Quantcast

The Army's new Squad Automatic Rifle will be Chambered in .270 Win. ...ish.

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Garandimal, Feb 1, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Garandimal

    Garandimal Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    Lee of Death Valley, ...where Tigers feed.
    Supposedly, the new 6.8mm is an “ultra high velocity” armor piercing round developed through the ARL, which is designed to defeat current body armor to 1,200 meters.

    The Rifle is also to be equipped w/ an optic that includes a range-finder/WX station/ballistic calculator.

    Think they are serious about the long range capabilities of this system.




    GR
     
  2. Coal Dragger

    Coal Dragger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    Location:
    Black Hills, SD
    No need to. Big Army goes through this idiocy every decade or so when some career officer in procurement gets this notion that the key to his next promotion, or golden parachute into the defense industry lies in a new weapon system. The procurement process is so broken that it’s nearly impossible to make anything happen, and the big brass quickly see some other shiny new high tech weapon system and move on to the next procurement debacle.

    Adopting a new cartridge and weapon into inventory will see huge hurdles and pushback from the logistics side of the Army, as well as most commands who don’t want to deal with it. Training Joe on a new weapon eats into an already packed training schedule, and that’s not going to be a priority.

    So yeah, I’ll bet you $20 that this never makes it past rumors.
     
    alsaqr likes this.
  3. Coal Dragger

    Coal Dragger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    Location:
    Black Hills, SD
    I’ll just leave this here for any interested parties to listen to. Pretty good discussion about 5.56mm vs interim alternatives, 7.62mm ETC. Sone of these dudes have been there and done that, more combat experience than me for sure but mine mirror theirs in 5.56mm effectiveness. There’s some salty language, so be forewarned. Pretty good idea of where this conversation goes at about 8:10 or so mark.

     
    FL-NC likes this.
  4. jmorris

    jmorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    11,895
    The M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW) is 5.56.
     
  5. sarduy

    sarduy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2007
    Messages:
    2,536
    Location:
    United States of America
    Get a 556 case and do the same thing as they did to the 300 blk but in 7mm and call it the 7mm BLK with a 100/110gr bullet and call it a day.
     
  6. Coal Dragger

    Coal Dragger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    Location:
    Black Hills, SD
    I have an even better idea:

    Big Army and Fleet Marine Force need to pull their heads out of their buttocks at the division levels, and actually invest in good training.

    Stop worrying about hardware solutions to software problems looking for some magic carbine or cartridge that will not solve the issue of soldier and Marines not being able to put rounds on target.

    Putting rounds on target is what kills bad guys, and no amount of incremental cartridge "improvements" is going to fundamentally solve the marksmanship training issue.

    So here's my solution:

    Stop messing around with interim cartridge solutions, until polymer cased telescoped cartridges that weigh less than 5.56mm and offer reliability and lethality improvements are a thing.

    In the meantime drop all the drunk driving, sexual harassment, drug awareness classes and endless powerpoint crap that wastes 85% of a grunt's training time, and put them out on the range learning to shoot their individual and crew served weapons. Not dumbed down KD or pop up ranges either, but real training at running their guns and putting hits on dirt-bags. Up the ammo budget, make sure the crew served and individual weapons are in good shape and get the boys to the range on the regular.

    At the division level on down make it mandatory for career advancement of officers and staff NCO's that their troops can, at a moments notice pass a set of shooting standards after a training cycle or kiss their career good bye. Then actually randomly test at the company level. Put the fear of God into infantry O3's and E8's that if their boys can't shoot proficiently, they're done being O3's and E8's in the infantry. Same for battalion and regimental commanders, if their infantry companies are dorked up and can't pass standards for weapon proficiency they're done.

    This isn't even an unachievable goal, the money saved on trainman with what we've got vs pouring funds into procurement programs and other HR concocted training would pay for it.
     
    edwardware, qwert65, Gordon and 3 others like this.
  7. Catpop

    Catpop Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    1,796
    Location:
    Jack's Neck, NC
    Yeap, it’s not about shooting (Woodrow), it’s about hitting!
     
    FL-NC likes this.
  8. FL-NC

    FL-NC Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2016
    Messages:
    4,073
    Location:
    Fl panhandle
    The inability to achieve the desired results (lethality) is mostly a training issue, and distantly second an ammunition issue. The most "high performance units" world-wide enjoy a high level of success using individual weapons primarily in 5.56, and specialized weapons (many of their sniper systems and all light machine guns) in both 5.56 and 7.62. These units also extensively test other calibers, and have the assets and budgets to move away from one tool and adopt another with ease, if the change is warranted. Yet the 5.56 and 7.62 weapons remain in the ready rooms, standing by for the next mission. There is also the matter of the NATO standardization, and the benefits that come with this. Do other calibers like the 300 BLK, 5.7 x 28, and 4.6 x 30 have a footprint? Yes, but it is a small footprint, and they are used as "niche" weapons for specific tasks. If these guys can take care of business with the 5.56 and 7.62 NATO so efficiently, there is no reason our "general purpose" forces can't do the same, with the proper training. Most of what the SOF guys do, at least when it comes to putting lead on target, isn't some highly secret set of "ninja skills"- it is a matter of being really good at "the basics". Could the rest of our guys and gals putting in work benefit from the accuracy and terminal performance of improved ammunition? Certainly, and such ammo- which has been combat proven, already exists and is in use. And I get it that it is cost prohibitive to expend some of these rounds in such large quantities during most training for such a large force, especially with millions of rounds of the current standard ammo as well as older legacy ammo in warehouses. So it seems to me that given a hard and honest look at our training first, and then moving to an upgrade to what we are feeding into the guns (at least in theater) used by of our well-trained force second may be the answer.
     
  9. Texas10mm

    Texas10mm Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2018
    Messages:
    943

    When Seal Team Six was formed their ammo budget was more than the ammo budget for the ENTIRE Corps. There has to be a middle ground in there somewhere.
     
  10. Garandimal

    Garandimal Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    Lee of Death Valley, ...where Tigers feed.
    Keep your $20.

    The Army had a big enough problem w/ >300 meter targets, dressed in heavy leather jackets over wool sweaters and armed w/ AK's, to take out of arsenal and field M-14/M-1A's.

    This new system appears to allow accurate fire to defeat threats out to 1200 meters.




    GR
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2019
    SharpDog likes this.
  11. Garandimal

    Garandimal Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    Lee of Death Valley, ...where Tigers feed.
    As much as I agree w/ this philosophy and was saddened to see the Marine Corps migrate away from Marksmanship, that is not the issue of this RFP.

    The 5.56mm NATO was not defeating threats at >300 meters, and the 7.62 NATO was heavier than they wanted to haul.




    GR
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2019
    SharpDog likes this.
  12. Garandimal

    Garandimal Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    Lee of Death Valley, ...where Tigers feed.
    The Army's Next Rifle Will Be Epic (Or the iPhone of Lethality)

    This logic of the platform, Caggins said, was reflected in the unusual run-up to the January PPON. As Task & Purpose previously noted, the January notice followed an initial draft notice in November 2018. While several defense contractors previously received separate contracts under the NGSW program, those prototypes aren't for play; they're "totally intended to determine if industry could deliver from the performance and manufacturing standpoint," Caggins said.


    The January notice, on the other hand, is the real "no-kidding agreement," as Caggins put it — and one of three companies selected by the Army will ultimately end up cinching the contract to actually produce the weapon in all its glory.
    .
    .
    .

    Those capabilities, according to Arthur Fiorellini, NGSW team leader, include:

    • a specially-designed fire control system engineered to boost hit probability at extended ranges

    • the Advanced Small Arms Ballistic System, an onboard processor hardened against cyberattacks that miniaturizes the positioning system and range finder typically used on Army artillery pieces

    • a sensor suite designed to accommodate for changes in pressure and density using multi-laser rangefinder system to estimate wind speed and adjust rifle positioning accordingly.
    "The operator, as he lases the target, instantly gets an aim point and the system adjusts for ballistics instead of the operator trying to figure things out," Fiorellini told Task & Purpose. "A dot is displayed on the optic that the operator just puts on the target and everything else is taken care of ... the processor takes all of the information and boils it down.

    This is all to say nothing of the 6.8mm round required in the Army's PPON. According to Caggins, that rounds will integrate elements of the new 130 grain M80A1 Enhanced Performance Round developed by the Army to defeat 5.56mm-resistant body armor downrange. Indeed, the NGSW team is looking for a prototype that has a suppressor base in order to compensate for the intermediate round.
    .
    .
    .

    Sounds pretty serious to me.




    GR


     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2019
    SharpDog likes this.
  13. Coal Dragger

    Coal Dragger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    Location:
    Black Hills, SD
    Clickbait story.

    Wasn’t the HK Uber super plastic chassis gun supposed to be the next rifle? Then a smart 20mm airburst projectile.

    Then we were all getting the HK416..... and then....

    Big Army goes through this stupidity on a regular basis and it invariably goes nowhere.

    The linked article is an example of a proposal that has about zero chance of ever being adopted.
     
    Phaedrus/69 and Gordon like this.
  14. mpd61

    mpd61 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2018
    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    New England
    See my Avatar? I work at a DOD consortium Lab.
    Not Happening kids.........
     
    Gordon, Nature Boy, alsaqr and 2 others like this.
  15. Garandimal

    Garandimal Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    Lee of Death Valley, ...where Tigers feed.
    "The operator, as he lases the target, instantly gets an aim point and the system adjusts for ballistics instead of the operator trying to figure things out," Fiorellini told Task & Purpose. "A dot is displayed on the optic that the operator just puts on the target and everything else is taken care of ... the processor takes all of the information and boils it down.

    Out to 1200 meters?

    That's hitting.




    GR
     
  16. Coal Dragger

    Coal Dragger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    Location:
    Black Hills, SD
    Yeah, if the stars align and magic fairies appear to design and manufacture a sighting system that can do that, along with ammo consistent enough to be utilized, and a weapon mechanically accurate enough to take advantage of both. Then a powerful wizard, and his familiar will have to ensure that these magic weapons, sights, and ammo can be delivered on budget and on time.

    That will not happen. Instead the brass will continue to add ever more moronic requirements to the weapon system until it weighs 25lbs without ammo, costs $17,000 for the weapon, plus $25,000 for the sighting electro optics, and none of it will be reliable or durable in the field. Once it all finally gets green lit for procurement, after much data massaging and cherry picking, it will be 10 years late and $10 billion over budget.

    The ammo will then be so hideously expensive that no one will actually ever train with it ever. Joe’s will despise it, and whenever possible avoid using it. Assuming it’s not killed before launch when some sane General officer realizes it will cost more money than the Army can spare to outfit a single Regiment with it.

    Don’t believe I’m right? Look at any procurement program in the last 20 years and how stupid all of them have been. For example the atrocity that is the F-35, I guess the Army feels left out and wants an expensive, poorly designed, poorly conceived, poorly made boondoggle of their own! Why should the Navy, Chair Force, and Marines get to have all the fun burning freight trains full of tax payer money on garbage that doesn’t work? Big Army Generals need Defense industry contractor bribes and golden Parachutes too!
     
  17. kBob

    kBob Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,216
    Location:
    North Central Florida
    Ummm...OK I got bored and skimmed a lot so bear with me.

    A few things first yes the MG42 as used by the WWII German Army WAS a SAW it actually weighs less than the M60 or FNMAG (by whatever name). Like the M60 it works best when crew served and like the M60 one guy could and did run it alone at times with just the bipod and riflemen carrying spare ammo to be handed off when he needed it. It was issued one to a squad and German Infantry tactics had a dedicated fire support team with the MG42 and a dedicated maneuver team.....sort of like US squads of WWII were built around the single squad BAR

    Anyone around when the original US SAW project started? Wonder of wonders it was to use a special cartridge between the 5.56 and 7.62 called....wait for it....6mm SAW, basically a .243 in a case larger in diameter than 5.56 and small ere in diameter than the body of the 7.62.

    WHAT A CONCEPT!!

    of course the guns to use this wonder round had to be robust enough to deal with the larger than 5.56 round and able to stand the additional heat/pressure and.....it started to look like atleast on the gun the weigh savings programs then going on with the M60 might match the size and weight of the 6mm SAW.

    Mind you folks did jump on the 6mm band wagon for a number of reasons. There was even an article in Infantry magazine AFTER the 6mm Saw was dropped extolling the .243 Winchester (or was it 6mm Remington?) as the perfect Infantry cartridge suitable for both rifle and SAW with IIRC a FMJ 108 grain bullet (mind you this was just after the Infantry school attempt to lighten the M-14, which they did to the point it weighed what the M16A2 as originally adopted did with a folding stock, were working on Aluminum magazines, and decreased ammo weight by developing a 90 grain bullet, 3200 fps, load and were playing with aluminum cased ammo and it all got shot down).

    I hated the M16A1 as a Fireteam (so two to the squad) Automatic Rifle. At most the only Improvement to such rifles given to riflemen in that slot was a crappy "clothespin" bipod that never was at the right height or right angle and always in the way when mounted and always to slow to deploy from the belt pouch when needed. I always had much better luck in the short burst firing department when armed with the M-203/M16A1 combo and shot short burst better at range with that than with the regular rifle with bipod and sling fisted.

    One thing that amazed me with the M16A1 was that while us Little Green Army Men were getting lessons about a 450 meter Max effective range, we only shot to 300 meters and were only expected to get 50 percent hits to that range... and if you got enough hits closer to make your total 50 percent with only one 300 meter target hit you still were qualified. Meanwhile the Gyrenes got to have the magic rifle fairy sprinkle magic RBC on their rifles and got to shoot right on out to the max and were expected to have the same 50 percent hit ration at half again the range. Try as I might I could see no difference in their rifles and ammo and ours so it must have been magical Rifle Fairy wands that made the difference....or training and expectations ….HMMM,

    I would love to see the time, effort, and especially money going into project "hole in the backyard" programs like this spent on more ammo, more range time and gosh even freaking SIMULATORS where they can be used rather than putzing around with 40 year old ideas like they were new and improved.

    -kBob
     
  18. Garandimal

    Garandimal Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2017
    Messages:
    474
    Location:
    Lee of Death Valley, ...where Tigers feed.
    The Future... is Now.






    :D



    GR

     
    Gordon and mcb like this.
  19. Coal Dragger

    Coal Dragger Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,967
    Location:
    Black Hills, SD
    Heavy. Expensive. Fragile.
     
  20. mcb

    mcb Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Messages:
    1,294
    Location:
    North Alabama
    Heavy? We have never been afraid to overload the foot soldier before... The Trackingpoint ShadowTrax8 (338 LM version) is roughly the same weight (14.6lbs) as the currently fielded XM2010 and slightly lighter than a PSR Sniper systems.

    Expensive? The Army's current PSR sniper rifle system (Modular bolt action rifle with 338 LM, 300WM, 308 Win barrels) cost more than 20% more (~$21,000) than then ShawowTrax8 ($16,995) and that does not include another ~$3500 for the Schmidt & Bender PM II scope that is normally put on the PSR sytem. Even the XM2010 cost $9,999 (on sale at Euro-optics normally $11,500) and that again does not include optics. The price of the Shadow seems pretty reasonable in that light given it include the optics with all its capabilities. And nothing is too good for our boys.

    Fragile? The gun is as robust as the gun is. The actual tracking point system could be moved to an already proven rifle system (like the XM2010 or PSR) fairly easily but I doubt their rifle has any issues passing the rough handling mil-spec (TOP 3-2-045). As for the actual optics/electronics I would bet if that system is surviving a healthy diet of 338 LM recoil they have that system fairly robust already. If the Army got serious about adopting the system it would not take much to allow the system to pass the military rough handling spec. The hard part of the engineering is already done, the core critical tech is already developed and proven. Making it more robust is simply a matter of throwing more money at it. Same goes for weight reduction. The expense might go up a wee-bit in that case... :D
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
    Gordon likes this.
  21. someguy2800

    someguy2800 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2015
    Messages:
    4,436
    Location:
    Brainerd Minnesota
    Not arguing for or against it, but the US military’s joint strike fighter program is expected to cost 406 billion dollars. For that same money we could buy a tracking point system for every member of the US army, national guard, and army reserve, 22 times over.
     
    Gordon likes this.
  22. Texas10mm

    Texas10mm Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2018
    Messages:
    943
    But then they wouldn't have a kludged together mouse designed by a committee that's the elephant of the JSF.
     
    Gordon likes this.
  23. theotherwaldo

    theotherwaldo Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,668
    Location:
    In the Wild Horse Desert of Texas
    They've been trying to switch to a 7mm Mauser / .276 Petersen / 6.8mm Whatever since Teddy Roosevelt had such a hard time going up San Juan Hill against a foe that was outnumbered by about ten to one but was armed with a superior weapon.
    I still doubt that the military will overcome the existing institutional inertia... .
     
    mpd61, alsaqr and CoalTrain49 like this.
  24. CoalTrain49

    CoalTrain49 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2014
    Messages:
    3,717
    Location:
    Somewhere in WA.
    Ah the good old 7x57 still going strong. The 30-40 (30 gov't) dead and gone.

    Can someone explain to me the US military's fascination with the 30 caliber cartridge still in use. I would have thought that a 6.8 mm cartridge would have become obvious about 100 years ago.
     
  25. Mosin Bubba

    Mosin Bubba Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    Messages:
    976
    That's the interesting thing to me. With ancient propellants and a not overly sophisticated turn-of-the century understanding of ballistics, the Germans pretty much nailed a close to ideal spitzer rifle bullet on their first try.
     
    CoalTrain49 likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice