Senate Staffers look into M4 alternatives.

[SBL]

Hill Aides to Test M4 Alternatives

http://images.military.com/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=image%2Fjpeg&blobheadervalue2=inline%3Bfilename%3DFL_senateshoot_071108.jpg&blobkey=id&blobnocache=false&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1209977403537&ssbinary=true July 11, 2008
Military.com|by Christian Lowe


In a move that could ruffle the feathers of an Army command that views the Colt Defense-built M4 as the best carbine in the world, a select group of top senate staffers is gathering today to look at what could be the future of the military's standard assault rifle.
About 30 legislative aides have signed up to attend a July 11 demonstration at Marine Corps Base Quantico, just outside Washington, D.C., that will feature weapons from various manufacturers vying to end the reign of the M16 and M4 as the U.S. military's most fielded personal weapon.
The range day is intended to help familiarize key lawmakers with possible alternatives to the M16 and M4 once the exclusive contract with Colt Defense of West Hartford, Conn., ends in the summer of 2009, a senior senate aide told Military.com.
"When you re-compete the M4 it shouldn't just be for the same thing we've been building for the last 20 to 30 years," said the senior senate staffer who requested anonymity because the issue is so sensitive with the Army.
Over the past year the Army has taken fire from M4 critics who say there are better options available to troops, weapons that require less intensive maintenance and fire more lethal rounds. While the Army -- which is responsible for procuring small arms for all the services -- continues to stand by the M4 and M16, a small group of tenacious senators, including Oklahoma Republican James Coburn, have pressed the issue, forcing the service to subject the M4 to rigorous environmental tests and pushing for side-by-side competitions with several M4 alternatives.
"There's no urgent need to improve the M4, it's clearly working better than the M16," the senior senate aide said. "Our concern is that, urgent or not, we really ought to be improving it on par with technological improvements [and] not be wedded to an older weapon just because that's the way we've always been doing it."
While the aide declined to list all the companies participating in the demo, congressional and industry sources say the shoot will feature the standard 5.56mm M4 carbine, the FNH USA-build Mk-17 -- which fires a 7.62mm round -- and a modified "M4-style" rifle that fires a new 6.8mm special purpose cartridge round, among others.
The 6.8mm SPC round was born of a 6-month program launched by the interagency Technical Support Working Group which looked into how an M4 or M16 could be easily modified to fire a round that had better ballistic characteristics than the current arsenal when fired from a short barrel.
According to the TSWG, the so-called "modified upper receiver group" that accommodates the 6.8mm round "can be installed on [government-issued] M4 carbine lower receivers by operators in the field quickly and without tools for an immediate, considerable increase in projectile weight, surface area, and on-target terminal performance."
"The 6.8mm MURG offers improved combat capability and user survivability over comparable 5.56mm platforms," a TSWG statement said.
A consistent criticism of the M4 has been the 5.56 round's perceived lack of stopping power. A 2006 Center for Naval Analyses report conducted for the Army showed 30 percent of Soldiers surveyed wanted a rifle with a more deadly round.
"Across weapons, Soldiers have requested weapons and ammunition with more stopping power/lethality," the report said.
And one special operations Soldier who spoke to Military.com couldn't agree more.
"I know that when I'm shooting at someone I want to be confident that when I hit him, he's going to go down," the Special Forces operator said during a recent interview. "That's why I like the AK and its 7.62 round. It'll drop whatever you're aiming at."
The Army brushes off such criticism, saying lethality is closely tied to marksmanship. If you hit a target in the right place, you'll stop him, Army leaders argue.
The point of the July 11 test shoot is to allow manufacturers to showcase their M4 alternatives before an audience that's becoming more influential on small arms procurement decisions. The senate group tried to hold a similar demo last year, but the Army abruptly pulled out when news reports of the event leaked out, senate sources said.
Participants will have the opportunity to observe the effects of different caliber rounds in ballistic jelly, be shown how to fire each weapon and, of course, there will be some hands-on time as well.
Colorado Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar is heavily involved in the M4 alternative push and wants a competitive process that rewards the kind of innovation that leads to a host of choices when the M4 is re-bid in June of next year.
"Senator Salazar's concern is that the process itself could stifle industry innovation, it can result in lower weapons reliability and it can increase costs," said Salazar spokesman, Matt Lee-Ashley.
"He's going to work through the Army and the Armed Services Committee to make sure that when [the M4] is re-competed next June the process is open, that it's based on performance-based requirements and that it encourages industry innovation."




http://www.military.com/news/article/hill-aides-to-test-m4-alternatives.html?col=1186032325324&ESRC=dod.nl

[Hollis]

Sound like it will be a case of the blind leading the seeing.

[zoot]

Like this sort of thing hasn't happened before. I don't think it will make much a difference

[Waterman]

The Senate and Senate staffs selecting a weapon ?

You mean the "main force" of the anti-s is selecting a G-U-N ?

The army better reign them in....or they will end with single shot, bolt action tasers (they only hurt but not really kill too often) as their primary weapon on the battlefield. They will look really mean.....but not work real well.....and you will need an engineering degree and six hands to make one work.

(Anyone remember the photos of Sen then VP Dan Quayle holding the RPG backwards ?)

[vinny_121_ND]

The range day is intended to help familiarize key lawmakers with possible alternatives to the M16 and M4 once the exclusive contract with Colt Defense of West Hartford, Conn., ends in the summer of 2009, a senior senate aide told Military.com.

If the contract with colt ends next summer, might as well do the research now to see what alternatives are there.

[Tribunius]

Its not research. Its just politicians wasting peoples time and effort on something they have no clue about. They should leave the selection of weapons and other equipment to the pros.

[Seiran]

Its not research. Its just politicians wasting peoples time and effort on something they have no clue about. They should leave the selection of weapons and other equipment to the pros.

Quoted for Truth

[Tony Williams]

They should leave the selection of weapons and other equipment to the pros.

Which pros? The ones who say that the M4 is fine and the 5.56mm round does the job really well, or the ones who say that there are better guns than the M4 and that the 5.56mm needs to be replaced by something meatier?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)

[wildcat]

Which pros? The ones who say that the M4 is fine and the 5.56mm round does the job really well, or the ones who say that there are better guns than the M4 and that the 5.56mm needs to be replaced by something meatier?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)
There was an interesting article last month on the M4 and 5.56, basically the conclusion the M4 is doing it's job, and the 5.56 needs some more stopping power. There was some complaints from Cav scouts they interviewed, wishing they could drop a guy quicker. The article also points out the 5.56 makes a biger wound than the 7.62x39 and the 7.62x51.

The 5.56 has been kicking butts for a long time.

I think the M16/M4 has been doing fine. It's like the 60's where politicians will try to make the technical choices based on their own conclusions.

I think the choice should be left to the DOD, and not some sentors with there Lobbest.

[Seiran]

Which pros? The ones who say that the M4 is fine and the 5.56mm round does the job really well, or the ones who say that there are better guns than the M4 and that the 5.56mm needs to be replaced by something meatier?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)

I'm for the guys that know what they're talking about. If they say the M4 is the best choice for our needs, when put up against other platforms in a fair and unbiased series of tests, I'll support them. But if they say that something else is the best choice in those same fair and unbiased tests, I'll still support them.

But a bunch of underlings that more than likely wouldn't know which end gets pointed downrange making these decisions, doesn't sit well with me at all.

[Tony Williams]

For every article saying that the M4/5.56mm combo is fine, you'll find one saying that it isn't. The US Army's official position is that they're fine, but it was the people who spend most time at the sharp end - SOCOM - who want to replace their M4s with the FN SCAR and who also tried to introduce the 6.8mm Rem because they were dissatisfied with the effectiveness of the 5.56mm.

As far as the effectiveness of the 5.56mm is concerned, the best crit I've seen is this: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)

[delio]

The Senate and Senate staffs selecting a weapon ?

You mean the "main force" of the anti-s is selecting a G-U-N ?

The army better reign them in....or they will end with single shot, bolt action tasers (they only hurt but not really kill too often) as their primary weapon on the battlefield. They will look really mean.....but not work real well.....and you will need an engineering degree and six hands to make one work.

(Anyone remember the photos of Sen then VP Dan Quayle holding the RPG backwards ?)
There're actually a lot of Congressional staff member who have had a long career in the military (including the Special Forces), the FBI, the CIA etc. Some are even still in the military. A few have had to deploy.

Perhaps the most famous example of that is Mark Lippert, a Senate aide to Sen. Obama who just recently returned from a tour of duty as intelligence officer of a Navy SEAL unit in Iraq, ..



http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119042577714035919-5jc0LkuR6nzBcpjUBZF5_kXo2Xg_20071022.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top
From the Campaign to the Battlefront

Coronado Naval Base, Calif.

After a long day training to be deployed to Iraq, Navy reservist Mark Lippert unlaces his desert boots and pulls out a BlackBerry email device from his dusty backpack.

Checking his messages, he spots an email from the presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama: "I miss you, brother."

Mr. Lippert, a lieutenant junior grade sporting a buzz-cut and desert camouflage, is training here before being shipped out to Iraq, where he will serve as an intelligence officer for the Navy SEALs. In his civilian life, he is the chief foreign-policy adviser for Sen. Obama -- the Democrat whose most well-known foreign-policy stance is his opposition to the Iraq War Lt. Lippert is about to join.

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-AJ083_LIPPER_20070921175520.jpg

Mark Lippert in Sen. Barack Obama's office before shipping out to Iraq. Sen. Obama not only opposes the war, he has tried to distinguish himself in the Democratic field by stressing that he alone among the major candidates opposed it from the outset. And Lt. Lippert, 34 years old, has helped hone those views, particularly on a pullout of American troops, even as he prepared to go to war.

Since being called up for active duty and going on the Navy payroll, Lt. Lippert won't talk about his views on the war. "Now isn't the time for me to debate Iraq policy," Lt. Lippert says in an interview. "My job is to serve my country and to execute the decision of the commander-in-chief."

However, friends say that Lt. Lippert, from a family with a long military history, joined the Navy Reserve in 2005 even though he knew the deteriorating situation in Iraq meant the odds of fighting in the war were high. "Mark knew that he probably would be called to active duty," says his fiancée, Robyn Schmidek. "It's not the war he would have scripted, but he felt a higher calling to support the troops."

The deployment of Lt. Lippert -- who will be gone for about six months -- means a hole in Sen. Obama's foreign-policy team at a perilous point for the candidate. Sen. Obama is under sharpening attack by opponents and critics who say he lacks the experience in national-security affairs to lead the country in a time of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and a global fight with Islamic extremists.

It also means worrying about a friend who's suddenly in harm's way. Over the past two years, Sen. Obama and Lt. Lippert have traveled around the globe together, played one-on-one basketball and shared each other's shoes. Lt. Lippert has continuing email exchanges with the senator's half sister in Africa. Sen. Obama encouraged Lt. Lippert to get engaged. Sen. Obama calls Lt. Lippert, "one of my favorite people in the world."

...

The war has touched others on the campaign trail and in Washington. Republican candidate Sen. John McCain has a son deployed in Iraq. At the end of June, when Lt. Lippert went to Norfolk, Va., for processing, he met Sonja Maria Miller, an aide to First Lady Laura Bush who was also activated as a Navy reservist.

Here at the Coronado base, a vast naval complex where Navy SEALs train, Lt. Lippert is routinely asked by other sailors about his civilian job. At first, he says, he tried to answer that he worked in the Senate on foreign relations. Some Navy officers pressed: for which senator? Lt. Lippert, trying to play down his role with the presidential candidate, answered, "Barack Obama."

Lt. Lippert braced for some military personnel to debate the war once they found out he worked for Sen. Obama, but that hasn't happened. Instead, he says some sailors seem impressed that he is working for a politician whose name they recognize.
* * *

Lt. Lippert grew up in Cincinnati and played basketball, baseball and football. Many of his mother's relatives served in the military; an uncle, also named Mark, served for 20 years. James Lippert, Lt. Lippert's father and a lawyer, received a deferment during the Vietnam War. But he says, "I've talked to Mark that I truly regret not serving my country. I had some of my best friends killed in Vietnam."

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-AJ084A_LIPPE_20070921184607.jpg

As a teenager, Lt. Lippert dreamed of becoming an intelligence officer like the fictional Jack Ryan in the movie, "The Hunt for Red October." While obtaining a political-science degree at Stanford University, he considered Officer Candidate School, but instead stayed at Stanford for a graduate degree in international relations.

He then went to Washington seeking a foreign-policy job. After a stint at the State Department, he worked for Democratic Sens. Diane Feinstein and Tom Daschle, before joining the foreign-operations panel of the Senate Appropriations Committee -- rising fast based on his smarts and ability to forge strong relationships with Capitol Hill staff on both sides of the aisle.

Lt. Lippert said he felt an urge to join the armed forces as the U.S. undertook more military actions following the Sept. 11 tragedy.

He got the lengthy application in 2004, labored over it for months and finally applied to be a Navy reservist. In January 2005, he was commissioned. He began working one weekend each month at the Office of Naval Intelligence in Suitland, Md.

Around the same time, Sen. Obama, newly elected from Illinois, joined the Foreign Relations Committee, a perfect perch for a politician with presidential aspirations to burnish his foreign-policy credentials and speak about international hot spots. He asked his new chief of staff, Pete Rouse, who had run U.S. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle's office before his 2004 defeat, for recommendations of a foreign-policy aide. Mr. Rouse had worked with Lt. Lippert and suggested him, among others.

Lt. Lippert saw a brand new senator with little traditional foreign-policy experience. Still, "I could tell Barack loved foreign policy," Lt. Lippert says.

As the two men began to travel the world on Senate business, their personal ties began to grow. Tall and solidly built, Lt. Lippert is laid back and jovial, at ease joking with Sen. Obama between meetings or riding in the car with him during a "smoke" (before the senator quit recently). They also have intense bursts of serious conversation, debating what are considered realistic timetables to secure nuclear material around the world.

In September 2005, the two men traveled to Russia on a weapons-inspection trip. They arrived hours early in Moscow and wanted to work out. When the senator's luggage was delayed, he borrowed Lt. Lippert's size-13 sneakers, even though they were two sizes too large.

After lifting weights at the U.S. embassy in Moscow, Lt. Lippert recalls, Sen. Obama said, "Let's play one-on-one." The men played an intense game until they quit, sweating, with Sen. Obama the winner. "Barack has better moves and longer arms," says Lt. Lippert.

Sen. Obama's take: "Excuses."

In January 2006, Sen. Obama, as part of a congressional delegation, visited Iraq, where he bunked with Lt. Lippert in the old pool house of Saddam Hussein. A year into his reserve training, Lt. Lippert was gaining more insight into the military, a development that Sen. Obama valued. In Fallujah, while Sen. Obama met with one military official, Lt. Lippert stepped off to the side for a conversation with a Marine colonel. When Sen. Obama caught back up with him, he asked Lt. Lippert, "What did he say we should do to turn this situation around?" Lt. Lippert replied, "Leave."

The trip, Lt. Lippert says, helped strengthen Sen. Obama's growing belief that the U.S. needed to start bringing its troops home.

The two men grew closer when Sen. Obama set out in August 2006 for a trip to Kenya, his father's homeland. Lt. Lippert asked retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, who speaks Swahili, to join them. (Gen. Gration later signed on to advise the presidential campaign.) He arranged for Sen. Obama and his wife, Michelle, to get an HIV test, in an effort to publicize the problem of AIDS and promote testing, and arranged for Sen. Obama to go on live TV imploring Kenyans to root out corruption.

..

Lt. Lippert's role is largely behind-the-scenes, working to refine Sen. Obama's own ideas and finding other experts for input.
"I'm like a point guard," Lt. Lippert says. "Barack is about ideas and questions, and I don't have all the answers. He trusts me to pass the ball to others to give him points of view."

Lt. Lippert's biggest influence may have been in focusing Sen. Obama to stress confronting "trans-national" threats that don't emanate from nation-states -- threats such as genocide and weapons of mass destruction.

In April, Lt. Lippert helped draft the speech where the senator would lay out his foreign-policy goals as a presidential candidate. Largely ignoring old-line threats and institutions prominent since World War II, this speech laid out a "new vision of American leadership and a new conception of national security," Sen. Obama said. "Whether it's global terrorism or pandemic disease, dramatic climate change or the proliferation of weapons of mass annihilation, the threats we face at the dawn of the 21st century can no longer be contained by borders and boundaries."

...

At the start of this year, as the need for fresh troops intensified, Lt. Lippert sensed his time to get in the war was approaching -- just as Sen. Obama announced his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for president. "I want to get called up," he told Ms. Schmidek, his fiancée. "I don't just want to drill on the weekends. I want to make a difference right away. It will be fine with me if I go to Iraq."

In June, Lt. Lippert received word that he was being activated and had to report to duty.

He reached Sen. Obama on his cellphone in Chicago.

"Hey, I got mobilized," he recalls saying. "It's definitely happening."

"I'm worried about you," Sen. Obama replied. "I want you to be safe."

But Lt. Lippert still worried about his job. "The timing isn't great."

"I don't care about that," Sen. Obama said, according to both men. "Don't worry about us. Just get back here in one piece."

Lt. Lippert helped enlist Denis McDonough, onetime foreign-policy adviser to former Sen. Daschle, to take over his role.

Over the past three months, while preparing to be deployed, Lt. Lippert has remained in touch with his office. From his bachelor-officer housing, he has been briefing his successor by email and cellphone. Recently, the campaign sent him a terrorism speech that Sen. Obama was set to deliver; on another night, it was an op-ed column on Cuba.

But Lt. Lippert says he has ignored much of the campaign material sent to him because of his current mission. He also says he's just too busy -- drilling with an M-4 and full suit of body armor in the California desert, and learning wartime intelligence-gathering techniques.

Recently, Lt. Lippert fulfilled his final training: Dropped into a simulated operations center to provide intelligence to a SEAL team in a fake Iraqi village, complete with coyotes and scorpions and fake insurgents.

Lt. Lippert says he is looking forward to coming back in several months, rejoining the Obama campaign and getting married to his fiancée. "When you're going off to Iraq, your horizons become more short term," he says.

Earlier this week, he returned home to Washington for a few days. Sen. Obama, on the way to the gym, spotted Lt. Lippert on the street near the Capitol. "Come work out with me," he yelled. Lt. Lippert said he'd stop by the office that afternoon.
When they met, Sen. Obama and Lt. Lippert embraced.

"I think I've gained weight during training," Lt. Lippert complained. Within minutes, the two men had shut out the rest of the bustling Senate office. They sat in a corner and whispered, sharing deep-throated chuckles and gossip. When Sen. Obama's secretary tells him -- for the third time -- that he has to go to a meeting, the men are momentarily silent, then stone-faced.
"Be careful over there," Sen. Obama says.

Lt. Lippert replies, "Don't worry."

Sen. Obama adds: "I need you back here."

[wildcat]

For every article saying that the M4/5.56mm combo is fine, you'll find one saying that it isn't. The US Army's official position is that they're fine, but it was the people who spend most time at the sharp end - SOCOM - who want to replace their M4s with the FN SCAR and who also tried to introduce the 6.8mm Rem because they were dissatisfied with the effectiveness of the 5.56mm.

As far as the effectiveness of the 5.56mm is concerned, the best crit I've seen is this: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2008Intl/Roberts.pdf

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)

I far as I am aware the FN SCAR some in 7.62x51mm and 5.56x45mm, so does not fix the problem of the the 5.56. I have not read or heard anything from FN testing a 6.8 at this time. I know there is talk of an "enhanced caliber" in 6.8 or 6.5 but it is just that talk.

[Tribunius]

Which pros? The ones who say that the M4 is fine and the 5.56mm round does the job really well, or the ones who say that there are better guns than the M4 and that the 5.56mm needs to be replaced by something meatier?

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)


I realise that just saying a pro is a rather broad statement so I'll be a bit more specific. It should be a board of professional soldiers made up of shooters, ordnance heads, logs etc basically all those involved in the supply chain. Preferably equal numbers from both sides of the fence.

Well seeing as I'm not a pro for me to say to go with one or the other would make me a hypocrite.

Now I realise the M4/5.56mm platform has not had a perfect service history. Yes there are better platforms out there but how much better. Does the increased performance justify the cost of replacement not just monetary but time, effort and hassle involved.

There are a hell of a lot of factors that need to be taken into account in the selection of any system. That is if its done right. You need a complete set of unbiased data to make a propper decision.

Off that top of my head you need to know stuff like:

How many times has the current system failed?
Under what circumstances?
What were the consequences?

It is not enough to quote one or two soldiers (no matter their branch or service) to justify an action.

[Tribunius]

Oh and my bug bear in this case is that the only input civies should have in this situation is having read the clifts note version (the full report is likely to be over their heads) of the boards report to approve or deny the budget request.

[wildcat]

on a positive note when and if they move to 6.whatever, 5.56 will be come surplus and cheap.

[Power_serj]

Wouldn't NATO be pretty pissed off if the United States changed our round without at least consulting them?

[wildcat]

Wouldn't NATO be pretty pissed off if the United States changed our round without at least consulting them?

I personally don't see US moving from the 5.56 anytime soon, may be some SF will get something different. the 5.56 works, just ask all those who have died.

as for the FN scar I just want a US company to get the next contract.

[hank]

I personally don't see US moving from the 5.56 anytime soon, may be some SF will get something different. the 5.56 works, just ask all those who have died.

as for the FN scar I just want a US company to get the next contract.

The FN that gets the contracts is a US company. Owned by the Belgian FN but its technically a US comapny. Check out the website.

http://www.fnhusa.com/mil/

hank

[wildcat]

The FN that gets the contracts is a US company. Owned by the Belgian FN but its technically a US comapny. Check out the website.

http://www.fnhusa.com/mil/

hank


it a subsidiary, would like to see 100% US.

[MaverickCowboy]

i agree with wildcat,

if they do get FN, i rather see the FN FAL updated or an F2000 than a scar. the thing is Fugly.

[kinney_bmx]

i agree with wildcat,

if they do get FN, i rather see the FN FAL updated or an F2000 than a scar. the thing is Fugly.
and the 2000 isnt? lol

[MaverickCowboy]

the F2000 is "wierd" but its not ugly. its liek the Halo rifle n junk.

the AK47 has a character to it.
as does the m16, the FAL, G3, and such kindove artistic.
the Scar doesnt have character almost. its bland.

i hope i dont sound like im on something here. lol

[D-gin]

My 1911s have charter but I carry a Glock. Why? because it's dependable even if I don't feel like cleaning it after I've shot 500 rounds through it.


Use it because it works, not because it looks good.

[Ratamacue]

it a subsidiary, would like to see 100% US.FN already manufactures the military's M16s, M249s, and M240s. Adopting a new assault rifle from an American-owned company wouldn't mean very much in the grand scheme of things.

In any case, due to the combination of NATO standardization and the amount of 5.56 available (and existing manufacturing infrastructure), I don't believe the US Army is interested in adopting a new standard cartridge unless it presents a substantial breakthrough in technology and effectiveness. And until they adopt a new cartridge, it doesn't make any sense to switch to a new rifle. The M16/M4 are already here, work well enough, and our all our personnel are trained on them. Adopting a new 5.56 rifle/carbine is an unnecessary logistical and financial strain when there's a potentially revolutionary weapon system right around the corner.

[jagermeister]

the F2000 is "wierd" but its not ugly. its liek the Halo rifle n junk.

the AK47 has a character to it.
as does the m16, the FAL, G3, and such kindove artistic.
the Scar doesnt have character almost. its bland.

i hope i dont sound like im on something here. lol



who gives a **** what it looks like if it works?

[wildcat]

FN already manufactures the military's M16s, M249s, and M240s. Adopting a new assault rifle from an American-owned company wouldn't mean very much in the grand scheme of things.


and it bothers me. I wished it was a US company, I wish for US government to buy from US companies, so the tax payers money stays here in the US, building US jobs.




In any case, due to the combination of NATO standardization and the amount of 5.56 available (and existing manufacturing infrastructure), I don't believe the US Army is interested in adopting a new standard cartridge unless it presents a substantial breakthrough in technology and effectiveness. And until they adopt a new cartridge, it doesn't make any sense to switch to a new rifle. The M16/M4 are already here, work well enough, and our all our personnel are trained on them. Adopting a new 5.56 rifle/carbine is an unnecessary logistical and financial strain when there's a potentially revolutionary weapon system right around the corner.

That what I was trying to say, thanks you said it better.

[Ratamacue]

and it bothers me. I wished it was a US company, I wish for US government to buy from US companies, so the tax payers money stays here in the US, building US jobs.FN Manufacturing, LLC is based in Columbia, South Carolina. What do you think, that its employees consist entirely of transplanted Belgians who send their paychecks back across the Atlantic?

[wildcat]

FN Manufacturing, LLC is based in Columbia, South Carolina. What do you think, that its employees consist entirely of transplanted Belgians who send their paychecks back across the Atlantic?
LOL, I had pictures of illegal Belgians reading you post. But the profits are not being rolled back into the US, those go overseas, to the parent company.

I would like to see US owned and operated companies win US contracts. More to do with the government supporting it own people than anything else.

[akd]

and it bothers me. I wished it was a US company, I wish for US government to buy from US companies, so the tax payers money stays here in the US, building US jobs.



That what I was trying to say, thanks you said it better.

There are very, very few military products nowadays that are 100% US-sourced, and that is probably for the best.

[SMGLee]

i agree with wildcat,

if they do get FN, i rather see the FN FAL updated or an F2000 than a scar. the thing is Fugly.


Base the opinion of a weapon system souly on the looks.... isn't wise.

FN SCAR are by far the most capable weapon to come out of any manufacture in a long time.

better than anything else out there, including the F2000 and FAL.


As far as 6.8, i have seen SCAR in 6.8, but the military isn't picking that up as a general deployed system......the SCAR in 6.8 i saw are purely design study on the capability of doing such a caliber... Spposedly the SCAR-L will have 5.56, 5.45 and 6.8, with the 7.62x51 and x39 going over to the heavy.

[wildcat]

Base the opinion of a weapon system souly on the looks.... isn't wise.

FN SCAR are by far the most capable weapon to come out of any manufacture in a long time.

better than anything else out there, including the F2000 and FAL.


As far as 6.8, i have seen SCAR in 6.8, but the military isn't picking that up as a general deployed system......the SCAR in 6.8 i saw are purely design study on the capability of doing such a caliber... Spposedly the SCAR-L will have 5.56, 5.45 and 6.8, with the 7.62x51 and x39 going over to the heavy.

who is paying for all the research FN is doing? is it the US government or FN? I know they have at least 4 generations of the SCAR.

[MaverickCowboy]

i couldove sworn the 7.62x39 was in the SCAR-L

[Seiran]

i couldove sworn the 7.62x39 was in the SCAR-L

Nope. the SCAR-H.

[MaverickCowboy]

quick question. how does the masada compare with the SCAR?

[jagermeister]

Have you fired a weapon?

[MaverickCowboy]

what do you mean?

[D-gin]

Haha.... Sorry, but that's funny.

[MaverickCowboy]

Haha.... Sorry, but that's funny.

thought the same thing. :)

[D-gin]

If you don't mind me asking, what do you do with the Miami Police Dept.?

[MaverickCowboy]

PM sent. :)

[Tony Williams]

I agree that the US Army is not going to change to a new conventional calibre, because the bean-counters can always show that it would cost a lot more and it's difficult to prove that the benefit in lethality would be worth it (how would you quantify that?) - especially as a more powerful cartridge would be heavier (so the infantry could carry fewer of them) and recoil more (so more training needed). That's why the big army killed off the 6.8 Rem, despite reportedly successful SOCOM testing in Iraq.

The US Army is unlikely to switch from the M4 either, despite its poor showing in the recent dust tests (it seems to be one of the least reliable of the current generation of rifles). Again, money, logistics and training would probably outweigh the advantages of adopting a more reliable gun (at least, as far as the bean-counters are concerned - which may not be the view of the men whose lives depend on it working...).

The best opportunity to change the current gun and ammunition is the LSAT programme, since this promises major benefits in weight and bulk. This is the final section of the article on assault rifles and ammunition on my website:


The US Army is funding the Lightweight Small Arms Technologies development programme, with the aim of halving the weight of the current 5.56 mm M249 (FN Minimi) LMG and its ammunition. AAI Corporation is the lead contractor for the project and is responsible for the gun design. Two different cartridge designs are being tested, shown below in comparison with existing rounds. One is a polymer-cased telescoped round (by ARES), the other a caseless round (by ATK) based on HK G11 technology. The linked polymer-cased rounds are showing a 35% reduction in weight over conventional 5.56x45 ammunition, the caseless rounds a 50% weight reduction plus a 40% reduction in bulk. The preferred solution is the caseless round because of the greater reductions, with the plastic-cased round as a fall-back in case the caseless one meets with insuperable technical obstacles. The plastic-cased round is perceived as a lower risk and has currently made more progress, the gun having been extensively tested. If this project results in a service weapon, the earliest in-service date could be 2015.

The initial calibre and ballistics have been chosen to match the 5.56x45 SS109/M855 for comparison purposes, but in parallel with this, consideration is being given to using the weight savings to produce a "Company" MG which might replace both 5.56mm and 7.62mm MGs. This programme might therefore result in an MG no heavier than the 5.56mm weapons but with more powerful ammunition to enable it to replace 7.62mm MGs as well, which implies a calibre somewhere in the region of 6.5mm as discussed above. If so, the possibilities of building a new assault rifle round this "intermediate" MG round are obvious, and AAI is already considering this.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/P1070008.jpg

Current service rifle/MG rounds and potential developments, from left to right: 7.62x54R, 7.62x39, 5.45x39, 7.62x51, 5.56x45, 5.8x42, 6.8x43 Rem SPC, 6.5x38 Grendel, earlier versions of LSAT caseless and LSAT plastic-cased.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk)