作战2000论坛

标题: 美陆军对M4，MK16 SCAR，HK416，XM8进行沙尘环境试验 [打印本页]

作者: papop 时间: 2007-10-20 17:34
标题: 美陆军对M4，MK16 SCAR，HK416，XM8进行沙尘环境试验
美国陆军对M4，MK16 SCAR，HK416，XM8这4种步枪进行沙尘环境试验：

据英国《简氏防务评论》2007年9月1日刊报道继M4卡宾枪在沙漠环境下的测试开始之后，又有一批经挑选后的突击步枪开始在沙漠环境下的测试，以检验其作战时的可靠性。整个测试工作于8月21日在位于马里兰州的阿伯丁试验场开始，测试环境中所使用的细沙砾能够使多数的武器出现故障，从而影响其使用的可靠性。预计，所有与测试有关的数据收集以及数据分析工作，大概需要五个月的时间完成。

　　据美国陆军称，连同M4卡宾枪一起测试的还有其他三种5.56毫米口径武器，分别是FN公司的Mk16 SCAR突击步枪、H&K公司的XM8与HK416突击步枪。

整个测试结果将直接影响美国步兵中心对未来作战使用轻武器的选择。此次对步兵武器测试的重点，不是武器的精确性，而是其使用的可靠性。测试中，每种接受测试的武器，大约有十支样枪，在同样的沙尘环境下共发射约6000发子弹，以检验其性能。测试之前，接受测试的枪支以及弹匣，将暴露在极端恶劣的沙尘环境下约30分钟，然后在模拟阿富汗和伊拉克那种多沙尘作战环境下，发射约120发子弹。为了真正达到测试的目的，所有接受测试的枪支，其维护级别将被降低，大概在发射600发子弹以后，才将进行一次擦拭和润滑，到发射1200发子弹后，才将进行一次彻底清洁和保养。

　　M4卡宾枪自1994年开始在美国陆军服役，该枪80%的通用部件与M16A2卡宾枪一致。据悉，美陆军所有的M16A2卡宾枪都将由M4替换，目前已经有约10%的M16A2(约20万支)更换为M4了，而且美国海军陆战队也有意用M4替换M16A2。根据2006年美国海军分析中心的一份测试报告称，在派往阿富汗和伊拉克作战的2600名士兵中，约80%的士兵肯定了M4的可靠性，但有30%的士兵认为M4维护时，并不容易。

在整个测试过程中，可以清楚的对比运用气吹式导气系统的M4卡宾枪，和运用短冲程活塞导气系统的HK416、XM8、MK16 SCAR，它们在作战过程中，防止沙尘和泥土进入枪体的实际效果如何。

FN公司的MK16 SCAR突击步枪，目前还处于低速生产阶段，2003年服役于特种作战部队，主要是为了满足紧急作战需求。SCAR可适用于5.56毫米(Mk16)和7.62毫米(Mk17)两种不同口径，并且还可以选择三种不同长度的枪管，以满足不同任务的需求。

H&K公司的HK416增强型卡宾枪，同样利用了短冲程活塞导气系统，并且武器内部材料混合了碳元素，从而减少了武器清洁保养的次数以及故障率，大大增加了其可靠性。根据实弹测试，HK416卡宾枪实弹发射20000发之内，不需要任何清洁、润滑，且不需要更换部件，同时也不会出现故障。

XM8轻型突击步枪项目，因未解决未来作战需求的评估，项目在2005年被搁置。此前，美国武器研究发展与工程中心(ARDEC)已授予H&K公司价值500万美元的XM8项目研发合同。美国国会针对陆军试验的资金，已经通过了两年的财政预算，08财年为9800万美元，09财年1.03亿美元。

作者: HBY 时间: 2007-10-20 18:36
估计HK416表现会好些，因为系统可靠性比较高

作者: papop 时间: 2007-10-20 20:06

原帖由 HBY 于 2007-10-20 18:36 发表
估计HK416表现会好些，因为系统可靠性比较高

别完全信我前面贴的那个段所谓HK416可靠性更高的话。

当年G36刚出来那会儿，也是和现在这个HK416所宣传的一模一样，同样都号称2万发内不用清理，可结果呢？

G36发展到XM8，为了提高可靠性，专门把机匣内部空间重新设计，加大容污空间。

可就这，还是不能过沙尘关，只好再把XM8射速调高到850发/分，提高自动机运动能量，才算完。

作者: KSK精英 时间: 2007-10-20 20:07
XM8不是已经下马了吗,老美搞什么啊

作者: fisher 时间: 2007-10-20 20:07
还因为比较新

作者: Ryan 时间: 2007-10-20 21:34

原帖由 papop 于 2007-10-20 20:06 发表

别完全信我前面贴的那个段所谓HK416可靠性更高的话。

当年G36刚出来那会儿，也是和现在这个HK416所宣传的一模一样，同样都号称2万发内不用清理，可结果呢？

G36发展到XM8，为了提高可靠性，专门把机匣 ...

顺便问一下，到底G36和HK416到底怎么回事啊？可以详细说说吗？

作者: 痘痘狼 时间: 2007-10-21 02:05
第二张照片貌似是玩家...........

作者: kuzila 时间: 2007-10-26 14:31

原帖由 Ryan 于 2007-10-20 21:34 发表

顺便问一下，到底G36和HK416到底怎么回事啊？可以详细说说吗？

都是HK公司的，然后都是导气式，G36倒是跟XM8有比较大的关系

作者: dboy 时间: 2007-10-26 15:19
估计就是应付国会的
搞完之后宣布M16是“够用的”就一切不变了。

作者: 琴剑山河 时间: 2007-11-13 21:03
超喜欢XM8，G36+M4的伸缩托

作者: 豪侠 时间: 2007-11-13 21:08

原帖由 dboy 于 2007-10-26 15:19 发表
估计就是应付国会的
搞完之后宣布M16是“够用的”就一切不变了。

偶狂顶这个观点，M16步枪不能退出历史舞台呀，绝对经典的武器，再使用100年才好。

作者: Ryan 时间: 2007-11-15 10:23

原帖由 kuzila 于 2007-10-26 14:31 发表

都是HK公司的，然后都是导气式，G36倒是跟XM8有比较大的关系

这个我倒知道，但我的意思是说G36和HK416的可靠性到底如何……

作者: Ryan 时间: 2007-11-15 10:23

原帖由豪侠于 2007-11-13 21:08 发表

偶狂顶这个观点，M16步枪不能退出历史舞台呀，绝对经典的武器，再使用100年才好。

100年……社会主义初级阶段么……

作者: skulls 时间: 2007-11-16 06:50
干什么不把加利尔的专利弄过来，然后找公司给完善一下了？

呵呵。

作者: TNT老虎 时间: 2007-11-16 21:47
大批量换装是没有可能性滴，当年M16初期，毛病一堆，还是在坚持使用，改动也是小改。换装是巨大的事情，包含很多东西都要改，后勤零部件一项就是巨大开销，还有周边配套，甚至军校教材都要改，美国佬已经学聪明了，应该向以色列人学，把一种武器用到出神入化，不断在战斗中微调配置，才是真正的”杀器养成“

作者: zchen 时间: 2007-12-11 13:34
据ar15.com站某位现役说的测试已经结束，HK416是头羊。。但是幕后有不少“政治动作”和
“重新解释测试结果”

KevinB (Moderator) Posted :: 12/10/2007 5:13:12 AM PST
Test is done.
Lot of politics and "re-working" results.
Rumour has the Hk416 being the top dog.
Army is doing some odd stuff.

作者: 匪兵乙 时间: 2007-12-11 13:57

原帖由 zchen 于 2007-12-11 13:34 发表
据ar15.com站某位现役说的测试已经结束，HK416是头羊。。但是幕后有不少“政治动作”和
“重新解释测试结果”

虽然都是外国枪，但是HK416再怎样还是带有AR-15的血统。根据Target的说法，陆军特种部队已经开始看SCAR不爽了，说是什么“用起来有点不方便”。但是怎样不方便？哪里不方便？全都不说。相对的，海军和MC对SCAR的评价就相当高，也没听他们抱怨什么。

作者: LongQibing 时间: 2007-12-11 13:58
第二张是~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

作者: 維持動亂部队 时间: 2007-12-11 14:12

原帖由 匪兵乙 于 2007-12-11 13:57 发表

虽然都是外国枪，但是HK416再怎样还是带有AR-15的血统。根据Target的说法，陆军特种部队已经开始看SCAR不爽了，说是什么“用起来有点不方便”。但是怎样不方便？哪里不方便？全都不说。相对的，海军和MC对SCAR的 ...

其实416更符合以前的使用习惯而且买个上机匣就可以啦便宜得很啊陆军装备量那么大当然能省就省啦 MC多数做的事情都是为啦搞“军种区别”而已。。。

作者: zchen 时间: 2007-12-11 14:52
据说、传闻当年SEALS不取用HK416 10英尺型而选用CRANE特改的CQBR的原因是因为当
时HK416在海洋环境长期使用时的表现不好(虽然其它环境它都很不错)。。

[ 本帖最后由 zchen 于 2007-12-10 22:55 编辑 ]

作者: papop 时间: 2007-12-11 16:49

原帖由 skulls 于 2007-11-16 06:50 发表
干什么不把加利尔的专利弄过来，然后找公司给完善一下了？

呵呵。

加利尔精度和AR-15系没的比，但这不是关键，关键是太重了，而且俄式的机匣+机匣盖结构太不适合加装光瞄等战术附件来。

作者: jason-lee 时间: 2007-12-14 18:26
AR15还是主流.....

作者: wanjia521 时间: 2007-12-14 21:01
提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

作者: zchen 时间: 2007-12-20 06:54

Aberdeen Extreme Dust Test I = M4 vs M16A4 test in 2006
Aberdeen Extreme Dust Test II = M4 test summer of 2007
Aberdeen Extreme Dust Test III = M4 vs MK16 vs HK416 vs XM8 test November 2007

Carbines/rifles were subjected to 25 hours of constant, heavy dusting in laboratory conditions at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., 10 of each weapon fired 6,000 rounds apiece. They were fired in 50 120-round cycles. Each was then wiped and re-lubricated at the 600 round mark. After 1,200 rounds were fired from each weapon, they were fully cleaned and re-lubricated. All weapons exhibited significant wear that rendered them unsafe for firing beyond 6,000 rounds without replacement of the barrel and/or bolt.

MRBS (Mean Rounds Between Stoppage) for Class 1, 2, and 3 combined. A class 1 stoppage is one a Soldier can clear within 10 seconds; a class 2 stoppage is one a Soldier can clear, but requires more than 10 seconds; and, class 3 is a stoppage that requires an armorer to clear:

XM8: 472.5 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test III)

MK16 SCAR-L: 265.5 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test III)

416: 257.5 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test III)

M4: 195.5 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test II)

M16A4: 118 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test I)

M4: 89 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test I)

M4: 68 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test III)

M16A4: 28 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test I with light lube)

M4: 6 MRBS (Extreme Dust Test I with light lube)

MRBF data, this is a Class 3, meaning mean rounds before it is inoperatable (I can only find partial data):

XM8 5,454.5 MRBF (Extreme Dust Test III)

M4 5,454.5 MRBF (Extreme Dust Test II)

M4 3,158 MRBF (Extreme Dust Test III)

作者: zchen 时间: 2007-12-20 07:00
www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_carbine_dusttest_071217/

Newer carbines outperform M4 in dust test

By Matthew Cox - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Dec 17, 2007 9:25:16 EST

The M4 carbine, the weapon soldiers depend on in combat, finished last in a recent “extreme dust test” to demonstrate the M4’s reliability compared to three newer carbines.

Weapons officials at the Army Test and Evaluation Center at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., exposed Colt Defense LLC’s M4, along with the Heckler & Koch XM8, FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle and the H&K 416 to sandstorm conditions from late September to late November, firing 6,000 rounds through each test weapon.

When the test was completed, ATEC officials found that the M4 performed “significantly worse” than the other three weapons, sources told Army Times.

Officials tested 10 each of the four carbine models, firing a total of 60,000 rounds per model. Here’s how they ranked, according to the total number of times each model stopped firing:

• XM8: 127 stoppages.

• MK16 SCAR Light: 226 stoppages.

• 416: 233 stoppages.

• M4: 882 stoppages.

the results of the test were “a wake-up call,” but Army officials continue to stand by the current carbine, said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, commander of Program Executive Office Soldier, the command that is responsible for equipping soldiers.

“We take the results of this test with a great deal of interest and seriousness,” Brown said, expressing his determination to outfit soldiers with the best equipment possible.

The test results did not sway the Army’s faith in the M4, he said.

“Everybody in the Army has high confidence in this weapon,” Brown said.

Lighter and more compact than the M16 rifle, the M4 is more effective for the close confines of urban combat. The Army began fielding the M4 in the mid-1990s.

Army weapons officials agreed to perform the test at the request of Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., in July. Coburn took up the issue following a Feb. 26 Army Times report on moves by elite Army combat forces to ditch the M4 in favor of carbines they consider more reliable. Coburn is questioning the Army’s plans to spend $375 million to purchase M4s through fiscal 2009.

Coburn raised concerns over the M4’s “long-standing reliability” problems in an April 12 letter and asked if the Army had considered newer, possibly better weapons available on the commercial market.

John Hart, a spokesman for Coburn, who was traveling, said the senator was reviewing the test results and had yet to discuss it with the Army.

The M4, like its predecessor, the M16, uses a gas tube system, which relies on the gas created when a bullet is fired to cycle the weapon. Some weapons experts maintain the M4’s system of blowing gas directly into the firing mechanism of the weapon spews carbon residue that can lead to fouling and heat that dries up lubrication, causing excessive wear on parts.

The other contenders in the dust test — the XM8, SCAR and 416 — use a piston-style operating system, which relies on a gas-driven piston rod to cycle the weapon during firing. The gas is vented without funneling through the firing mechanism.

The Army’s Delta Force replaced its M4s with the H&K 416 in 2004 after tests revealed that the piston operating system significantly reduces malfunctions while increasing the life of parts. The elite unit collaborated with the German arms maker to develop the new carbine.

U.S. Special Operations Command has also revised its small-arms requirements. In November 2004, SOCom awarded a developmental contract to FN Herstal to develop its new SCAR to replace its weapons from the M16 family.

And from 2002 to 2005, the Army developed the XM8 as a replacement for the Army’s M16 family. The program led to infighting within the service’s weapons community and eventually died after failing to win approval at the Defense Department level.

How they were tested

The recent Aberdeen dust test used 10 sample models of each weapon. Before going into the dust chamber, testers applied a heavy coat of lubrication to each weapon. Each weapon’s muzzle was capped and ejection port cover closed.

Testers exposed the weapons to a heavy dust environment for 30 minutes before firing 120 rounds from each.

The weapons were then put back in the dust chamber for another 30 minutes and fired another 120 rounds. This sequence was repeated until each weapon had fired 600 rounds.

Testers then wiped down each weapon and applied another heavy application of lubrication.

The weapons were put back through the same sequence of 30 minutes in the dust chamber followed by firing 120 rounds from each weapon until another 600 rounds were fired.

Testers then thoroughly cleaned each weapon, re-lubricated each, and began the dusting and fire sequencing again.

This process was repeated until testers fired 6,000 rounds through each weapon.

The dust test exposed the weapons to the same extreme dust and sand conditions that Army weapons officials subjected the M4 and M16 to during a “systems assessment” at Aberdeen last year and again this summer. The results of the second round of ATEC tests showed that the performance of the M4s dramatically improved when testers increased the amount of lubrication used.

Out of the 60,000 rounds fired in the tests earlier in the summer, the 10 M4s tested had 307 stoppages, test results show, far fewer than the 882 in the most recent test.

in the recent tests, the M4 suffered 643 weapon-related stoppages, such as failure to eject or failure to extract fired casings, and 239 magazine-related stoppages.

Colt officials had not seen the test report and would not comment for this story, said James Battaglini, executive vice president for Colt Defense LLC, on Dec. 14.

Army officials are concerned about the gap between the two tests becaus the “test conditions for test two and three were ostensibly the same,” Brown said.

There were, however, minor differences in the two tests because they were conducted at different times of the year with different test officials, Brown said. Test community officials are analyzing the data to try to explain why the M4 performed worse during this test.

Weapons officials pointed out that these tests were conducted in extreme conditions that did not address “reliability in typical operational conditions,” the test report states.

Despite the last-place showing, Army officials say there is no movement toward replacing the M4.

The Army wants its next soldier weapon to be a true leap ahead, rather than a series of small improvements, Brown said.

“That is what the intent is,” he said, “to give our soldiers the very best and we are not going to rest until we do that.”

Col. Robert Radcliffe, head of the Directorate of Combat Developments for the Infantry Center at Fort Benning, Ga., said the test results will be considered as the Army continues to search for ways to improve soldier weapons.

For now, he said the Army will stick with the M4, because soldier surveys from Iraq and Afghanistan continue to highlight the weapon’s popularity among troops in the combat zone.

“The M4 is performing for them in combat, and it does what they needed to do in combat,” Radcliffe said.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/12/army_m4_hearing_071217w/

"M4 may get tougher barrel, better mags

By Matthew Cox - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Dec 17, 2007 16:08:30 EST

Army weapons officials said Monday they are considering equipping the M4 carbine with a more durable barrel and improved magazines during a Pentagon briefing that discussed why three newer carbines outperformed the M4 in a recent reliability test.

Army Test and Evaluation Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., completed an “extreme dust test” in late November that looked at the M4’s reliability compared to the Heckler & Koch XM8, FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle and the H&K 416.

The weapons were exposed to 25 hours of heavy dust conditions over the course of the two-month long test that fired 6,000 rounds through each test weapon.

In the end, XM8 finished first, SCAR finished second, 416 finished third and M4 finished fourth.

Despite the findings, Army weapons officials are still pleased with M4’s performance, said Brig. Gen. Mark Brown, commander of Program Executive Office Soldier, the command that is responsible for equipping soldiers.

Brown described the Colt Defense LLC M4 as a “world-class weapon,” at a briefing with reporters.

“There is a very high satisfaction rate with this rifle,” Brown said, adding that soldier surveys give the M4 an 89 percent approval rating.

Army weapons officials say there is no movement toward replacing the M4 but say they will continue to improve upon the design.

“We want to increase reliability,” said Col. Robert Radcliffe, the head of the Directorate of Combat Developments for the Infantry Center at Fort Benning, Ga.

One of the upgrades that may be coming in the future is a more reliable magazine. The test revealed that 239 of the 882 stoppages M4 suffered were magazine-related.

The hope is that upgrades, such as stronger springs, will increase the magazine’s ability to feed rounds more effectively, Radcliffe said. If all goes well in testing, the improved magazines could be ready by next spring.

Another upgrade under consideration is a “hammer-forged” barrel, Brown said.

While there is no timeline in place, Brown said switching to this specific manufacturing process could yield M4 barrels that “have a longer life.”

Army weapons officials agreed to perform the test at the request of Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., in July. Coburn took up the issue following a Feb. 26 Army Times report on moves by elite Army combat forces to ditch the M4 in favor of carbines they consider more reliable. Coburn is questioning the Army’s plans to spend $375 million to purchase M4s through fiscal 2009. "

[ 本帖最后由 zchen 于 2007-12-19 15:10 编辑 ]

作者: zchen 时间: 2007-12-20 07:07
Heres a quote from DocGKR on another forum...

The Army is trying hard to spin this one. As Brett states, the actual report goes into much more detail. The M4 did NOT do well in this test. The 416 did better than indicated, as there was one problematic 416 that had numerous failures, while the other nine 416's ran better than XM8. Note, that while the XM8 is a POS, that I despise for many reasons, it does have a good reliable gas system.

作者: papop 时间: 2007-12-22 10:48
看不懂呀！看不懂！

只看懂了优胜者是XM8，其次MK16，再次HK416，最后M4（而且还和前面差了几个数量级。

而具体试验过程如何？试验标准如何？美陆军对这个试验的态度如何（比如：美陆军会不会因为这个结果，而重启XM8计划）？一概都没看懂呀！

小弟恳请哪位英文好的兄弟，行行好，帮个忙，详细翻译一下好吗？？

Dboy在吗？你是版主，帮忙有责。

zchen在吗？你是挖这个坑的人，更是责无旁贷呀

还有其他英文高人也来帮忙呀

作者: dboy 时间: 2007-12-22 19:02
最近比较忙啊，过几天有空再做吧

作者: zchen 时间: 2007-12-23 01:14
基本上测试是每个型号抽出10只样枪、在实验室中经过25个小时(这个25小时应该指
的是每只枪经过30分钟的摧残，既50只枪X30分钟=1500分钟=25小时)不断的沙尘摧
残。每一只枪都发射6000发子弹(每次120发、进行50次的循环)。在600发时进行
清洁和润滑。1200发时进行完全清洁和润滑。每只枪在6000发时都发现必须替换枪
管或枪机。这次测试跟上次的M16对M4测验一样

MBRS代表的是发射多少发弹药时停止无法发射
CLASS I停止=10秒可解决
CLASS II停止=10秒以上才可解决
CLASS III停止=必须由军械士解决

内部谣传：HK416的10只样枪中有一只的表现比其它都差所以总体成绩下滑。

美陆军的态度还是M4够用毋须替换，目前考虑的是给M4替换枪管和弹匣(M4的882次停止中有239次是因为弹匣。。从这里看出XM8的成绩有不少靠的是它的弹匣吧。。)...还有更好的润滑油.

XM8计划应该不会重起。根据2007年NDIA的轻武器简报，美军研究讨论的是更换比现役5.56mm更好弹药然后才是考虑换枪

Highlights of the 2007 Small Arms breif at NDIA:

Small Arms Ammunition Strategy:
Near Term (2007-2009)
Increase Warfighter lethality and training capability
Field an improved 5.56mm cartridge
Mid Term (2010-2013)
Increase Warfighter survivability and develop predictive tools
Implement reduced flash propellants/Small Caliber Effectiveness Assessment Program
Far Term (2014-)Significantly greater effectiveness & lighter weight systems
Potential Alternate Rifle Caliber

Individual Small Arms Strategy
Near Term (2007-2009)
M4 MWS Sights & Accessories
Mid Term (2010-2013)
Personal Defense Weapons (PDW)/Future Handgun System (FHS)

Far Term (2014 and beyond)
Commonality / Family Concept[/quote]

JSSAP Caliber Study
• Began: July 2006
• Organization: ARDEC AMSRD-AAR-AEM-I
• Sponsor: Joint Service Small Arms Program (JSSAP)
• Summary: The purpose of this study is to determine the tradeoffs
associated with increasing the lethality over the current M16 series
of rifles and carbines and ultimately the possibility of using a single
round of ammunition in the rifle squad. The research effort will be a
theoretical study to assess the performance trade space that is
associated with various calibers and cartridge designs.
• Progress: Multiple key performance areas have been identified and
the data from past testing is being assessed to determine trade offs
and capabilities.

[ 本帖最后由 zchen 于 2007-12-22 09:17 编辑 ]

作者: panzerswine 时间: 2007-12-23 12:58
美军研究讨论的是更换比现役5.56mm更好弹药然后才是考虑换枪
证实我当初的猜测，XM8沿用目前的5.56*45弹药想实现全面换装几乎没可能

欢迎光临作战2000论坛 (http://combat2000.cn/)