Army bans Polymer mags

[MarkCO]

Interesting story today indicating that the Army has banned all ploymer magazines: Military.com

[Pop N Fresh]

come on mil-surp pricing................

[J-Ho]

I will never ceased to be amazed

[TRUBL]

Probably a Military mess up (SNAFU)....the PMAG was (key word here...."was") authorized, but all the others that sorta kinda looked like the PMAG were not. It's easy to just say "all polymer" or "only metallic authorized".....makes it cut and dry to all our boys.

Bet we see that reversed within 6 months, when they figure out just how many PMAG's they have and have order's for.

That is....unless it's part of the EPA's evil plan to ban all plastics made from crude. Go Figure.

[Sleepswithdogs]

I always look to the money trail. Makes me wonder if someone toes got stepped on, someone didn't get there kick back or some such and this lead to the ban. It's a stronger, better working mag, so why ban it??? Money??

[twodownzero]

We should all be asking why any non-issued magazines were ever being used in the first place. I do like the PMAGS, but I don't know why a non-standard magazine design would be authorized, ever. Too much potential for junk mags unless they are properly tested and approved.

I can't imagine the disaster that would result if Promags ever made it in the field. Actually, I lie, I can--the mags supplied with most 1911s are about equal in quality.

[JimmyZip]

Maybe someone realized that they wanted their unit, in or out of channels, to have something better than issue, for their own command, and other commands saw a good thing, and so on, and so on... Once in a while something useful makes it onto the battlefield, outside of channels. It does happen.

[Flatland Shooter]

Bet we see that reversed within 6 months, when they figure out just how many PMAG's they have and have order's for.

/quote]

Kinda what I thought when then switched from 45 ACP to 9 mm.

[Sleepswithdogs]

Maybe someone realized that they wanted their unit, in or out of channels, to have something better than issue, for their own command, and other commands saw a good thing, and so on, and so on... Once in a while something useful makes it onto the battlefield, outside of channels. It does happen.

Exactly. I remember back to Desert Storm when soldiers in the field were getting GPS units sent to them from home so they could find there way around in the desert. I was watching battle footage of fighting in Tal Afar and in one unit, nearly everyone was carrying an AK47. Troupes want to fight with the best they can find.

Edited May 26, 2012 by Sleepswithdogs

[Jadeslade]

Yeah, well since we are not in the Army, we can use better mags. Sad but true.

[AlamoShooter]

Well at least they didn't go back to the breach load single shot like in the 1880s-1900s when bolt action and lever action guns were the best. They didn't want the solders firring too many bullets

And Army contract went to 'guy' with connections, things like that have gotten lots better in the past 100+ years

[LPatterson]

We should all be asking why any non-issued magazines were ever being used in the first place. I do like the PMAGS, but I don't know why a non-standard magazine design would be authorized, ever. Too much potential for junk mags unless they are properly tested and approved.

I can't imagine the disaster that would result if Promags ever made it in the field. Actually, I lie, I can--the mags supplied with most 1911s are about equal in quality.

Special Operations Command can buy and use whatever it feels will get the job done best, if it is a PMag so be it. There is a total difference between what is issued/provided for SOC use and the rest of the Army/Navy/Marine Corp. The Marine's are issuing reconditioned 1911's to some of its units who feel the M9 is crap. The 20 round M16 mags were a crap shoot and a manufacturer that worked was hoarded. It took a bunch of letters to Senators about their buddies dieing before that problem was partially fixed.

[warpspeed]

It will be interesting to see what they do with all the mags they have.

[StealthyBlagga]

I suspect the army has found PMAGS did not hold up as well as they hoped over the long term. They are apparently more likely to eject round when dropped, the feedlips are prone to cracking in cold-weather combat conditions, and insect repellent dissolves the polymer of the body - stuff that may not matter to 3-gunners, but is a big deal for the army. Plus, I am sure lots of GIs were buying ProMags and similar substandard polymer mags. Rather than try to resolve between the different polymer mags, it's easier to withdraw all of them from service.

Unlike some others here, I have never seen the GI mags as "inferior". There are pros and cons. GI mags fit better in issued carriers and the widest range of mag wells, do not eject rounds when dropped, hold up under the full range of environmental conditions etc., and feed lips don't wear out - with current issue followers, they are exceptionally reliable. The downside of GI mags is that bent feedlips bring them to a screaming halt. A lot of the problems come from the army treating something that was originally designed to be disposable as a perpetually reusable item... armorers need to destroy suspect mags on the spot by crushing them, instead of re-issuing them to make their paperwork easier.

[Langenator]

I would really like to see the actual SOUM to see what it says. The way the story reads, only GI issue aluminum mags are authorized. The story concentrates on PMAGs, but if only standard issue mags are allowed, that would exclude steel mags like the HKs and CProducts ones as well.

And Army TACOM has no jurisdiction over the Marines, so the SOUM doesn't effect them. The Marines can still use PMAGs, HKs, Lancers, whatever. Just like the Marines can wear Vibram 5-Fingers for PT, and the Army can't.

[CMonty]

Im still taking my PMAGS to Afghanistan... Because if i ever run into the situation where i need them, i know they'll work.

[Atlgentlegiant]

It will be interesting to see what SOCOM has to say on this. Lets see how aluminum mags stand up to salt water+sand+dust and whatever else gets thrown at them. Looks like a major supplier play to me. Kind of like my Dad (SF in Vietnam) talked about having to download his mags to keep them running.

[Sleepswithdogs]

Im still taking my PMAGS to Afghanistan... Because if i ever run into the situation where i need them, i know they'll work.

Stay safe over there.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Sleepswithdogs

[Langenator]

OK, the actual SOUM has been posted by Weapon Evolution here.

And by my read, it's not just the polymer mags, it's any mags that are not official issue. (Just because something has an NSN, which PMAGs do, doesn't make it official issue.) Steel mags like the HK ones are also not authorized.

Message below.

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.

[Tom Freeman]

We should all be asking why any non-issued magazines were ever being used in the first place. I do like the PMAGS, but I don't know why a non-standard magazine design would be authorized, ever.

PMAGS are an issue item. They have been in the supply system for years.

[DocMedic]

...do not eject rounds when dropped, hold up under the full range of environmental conditions etc., and feed lips don't wear out...

Yea... I can tell you from my real life combat experience that's bull$#!^

and this doesn't come to surprise to me at all, even though there's well over 20 years of study done on minimalist/barefoot running, the U.S. Army ban 5-finger Vibrams because, it took away the appearance of a professional soldier.

Edited May 27, 2012 by DocMedic

[9X23Guy]

Hey blagga, not sure where you got your info about problems in cold weather test bro. Pmags worked just fine for me at -51 degrees F. I know, I was testing them. No issues with bug dope either. Dissolves? Really......

Edited May 27, 2012 by 9X23Guy

[Langenator]

We should all be asking why any non-issued magazines were ever being used in the first place. I do like the PMAGS, but I don't know why a non-standard magazine design would be authorized, ever.

PMAGS are an issue item. They have been in the supply system for years.

PMAGs are NOT an issue item. They have an National Stock Number (NSN), which means they can be purchased with unit supply budget funds through standard channels. IIRC from my company command time, magazines are a Class II item (expendables). Standard issue mags are purchased as replacements for worn out ones the same way, except they come from a central .gov supply because the .gov buys them by the tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands.

Now, I can look at this a couple of ways, both of which relate to money. First is from a Big Army budgetary point of view. PMAGs are more expensive than standard mags. Not sure how much, but say it's $5 per mag just for illustration. If an infantry battalion going to Afghanistan buys 10 PMAGs for every one of their riflemen (say 500 for easy math) that's an extra $25,000 (500 x 10 x $5). I'm not sure how many infantry battalions we have in country any more, but as of Jun 2010, there were an even dozen infantry/cav battalions/squadrons just in RC-East. That doesn't count engineers, MPs, artillery being used as infantry, etc. Or replacements for magazines that get worn out, damaged, lost, etc. But you're probably talking over $1 million every year, over and above the cost of standard mags (I realize that's a rounding error in the F-35 budget, but the Army's looking at huge budget cuts, and the F-35 isn't.)

Now look at it from the POV of the contractor that makes standard mags: if that infantry battalion buys 5000 PMAGs, they're not buying 5000 of your mags. If you've got 20-30 battalions going to Afghanistan every year, that's 100k-150k mags that are left sitting in Uncle Sam's GSA warehouse. So when Big Army looks at how many they need to buy for next year, they buy 100k less of your mags, and you make that much less money.

[Sleepswithdogs]

We should all be asking why any non-issued magazines were ever being used in the first place. I do like the PMAGS, but I don't know why a non-standard magazine design would be authorized, ever.

PMAGS are an issue item. They have been in the supply system for years.

PMAGs are NOT an issue item. They have an National Stock Number (NSN), which means they can be purchased with unit supply budget funds through standard channels. IIRC from my company command time, magazines are a Class II item (expendables). Standard issue mags are purchased as replacements for worn out ones the same way, except they come from a central .gov supply because the .gov buys them by the tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands.

Now, I can look at this a couple of ways, both of which relate to money. First is from a Big Army budgetary point of view. PMAGs are more expensive than standard mags. Not sure how much, but say it's $5 per mag just for illustration. If an infantry battalion going to Afghanistan buys 10 PMAGs for every one of their riflemen (say 500 for easy math) that's an extra $25,000 (500 x 10 x $5). I'm not sure how many infantry battalions we have in country any more, but as of Jun 2010, there were an even dozen infantry/cav battalions/squadrons just in RC-East. That doesn't count engineers, MPs, artillery being used as infantry, etc. Or replacements for magazines that get worn out, damaged, lost, etc. But you're probably talking over $1 million every year, over and above the cost of standard mags (I realize that's a rounding error in the F-35 budget, but the Army's looking at huge budget cuts, and the F-35 isn't.)

Now look at it from the POV of the contractor that makes standard mags: if that infantry battalion buys 5000 PMAGs, they're not buying 5000 of your mags. If you've got 20-30 battalions going to Afghanistan every year, that's 100k-150k mags that are left sitting in Uncle Sam's GSA warehouse. So when Big Army looks at how many they need to buy for next year, they buy 100k less of your mags, and you make that much less money.

... and so you grab some congressman or some general who grabs some congressman and raise a stink. "Say, don't you know how dangerous those PMAGS are? Don't you know if you allow PMAGS, before you know it some Air Force guy is going to decide he'd rather fly a LEAR than his F22 and what you have is anarchy." All this over a very expensive dinner, with some very pretty "assistants" helping out.

History is full of examples where inferior equipment was chosen because either the brass was too stupid to know how good another was, or too crooked to let the better one to be chosen. This has been especially true in procurement of aircraft. Hell, they ran Billy Mitchell out of the service for proving the battle ship was no longer king of the sea. The brass believed in battle ships not air power and were very angry when general Mitchell proved a battle ship could be sunk by an airplane. He was made a permanent colonel, then dismissed from the service. All this for showing America how important air power was. Incidentally, the Japanese were also in attendance watching Mitchell drop bombs on the captured German battle ship from WW1 and sink it, and they came away with a completely different opinion of air power than our own people did.

It's one of the hazards of being a capitalistic nation. Personally, I'd rather be rich than poor, but there are limits to what I would do to become rich. Unfortunately, not everyone has.

Edited May 27, 2012 by Sleepswithdogs

[DyNo!]

Politics and money.

If the DoD doesn't come around, operators will continue to use P-Mags anyway...