New Air Force Survival Rifle

[Ben]

I thought this was interesting. They've come a long way from the old AR-7. I'm wondering if they had to give up any other survival items given the limited room in the ejection seat? From what I've read, pilots haven't had a rifle under the seat for some time and have been using a pistol as their defensive weapon.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/06/28/the-air-force-is-arming-pilots-with-a-longer-range-stand-off-rifle-to-use-if-theyre-ever-shot-down/

[MillCreek]

Also here: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/06/26/usafs-new-gau-5-a-aircrew-self-defense-weapon/

[MechAg94]

I didn't see the barrel length.  I thought it was 16", but then I saw that guy holding one and it looks overall smaller than I thought.

I am not sure why they would need a 3 round burst.  I guess it might be standard these days.

So when will the civilian version be available?   

[BobR]

So when will the civilian version be available?   

http://cryhavoctac.com/qrb-kit.html

bob

[French G.]

Now I kinda want one.

[Ben]

I think the video said 10" barrel. I have no experience with M4gories. Would that (depending on the stock) possibly make a civilian version a good choice for home defense vs a standard sized M4(gory) from the hallway maneuverability perspective??

[MechAg94]

I think the video said 10" barrel. I have no experience with M4gories. Would that (depending on the stock) possibly make a civilian version a good choice for home defense vs a standard sized M4(gory) from the hallway maneuverability perspective??

I have never had an AR pistol in 5.56.  I always figured the muzzle blast would be substantial.  I see a lot of people talk about using the flash cans.  I have been considering getting an AR pistol, but I would lean toward 300 Blackout.  I figured it would have less muzzle blast and I would want to pair it with a suppressor anyway. 

[just Warren]

Bah, a C96 in  7.63×25 with the wooden holster/stock would work just as well!

Put a scope up top and you're ready to go!

[Devonai]

Fun fact, the GAU-5 has been the Air Force designation for carbine variants of the M-16 for decades. Also fun is that the nomenclature form (Gun, Aircraft, Unit) is the same all the way up to the GAU-8 Avenger.

 

[dogmush]

I think the video said 10" barrel. I have no experience with M4gories. Would that (depending on the stock) possibly make a civilian version a good choice for home defense vs a standard sized M4(gory) from the hallway maneuverability perspective??

Like so?:


Yep.  Sure does.  It's loud, but not all that much louder than a 16" barrel.  (Subjective/tested with ear pro)  It doesn't induce flinching or anything.

[230RN]

"...with an effective range beyond 200 meters."

Yeah.  Sure.  If you say so.

[dogmush]

"...with an effective range beyond 200 meters."

Yeah.  Sure.  If you say so.

It's not as bad as you think.

My 10.5 will push M855 between 2500 and 2600 FPS at the muzzle, and I have loaded some 55gr HP's faster than 2700FPS while messing about. 

I'd estimate that M855 or M855A1 that the airmen will have will be going 2100-2300FPS at 200 meters.  The 1 in 7 twist seems to stabilize them just fine.  Probably won't get amazing fragmentation or penatrate armor plates, but it's still suck pretty bad to get hit with. The bigger issue would be getting in a firefight at 200M with only 4 mags and no backup.

[230RN]

In the wind?  If you say so.  Say, why did you feel it necessary to load it so heavy?

(Just jazzin' everybody on the military's insistence on how great and wonderful and superior and excellent and virtuous the .223 Remington varmint cartridge is even though they've had to keep souping it up with heavier bullets, higher pressures, and reinforced cartridge cases for critters larger than prairie dogs for.... ummm.... 50 years?  Good selling job, Colt.)

[dogmush]

In the wind?

Meh.  We put 5.56 into people sized targets at 300M on the qual range all the time.  I don't see the extra couple 100 FPS being that big a difference in wind drift at a closer range.

An M16A2 is an about 1-2 MOA rifle.  Even if this is half that, it's still putting rounds in an 8" circle at 200m.  That's man-effective.

[41magsnub]

I am not sure why they would need a 3 round burst.  I guess it might be standard these days.

The article says they are converting the rifles.  So, I assume they are using old M4's and M16A2's (if the AF had M16A2's) for the lowers and trigger groups at least.

[T.O.M.]

Given the choice between this and a 9mm handgun with 3-4 magazines, I'd take this package in a heartbeat, especially if you could personalize it a bit...maybe a small optic.  Maybe sneak an extra mag or two in the kit.  A suppressor would be a good add on.

Curious, since the handgun is worn on the survival vest and this is intended to be in the seat kit, will the handgun be eliminated, or will the pilot be able to choose to have both.  Given that option, I'd take both.

[Sindawe]

http://cryhavoctac.com/qrb-kit.html

bob

[dogmush]

In the wind?  If you say so.  Say, why did you feel it necessary to load it so heavy?

Early in my reloading career I considered "max load" numbers the minimum acceptable performance, so anytime I got a new bullet or powder I'd head for those numbers, because MOAR BANG!!

[Hawkmoon]

In the wind?  If you say so.  Say, why did you feel it necessary to load it so heavy?

(Just jazzin' everybody on the military's insistence on how great and wonderful and superior and excellent and virtuous the .223 Remington varmint cartridge is even though they've had to keep souping it up with heavier bullets, higher pressures, and reinforced cartridge cases for critters larger than prairie dogs for.... ummm.... 50 years?  Good selling job, Colt.)

You're right, of course. The Air Force should scrap this idea and take back all those M1911s and M1911A1s from the CMP. They'll fit nicely under the ejection seat, and they shoot big bullets.

Hey, it was good enough to take down a Zero in WW2.

 

[Hawkmoon]

The article says they are converting the rifles.  So, I assume they are using old M4's and M16A2's (if the AF had M16A2's) for the lowers and trigger groups at least.

Didn't the Air Force adopt the M16 (or the AR-15) before the Army? These might be M16 A-zero models.

[Firethorn]

Didn't the Air Force adopt the M16 (or the AR-15) before the Army? These might be M16 A-zero models.

Those are full auto though, not 3 round burst.

@41magsnub, yes the USAF had M16A2 rifles.  I deployed with one a couple times.