Jump to content

The Next US Assault Rifle


Recommended Posts

Marines are saying goodbye to the M16.

Funny, given that the M16 is (slightly) more accurate at longer ranges, I figured the Corp would have resisted the changeover to the M4.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/07/28/the-marines-are-slowly-saying-goodbye-to-the-m16/

Where have you been the last 10 years?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

All is well, the army now has "Super Guns",   engineered to more quickly identify, attack and destroy enemy targets.  How cool is that?  

 

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/did-the-us-army-just-build-117000-super-guns-18883

 

On a somewhat more down to earth note, this is an interesting pilot test.  Never really thought about distributing suppressors down to grunt level.  Seems to have some merit.

 

 https://thearmsguide.com/10661/10661/

 

Edited by 11bee
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2012 at 10:43 PM, toadwbg said:

I know we always hear of the Russian based AK-rifle as "never jamming" and "being foolproof", but I gotta question how true that is. You probably don't hear from all the dead guys it jammed on... :wasntme:

I used to own the one good AK47, the rest leave a lot to be desired if you put your life on the line. The AK's one major fault (besides accuracy) is noise. In the bush, you can hear the safety let off 150 yards out. Magazines are extremely noisy unless you have the premium red Russian mags (even then loud). Will an AK 47 jam? They all will! Just inserting a new mag can be a harrowing event in combat (unless everything around you is getting loud).  Will an AK blow up? Yep, but it takes a little work to do it. Any rifle will do that if the right events are presented. Is the M16 a better rifle?  Not really, but the AK is not any better as well. One is a 100 yard platform, and the other is a solid 300 yard platform. One is horrible shooting off hand, and the other is a great platform for accuracy. Yet in real world combat, 85% of WIA's / KIA's are taken at 100 yards or less. So the accuracy thing is lessened greatly, but it's still there. Nice thing about the AK is that you can use it several days without cleaning it. Still you can clean an AR platform in six or seven minutes without breaking out a sweat.

 

The Russians dropped the AK47 years back, but you still see a few in Russian service. Yet looking closely; they don't look a lot like what we've come to think of.  I think the .224 bore has run it's course. There are certain advantages to using a 70 or 80 grain bullet in that bore size, but few if any are shooting at people six or seven hundred yards out. In the late sixties it was common knowledge that the Army really wanted a 27 caliber rifle shooting 120 or 130 grain bullets instead of the 52 grain 22 caliber rifle they were given.  The 6.8 SPC round was close (actually a 27 caliber bore). The real issue with the 6.8 is lack of ammo and shooting it thru a rifle designed for a smaller case diameter. The platform is good, but needs to be about 5mm wider. The AR ejector has been proven to be among the very best ever designed. The multi lug system for the bolt is nice but also can collect dirt and powder. That needs a redesign. The rifle needs to be built around a 22" barrel instead of the short ones. You may add a pound to the platform, but end up with a far better rifle. I always felt the sights on the AR sucked even on a bright and sunny day. Needs a complete redesign!  You can be set up to either spray and pray, or do three to five shot accurate bursts. The latter wins everytime!

 

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 11bee said:

All is well, the army now has "Super Guns",   engineered to more quickly identify, attack and destroy enemy targets.  How cool is that?  

 

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/did-the-us-army-just-build-117000-super-guns-18883

 

 

FTFA:

 

Quote

 

The US Army has now produced at least 117,000 battle-tested, upgraded M4A1 rifles engineered to more quickly identify, attack and destroy enemy targets with full auto-capability, consistent trigger-pull and a slightly heavier barrel.

The US Army has now produced at least 117,000 battle-tested, upgraded M4A1 rifles engineered to more quickly identify, attack and destroy enemy targets with full auto-capability, consistent trigger-pull and a slightly heavier barrel, service officials said.

 

 

 

Dude what a coincidence, I was talking to a soldier just the other day and he was telling me about how, "The US Army has now produced at least 117,000 battle-tested, upgraded M4A1 rifles engineered to more quickly identify, attack and destroy enemy targets with full auto-capability, consistent trigger-pull and a slightly heavier barrel"

 

Didn't even know the army still Carried Rifles/Carbines. I'm told grunts rely exclusively on Air Force CAS, namely from A-10s. Helpless without them if the headlines are to be believed. :touche:

 

These rifles sound great, Its important to have a weapon this good while not being able to use it thanks to the ROEs and EOFs. :sunrevolves: 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ChesshireCat said:

I used to own the one good AK47, the rest leave a lot to be desired if you put your life on the line. The AK's one major fault (besides accuracy) is noise. In the bush, you can hear the safety let off 150 yards out. Magazines are extremely noisy unless you have the premium red Russian mags (even then loud). Will an AK 47 jam? They all will! Just inserting a new mag can be a harrowing event in combat (unless everything around you is getting loud).  Will an AK blow up? Yep, but it takes a little work to do it. Any rifle will do that if the right events are presented. Is the M16 a better rifle?  Not really, but the AK is not any better as well. One is a 100 yard platform, and the other is a solid 300 yard platform. One is horrible shooting off hand, and the other is a great platform for accuracy. Yet in real world combat, 85% of WIA's / KIA's are taken at 100 yards or less. So the accuracy thing is lessened greatly, but it's still there. Nice thing about the AK is that you can use it several days without cleaning it. Still you can clean an AR platform in six or seven minutes without breaking out a sweat.

 

The Russians dropped the AK47 years back, but you still see a few in Russian service. Yet looking closely; they don't look a lot like what we've come to think of.  I think the .224 bore has run it's course. There are certain advantages to using a 70 or 80 grain bullet in that bore size, but few if any are shooting at people six or seven hundred yards out. In the late sixties it was common knowledge that the Army really wanted a 27 caliber rifle shooting 120 or 130 grain bullets instead of the 52 grain 22 caliber rifle they were given.  The 6.8 SPC round was close (actually a 27 caliber bore). The real issue with the 6.8 is lack of ammo and shooting it thru a rifle designed for a smaller case diameter. The platform is good, but needs to be about 5mm wider. The AR ejector has been proven to be among the very best ever designed. The multi lug system for the bolt is nice but also can collect dirt and powder. That needs a redesign. The rifle needs to be built around a 22" barrel instead of the short ones. You may add a pound to the platform, but end up with a far better rifle. I always felt the sights on the AR sucked even on a bright and sunny day. Needs a complete redesign!  You can be set up to either spray and pray, or do three to five shot accurate bursts. The latter wins everytime!

 

gary

The sights are not a problem, there isn't a combat arms unit in the Army that is using just iron sights.  Even support units have M68s and most are using ACOGs.  Iron sights are backup.  

 

The AK is decent platform but I'll take an M4 or M16 anyday.  The longer barrels have an advantage with improved accuracy past 300 meters but like you said most engagements are a lot closer than that.  The shorter, lighter M4s are better in urban terrain, and when you have to hump all your gear every pound counts.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎5‎/‎2012 at 11:38 PM, crazydon said:

As Dave mentioned, no full auto rifle/carbine can withstand repeated full auto mag dumps close together.

The M-4 system has had problems with range in Afghanastan due to the shorter barrel. Trick is we started using it because of the urban combat we encountered in Iraq where full sized M-16A2's proved combursome in house to house fighting

A 20" to 22" barrel length is all that's needed for the powder capacity of the .223 / 5.56 case. Anything more is a waster of steel. I was issued an M16 that was so early that it actually had AR15 cast into the side of the receiver. It had the short buffer and light weight buffer spring. We called it a "hummer" because it shot so fast. They later replaced the spring and buffer with heavier units. Slowed it down a little bit, but not as much as you'd have thought. Later they changed out the entire upper end with the latest and greatest chrome plated stuff. You could literally clean it with a dry rag in a few minutes. Even later I was issued a brand new CAR15 with the longer barrel and second style flash suppressor (3 different lengths and two different suppressors were used). I tried to get rid of that turd a half dozen times! Yet never had an issue with the M16, and it must had 2,000 rounds thru it in full auto alone. The CAR15 barrel was too short for a complete powder burn, so the bolt lugs would be full of unburnt powder.  Honestly, the only folks in a team that need a high fire rate are numbers one thru three (sometimes a fourth). Number two is usually a machine gun, and number one just sprays a mag in the general direction to make everybody hide their heads. The machine gun then takes over while everybody sets up. Then they shoot a mag or so to allow the MG to move out. An ambush works different if it's your setup. The MG institutes the action with Claymores going off at the same instant.

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎6‎/‎2012 at 0:22 PM, dbsmith88 said:

They have been making them. HK is just trying to recoup some of their losses by converting those guns for the US market.

On the barrel point, I won't own a chrome-lined AR barrel. Not as accurate as the standard barrels because of the unevenness of the chrome lining. It makes the bullets wobble ever so slightly. Military units like the chrome lining because it makes the barrels easier to clean.

Barrels are NP3 plated, and the coating goes on within .000050". A typical hammer forged mil-spec barrel will be lucky to be within .00075". Nobody gets a match quality barrel unless your a sniper. I used to shoot sparrows with my generic issue M16 @ 100 yards all the time.

gary 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎13‎/‎2015 at 11:13 AM, 11bee said:

Army is looking at a bunch of upgrades, which will become the "M4A1+"

Free floating barrel, revised gas system, new trigger, coyote brown hardware, the full list is here:

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/03/18/army-wants-upgrades-improve-m4a1-carbines-performance-accuracy.html

 

On ‎12‎/‎31‎/‎2016 at 10:40 AM, 11bee said:

All is well, the army now has "Super Guns",   engineered to more quickly identify, attack and destroy enemy targets.  How cool is that?  

 

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/did-the-us-army-just-build-117000-super-guns-18883

 

On a somewhat more down to earth note, this is an interesting pilot test.  Never really thought about distributing suppressors down to grunt level.  Seems to have some merit.

 

 https://thearmsguide.com/10661/10661/

 

The "super gun" is the M4A1 upgrade you posted about that started in 2014. I personally would like to see all maneuver elements issued quick detach suppressors, they've been using items from the old sopmod kit for a long time now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

I'm told grunts rely exclusively on Air Force CAS, namely from A-10s. Helpless without them if the headlines are to be believed. :touche:

 

At certain times and in certain places they do/did for both the Marines and Army.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2014 at 5:19 AM, 11bee said:

Army holds test to determine what is the best assault rifle.

One of the competitors outscores the incumbent (M4A1).

Army cancels test.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/armys-quits-tests-after-competing-rifle-outperform/

Why do I think that 50 years from now, my grand kids will still be issued M4's when they enlist? I know the Army is not exactly a huge fan of change, what I do find surprising is that the Marines seem to be following the Army's lead.

And so it goes.....

This pretty much explains why.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usas-m4-carbine-controversy-03289/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Marines may be looking to phase out the M4 for their infantry units and issue the grunts M27's.   M27 looks pretty impressive, still not sure it is a good replacement for the SAW though.   Tough to put out serious automatic firepower with a magazine-fed rifle.  The Army tried that decades ago by just issuing the squad's Automatic Rifleman a bipod for his M16, giving him a few extra magazines and telling him to fire in full auto.   Didn't work out very well and they got rid of that concept when the M249 SAW came along.

 

Otherwise, the M27 looks pretty sweet.

 

https://kitup.military.com/2017/02/marines-iar-infantry-service-rifle.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Throwing my 2¢ in, but I love the M-4.  I've had it jam in firefights, but I've also had .50s and 240s jam too.  It's the nature of the beast.  

 

Heck,  I've had bombs get STUCK on aircraft doing CAS runs for us.  

 

The upgraded M4s are pretty awesome, but I've never used full auto in a fight so I'm not sure the necessity of it (heavy barrels are great though).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

What comes goes around, comes around.   Army apparently is considering issuing a 7.62 rifle on a grunt-wide basis.  Appears to be an issue when engaging bad guys with PKM's at longer range,where most of the 5.56mm weapons in a current Army infantry squad are out-ranged.  

 

Bring back the M14 or FAL baby!  To save weight, get rid of those fancy optics, laser pointers, etc. Real men just need iron sights and a bayonet. If they do things right, they'll provide a wooden buttstock.  In a pinch, the grunt can use his rifle as a club and bludgeon bad guys to death.

 

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/05/us-army-considers-7-62-interim-battle-rifle/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2017 at 8:15 PM, crushkill said:

Heck,  I've had bombs get STUCK on aircraft doing CAS runs for us. 

I'm curious how the Air Force (or whoever's flying) handles bombs that don't drop. Do they need an EOD crew to check out the weapons once the pilot lands? Does the poor guy fly back to base wondering if the bomb on his wing is about to blow up for no reason?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2017 at 8:56 AM, 11bee said:

Marines may be looking to phase out the M4 for their infantry units and issue the grunts M27's.   M27 looks pretty impressive, still not sure it is a good replacement for the SAW though.   Tough to put out serious automatic firepower with a magazine-fed rifle.  The Army tried that decades ago by just issuing the squad's Automatic Rifleman a bipod for his M16, giving him a few extra magazines and telling him to fire in full auto.   Didn't work out very well and they got rid of that concept when the M249 SAW came along.

 

Otherwise, the M27 looks pretty sweet.

 

https://kitup.military.com/2017/02/marines-iar-infantry-service-rifle.html

 

The concept of the automatic rifleman in a fireteam predates the M-16. And the SAW was adopted thanks to Belgium buying the f-16. Yay!

 

I never liked the SAW. It's triple the weight, double the firepower. And the only thing it had going for it was that its belt fed. Other than that I loathed it. Hopefully drum mags can help make up the short fall but M-27 has a LOT of advantages, weight, size, accuracy reliability, close quarters work and the fact it's harder to single out visually. Wouldn't mind if the USMC went full M-27. Hope to get an MR556 someday myself. Because i have money to burn I guess. Plus you know HK. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2017 at 8:11 AM, 11bee said:

What comes goes around, comes around.   Army apparently is considering issuing a 7.62 rifle on a grunt-wide basis.  Appears to be an issue when engaging bad guys with PKM's at longer range,where most of the 5.56mm weapons in a current Army infantry squad are out-ranged.  

 

Bring back the M14 or FAL baby!  To save weight, get rid of those fancy optics, laser pointers, etc. Real men just need iron sights and a bayonet. If they do things right, they'll provide a wooden buttstock.  In a pinch, the grunt can use his rifle as a club and bludgeon bad guys to death.

 

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/05/us-army-considers-7-62-interim-battle-rifle/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

 

 

Wow you mean the m-4 came up short on range? No way!

 

Doubt the army will switch OTOH I was happily surprised by the recent Sig decision

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, RedHeadKevin said:

I'm curious how the Air Force (or whoever's flying) handles bombs that don't drop. Do they need an EOD crew to check out the weapons once the pilot lands? Does the poor guy fly back to base wondering if the bomb on his wing is about to blow up for no reason?

Well it all depends, if the rack had a bad cart and just didn't fire the bomb is pretty safe its just like you've never dropped it. If for some reason the carts partially dislodged the shackles the bomb couls come off on landing but probably won't explode as the the fuse wouldn't arm. Still a very dangerous situation! and yes they would probably call in EOD. The most dangerous situation a pilot told me about, was he had just taken off at Ft.Drum (one of the few spots we could do lives on the east coast)  he had a bird strike the bomb on station #2 and it managed to pull the arming wire from the nose fuse of the Mk 82. The pilot said he looked over and saw the little propeller spinning and spinning he said it only took him a few minutes to get to the range  to drop that bomb but he said that was the most nervous he's been in quite a while. All it would have htaken was another bird to hit the nose of that now armed bomb and BOOM!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, boom175 said:

Well it all depends, if the rack had a bad cart and just didn't fire the bomb is pretty safe its just like you've never dropped it. If for some reason the carts partially dislodged the shackles the bomb couls come off on landing but probably won't explode as the the fuse wouldn't arm. Still a very dangerous situation! and yes they would probably call in EOD. The most dangerous situation a pilot told me about, was he had just taken off at Ft.Drum (one of the few spots we could do lives on the east coast)  he had a bird strike the bomb on station #2 and it managed to pull the arming wire from the nose fuse of the Mk 82. The pilot said he looked over and saw the little propeller spinning and spinning he said it only took him a few minutes to get to the range  to drop that bomb but he said that was the most nervous he's been in quite a while. All it would have htaken was another bird to hit the nose of that now armed bomb and BOOM!  

 

Reminds me of a part in the Stephen Coonts book "Intruder" where the arming wire gets worked out of a Mk. 84.  They notice the propeller spinning as they're about to hit the IP.  Needless to say they get good and drunk after delivering the plane to EOD  (they divert to Cubi).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2017 at 2:12 PM, RedHeadKevin said:

I'm curious how the Air Force (or whoever's flying) handles bombs that don't drop. Do they need an EOD crew to check out the weapons once the pilot lands? Does the poor guy fly back to base wondering if the bomb on his wing is about to blow up for no reason?

The question was answered way better than I can, but I'm amazed at the frequency of the issue.  I've had it happen (at least according to the pilot on the other end of my radio) on F-16, F-15, and most often, Hellfires off of AH-64s.  I'm pretty sure there was a bad batch in 2009/2010 cause it seemed like every time we called one in they'd wave off saying it misfired.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 9 months later...

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/02/07/army-not-interested-marine-m27-will-pursue-next-gen-auto-rifle.html

 

The Army is not going to follow the Marine's lead and issue the M27.  Instead it will be going with a couple of different solutions, including developing a 7.62mm weapon for a squad's designated marksman (so at least one guy will have a weapon capable of penetrating bad guy's body armor) and most exciting of all -  a revolutionary squad assault weapon firing a < 7.62mm telescoping case round.  How cool is that?  

 

Why do I think this won't end well...    Plus, aren't the special op's guys already using a 7.62mm assault rifle?  If so, why does the Army need to re-invent the wheel?

 

Looking forward to the Army throwing it's beloved M16/M4 rifles a great 100th birthday party in another 35 years.  I'm pretty sure they will still be standard issue at that time.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, 11bee said:

https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/02/07/army-not-interested-marine-m27-will-pursue-next-gen-auto-rifle.html

 

The Army is not going to follow the Marine's lead and issue the M27.  Instead it will be going with a couple of different solutions, including developing a 7.62mm weapon for a squad's designated marksman (so at least one guy will have a weapon capable of penetrating bad guy's body armor) and most exciting of all -  a revolutionary squad assault weapon firing a < 7.62mm telescoping case round.  How cool is that?  

 

Why do I think this won't end well...    Plus, aren't the special op's guys already using a 7.62mm assault rifle?  If so, why does the Army need to re-invent the wheel?

 

Looking forward to the Army throwing it's beloved M16/M4 rifles a great 100th birthday party in another 35 years.  I'm pretty sure they will still be standard issue at that time.  

 

 

Nothing's going to come of this

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎4‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 10:11 AM, 11bee said:

What comes goes around, comes around.   Army apparently is considering issuing a 7.62 rifle on a grunt-wide basis.  Appears to be an issue when engaging bad guys with PKM's at longer range,where most of the 5.56mm weapons in a current Army infantry squad are out-ranged.  

 

Bring back the M14 or FAL baby!  To save weight, get rid of those fancy optics, laser pointers, etc. Real men just need iron sights and a bayonet. If they do things right, they'll provide a wooden buttstock.  In a pinch, the grunt can use his rifle as a club and bludgeon bad guys to death.

 

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/05/us-army-considers-7-62-interim-battle-rifle/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook

it's most obvious that you've never carried a heavy combat load thru the bush. Ain't fun! The FAL and the M14 are great rifles, but for most folks are a second and third shot pain. Ammo weighs a ton, and takes up a lot of space. Considering the well known fact that the vast majority of KIA's come in under 100 yards; there's little to be gained. Three hits from an M16 is equal to two hits from the 7.62 seven days a week. Never been a fan of 22 caliber combat, but have seen the results of 7.62 combat as well. The answer is somewhere in the middle. Perhaps 7mm or even 6.5mm. A .250 Savage with 100 grain bullets would be perfect. Legit 350 yard ballistics, and probably 50% harder hit at 300 yards. The other serious issue is the rapid second and third shot (one shot KIA's are not all that common). Pretty slow, and your getting four rounds down range with an M16. One hit, and he's toast. 

     Remember on the battlefield 85% of KIA's are from arty. 10% are from air strikes. Guess who gets the next four percent? Disease and accidents get about one percent. Maybe the Germans had the right idea with bolt action rifles or even semi autos! Makes you shot a lot better, as round one better count!

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...