PDA

View Full Version : In Reversal, Army Bans High-Performance Rifle Mags - By Military.com



John Hwang
26 May 2012, 10:10
The Army has ordered that soldiers may use only government-issued magazines with their M4 carbines, a move that effectively bans one of the most dependable and widely used commercial-made magazines on today’s battlefield.

The past decade of war has spawned a wave of innovation in the commercial soldier weapons and equipment market. As a result, trigger-pullers in the Army, Marines and various service special operations communities now go to war armed with commercially designed kit that’s been tested under the most extreme combat conditions.

Near the top of such advancements is the PMAG polymer M4 magazine, introduced by Magpul Industries Corp. in 2007. Its rugged design has made it as one of the top performers in the small-arms accessory arena, according to combat veterans who credit the PMAG with drastically improving the reliability of the M4.

Despite the success of the PMAG, Army officials from the TACOM Life Cycle Management Command issued a “safety of use message” in April that placed it, and all other polymer magazines, on an unauthorized list.

The message did not single out PMAGs, but instead authorizes only the use of Army-issued aluminum magazines. The message offers little explanation for the new policy except to state that “Units are only authorized to use the Army-authorized magazines listed in the technical manuals.” Nor does it say what Army units should now do with the millions of dollars’ worth of PMAGs they’ve purchased over the years.

Magpul officials have been reluctant to comment on the issue. Robert Vidrine, vice president of marketing and sales, said the company found out about TACOM’s message only after it was released to the field.

The decision has left combat troops puzzled, since the PMAG has an Army-approved national stock number, which allows units to order them through the Army supply system.

“This just follows a long line of the Army, and military in general, not listening to the troops about equipment and weaponry,” said one Army infantryman serving in Southwest Afghanistan, who asked not to be identified.

“The PMAG is a great product … lightweight and durable. I have seen numerous special ops teams from all services pass through here, and they all use PMAGs. Also, a large amount of Marine infantry here use PMAGS, including their Force Recon elements.”

TACOM officials said the message was issued because of “numerous reports that Army units are using unauthorized magazines,” TACOM spokesman Eric Emerton said in a written response to questions from Military.com. Emerton added that only “authorized NSNs have ever been included in the technical manuals. Just because an item has an NSN, does not mean the Army is an authorized user.”

This seems to be a complete policy reversal, since PMAGs are standard issue with the Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment and they have been routinely issued to infantry units before war-zone deployments.

Soldiers from B Troop, 3rd Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment, had been issued PMAGs before deploying to Afghanistan in 2009. On Oct. 3 of that year, they fought off a bold enemy attack on Combat Outpost Keating that lasted for more than six hours and left eight Americans dead. Some soldiers fired up to 40 PMAGs from their M4s without a single stoppage.

Militay.com asked TACOM officials if the Army had discovered any problems with PMAGs that would warrant the ban on their use. TACOM officials would not answer the question and instead passed it off to Program Executive Office Soldier on Thursday evening before the four-day Memorial Day weekend.

TACOM’s message authorizes soldiers to use the Army’s improved magazine, which PEO Soldier developed after the M4 finished last against three other carbines in a 2007 reliability test. The “dust test” revealed that 27 percent of the M4’s stoppages were magazine related.

The improved magazine uses a redesigned “follower,” the part that sits on the magazine’s internal spring and feeds the rounds into the M4’s upper receiver. The new tan-colored follower features an extended rear leg and modified bullet protrusion for improved round stacking and orientation. The self-leveling/anti-tilt follower reduces the risk of magazine-related stoppages by more than 50 percent compared to the older magazine variants, PEO Soldier officials maintain. Soldiers are also authorized to use Army magazines with the older, green follower until they are all replaced, the message states.

Military.com asked the Army if the improved magazine can outperform the PMAG, but a response wasn’t received by press time.

The same infantryman serving in Southwest Afghanistan had this to say about the new and improved magazine:

“Like any magazine, they work great when they are brand new and haven’t been drug through the dirt and mud. I haven’t noticed much of a difference between these tan followers and the older green ones. After some time training up for the 'Stan, the same issues started to occur: double feeds, rounds not feeding correctly so on and so on. While it seems to occur about half as often, it’s still not a great solution.

“The magazines still get bent at the opening and are still prone to getting crushed in the middle. I haven’t seen any issues like this with the PMAG due to the polymer casing. I have seen an empty PMAG get run over by a MaxPro [vehicle] and operated flawlessly later that week when we tested it at the range. Last time I saw this happen to a standard issue magazine, it was scrap metal after that.”

Read the news here. (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2012/05/25/in-reversal-army-bans-high-performance-rifle-mags.html#.T8Cxmtx3OT0.facebook)

zero7one
26 May 2012, 18:23
Politics at its best. Someone has their wallet fat and happy after making this decision. There is no reasonable explaination for this, though I would like to see what they have to say their reason was.

zero7one
26 May 2012, 18:52
Here is the TACOM message:


TACOM LCMC MI 12-021 M4-M16 Improved Magazine and the Use of Commercial Magazines
Originator: /C=US/O=U.S.
GOVERNMENT/OU=DOD/OU=ARMY/OU=ORGANIZATIONS/L=CONUS/L=WARREN
MI/OU=TACOM/OU=TACOM SAFETYOFUSE(UC)
DTG: 301307Z Apr 12
Precedence: PRIORITY
DAC: General

//UNCLASSIFIED//
Subject: Maintenance Information (MI) Message, TACOM Life Cycle Management
Command, (TACOM LCMC) Control No. MI: 12-039, M4/M16 Improved Magazine NSN
1005-01-561-7200, Part Number: 13021312, Cage Code: 19200, Old Magazine NSN
1005-00-921-5004, Part Number: 2411362962382, Cage Code: 13629, and the use
of commercial magazines. End Items: M16A2 NSN 1005-01-128-9936, M16A3 NSN
1005-01-357-5112, M16A4 NSN 1005-01-383-2872, M4 NSN 1005-01-231-0973, and
M4A1 NSN 1005-01-382-0953.

1. Distribution:
a. This is a Maintenance Information (MI) Message. Commanders/Directors
of Army Commands (ACOM)/Army Service Component Commands (ASCC)/Direct
Reporting Units (DRU), Army National Guard (ARNG), US Army Reserve (USAR)
Command, US Navy (USN), US Air Force (USAF), US Marine Corps (USMC) and
other Service Commanders and Responsible Offices will retransmit this
message to all subordinate Commanders/Activities.
b. This message will be available on the Safety First Web Site located
on the TACOM Unique Logistics Support Applications (TULSA) portal within
twenty-four hours of transmission. Access to the Safety First Web Site
requires CAC Card authentication. You must first request access to the
Safety First Web Site. To request access click here
https://tulsa.tacom.army.mil. For assistance, email the TULSA Helpdesk at
tacom-lcmc.ilsc_tulsa@mail.mil. The Safety First Web Site also has the
capability to email Safety and Maintenance messages directly to your inbox.
To subscribe to the mailing list, click on, E-Mail Subscriptions, on the
Navigation bar.

2. Issue: TACOM has become aware of units ordering 30 rd. commercial (i.e.
polymer, etc.) magazines for their M4/M16 family of weapons. The M4/M16 Army
authorized magazines are the following: NSN 1005-00-561-7200 (improved
magazine) and NSN 1005-00-921-5004 (older magazine; use until exhaustion).

3. User Actions: TM 9-1005-319-10, the Additional Authorized List (AAL),
states that NSN 1005-00-921-5004 is authorized, as well as NSN
1005-00-561-7200. Units may use the older magazine NSN 1005-00-921-5004
with the green follower until exhausted. The improved magazine is available
in stock, NSN 1005-00-561-7200, and has a tan follower. The improved
magazine features an improved follower and follower spring. These new
features help to reduce the risk of magazine-related stoppages. Units are only authorized to use the Army authorized magazines listed in the technical manuals. Remember; "tan-is the plan, green-start to lean, black-take it
back." Magazines with the black follower are the oldest and should be turned
in to your unit supply sergeant or local supply point.

4. Unit Commanders, contact your local TACOM LCMC Logistics Assistance
Representative (LAR) or your State Surface Maintenance Manager upon receipt
of this message for assistance. For assistance in locating your TACOM LCMC
LAR, see below.

FortTom
27 May 2012, 06:24
This whole thing stinks of political chronyism. What's the life of a few U.S. combatants, worth, compared to millions in some politcal chroniy's pocket. I truly wish the folks at Militaty.Com and others could pool their resources and force a full congressional investigation. In my 20.5 years in the military (Retired), I've seen this same kind of crap happen so many times that I couldn't recall them all if I tried. This may be redundent, but I'm sure someone's pocket is getting filled here, along with some politicians campaign coffer. Troops be damned. Sickening to have to read that post.

FT.

csmith
27 May 2012, 21:50
I know this is directly for the Army, but the AF was never authorized to use them. Some units did and do, but it was never a "legal" move. Atleast it wasn't last time I looked it up. The best we've had are the improved magazines, and to say we're not fans is an understatement.

The PMAG bandwagon was jumped on hardcore when they were issued NSN's, but when they never came out with guidance authorizing them they became relegated to range use. Such a waste.

TripleBravo
28 May 2012, 05:31
For you all that are still active military....how seriously so you think this rule be enforced in combat?

15ICAM
28 May 2012, 14:18
About as actively as the "No Porn Rules"... sorry if that was crass but the best comparison I could think of at the moment

mlosi762
29 May 2012, 06:24
Somehow, somewhere, the "good idea fairy" struck again. An absolutely ridiculous move. In accordance with plenty other upper level, never seen combat, rear echelon decisions that makes no sense whatsoever. Reminds me of when I was told that I couldn't use my own personal Tactical Tailor rack system since it wasn't Army issued. In Ramadi (later part of 2007, when things began to calm down) we were ordered to carry LESS ammunition, so we wouldn't look overly intimidating to the public while on patrol... Or when I had a CO that told everyone in the company that they had to arrange all their mag/equipment pouches exactly the same way, for uniformity reasons... The list goes on and on. Fortunately, I don't see any line units enforcing that rule, for most of those types of "orders" are disregarded en mass once guys get down on the front lines.

Sak007
31 May 2012, 11:35
I will take all the surplus P-mags :)

John Hwang
7 June 2012, 10:47
REVERSED!

The Pentagon has clarified the Army’s stance on a recent safety message that effectively banned a certain high-performance, commercial M4 magazine, which means soldiers can keep using their PMAGs.

The confusion began when Army officials from the TACOM Life Cycle Management Command issued a message in April, declaring that the only government-issued aluminum magazines were authorized for use in the M4 and M16 rifles.

TACOM officials released the message to address reports of Army units using “unauthorized” commercial, polymer magazines such as the popular PMAG, introduced by Magpul Industries Corp., in 2007. The decision left combat troops puzzled, since the PMAG has demonstrated its extreme reliability in combat and has an Army-approved national stock number, which allows units to order them through the Army supply system.

Army officials acknowledged June 6 that TACOM’s message was poorly written and not intended as a directive on the use of PMAGs. Matthew Bourke, an Army spokesman at the Pentagon responding to questions from Mililtary.com, said the message should have included guidance that the final decision rests with commanders in the field.

“At best, the message is incomplete; at worst the message allows soldiers to jump to the wrong conclusions,” Bourke said. “Maintenance Information Messages [from TACOM] are permissive. They are not an order. They are not a directive. All content and direction in those messages are optional for the recipient.”

It’s still unclear why TACOM issued the message at this time, but sources say it might have something to do with the $10.7 million contract TACOM Rock Island awarded to Brownells Inc. in 2009 to produce 1.4 million improved magazines by January 2010.

Program Executive Office Soldier set out to develop the improved magazine after the M4 finished last against three other carbines in a 2007 reliability test. The “dust test” revealed that 27 percent of the M4’s stoppages were magazine related.

The improved magazine uses a redesigned “follower,” the part that sits on the magazine’s internal spring and feeds the rounds into the M4’s upper receiver. The new tan-colored follower features an extended rear leg and modified bullet protrusion for improved round stacking and orientation. The self-leveling/anti-tilt follower reduces the risk of magazine-related stoppages by more than 50 percent compared to the older magazine variants, PEO Soldier officials maintain.

In late May, Military.com asked PEO Soldier if weapons officials had tested to see how the improved magazine performs against the PMAG. The command responded through Army public affairs that weapons officials had conducted “limited side-by-side testing and found that no commercial magazine was superior to the improved magazine,” Bourke said.

By contrast, PMAGs have developed a word-of-mouth reputation for being extremely reliable as well as durable. Special operations units such as Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment issue PMAGs as do many infantry units before war-zone deployments.

Soldiers from B Troop, 3rd Squadron, 61st Cavalry Regiment, had been issued PMAGs before deploying to Afghanistan in 2009. On Oct. 3 of that year, they fought off a bold enemy attack on Combat Outpost Keating that lasted for more than six hours and left eight Americans dead. Some soldiers fired up to 40 PMAGs from their M4s without a single stoppage.

Army officials maintain that TACOM’s message was intended to make soldiers aware that not all commercial magazines have gone through the same testing as the improved magazine, but concede that there are exceptions.

“The main message we want to get out is – although the Army does support and is confident in the improved, tan-follower magazine – we don’t want soldiers to fear punishment for using PMAGs,” Bourke said.