll tell you in the arms room inventory they were M16A1s. I had A2's also, then I had a shorty that had a A1 rear sight, A2 ?ejection bump?, a 1/7 twist 10.5 barrel, and a plastic covered metal collapsable stock, and we called it a CAR, what was it called in the arms room? Who the hell knows? I also had a MP5SD, which is not a army nomenclature but thats what it was called on the books.
What did they have in BHD? A bunch of different guns based on the AR15/M16 family of weapons that weren't actually in Somalia. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 7:58:20 PM EDT
[#4]
ARMY TM 9-1005-319-23&P lists the Carbine, 5.56MM, M4 as NSN 1005-01-231-0973 the copy I have is dated May 1991...it's shown as an A2 carbine with an M4 bbl and 4pos stock, 3rd burst...the M4A1 is listed as an M4 carbine with the detachable rear sight and full auto fire control parts
The NSN #'s I listed for the Carbine, 5.56MM M16A1 is listed in several sources including the Black Rifle II on page 268 and Small Arms Today 2nd Edition pg 409 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 9:00:00 PM EDT
[#5]
don't bother asking him. it will piss him off. it's not his hobby to care about the weapon he used, just ours. www.bhd93.com is where a lot of the guys keep in touch and they have a reputation of not liking to have to answer questions along those lines. to them, it wasn't about what type of neat gun they got to carry and shoot people with, it was much more serious than that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:31:03 PM EDT
[#6]
Agreed. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:34:35 PM EDT
[#7]
Just a bit of trivial, that would be an XM16E1. We had one that had a serial number as low as 54,XXX. Those old XM16E1's in Army inventory were long ago rebuilt and remarked to M16A1 standards. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:35:53 PM EDT
[#8]
This thread is just so airsoftish.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:41:03 PM EDT
[#9]
I have one of those 1991 manuals with the M4 in it. Check the changes, there is a list of page updates in the front. The M4 stuff was added in 1994, in my copy anyhow. Mine don't have the carry handle stuff in it. The carry handle/flat top was adopted in 1995, so I bet yours is a newer one then mine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 10:59:01 PM EDT
[#10]
Geek quota has been reached? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:04:14 PM EDT
[#11]
What discussing the history of the M4? Why do you think so. beats the "Colt vs Everybody else" and "what's the forward assist for" threads. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:16:42 PM EDT
[#12]
History is fine. But "what Delta uses" discussions usually go down hill fast and rarely involve any information thats confirmable. ...after all, they dont exist 
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:20:20 PM EDT
[#13]
so very true, especially not caring about what rifle we had. i carried a Car15 and loved it because it was light, gave me a break on the road marches. sure it had full auto, but i never fired full auto at the range., didnt care to. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 11:55:24 PM EDT
[#14]
Well, Delta uses a lot of shit. We could accuse Delta of having used almost anything, and probably be right. I don't know why so many people get wrapped up in it though. BTW, the M4 DID enter service in the 1980s. Not 1991, 1994, or 1995. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 12:23:55 AM EDT
[#15]
Yes, the TMs from the Early/mid 90s showed the M4 as having an A2 handle, and the M4A1 as being flattop with Auto. If you found the information in a book, then they are using outdated or incorrect information. I checked US MIlitary sources to verify them. A google search of each NSN will reveal its true nature. Oddly enough, while searching for the NSNs I also found NSN for the XM-177 types, XM-16E1, AR-15, and there is even a NSN for a Bushmaster "V-Match". |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 12:26:06 AM EDT
[#16]
Some of us are more interested the history of such things. As for the date, there is a major difference between a Commercial Off the Shelf purchase, a minor purchase from USSOCOM, and actually being adopted and accepted by Big Army. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 12:33:02 AM EDT
[#17]
Of course. I never claimed that the Big Army had anything to do with the M4 in the 1980s-- the Marine Corps had the M4 first....which is kind of funny, cause they LOVE those M16A2s and A4s. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 1:37:20 AM EDT
[#18]
Very true. When I was an Air Force SP, I had a low serial number M16 with the triangular handguards, 3 prong flash hider, A1 sights and no shell deflector. Have seen pictures of PJ's with the same style upper receiver and sights, but rebarrelled with an M4 style barrell. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 5:05:53 AM EDT
[#19]
OK, I see your point. Speculation leads to nonsense. Although there were a few factual tidbits I was not aware of. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 5:18:12 AM EDT
[#20]
1980's? Well, guess it depends on what you consider an M4 to be. I don't consider those commercial A2 carbines to be M4's and apparently you do. |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 1:11:55 PM EDT
[#21]
JosephR wrote:
<don't bother asking him. it will piss him off. it's not his hobby to care about the weapon he used, just ours. www.bhd93.com is where a lot of the guys keep in touch and they have a reputation of not liking to have to answer questions along those lines. to them, it wasn't about what type of neat gun they got to carry and shoot people with, it was much more serious than that.> OK, forget that I offered. I just thought it might be worthwhile to record for posterity, if he was willing, and if I breached the subject tactfully. BettysNephew - Out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 1:46:09 PM EDT
[#22]
I'm more interested in what they are using today. BHD was over ten years ago. Alot has changed since then.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 1:53:41 PM EDT
[#23]
From a historical perspective, it's usually important to know what weapon was used and why, when talking about a battle and stuff. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 3:22:43 PM EDT
[#24]
i was just letting you know. if you have access to someone like that, you'd be best off not trying to pry out information like this. that's all. i'd suggest you do try to strike up conversation, but you could easily offend them, or rather, it seems that that type of questions can insult someone who had to do a lot of killing and had a lot of his own brothers killed. that was a friggin' war- maybe much moreso than a lot of guys saw in desert shield and desert storm. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 6:27:32 PM EDT
[#25]
The carbine I am talking about is basically an M16A2 with a 14.5 inch M4 contour barrel, and CAR stock. And it was apparently called the M4. I got this information straight from Patrick A. Rogers, at a class of his I attended. |
||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 2:29:56 AM EDT
[#26]
No body? I'd just like to know if my rifle in it's current configuration would be similar to a military issue weapon of that time. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 6:36:08 AM EDT
[#27]
That is what I suspected, we are talking about the same Carbine, just calling it two different things. Far as I am concerned those are M16A2 Carbines, if some want to call them M4 Carbines I am not going to spend a bunch of time arguing that they are not. |
|||||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 9:46:59 AM EDT
[#28]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 10:10:09 AM EDT
[#29]
Based on the age of many of our issued weapons that we used in the Corps, they are still probably still serviceable and in use, but not necessarily by the Army and most likely in updated configurations. We had many 'Nam era weapons and equipment back in the early 1980's - so using that as a basis - the Delta's weapons would be around the same age. Ours were completely reliable and would have still been in service a few more years had we not gone to the A2 configuration in 1984. I'm sure some Marine is carrying my old Colt M16A2 in Iraq. That weapon would be 20 years old now, that's hard charging Marine Corps years in an infantry Company . |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 11:03:16 AM EDT
[#30]
QUIB- IIRD, the regular army all had M16s in the movie and the Delta all had shortened barrels- 10.5 or 11.5" barrels- some are saying 14.5s as well with no cut for M203, but I don't think there would have been anyone with a 16" barrel like that. Yours is a nice looking carbine though... |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 11:03:58 AM EDT
[#31]
LOL, you wouldn't want to piss of the man at this time. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 11:37:07 AM EDT
[#32]
Hmm anyone going to one of Sgt. Paul Howe's carbine classes? I'm sure you could ask him during the class.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 11:45:35 AM EDT
[#33]
My sarcasm meter's not working today, he teaches now?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 11:59:33 AM EDT
[#34]
Yes, he has a firearms training school in Texas. SWAT magazines did a review on his carbine course earlier this year. His personal AR is pretty basic - iron sighted carbine, fixed stock and a Surefire light. No flattop, rails, or VFG. Link to SWAT issue (you can buy it in PDF format online) Link to his Facilities website |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 12:23:23 PM EDT
[#35]
Delta tends to shoot a bit more in training than most .mil units... weapons do wear out eventually. (High round count/long term durability is one of the considerations behind the SCAR program IMHO). Most stuff from that era I would imagine is either scrapped or rebuilt by now. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 5:11:29 PM EDT
[#36]
I'm not talking about the movie, but reality. According to Joescuba’s description my rifle is configured similar to the rifles used at that time. |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/7/2005 5:29:48 PM EDT
[#37]
Aside from the 1.5" longer barrel, your AR is pretty close to what a Colt 723 looks like, which is the most likely canidate for Delta's carbine in Somalia. AR-15 Models |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2005 6:22:46 PM EDT
[#38]
Short answer from an authentic 1st SFOD-D vet of the fight:
"I dunno what you call it, it was a f*cking M4 or close to it." There you have it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2005 6:28:17 PM EDT
[#39]
That is interesting. I can tell you exactly every gun make/model (as well as most other gear) I have been issued since the late 70s. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2005 6:50:15 PM EDT
[#40]
Same here, but the Carbines in question are not as simple to name in that they were not standard equipment. They would say M16A2 on side, and be refered to as a Model 727 by Colt's. The guys issued them would call them an M4, or a CAR-15, or a "$+%@! M4 or close to it", or maybe even a "shortie". I call them a M16A2 Carbine, for what that is worth. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 8:18:47 PM EDT
[#41]
Yeah, I get the impression that most of them were assembled out of parts at practically the unit level. Insight into that came from a discussion on why I can't put my own SPR upper on an issue rifle.
"The reason we don't do things like that with our weapons is units that ARE allowed to do that with their weapons have to travel with cases and cases of the non-standard spare parts they can't get from the standard supply system. We don't have that luxury here, so live with it." |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
