User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 10:14:36 AM EDT
[#1]
This whole mess is stupid. Dumb concept, dumb mentality, but it is funny to hear people try to make justifications for it. The "because it looks cool/it's next level/I'd totally buy one in a different caliber/it should be an SBR/it would totally make sense if the military used it in the way I think" (which is probably based on movies and video games).
It's as if some people haven't paid attention to any of the small arms debacles of the past century and are chomping at the bit to play stupid games again. You want to buy one as a civilian? That's swell. Knock yourself out and enjoy stroking yourself in the mirror with the slung up rifle and an empty mag because you can't get ammo. Or, even better, a mag full of ammo that doesn't offer the promised performance because the "real" stuff is vaporware. On the plus side, those bolts and barrels will actually be able to last a long time that way 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 10:20:46 AM EDT
[#2]
Muh m14 will never be replaced by no new fangled space junk poodle shooter….
The m16 was once looked down on, then it’s issues were resolved and it’s been great ever since. Will the xm5 work out? Time will tell. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 10:31:55 AM EDT
[#3]
Just like the XM8 project all over again, with more complexity and money.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 10:42:53 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Muh m14 will never be replaced by no new fangled space junk poodle shooter…. The m16 was once looked down on, then it’s issues were resolved and it’s been great ever since. Will the xm5 work out? Time will tell. Very different issues presented by M16 and XM5 adoption. We already know exactly what the downside is of going to ammo that is almost double the bulk and weight of 5.56. Also, the XM5 is basically a modernized M14 (they are both battle rifles), making this analogy even more suspect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 11:15:22 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s something like 500 pounds of 7.62x51mm ammunition. Nobody’s carrying that without a vehicle no matter the caliber. Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s something like 500 pounds of 7.62x51mm ammunition. Nobody’s carrying that without a vehicle no matter the caliber. A platoon can carry that, it's 25 pounds of ammunition per person. Using polymer cases it's under 18 pounds. Quoted: Remember that the .338 machine gun idea was only a matter of wanting to increase effective range without giving everyone a heavier gun and compromising close range rifle performance. If there’s no effective range deficiency in the first place, then it isn’t needed or desirable. This has clearly grown beyond its appropriate context and is off topic. Probably shouldn’t have mentioned it. If you want to increase range use a 6.8 TV or 6.5 Creedmoor M240. That way the ammunition actually gets lighter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 11:16:13 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That assumes the guns don’t have high magnification scopes. With the ability to see detail in the target area, you don’t need to shoot with limited awareness. Not how suppression works but OK... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 11:17:49 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My gut feel says this will be a failure and in <10 years we will be looking for a replacement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 11:19:56 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Even if it was a success, the government will be looking for a replacement. Need that campaign cash, and board positions. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: My gut feel says this will be a failure and in <10 years we will be looking for a replacement. Partly the case for sure. Another part of that - and you're right since it's exactly what happens and is endless - is pushing toward whatever may be next. I'd rather we have a proactive development process than a reactive one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 11:21:24 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Partly the case for sure. Another part of that - and you're right since it's exactly what happens and is endless - is pushing toward whatever may be next. I'd rather we have a proactive development process than a reactive one. Well, this nonsense is the result of a retroactive development process, so.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 11:23:53 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well, this nonsense is the result of a retroactive development process, so.... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Partly the case for sure. Another part of that - and you're right since it's exactly what happens and is endless - is pushing toward whatever may be next. I'd rather we have a proactive development process than a reactive one. Well, this nonsense is the result of a retroactive development process, so.... Also very true. Reaction to a totally nonexistent threat nonetheless. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 1:17:14 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A platoon can carry that, it's 25 pounds of ammunition per person. Using polymer cases it's under 18 pounds. If you want to increase range use a 6.8 TV or 6.5 Creedmoor M240. That way the ammunition actually gets lighter. That’s reasonable. The M240 itself is heavy (heavier than that MG-338 by itself) but there’s no reason the cartridge couldn’t be adapted to a lighter gun like a KAC AMG or the Sig XM250. The .277 fury is a problem but the XM250 gun looks OK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 1:35:43 PM EDT
[#12]
Lighter machineguns probably have a shorter service life. That’s a good trade for light infantry but a poor trade in a vehicle mounted application. One of several reasons that the GPMG concept is dead.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 2:47:14 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lighter machineguns probably have a shorter service life. That’s a good trade for light infantry but a poor trade in a vehicle mounted application. One of several reasons that the GPMG concept is dead. There hasn't been a new machine gun in modern inventories in like 40 years. they make the old machine guns lighter and lighter but a certain point, technology has evolved. the last machine guns the military adopted were adopted in the 70s and one was designed in the 50s. even socoms mk46 and mk48 machine guns are just shorter barreled lighter variants of those same guns. we've never seen a long term test of a light weight machine gun, either a new LMG or a GPMG |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 2:52:28 PM EDT
[#14]
Stamped is lightweight btw.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 2:55:14 PM EDT
[#15]
Well, that will certainly fix all of our recurring problems with poor marksmanship.
 Joe can barely manage to qualify with the existing M4 series weapons, so why are we coming up with a new, improved and more expensive weapon for Joe to shoot a 14/40 with? That money would have been more usefully spent if it had supported unit-level marksmanship activity, more opportunities for live fire training and competition. The weapons don't make a difference if the shooters can't shoot. This is just another big money boondoggle for some retired senior leaders and their various hangers-on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 2:58:01 PM EDT
[#16]
lol
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:00:39 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: it seems Sig is really really good at govt lobbying. incredibly good. no other mfr even comes close to Sig's govt marketing & lobbying corp. They are slick. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I wonder how much these payoffs are. They must be YUGE it seems Sig is really really good at govt lobbying. incredibly good. no other mfr even comes close to Sig's govt marketing & lobbying corp. They are slick. It's not marketing and lobbying. It's being willing to fund R&D on a program every 8 months when BigGov changes their mind about what they want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:06:16 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote History$4 a round? uggh, I will be poor as always
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:08:49 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I feel like this isn't going to go anywhere and will die before it gets off the ground. It's a cool concept, but the rifle is massive and heavy, and NATO and our Allie's likely won't follow us into this change. I bet it'll be gone in 10 years max A cartridge like the 224 Valkyrie necked up to 6mm would be interesting as a 556 replacement, and with 80-90gr bullets the armor penetration should be good, while keeping weight and cost down |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:22:11 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: why bother when 6mm ARC is available and has pretty fucking good performance? Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:25:32 PM EDT
[#21]
Videos of that thing show some serious recoil for even big guys who know what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:31:58 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:36:57 PM EDT
[#23]
I just want the optic, that's it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:42:34 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg All of this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:43:44 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Videos of that thing show some serious recoil for even big guys who know what they are doing. Physics be no liar. Recoil; 6.8/.277 Fury SIG: 135 @ 3000 fps, 9 lb rifle = 15.7 ft lbs. 7.62 NATO (e.g M14) : 147 @ 2800 fps, 9 lb rifle = 14.1 ft lbs. .30'06 (e.g, M1 Garand): 150 @ 2800 fps, 9.5 lb rifle = 14.3 ft lbs. This is a Battle Rifle, with all the "luggage" (+ and -) that brings along with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:45:09 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: why bother when 6mm ARC is available and has pretty fucking good performance? Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg Can you get a first round hit at 1km with this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:54:16 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can you get a first round hit at 1km with this? With a typical frag radius of around 20m for a 60mm mortar shell... yeah, you probably can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:55:05 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: why bother when 6mm ARC is available and has pretty fucking good performance? Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg Yep. Mortars should be a weapon soldiers qualify on and not an MOS. Every unit should have them. More grenade launchers and smart rounds, light weight mortars, modernized RPGs etc would be more effective and cheaper. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:55:08 PM EDT
[#29]
Can you expect a first round hit with anything in the squad?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:57:29 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That’s reasonable. The M240 itself is heavy (heavier than that MG-338 by itself) but there’s no reason the cartridge couldn’t be adapted to a lighter gun like a KAC AMG or the Sig XM250. The .277 fury is a problem but the XM250 gun looks OK. The M240 on a diet can get down to 20 pounds, that's 4 pounds lighter than the GD 338. The KAC and Sig probably won't hold up to the abuse that a fire support machinegun gets, they are more like assault guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:58:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Joe can barely manage to qualify with the existing M4 series weapons, so why are we coming up with a new, improved and more expensive weapon for Joe to shoot a 14/40 with? That money would have been more usefully spent if it had supported unit-level marksmanship activity, more opportunities for live fire training and competition. The weapons don't make a difference if the shooters can't shoot. This is just another big money boondoggle for some retired senior leaders and their various hangers-on. This. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 3:59:44 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. Mortars should be a weapon soldiers qualify on and not an MOS. Every unit should have them. More grenade launchers and smart rounds, light weight mortars, modernized RPGs etc would be more effective and cheaper. Oh hell, since we're going in on 84mm Carl G, I want to leverage the fuck out of that round too. If you can make a man-portable 15-pound gun, making a 200-pound wheeled or turret-mounted gun with a longer barrel and less venting should be pretty easy... and give you better range and sustained fire capability. Bring back the pack howitzer concept! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:02:10 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Can you expect a first round hit with anything in the squad? With a magnum uber rifle and a range finding uber scope, I expect good things.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:02:46 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg I get your point, but the Army hasn't invested in FMJ in over 40 years. We have moved way beyond FMJ in terms of bullet performance. But why not get both? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:03:09 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yep. Mortars should be a weapon soldiers qualify on and not an MOS. Every unit should have them. More grenade launchers and smart rounds, light weight mortars, modernized RPGs etc would be more effective and cheaper. This. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:04:50 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I get your point, but the Army hasn't invested in FMJ in over 40 years. We have moved way beyond FMJ in terms of bullet performance. Do you even creative license, bro? I'm thinking bumper sticker, and you're coming at me with doctoral dissertation shit. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:05:29 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. True, but there's a lot of room for improvement in traditional cartridges. -30% weight with polymer cases. +50-100% performance with higher psi. The army is squandering it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:10:25 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: True, but there's a lot of room for improvement in traditional cartridges. -30% weight with polymer cases. +50-100% performance with higher psi. The army is squandering it. There is promise is polymer cases... but that also kinda starts to leave the realm of "traditional cartridges", so I'll stand by my point. As for higher operating pressures... I'm still highly dubious of any real-world useful advantage they are going to provide. Ballistic bench racing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:10:56 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: True, but there's a lot of room for improvement in traditional cartridges. -30% weight with polymer cases. +50-100% performance with higher psi. The army is squandering it. Plastic cases are backwards compatible, we could be using them now for light infantry and aerial applications. It is more expensive. We can afford it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:13:12 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Plastic cases are backwards compatible, we could be using them now for light infantry and aerial applications. It is more expensive. We can afford it. Back when I was "in the biz" 15 years or so ago, the biggest problem with the polymer case was shit precision because of inconsistent bullet crimp. It's pretty cool if they've solved that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:20:36 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There is promise is polymer cases... but that also kinda starts to leave the realm of "traditional cartridges", so I'll stand by my point. As for higher operating pressures... I'm still highly dubious of any real-world useful advantage they are going to provide. Ballistic bench racing. The advantage is volume and mass. A M855A1 clone with half the size and weight of a 556 cartridge, so you can have 50 straightwalled rounds in a thinner AR mag or 300 rounds in a SAW drum, or can fit 6 30-rnd stick mags of 5.7 size cartridges in the space of 3 AR mags. Reducing powder mass also reduces heat & recoil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:25:11 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not how suppression works but OK... If you just want volume, why not just use an improved 5.56mm machine gun? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:26:55 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Why bother when 5.56 works really fucking well? If we adopt a 5.56 replacement that still uses nitrocellulose propellant and any sort of "cartridge case/bullet" paradigm, we're being fucking stupid. The ONLY "traditional" cartridge worth looking at is the .338NM for MG use, and even that is a pretty limited niche. You want greater combat effectiveness (through hardware not software), invest in HE, not FMJ. https://www.popularairsoft.com/sites/default/files/import_files/norskusa_imortar.jpg I think you’d like the French LGI grenade projector |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 4:31:58 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you just want volume, why not just use an improved 5.56mm machine gun? I've seen very experienced people suggest just that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 5:00:31 PM EDT
[#45]
Serious question-
How is this better than a modern updated version of the M-4 using 855A1? Exactly what capability gap is it filling? On the MG side, how is it superior to the current para saw and what does it do better? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 5:06:06 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Serious question- How is this better than a modern updated version of the M-4 using 855A1? Exactly what capability gap is it filling? On the MG side, how is it superior to the current para saw and what does it do better? It's a 6.5 creed with worse BC but better MV, stuffed into a DMR and lightweight beltfed. Milley fulfilled the boomer battle-rifle dream. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 5:09:30 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Serious question- How is this better than a modern updated version of the M-4 using 855A1? Exactly what capability gap is it filling? On the MG side, how is it superior to the current para saw and what does it do better? The new round? The 6.5 has a lot more energy than 5.56. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 5:11:34 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's a 6.5 creed with worse BC but better MV, stuffed into a DMR and lightweight beltfed. Milley fulfilled the boomer battle-rifle dream. Your bOoMeRs were carrying the M16. And liked it better than the M14. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 5:12:15 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Serious question- How is this better than a modern updated version of the M-4 using 855A1? Exactly what capability gap is it filling? On the MG side, how is it superior to the current para saw and what does it do better? Turns cover into concealment. This will penetrate targets at several hundred meters that M855A1 will not penetrate at the muzzle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2022 5:12:50 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your bOoMeRs were carrying the M16. They carried it but a lot of people wanted a bigger round in the form of a battle rifle. From Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
