Does "improve" include retrofitting with HK416 uppers?
Marines Won't Follow Army's Lead on new Carbine
November 17, 2011 Military.com | Matthew Cox
http://www.military.com/news/article...w-carbine.html
The Marine Corps will not follow the Army if it selects a replacement for its M4 carbine but instead will settle on improving its fleet of M16A4s and M4s, acquisition officials told lawmakers Wednesday.
South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson asked about the Corps’ carbine plans at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces.
“Does the Marine Corps plan to procure a new carbine to replace the M4 or M16 and what is the Marine Corps’s current and future strategy for a new small arms weapon?” asked Wilson, whose district includes gun-maker FN Manufacturing LLC, a contender in the Army’s improved carbine competition.
In June, the Army invited vendors to submit proposals for off-the-shelf carbines that could replace the M4, made by Colt Defense LLC. Senior Army leaders first announced a plan to hold a competition for a new carbine in November 2008, in the face of congressional scrutiny over the service’s devotion to the M4 in spite of its shortcomings.
The Marines, however, have decided they have no plans to spend money on a new individual weapon.
“There is no replacement for the [M4] carbine,” said Brig. Gen. Daniel O'Donohue, director of the Capabilities Development Directorate, Combat Development and Integration for the Marine Corps.
“We have looked hard at our infantry weapons, and there are several aspects of it -- How do you train the Marine? What ammunition do you use? And the weapon itself,” O’Donohue said. “We believe the most cost-proficient means of meeting our profile is a product improvement to the M16A4.”
The M4 carbine is a shortened version of the M16 family, but uses the same operating system -- a direct gas tube system, which cycles the weapon using the gas created inside the barrel when a bullet is fired. The system blows hot gases mixed with carbon residue into the firing mechanism, drying up lubrication and causing extreme wear and tear on internal parts.
Many modern carbines rely on a piston-style gas system, which uses the weapon’s gas to push a piston rod to cycle the weapon —instead of blowing it directly through the receiver.
The Marine Corps’ new M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle is a version of the piston-driven Heckler and Koch 416 -- one of three piston guns that outperformed the M4 in a November 2007 Army reliability test.
Marine officials did say they have considered the possibility of the M27 as a future individual weapon, but for now are satisfied with making improvements to current weapons.
Marine infantry squads will replace their M249 light machine gun with the highly accurate M27 beginning February 2012, said Brig. Gen. Frank Kelley, commander Marine Corps Systems Command.
Earlier this year, the Corps fielded more than 450 M27s to five infantry battalions headed for Afghanistan.
“A few have already fielded in Afghanistan in a limited quantity to get our Marines’ assessment, and it’s performing exceptionally well,” Kelly said, adding that the Marines should finish fielding more than 4,000 M27s in April 2013.
Last edited by JRT; 19 Nov 11, at 17:49.
.
.
.
I don't think it has to necessarily be HK416 upper receivers. I believe Colt has it's own line of upper receivers with the same gas piston operation and is possibly gonna sell it for cheaper if the USMC or the entire military for that matter feels like upgrading a good number of their M4s and M16s.
But will the IAR have the same capability of suppression as the M249? It's certainly an advantage to be able to use regular STATNAG mags in a pinch but will C-Mags or other >30 capacity mags be issued with the rifle to provide more sustained fire? Granted the Corps operates with more precision and have bigger squads than the Army.
"Draft beer, not people."
IAR does not seems to be bought to replace M249,but a way to bypass bureacracy in order to put their hands on HK.
Those who know don't speak
That is the thing that had been bugging me. It seems that the USMC wanted to bring the AR man back.Originally Posted by Red Team
It is meant to replace M249, albeit not completely. A few LAV battalions had been operating with IAR instead of M249 as their squad automatic weapon for some time now.
All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
-Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.
Not many guys have heard of the Shrike. I am familiar with it because it caused an enormous amount of grief due to delays in its manufacture... the company took deposits, then sat on them for nearly 10 years before the company finally delivered the product.
What it is - a belt fed 5.56 upper for the standard AR/M-16 lower. It creates probably the lightest belt-fed 5.56mm weapon ever made. Guys that have one say the system works, and works well, although it is a bit choppy and harsh due to the light weight. They are fed using standard SAW boxes. No magazine-fed automatic weapon can compete with a belt-fed when laying down large volumes of fire.
I like the notion - I know Ares defense has pitched it to the military, with no bites yet.
Hows about one of these Chogy.
http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/File:Rooster_11.jpg
Fortitude.....The strength to persist...The courage to endure.
When I was a kid, I had one of those "Gun Digest" annuals, and one of the articles discussed Dr. Gatling and his amazing invention. The article stated that a standard Colt Gatling Gun was fitted with an inline electric motor circa 1900, and they achieved 6,000 RPM with reliability... exactly the same ROF as a modern M-61 cannon on high. I've always loved them. But the ammo... an F-15 has a huge drum for the shells, contains 900+ rounds, and it's all gone in 9 seconds. The good news is that a one second burst can shred any aerial target.Hows about one of these Chogy.
File:Rooster 11.jpg - imfdb :. guns in movies :. movie guns :. the internet movie firearms database
They have made a 5.56mm gatling/mini-gun and tested it, and it worked fine. Obviously it would be for vehicle or pintle use only. The sustained recoil would make it uncontrollable. IIRC the stock 7.62mm mini-gun creates something like 100+ lb rearward force. The thing is like a rocket engine.
There is such a thing as too high a ROF, I guess. One of the things that made the WW1 Maxims so effective was their ability to chug-chug-chug along at 400 RPM for long periods of time. They simply denied whole areas with interlocking fire. Take the ROF up and you get ammo and overheat problems.
M249 fires from open bolt.Not many guys have heard of the Shrike. I am familiar with it because it caused an enormous amount of grief due to delays in its manufacture... the company took deposits, then sat on them for nearly 10 years before the company finally delivered the product.
What it is - a belt fed 5.56 upper for the standard AR/M-16 lower. It creates probably the lightest belt-fed 5.56mm weapon ever made. Guys that have one say the system works, and works well, although it is a bit choppy and harsh due to the light weight. They are fed using standard SAW boxes. No magazine-fed automatic weapon can compete with a belt-fed when laying down large volumes of fire.
I like the notion - I know Ares defense has pitched it to the military, with no bites yet.
M27 fires from closed or open bolt on first shot, and fires from open bolt on follow on shots.
ARES-16 fires from closed bolt in all modes of operation, so its going to heat up more quickly than either M249 or M27, and a chambered round could sink a lot of that heat from the chamber surface and bolt face.
From their website (at this link), "In all present configurations, the ARES-16 AMG™ weapons are gas-piston operated, select-fire from a closed bolt..."
.
.
.
@Chogy"They have made a 5.56mm gatling/mini-gun and tested it, and it worked fine. Obviously it would be for vehicle or pintle use only. The sustained recoil would make it uncontrollable."
The Escapist : News : US Army Tests Super Strong Exoskeleton
Perhaps if exoskeleton technology is further developed we could see man portable miniguns, maybe powered armor to go with it? A bit off topic but interesting at the very least.
"Draft beer, not people."
Why pay a premium for an HK product when we can get the same thing at much lower cost with domestic designs?
Piston AR uppers aren't exactly new. There are literally dozens of models on the market already. I'm sure we can find one that works just as well as an HK but without the huge price premium.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
What's wrong with Colt's gas piston offerings? Colt makes good guns and has the experience of mass producing rifles. It seems wise to buy from a known and proven company and at the same time keep it in business.
All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
-Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.
Like so?
All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
-Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.
Colt is nothing special anymore, and not to offend anyone, I will probably never have another. The last 1911 I bought of thiers about three years ago was bad out of box. They did send me a new hammer without question, but I traded it off anyway. There many wayyyy better AR style offerings out there. Having a Colt AR is like having a pair of Nike tennis shoes, your just paying for the name and colt prices are ridiculous.
from wiki;
The 1990s brought the end of Cold War, which resulted in a large down turn for the entire defense industry. Colt was hit by this downturn, though it would be made worse later in the 1990s by a boycott by the shooting public in America. In 1994, the assets of Colt were purchased by Zilkha & Co, a financial group owned by Donald Zilkha. It was speculated that Zilkha's financial backing of the company enabled Colt to begin winning back military contracts. In fact during the time period it won only one contract, the M4 carbine. However, the U.S. Military had been purchasing Colt Carbines for the past 30 years (See Colt Commando). During a 1998 Washington Post interview, CEO Ron Stewart stated that he would favor a federal permit system with training and testing for gun ownership. This led to a massive grass-roots boycott of Colt's products by gun stores and US gun owners.[41]
Zilkha replaced Stewart with Steven Sliwa and focused the remainder of Colt's handgun design efforts into "smart guns," a concept favored politically, but that had little interest or support among handgun owners or Police Departments. This research never produced any meaningful results due to the limited technology at the time.[41] Colt announced the termination of its production of double action revolvers in October 1999 The boycott of Colt gradually faded out after William M. Keys, a retired U.S. Marine Lt. General, took the helm of the company in 2002. Keys salvaged Colt's reputation and brought Colt from the brink of bankruptcy to an international leader in Defense production.[41] In 2010 Gerald R. Dinkel replaced Keys as CEO, while Keys remained on the Board of Directors for Colt Defense.[42]
Colt has to compete with other companies that make M1911-style pistols such as Kimber and AR-15 rifles such as Bushmaster. Bushmaster has subsequently overtaken Colt in the number of AR-15s sold on the civilian market. Colt suffered a legal defeat in court when it sued Bushmaster for trademark infringement claiming that "M4" was a trademark that it owned. The judge ruled that since the term M4 is a generic designation that Colt does not specifically own, Colt had to pay monetary reimbursement to Bushmaster to recoup Bushmaster's legal fees. The M4 designation itself comes from the U.S. military designation system, whose terms are in the public domain.[34]
Colt has entered in several US contracts with mixed results. For example, Colt had an entry in the Advanced Combat Rifle (ACR) program of the 1980s, but along with other contestants failed to replace the M16A2. Colt and many other makers entered the US trials for a new pistol in the 1980s, though the Beretta entry would win and become the M9 Pistol. The Colt OHWS handgun was beaten by H&K for what became the MK23 SOCOM, it was lighter than the H&K entry but lost in performance. Colt did not get to compete for the XM8 since it was not an open competition. Colt is a likely entrant in any competition for a new US service rifle. Current M16 rifles have been made primarily by FN USA since 1988. However, Colt remains the sole source for M4 carbines for the US military. Under their license agreement with Colt, the US military could not legally award second-source production contracts for the M4 until July 1, 2009.[34]
What's the price of Colt carbines per unit in a government contract? And what are the production volumes of Colt's competitors?
Edit
I am raising those points because manufacturers who are able to produce quality weapons in small quantities often fail at producing mass quantity of arms because their quality control is overwhelmed by the number of orders the military put on them (apparently that was what happened with Knights Armament's DMRs). Also, it has not been demonstrated if other rifle manufacturers could actually compete with Colt in terms of price tag per carbine. Colt sells a carbine w/ BUIS & ARS to DoD at 1,200 USD (I just checked). Daniel Defense's comparable offering costs 1,500.
Last edited by Triple C; 23 Nov 11, at 03:24.
All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
-Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
7Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Share this thread with friends: