VITAL-2, seen a good number of them on AFSOC M4A1s.  

~Augee

Ah, your right. They short on PEQs and pulling them out of storage or something?

Not having any direct knoweldge of that guy's situation, I would say more likely he just hasn't gotten "re-equipped" yet, his Aimpoint mount is a QRP, too.  

I would figure that since they already have VITAL-2s, whomever's in charge of the money said "they work fine, we're not buying new ones."  

I lot of SOF guys were still using CompMs while everyone else on the conventional side was getting brand new CompM2s for a while.  

~Augee

Gotcha. My unit has a couple dozen sitting in our arms room right now and we can't get rid of them since they apparently "don't exist"

Special Tactics Squadrons run whatever weapons and add-ons the team that they're supporting run.  Of course there's alot of leeway in these environments, particularly since there's even more leeway when the STS team needs different weapons or add-ons than the team they're supporting issues to their own teams.   An air traffic control function in an expedient TOC, or a paramedic in a casualty collection spot will not need the same configs as the guys that are knocking down doors, etc, but special ammo or other concerns can come into play here too.  Not to mention the ride (walk/swim/vehicle/jump) to work.  There's some standardization that does come into play at some point. Its also about spreading the responsibility as an asset to the overall mission, not just your special tasks.

M4's, shotguns, 1911, M9,  MP5, M203, longer range 308 type setups, you name it.  I've seen a 44 mag S&W on a shoulder rig too.  Anyway, the standard issue is what's been proven to work best for the task, since funding and training are a non issue, given enough advanced scheduling and research (time).

For some reason I really like this rifle...almost as much as a Block II carbine.

Yeah, I was there last year as a volunteer.  The two teams from Nellis were pretty impressive.

I guess Im not seeing what so "special order" about the weapon pictured.  Aside from the surefire brake, it looks identical to my issued colt M4 with a few add-ons.  I could make mine look like that with a simple request to my commander and paying for the items myself.  Which is quite common, mind you.
Thomas

vltor stock
surefire fh
dd omega rail
tangodown grip
aimpoint micro

Yeah I know.  Thats why Im saying it just doesnt seem like a "special order" weapon.  Just a few add-ons.  (issued M4's already have the KAC rail, so the DD wouldnt be required)

the DD omega is a huge upgrade from the KAC  M4 RAS. while its a good rail FF rails are the way to go now, its very easy to change POI by cranking down on the handguards or resing the rifle different ways, the Omega fixes that issue

http://]

Top rifle looks more like a standard M4 than an AFSOC specific weapon.

riiight... huge upgrade on a close quarters weapon?  I dont think so.  Maybe if it had a magnifying optic or longer barrel.  But on a 14.5" weapon with a max range of 600m (according to the military).  The KAC RAS does tension against the barrel, but so does the gas block. I don't see a benefit here.

The difference comes when you have to rest the hand guard against something solid.  Resting a non-free floating barrel against a solid object could shift POI as much as 6 inches @ 300yd, resulting in a miss.  It is not an issue of being able to shoot a tight group.  It's instead an issue of POI shift.

I've worked on a couple of their helo's down range and would definitely have to agree with the beg borrow and steal comment. It was a rescue wings birds so it was all pj's no controllers but the rifles were standard m4 issue with a rail system eotech but mostly aimpoints an infrared aimer and a mountain of pmags. None of the guys I talked to were running cans either.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWaehyJb0pg

Exactly, someone posted a comparison here recently and while resting a non FF barrel he saw a poi shift of 2" at 100yrds. That is a huge difference and could me a hit or a miss in the .mil, so there is a big advantage to have a FF rail. Theres a reason why the block II have the DD RIS II

Also if you knew about the war youd realize often times they are engaging enemies past 300M

Looky what I got.

Pinned and just waiting for a omega 7.0



And yes I know my man cave is dirty

Looking forward to seeing this one develop.

What's "special order" about these carbines is that the add-ons appear to be "program" issued items, and therefore officially supported.  They're not end-user add-ons.  

You have to make the request to your commander and pay for the add-ons.  It appears that they do not.  

~Augee

Point being, they're not modified in any manner that would be inconceivable to any other person with a standard issued m4.  Or an armorer could easily change the m4's for one single team with a couple bolt-ons.

split hairs much?

I'm not understanding your protest?

No one's saying it's hard to build a clone of one of these rifles, or even get the approval to make these modifications.  Surely you understand the difference between being issued a certain configuration and being a barracks armorer?

The Surefire muzzle devices themselves represent a pretty big variation from the usual SOPMOD modifications at the timeframe these photos are from.  They imply access to and use of Surefire suppressors before they were SOPMOD items, meaning individual unit purchase.

They're just a SOF variant of the M4A1 Carbine that's officially supported.  No more, no less.  There's some interest in discussing them.  



It's a pretty big distinction.  SF has a particular mission as do the different AFSOC elements.  

~Augee

If you were to go to a math forum and during the discussion say something to the effect of "Pi is 3. And 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209 ... is just splitting hairs"  you'd be wrong.

On ARF, in a thread about specific intricate details, using the wrong colloquialism because it's "just splitting hairs" is wrong. Exact words and terminology are important when discussing technical details regarding clones and the units and personnel using them. For example, while certain SOF units may use a configuration Army SF may not. So saying "SF" uses that particular configuration is not only inaccurate, it's downright wrong.

Getting there



BCM Tube with H buffer

Surefire FA556-212  .  from the EE .   Thanks matty now I look at the EE like a hawk? ok a hungry pigeon

B5 from untrust worthy vendor ( Omega 7.0 dilema )

Spikes Zombie lower

BCM bolt and charging handle



Still need to get my hands on the OMEGA 7.0 when I get my refund from a f-n vendor ( so ticked at that mf'r )

I like the B5 stock and it went on the BCM tube no issue's ( gonna try something in a bit with it )

Embrace the EE

Zombie lower

The EE has been good to me the past week.

Sold my 1PN34 in less then a day when it sat at another site for over a month

Sold both MATECHS in less then 3 hr's

Sold my extra furniture and trigger guards just as quick as the 2 above


Ive been keeping my eye out for ACOG's the last couple days at work. Wouldve been nice to have bought a TA01




The zombie lower has been mocking me for months and the only bargain since MEGA's were out of stock at the time

NDS.



 

I love it when threads stay on topic!

Anyway…

Maybe just me, but I seem to favor clones/copies (whatever you want to call it) of firearms used by the folks who serve our country (in particular one of my favorite cousins who is in the Air Force) (working on a Navy MK 18 MOD 0 as well as an Air Force GUU-5/P at the moment too). To that end, this seems like a fairly simple "build" as it were to be able to build up a carbine with a few extra parts and have it be non-NFA for a change.

Interested in making my own clone/copy, have a few ideas and questions if y'all don't mind.

First...


Is this a fer sure thing? What I was considering doesn't have a SOCOM barrel, but I might work towards one some day if that's what they all have. Being Air Force carbines they may well utilize both different M4 barrels.

So, I've got this ole Bushmaster M4 carbean with a 14.5-inch M4 profile barrel and a permanently attached Gem Tech Bi-Lock suppressor mount. The intention was to get an M4-96D years ago, but that never came to be and I've since jumped on the KAC bandwagon.

The Bushmaster in question...



How feasible is it to remove the Gem-Tech QD mount (it was pinned and welded over at Gem-Tech) and attach the Surefire FH556-212A (I just bought on gunbroker(makesmebroker) for $50 because of this thread)? Or, would I be better off trying to sell the barrel (or even the entire upper) and replacing it with a new(er) barrel/upper?


That is fer sure Air Force! I've been fortunate to get to play with some of their GUU-5/P carbines and have seen just about everything under the sun with them. I can confidently say the only thing that seems to be the same on ever one of em I've seen is that all have slip rings, never a delta ring to be seen.

Next question... on the matter of the DD rail... as mentioned, I'm a big fanboy of KAC. Is it me, or does the DD rail seem much larger (taller) than the KAC RIS and RAS (the only two I've got experience with)? Have a lot of questions about this rail, but am liking the looks of it; will do some looking around rather than pester everyone here about a rail.

Any particular BUIS these carbines are using?

Thanks for all the great info and pics guys, I really appreciate it and am looking forward to the build.

 

I love those old GUU 5P's.  I used to carry one every day.  I have seen MANY versions but mine was A1 upper/lower and M4 barrel.  I have often pondered a clone for shits and giggles.

Current USAF issue M4A1s are RO921HBs, and I doubt the AF purchased many RO921s back in the day before the switch to the HB profile barrel.  

That being said, they do have plenty of RO920s these days, and we all know how creative AF armorers can be.  

Also, GUU-5/Ps "mocked up" as "M4A1s" probably had gov't profile barrels.  

As for "what the GUU-5/P" is, it would appear that the only limiting factor for a GUU-5/P is a 1/7 barrel twist - after that the AF began getting actual M4s and M4A1s - so, by all rights, any currently used mixmaster AF Carbine should be on the books (whether it's marked that way or not) as a GUU-5/P unless it's still got a 1/12 barrel - (this is from the service that *still* has some factory R601s in the inventory).  

Either ADCO or Gemtech themselves should be able to remove the permanently pinned Gemtech muzzle device, though it looks like you have the out of production "A2" style bilock, not the current "A1" style bilock.  

Only because the A2 styles are hard to find and removal of the muzzle device runs a pretty high chance of rendering it unusable - I would suggest selling the barrel if someone wants a pinned A2 bilock for their G5, and starting from scratch with a new barrel.  

I'm not sure whether the DD rails are any deeper than the KAC rails, though there's a comparison chart floating around out there - but I can tell you that they're significantly narrower - which changes the grip profile a lot if you're gripping the forearm.  



I will say, without calipers, the "feel" of the RIS II is very similar to the KAC RAS - almost certainly intentional, so based on that chart, it would appear that the Omega is a little bit deeper.  

~Augee

When was the switch made to the M4 heavy barrel profile?  I saw the Security Forces Academy take delivery of M4s in 1998, scores and scores of them.  This was to bring the SF Academy up to speed with what the field was actually using, so I assume the schoolhouse was pretty late in arming up with M4s compared to the field Security Forces units.

On the other hand, in my experience, it seemed that a GUU-5 was "a short barreled M16 with some sort of collapsible stock," and any number of variables in terms of uppers, lowers, etc.  Sort of cobbled together from what was on hand to meet the mission.  There could easily have been (in the past, of course) M177 barrels with whatever twist they used being put into the mix.  And remember, the XM177/GAU-5/GUU-5 family came into being in about 1966, so a lot of old designs and parts could have been left lying around in USAF arms rooms.

'98 and you wouldn't've seen 'em.

The RO921HB was introduced in about 2000, and went first to line SOF, then SOF support.  I would suspect Air Force SF would have taken a while to get them.  

From what I've seen, there was relatively more standardization in AF carbines up until the R653s.  Again, it's just my guess, but I'm thinking that the change to M855 - necessitating the change to 1/7 barrels - is what made for most of the craziness - starting with the fact that all the old carbines were re-barreled with both .625 and .750 barrels, while additional rifles were converted over.  Parts could, would, and did get mixed up and reinstalled, while others were replaced or upgraded, and all designated "GUU-5/P" as the "current" short M16 variant with the proper barrel for issue ammunition, with little to no other standardization.  

~Augee

Kinda getting off track here, but it is arf.com and we are talking Air Force carbines...

One of the coolest ones I've seen...



SN is 909xxx

Now, lets see some more of that Air Force M4!

If I remember correctly the difference between GAU's and GUU's was the barrel

My brother in law is a CROW/PJ and has deployed to Afganistan and another undisclosed location w/ a tier one unit....

They mostly use Elcan's and LMT stocks in the field. I have hardly ever seen them use aimpoints...

He said that his units prefer Eotech if the mission required CQB or Elcans for more precision stuff. End of story.

My last several qualification sessions before retirement were conducted with M16A2s that started out as straight M16s and were converted by way of replacing the FCG with burst parts, re-marking the lowers, and slapping a complete A2 upper (the one I really examined closely was FN) on top.  Standardizing on A2s for the rank and file was slow and expensive for the Air Force, so I think the GUU/GAU system standardization was probably at least very slow, and while less expensive (fewer weapons, but done piecemeal) it must have been a lot less "standardized."

The "A2" that I deployed to A-stan with back in 2003 had the same treatment.  

.

Here is a picture from TACP selection taken last year showing A1 upper carbines with both the older barrels and M4 barrels.




Couple more AFSOC pics:





.

alright that's it Im cross training to TACP lol

Here you go....  http://www.romad.com/wordpress/  

.






More weapons pics can be found here: http://specialtactics.us/gallery/albums.php

http://www.specialtactics.com/

.

I fucking love this photo.



 

Back "in the day," a ROMAD was issued a jeep, a radio pallet, and a second lieutenant. The ROMAD had to sign a receipt for the jeep and the radios...

I was Ground Radio when we still had that kind of ROMADs in the service.  I worked for one...

Hmmmm donkey huh ? ( looks over shoulder at black lab )





Close enough

I was CATM in 98. At that point in time unit issued weapons varied base to base and unit to unit. I got out in March of 98 and we were geting ready to convert the current standard issue M16s (not A1s) to M16A3s, at least thats what we were told they would be marked. There where to be full auto retaining the M16 lower, which would be hand stamped A3 or in some cases M-16A3 depending on how the weapon was marked originally, they were supposed to have an A2 style upper and be full auto not burst. I got out before they did the upgrade so I don't know if it ever went through AF wide. I do know that Security Forces at the time issued FN A2s as standard along with GAU5s which were usually reserved for senior enlisted, flight sgts and officers. The GAUs where a mixture of different stocks, barrel lengths, gas systems and muzzle devices. TACP was using MP5s. Most base units still had M16s as their issue weapons, many older than hell and in mint condition. During inspections I saw weapons that still had 3 prong flash hidders, some that actually had green furniture, black barrels (as in not chrome lined) and rifles marked AR not M16. Standard AF wide was 20 round mags with Security Forces, TACP etc, getting 30s, greenfolowers where being worked in on an as needed basis. I never interacted with PJs or CCs so I have no first hand info on what they were using then. I did however know a TSgt that was the JSOC CATM guy and he said they were using GAU-5s. Which given the terminology of the time could have been dang near any M-16 based carbine.

The weight savings alone is an "upgrade."

11.6 oz on the RAS versus 7.6 oz for the Omega.

It doesn't sound like much, but when I swapped the RAS off of my 10.5" carbine to the Omega, the difference was amazing.

Plus the POI issues as mentioned above by other posters.

Damn I wish I had taken a picture. When I deployed to Iraq In 2004, I was issued from supply an M-16A1, full auto, A-1 sights, 3-prong FH...the works. That, along with 2 20-rd mags was my issue weapon. No biggie though, After I got in country, it was taken and put in a hanger along with everyone elses. The AF aren't front line troops. I'd much rather see them armed with the best than waste it on flightline guys who will never shoot them. Cause if it gets to the point where they are...things have gotten way outta control.

A couple more AFSOC / STS M4A1s:





SF muzzle brake:




~Augee

Found a few photos of PJs using the SureFire CAM4FA556.









Only photos I found that have the FA556AR suppressor attached.

I ordered some parts for a dedicated AFSOC carbine which will also be my bug out  rifle.  I have a couple other rifles and I'd like to do a clone.  Today I picked up the following.

BCM 14.5" with pinned A2X
VLTOR IMOD

I already have:
DD Omega 7
CMMG Lower
I have Surefire G2 to hold me over while I save for the Surefire Scout light
Still deciding on a sling.

My question is, would an EOtech 553 be on the "list", I see there are EOtechs being used, i just don't know if they are the 553 model used in SOCOM.  I'm also kind of looking at the T-1 but I like the EOtechs because they use the same battery as the Surefire lights.  Battery commonality would be nice.

Any suggestions or insight would be greatly appreciated.

Augee, it looks like most of those rifles are still sporting the KAC RAS.  Optics seem to range from the Elcan to the Comp M2.  Noticed one LaRue 150 mount for the M2.  Interesting.  Thanks for posting these, Cujo.  Seems there is a lot more latitude with this variation.  Any idea if they are moving towards a standardized config. for AFSOC, or is it still a hodge-podge of whatever the end-user wants or what they have in the armory?