Why were M14 magazines not designed to drop free?

[Splatter]

While I believe most MBR's were designed to be routinely reloaded by replacing the empty with a full mag, as opposed to reloading with clips, the steel box magazines were (relatively) expensive and in limited supply.
The Canadian variation of the FN-FAL is, in my experience, much easier to change mags on than an M14; but it's stil a ways from "drop-free".
Doctrine with the FN-C1 involved removing the magazine in a controlled manner, and retaining it, before reloading, during fire-and-movement.
As a young soldier, many was the time when our section had to retrace the steps of an assault to find a dropped mag, while some sergeant gently reminded us that a lost magazine might make the difference between living and dying (and also how sorry he was that our mothers had given us syphilis, after having contracted it from the monkeys they were enjoying conjugal relations with, and other such expressions intended to uplift our spirits and encourge us).

 

[Pete031]

My AR does not leave my shoulder on the reload(unless I am behind cover) the trick for me is round count...I try to never let it run dry


Jamie Barkwell

Yeah my mag change is really quick. And we are not really talking about 5 rounds.. That may be ok for competition, but in the real world, I can get a fresh 30 on pretty quick. Put tracers as your last 5 and your weapon shouldn't run dry.

 

[Unsub]

I thought Arkypete did a good job explaining why modern army's use smaller rounds even though they don't have the range or do as much damage.
"Suppresive Fire doctrine" All you have to do is compare how many 5.56 rounds
to 30.cal in 10 pounds. I think the problems with stripper clips interfering with
optics can be overcome simply by scout style mounting. I think the russian style units with AK74's but the best shot has an SVD in order to increase the range the unit can be effective at to 600 metres is a good idea. That way you are not wasting 30 cal bullets on supresive fire and not trying to snipe at 60 meteres with 5.56. A FAL or socom 16 would fit this role nicely.

 

[Morpheus32]

Gentlemen
I'd suggest that there are two different small unit doctrines in play, the non free dropping mag of the M-14 and the drop free M-16 mag.
During WWI bolt actions were universal and doctrine said each shot was aimed. During WWII the M-1 replaced the boltguns for the US forces and suppressive fire slipped into small unit doctrine. The suppressive fire aspect became more popular, so basically the US military doctrine combined the M-1 with the BAR's 20 round mag.
If doctrine dictates that aimed fire is obsolete and suppressive fire is the way of the future then a lighter weight weapon with more ammo available and faster reloads, means faster training for the troops. Wallah we have the M-16 family of weapons.
People shot with 30s stay shot, people shot with 45s stay shot, unfortunately the same can not be said of the 5.56 and the 9mm. This is my experience, observation and opinion.
Jim

Jim,

No offense intended but show me when and where aimed fire was abandoned in favour of suppressive fire? Soldiers are trained to fire aimed shots. They have been since WWI. Machine guns, since there invention have been used to provide suppressive fire. Suppressive fire allows manoever, manoever allows soldiers to close with and destroy....to quote doctrine...manoever is combat.....not just firing rifles....

For the record, people who were shot in WWII with 8mm mauser and 3006/303 did not all expire instantly....and stay shot as you noted.....some were actually wounded. Having been on a two way range twice in my life with a 5.56 and 9mm, I can not agree with your comments.....and for that matter, the Canadian Forces, particularly after a year of combat....agrees as well. The C7/C8 is doing just fine thanks.

No reference drop free mags. Doctrine did not decide the need for drop free, weapon design did. The AR10 which was designed by Stoner in direct competition with the M14 had a drop free magazine design, to enable rapid reloading but at no time did the magazine become disposable....

Cheers

Jeff

 

[Morpheus32]

I thought Arkypete did a good job explaining why modern army's use smaller rounds even though they don't have the range or do as much damage.
"Suppresive Fire doctrine" All you have to do is compare how many 5.56 rounds
to 30.cal in 10 pounds. I think the problems with stripper clips interfering with
optics can be overcome simply by scout style mounting. I think the russian style units with AK74's but the best shot has an SVD in order to increase the range the unit can be effective at to 600 metres is a good idea. That way you are not wasting 30 cal bullets on supresive fire and not trying to snipe at 60 meteres with 5.56. A FAL or socom 16 would fit this role nicely.

Please see my previous comments.....in combat, firing the machine gun is seldom considered "wasting ammo". Combat is not like hunting. Combat is about firepower. If the enemy has his head down and can not influence you, you can manoever up and thump him on the head....but why not just chew him up with the 25mm and be done with it. The CF is doing just fine overseas. Remember that a soldier fights with other soldiers who have a large variety of weapons with different capablities. The majority of engagements have been very short range ie stone throwing distance or long ways off. In a platoon and company, you have the C6, 25mm Chain Gun, Arty and a nice 2000lb JDAM. It is all about the right mix. At 600m we light them up with arty, fast air and cannon fire. A FAL or socom, although discussed in gun mags, is not needed within a platoon....our snipers, assigned to the company have been supporting with precision fires....so the coverage already exists. Remember the comment from the Marines in WWII - My job is to expend ammuniton at the enemy....not the lives of my soldiers. No ammo is wasted with disciplined troops....

Cheers

Jeff

 

[Gothmog]

No reference drop free mags. Doctrine did not decide the need for drop free, weapon design did. The AR10 which was designed by Stoner in direct competition with the M14 had a drop free magazine design, to enable rapid reloading but at no time did the magazine become disposable....

Hi Jeff, what do you know about the M14 weapon design as it relates to mag retention? Was it a necessary part of the design or simply done that way for a certain reason? If the latter, do you know what that reason was?

As to comments by others on the subject of 'reality vs sport' ... the true 'reality' is that most of us will use these rifles for sport and not combat.

References to combat experience are interesting mind you, because they provide an historical design context. However, 'combat experience' arguments do not influence the sporting use of a firearm, IMO and does not per se defeat the notion that a 'drop free' system for sporting use of said rifle is desirable.

 

[Unsub]

I like what you said Morpheus, you don't need a 30cal because you have artillery and snipers. I don't think suppresive fire "waste's " bullets but soldiers now do fire alot more rounds per enemy killed than in WW2. The trade off with a 5.56
compared to a 30 cal is weight versus range. You don't need the range because you have a sniper and artillery. I think nonsoldiers make to much about the difference in lethality between 5.56 and 7.62. The same people tend to lament the replacment of the 45 with the 9. A 5.56 des not have enough "STOPPING POWER" but a subsonic pistol round does?

If I could carry 60 rounds of 5.56 but only 40 rounds of 7.62 it would be an easy choice as long as I had artillery or snipers for longer ranges.
If I was in a unit all by our lonesome I would want someone who couldkeep some distance between me and trouble. Like the russians do with one guy with an SVD.

I just realized none of what I just wrote has the faintest bit to do with whether a mag should drop free or not, oops.

 

[Greenhorse six]

While I believe most MBR's were designed to be routinely reloaded by replacing the empty with a full mag, as opposed to reloading with clips, the steel box magazines were (relatively) expensive and in limited supply.
The Canadian variation of the FN-FAL is, in my experience, much easier to change mags on than an M14; but it's stil a ways from "drop-free".
Doctrine with the FN-C1 involved removing the magazine in a controlled manner, and retaining it, before reloading, during fire-and-movement.
As a young soldier, many was the time when our section had to retrace the steps of an assault to find a dropped mag, while some sergeant gently reminded us that a lost magazine might make the difference between living and dying (and also how sorry he was that our mothers had given us syphilis, after having contracted it from the monkeys they were enjoying conjugal relations with, and other such expressions intended to uplift our spirits and encourge us).

+1 on the C1, it was more thought out about mag changes,same type of mag,in that you hooked the front lug in first then rolled it back to lock as the M14,it uses a guide on the right side to help with the reloads , big advantage.

Thats it boys ,moment of clearity,How do you remove the mag from a M14 or a C1A1,you put your hand on it ,press the release catch,rock it forward,the mag is in your hand,not falling to the ground, and it go's in your pocket.

This is more of a Quartermaster issue,mags cost money,this is the same reason that the old Lee Enfields had mag cut offs,so soldiers would'nt waste.

 

[John Sukey]

What exactly is your experience in that matter ?
Why is it that most modern police/military forces use 556 and 9mm instead of 30 and 45 ? They must all have it all wrong I guess...

You are correct in that statement.

Just because the cops are using 5.56 or 9mm doesn't necessarily mean they are right. They DO use 30 cal in their tactical rifles and some departments have even gone larger.
Our military uses 9mm because of a political decision. apparently the politicians think we can't supply enough .45ACP to our military.
In any case 9mm doesn't seem to be anchoring the terrs very well.
Spray and pray didn't work well in Vietnam and it certainly hasn't improved since then.

 

[cancer]

You are correct in that statement.

Just because the cops are using 5.56 or 9mm doesn't necessarily mean they are right. They DO use 30 cal in their tactical rifles and some departments have even gone larger.
Our military uses 9mm because of a political decision. apparently the politicians think we can't supply enough .45ACP to our military.
In any case 9mm doesn't seem to be anchoring the terrs very well.
Spray and pray didn't work well in Vietnam and it certainly hasn't improved since then.

Ammo's all produced on contract. If the US government puts out a contract for .45ACP ammo, it'll get made.

Spray and pray never works. Having 30 rds in your magazine that you can fire quick aimed shots with compared to 20 large rounds with more recoil is the main reason for the 5.56 to 7.62 change over. More bullets equals higher hit probability.

 

[John Sukey]

Actualy that was meant to be sarcasm. Of course we could make all the .45ACP we could use, but it was a political decision to go with the wimp nato round. Oddly enough our .45 ACP was being made by IMI.

Now if you have a go-fast switch on your rifle, folks tend to use it. I would rather have 20 of those big rounds and hit something than 30 of the other ones and just make a lot of noise.

Oh by the way, if you have to change magazines so fast that "drop free" is necessary, you had best have that sharp pointy thing on the end of the barrel because you are going to need it. Either that or have something that feeds with a belt rather than a mag.