New American Rifle and cartridge for Army?

[norcan]

What does this mean you think?

A new NATO round again? Or a special American project that everybody has to copy in a few years time?
And instead of using Scandi/Euro 6,5mm or 7mm... they went for 6,8mm or .270

A bit unsure if its 6.8SPC or a new 6.8 round... I see 6.8x51 mentioned several places.

Army awards Next Generation Squad Weapon contract

The U.S. Army announced the award of a 10-year firm-fixed-price follow-on production contract to for the manufacture and delivery of the NGSW.

www.army.mil

 

[User00040]

This project has been in the pipeline for years, and the concept (a general purpose round that has more reach than 5.56x45) will probably be outdated by the time it hits general issue.

The rifles look HEAVY which implies a reliance on mechanised or airborne (probably helicopter) deployment of infantry.

Would think there would be lessons learnt after the time in the sandbox showing over-encumbered infantry is not a good thing especially when mountainous terrain comes into play.

The one true step forward in terms of infantry small arms was the Armalite AR15 and .223 Remington round to go with it, shame Uncle Sam had to intervene to save costs and get so many GI's killed in Vietnam (unlike the Brits buying the unmolested AR15 and .223 for use in Borneo and Malaya before the M16 became general issue).

The AR15 was a lightweight rifle which shot an extremely lethal round, proven by the fact that the Soviets came out with 5.45x39 in response (also an impressive round for military use).

However, the M16 has gone through a lot of changes, and I believe the M4 Carbine is now the general issue weapon in the US Armed Forces. It's become a heavier platform over the years even though the barrel lengths have gotten shorter. An interesting development was the MK12 Mod 0 SPR, a 5.56 designated marksman's rifle which was not general issue outside of SOCOM.

I suspect the 6ARC that Hornady developed with Department of Defense input (.308 ballistics which fits in an AR15 platform) will make the 6.8 SPC stillborn. I believe 6.5 Creedmoor is already being issued within the US Armed Forces, with M110 rifles being converted to use it.

More info on 6ARC here:

The US Army procurement system is bogged down by bureaucracy, by the time they get their act together, the product will either be so impractical to meet all the unrealistic parameters set out, or too expensive, or too heavy etc... look at the M24 rifle, long action Rem 700 for a .308, outdated optic (fixed 10x Leupold Mk4), ridiculously expensive due to unnecessary inclusion of target style iron sights and slow to reload due to a hinged floorplate

On the other hand, the USMC and their M40 program (pretty much a custom built rifle) evolved as they spent the time and money making it better.

I'm sure @MarinePMI will be able to give you the true picture, unlike my armchair observations typed above.

 

[I. Farticus]

Looks like a polymer & alloy chassis to keep the weight down. It'll be all the FIBUA cr*p hanging off the rails and ammo that whacks the weight up. Any idea how much more 20 rounds of 6.8mm weighs than 5.56?

 

[MarinePMI]

My humble opinion is: The Army could F up a wet dream, never mind what they have, and will, do when trying to field the "NextGen" Squad weapon. (eyeroll)

These type of "programs" have been going on for the last 20+ years, never delivering anything beyond "test articles". Telescoping ammo, caseless ammo, 6.8mm, 6.5mm, 6mm...an endless list of concepts that espouse technical merits, while avoiding the rather large elephant in the room; the sheer amount of logistical headaches involved in supporting 3 different types of ammo down the Company (and sometimes) platoon level. And the associated costs that go with that.

If I had to guess, it'll be one of the smaller services (USMC, USAF, SOCOM, Space Force, etc.) that adopts a new rifle/round, long before it ever becomes a standard across DoD. It won't be the Army. Case in point, the M-16 was adopted by the USAF before Big Green (US Army) could get off it's collective a$$ to field an updated rifle/ammo. The Army is a bureaucracy of Officers, all trying to get promoted, all while elbowing others away from the trough that they feed from. They (the vast majority) could give two sh#ts less about the quality or suitability of the rifle that the common soldier carries; especially if it does nothing to get them promoted, or nominated for some type of commendation medal.

The USMC isn't much better when it comes to procurement, though occasionally a blind pig does find an acorn. In this case, the USMC (as I understand it) has begun to depart from their M-40x program because someone finally woke up and looked at current manufacturing capabilities, and started crunching numbers. What they found was that the cost of building an M-40Ax was significantly more expensive, and no more accurate than many commercially made rifles. As such, they have begun purchasing sniper rifles as systems (for O&M reasons), and are retiring the older M700 M-40Ax systems (if they haven't retired them all already).

A lot of what will drive the next caliber selection will be largely dependent on two things:

1. Time -- We need to have a threat long enough, for the collective idiots in military procurement to connect their heads to their butts, and go through the lengthy process of downselecting, awarding/purchasing, and fielding of both the weapons and the ammunition (logistically).

2. Adversary -- The adversary needs to be a constant, and their battlefield equipment needs to be constant as well. Shooting middle eastern terrorist insurgents in an insurgency, is a far cry from going after a near peer adversary that carries Lvl 4 body armor and high quality optics/aiming technology.

Until those two things happen, these "announcements" are just that; statements that have little lasting effect other than to garner someone a promotion for a "successful acquisition" of some program or another. Not whether the program is actually successful or not. And we will continue to see these awards because of that. As such, I have no confidence they will field anything new in large numbers any time in the near (or distant) future. People will have to start dying before expediency and focused thought are brought to bear. And that requires pain. Political pain.

Sorry to sound so negative, but I've been in the Defense contracting world now for many, many years. It is the epitome of a self licking ice cream cone. Nothing changes until outside, real world events, force them to change.

/end rant

 

[bowji john]

The Army is a bureaucracy of Officers, all trying to get promoted, all while elbowing others away from the trough that they feed from. They (the vast majority) could give two sh#ts less about the quality or suitability of the rifle that the common soldier carries; especially if it does nothing to get them promoted, or nominated for some type of commendation medal.

/end rant

Nailed it !!

No different in any man's peace time army

You get a different class of officer in a war - in war they generally ''warrant their warrant'

In peace time they are largely office middle managers in a pretty outfit

I've had the privilege of serving under some superb individuals .....

And suffered under some utter pond life

 

[bfltd0]

USD 20,000,000 does not buy many of these new 6.8mm weapons, especially when you factor in the accessories, spares and contractor support. The funding to completely replace the M16/M4 series of weapons would have a couple of extra noughts on it as a minimum. The XM designation is, I believe, for Experimental. Think about the CAR-15 which was designated in the military as XM177E1 and XM177E2 before it was adopted in real numbers.

Interesting to note that our Royal Marines decided to adopt the Colt L119A1/A2 (still in 5.56mm) to move away from the "green army" and be more in line with the SF community. However, line infantry/corps can expect to use the L85A3 for the foreseeable future.

So I predict that unless or until the US moves en masse to a 6.8mm new weapon system as a replacement for the AR series, we will see no change in the UK forces weapons. And there is no real push to do that at the moment, as MarinePMI says.

So if Putin moves over a NATO border and it all kicks off for real, it is far too late to re-equip the entire Armed Forces.

The UK procurement guys earned their crust in 2003 when we moved into Iraq. Apparently, there were a number of phone calls to FN asking how many Minimis were available RIGHT NOW and we bought them all on a UOR budget (Urgent Operational Requirement).

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Bureaucracy of Officers

Nailed the collective noun!

 

[simgre]

The cartridge is the .277 Sig Fury, designated the 6.8x51. It has a brass case with a steel case head due to the operating pressure of 80000psi!!!! The US gun press has been raving about it for some time.

I had a 6.8SPC. It was in a Remington LTR. It was an awful cartridge!! Saddler on here talked me into it. Eventually I sold it. Some dealer bought it, put a new barrel on it and chambered it for .224 Valkyrie and charged five grand for it!

 

[norcan]

Seeing how the war is fought in Ukraine, I see no use for these new rifles and calibers...
The point was to being able to penetrate body armor...
Drones and using guided 155mm artillery or 120mm mortar shells are the way forward.

Small arms used for suppressing fire, while drone operator calls in strike.
155mm with 50km range and 120mm with 10km range, and hits within 1m of target... body armor doesn't work against that.

 

[saddler]

The cartridge is the .277 Sig Fury, designated the 6.8x51. It has a brass case with a steel case head due to the operating pressure of 80000psi!!!! The US gun press has been raving about it for some time.

I had a 6.8SPC. It was in a Remington LTR. It was an awful cartridge!! Saddler on here talked me into it. Eventually I sold it. Some dealer bought it, put a new barrel on it and chambered it for .224 Valkyrie and charged five grand for it!

Piffle...ya couldn't handle the awesomeness of it after that 233 Browning showed you your real potential.

 

[jimmer.13]

Seeing how the war is fought in Ukraine, I see no use for these new rifles and calibers...
The point was to being able to penetrate body armor...
Drones and using guided 155mm artillery or 120mm mortar shells are the way forward.

Small arms used for suppressing fire, while drone operator calls in strike.
155mm with 50km range and 120mm with 10km range, and hits within 1m of target... body armor doesn't work against that.

Assault,suppress, reserve.

Drones,air and artillery only assist in taking the objective.
Infantrymen and armour secure and hold it.
History shows a dug in infantryman is a worth while adversary and as long as he has good combat service and support, all the technology in the world including thermobaric and nuclear will struggle to dig him and the last man out.