“I’m very positive in my outlook that the Army is going to see a new carbine,”

The rifle they NEED to purchase isn't even on the list...the H&K 416 & 417 are far superior to everything on that list to replace the M-16/M4,
you can drop 'em in the mud/water/sand and then pick 'em up and start firing like an AK47!!
 
Last edited:
And I guess I'd argue they don't NEED to buy anything that isn't a major leap forward. Replacing the current carbine with only a marginally improved variant, but that will still require changes in training and logistics cycles, is wrongheaded, short-sighted, and a huge waste of money in my opinion. None of the rifles being discussed are in any way revolutionary, and that's the only real reason to do a wholesale upgrade, at least in my opinion. Otherwise you're spending major bucks for, at best, moderate improvement.
 
So, "New, Advanced Weaponry" means punishing recoil and single shot shotguns?

The M26 modular shotgun. The Army plans to buy 35,000 M26s. The first made their way to units late last year ....

The shotgun weighs half as much as the Mossbergs soldiers now carry .....

The 12-gauge is single-shot, which means less cleaning and fewer moving parts than one would see in a semiautomatic.
Click to expand...

I understand they want to adapt this, due to its ability to be installed on an M4. But, what's with thinking it's a good idea as a stand-alone weapon (with its butt stock installed) for engineers and MPs?

They want to give grunts a full-auto weapon, again; and give single shot shotguns to MPs and the guys that keep the war going...

Lunacy.
 
All competitors must present their products by mid-August. No caliber restriction has been placed on new designs.
Click to expand...

No; but I've read that if any caliber but 5.56x45 is offered then the manufacturer must also submit 8 different projectile types and 280,000 rounds of ammo - which means that there is almost zero chance that anyone submits anything besides 5.56x45.

It has a hydraulic butt stock to absorb recoil — a necessary add since the barrel is 7.75 inches. The size would be illegal on the streets, but provides a significant spray that is effective to 25 meters. That’s good news for any soldier who needs to clear a room with one shot.
Click to expand...

Well, that's nonsense unless the "room" is a coat closet.

The Army’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center also is fielding a 5.56mm telescoped ammunition that uses a thin plastic casing instead of the traditional brass shell. This would reduce the weight by 42 percent
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the telescoped ammunition doesn't work well with a traditional extraction and ejection system due to the plastic case. So why would you have a trial to select a new rifle, with every rifle in the test having conventional extraction and ejection, if you thought you might be soon fielding a new ammo that would require a complete rework of the rifle?

Maybe I am wrong in my speculation; but I don't see how a plastic case will not fail in a traditional system as the rifle gets hot.

Some neat ideas though. I hope some of them live up to the hype.
 
I noted some of the strange statements in the article as well. Probably just semantics. Army Times is famous for having writers that don't have a clue what they are actually writing about.
 
The rifle they NEED to purchase isn't even on the list...the H&K 416 & 417 are far superior to everything on that list to replace the M-16/M4,
you can drop 'em in the mud/water/sand and then pick 'em up and start firing like an AK47!!
Click to expand...

O god please help me:rolleyes:

Attention netGIjoeys...hear ye and mark my words for two years for now:

Colt will still be making M4s which will still be issued to troops.


WildihavespokenAlaska ™©2002-2011
 
retire the beloved Ma Deuce.
Click to expand...

The army still believes "if it aint broke, don't fix it". replacing the stoner platform I can buy into, 3 generatons of soldiers have been complaining on and off about the platform. I don't think a soldier has ever complained about ma deuce, unless he was the guy who had to hump it;)
 
Wildalaska said:
"...Attention netGIjoeys...hear ye and mark my words for two years for now:

Colt will still be making M4s which will still be issued to troops."
Click to expand...
True dat!

How many competitions has the US Army had previously, which are breathlessly written up as "the rifle of the future battlefield"? I'm sure the competition will take place, and equally sure that Dept of Defense funding will be cut severely under the new SecDef, and the army couldn't field a new toothbrush in two years. A new weapon will eventually emerge, but I suspect it will be awhile, and it won't be a million copies of a marginally improved M-4.
 
As stated by Rob3, all the the "Times" for the individual branches of the armed forces have no actual affiliation with the branch they claim to represent. They sell newspapers by hyping up small issues and putting out articles without doing a bit of research, then putting a huge front page spread out that says something along the lines of

"Why the military is not using this ultimate weapon that will kill them and save you, and what it is costing us on the front lines"

Then it is placed right near the cash register in the PX so people make impulse buys to see it. While they do report some actual facts every now and then, its mostly just hype.
 
The one feature of the M2 that I've wondered how it lasted so long was the adjustable head space and timing. I never really saw the benefit in that as it seemed an unnecessary complication. We sure did spend quite a bit of time training on setting the head space and timing on those things.

Oh one more thing... If I were a betting man, I'd put my money down saying Wild Alaska is dead on about Colt still making the M4 when all is said and done.
 
The m4 is not the super duper awesome end all carbine everyone makes it out to be. Its good, so are a lot of things. If something beats it go for it. The xm26 on the other hand, that thing has a straight pull bolt and is a pretty bad shotgun for anything other than door breaching.

The "isnt a major leap why bother" mentality makes me laugh, i can imagine guys with funny mustaches saying that when seeing a 1860 henry then start saying that their springfield musket was the best, or have a guy with a 1917 laughing at garands....
 
I don't think a soldier has ever complained about ma deuce, unless he was the guy who had to hump it
Click to expand...
People that don't understand how to time it and set head space often complain of its lack of "user friendliness". ...They're the idiots you see launching barrels. (Which is quite a spectacular, bone-headed failure, when it is mounted on a helicopter flying at 800 feet agl.;) )

I'd love to see the M2 stick around, but it really is giant chunk of steel. If there is a better platform with less weight (and the same or better ballistic performance), I'm all for it.
 
Except comparing Henry rifles to muskets and M1's to bolt action rifles are a **** poor example to back up your argument. Those WERE major leaps in weapons technologies at the time. I believe zee Germans tried to reverse engineer the Garand as well cause they thought it was pretty neat.

What can these new whizbang carbines DO that the current crop of m4's CANNOT? Aside from costing a lot more?
 
less stoppages and better accuracy? Truly ambi desighns for left handed shooters? Will get ar-15 fanboys to drool over something else?
 
:D

I'm actually an AK person myself. I can't comment on the stoppages aprt, but arent the AR-15's one of the most accurate military rifles out there? My '74 comes close but isn't quite an M4
 
I agree with many of the comments here: The Stoner EBR isn't going away anytime soon. There is not the money available to buy enough rifles to re-equip the active-duty Army and Marines, let alone all of the reserves.

A caliber change is not going to happen for the same reason the M-1 wasn't issued in .276: Cost.

Even if a new rifle were issued, look for a very gradual introduction over time. The money isn't there to buy all new carbines just because Big Army is jonesing for them.

Finally, given the point that the terrain in Afghanistan (and the ROEs) seem to result in firefights at several hundred meters (and the point that our troops are likely going to be there for a long time to come), what is the point of going with a short-barreled carbine for everyone?
 
At least that's the word from the project manager.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to call the good colonel a liar, but show me a project manager anywhere who is going to express a lack of confidence in the results and effects of his project...

As Rob228 said - the times offered a good place for the brass running the acquisition of new tech a chance to show how they're doing great things for the Army, and they ran with it.

It may happen, it may not happen... take the article with a grain of salt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top