Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 189

Thread: US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5

  1. #101
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393

    Update

    There's been a name change, but apparently no other action.
    Based on briefings conducted at the NDIA Armaments Conference by PEO Soldier’s PM Weapons team, along with discussions with industry, we have an update on Army plans to field a new 7.62 NATO capability within the next 24 months.

    First off, although a contract has been awarded for H&K’s Compact Semi Automatic Sniper System, the weapon remains unfunded for FY17.

    However, the Army is also committed to concurrently fielding an SDMR based on the same platform as the CSASS.

    While there has been talk of adding up to two SDMRs per Squad, internal Army discussions continue about expanding the basis of issue of a 7.62 rifle, now referred to as the Interim Service Combat Rifle to all BCT members. However, there is still no formal requirement for the ISCR, and acquisition officials are leaning forward on the foxhole in anticipation, prepared to make this happen as quickly as possible.
    Full article @ http://soldiersystems.net/2017/05/03...-rifle-update/
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  2. #102
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Army researchers are testing half a dozen ammunition variants in “intermediate calibers,” which falls between the current 7.62 mm and 5.56 mm rounds, to create a new light machine gun and inform the next-generation individual assault rifle/round combo.

    The weapon designs being tested will be “unconventional,” officials said, and likely not one that is currently commercially available.
    https://www.armytimes.com/articles/n...the-m4-and-556
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  3. #103
    Seems like Grendel could be used in all 3 platforms and everybody could share ammo? 14" barrel with 80-100 grain ammo, 20" barrel scoped with 120-130 grain ammo, and a saw type platform. Really no need for a heavy machine gun. Maybe a dude with a bolt .50 for vehicles and bunkers.

  4. #104
    Chieftain
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SE Il
    Posts
    2,229
    If big Army moves away from the 5.56X45 I think it will likely be with telescopic cased (TC or CT round requiring completely new rifle) or Polymer cased ammo and more traditional rifle. It'll be interesting to see if they actually settle on 6, 6.5 or 7 MM. If they go 6.5 MM I wouldn't be surprised if they don't adopt a bullet close to 107-108 grains with a M-855A1 style bullet. In any event I don't think the 6.5 Grendel as we know it today will be adopted by the US military. If the military goes for the 264 USA cartridge I'd be surprised if it uses a conventional brass case unless it for a DMR role and only a temporary solution.

  5. #105
    Army researchers are testing half a dozen ammunition variants in “intermediate calibers,” which falls between the current 7.62 mm and 5.56 mm rounds, to create a new light machine gun and inform the next-generation individual assault rifle/round combo.

    The weapon designs being tested will be “unconventional,” officials said, and likely not one that is currently commercially available..
    Sounds like the Lightweight Small Arms Technology (LSAT) LMG and Carbine, maybe?
    Last edited by Essayons; 05-12-2017 at 10:33 PM.

  6. #106
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Essayons View Post
    Sounds like the Lightweight Small Arms Technology (LSAT) LMG and Carbine, maybe?
    Yeah, probably. Although at first reading I thought perhaps "unconventional" meant bullpup...
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  7. #107
    Speaking of unconventional/bullpups, it will be interesting to see how the Desert Tech MDR works in the real world. Lots of flexibility in that platform if it lives up to the hype.

  8. #108
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Looks like the Marines are joining the Army on the battle rifle bandwagon.

    An RFI has been issued for a multi-caliber rifle capable of firing .264 USA, .260 Remington, and 7.62 NATO, etc, as well as 5.56 NATO.

    RFI: https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=60...24dda8a331abde

    TFB article: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...ssors-targets/

    Colt 901, anybody?

    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  9. #109
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    USSOCOM Weapons Portfolio Overview (page 10): http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2017/armament/Owens.pdf

    6.5mm Ammo Development during FY2018. Intermediate Caliber Sniper Rifle and Carbine to begin fielding late-FY2018.

    6.5mm Machinegun Development FY2018-2019. Intermediate Caliber Machinegun to begin fielding mid-FY2019.
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  10. #110
    Super Moderator LRRPF52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,491
    Hmmmm, where have I seen this before....

    You end up with:
    Suppressed Glocks
    PDW Compact
    Suppressed Upper Receiver Group M4A1 SOPMOD carbines
    6.5mm Semi Automatic Sniper Support Rifles
    6.5mm Assault Machine Gun
    Advanced Sniper Rifle with integrated systems optics
    .338 Norma Magnum LW Medium Machingun

    That's an appropriate small arms mix for Special Operations units across the services. You can tailor the force adequately, without having to try to pound square pegs in round holes.

    You have several systems for ADVON parties (Glock w/can, PDW, SURG, 6.5 SSR).

    For DA, you have PDW, SURG M4A1, 6.5 SSR, 6.5 AMG, .338NM LWMMG, ASR

    For SR, you have PDW, SURG M4A1, 6.5 SSR, 6.5 AMG

    This is an excellent weapons mix, something a few of you will recall being discussed many years ago here, where 7.62 NATO is slowly displaced and replaced by 6.5mm, while still keeping 5.56 M4 evolution, and developing a compact PDW, as well as a .338 Medium Machinegun with constant recoil.
    NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

    CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

    6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks can be found here:

    www.AR15buildbox.com

  11. #111
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by LRRPF52 View Post
    This is an excellent weapons mix, something a few of you will recall being discussed many years ago here, where 7.62 NATO is slowly displaced and replaced by 6.5mm...
    Alas, I do not recall any thread with a discussion of 7.62 NATO being slowly displaced and replaced by a 6.5mm round like .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor.

    However, for the few of you who on page 1 of this thread scoffed at the report that the Army was considering adoption of a 7.62mm Interim Battle Rifle, I offer the following presentation:

    Project Manager Soldier Weapons http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2017/armament/Stehle.pdf

    PM Soldier Weapons Portfolio (page 4)
    Development
    Directed Requirements
    - Squad Designated Marksman Rifle
    - Interim Combat Service Rifle
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  12. #112
    Warrior
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    872
    Quote Originally Posted by stanc View Post
    Alas, I do not recall any thread with a discussion of 7.62 NATO being slowly displaced and replaced by a 6.5mm round like .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor.
    I participated in those discussions and, yes, gradually came to understand that replacing the 5.56 with the Grendel would ultimately not work well, but that a 6.5 caliber medium machine gun could work.

    The biggest challenge at the time was that the Grendel, while outperforming the 7.62 at long range, was not very competiive inside about 400 meters. The larger cases solve that challenge.

    Nonetheless, my understanding is that a number of folks are still pushing the 6.5 Grendel and .264 USA in addition to the 260 and 6.5 Creedmoor. Absent a final decision, it is therefore fair to say that we do not know what the final cartridge mix will be.
    shootersnotes.com

    "To those who have fought and almost died for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
    -- Author Unknown

    "If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished!" -- Milton Berle

  13. #113
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by JASmith View Post
    I participated in those discussions and, yes, gradually came to understand that replacing the 5.56 with the Grendel would ultimately not work well, but that a 6.5 caliber medium machine gun could work.
    I do remember being in many discussions about replacing 7.62 NATO with 6.5 Grendel. I just don't recall any threads about replacing 7.62 NATO with .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor.
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  14. #114
    its gonna be a tough sell whichever way they attempt to displace the 7.62x51 nato or 5.56.

    now if the new "plastic' ammo can be made much cheaper then there might be progress.

    its all about economy of scale.

  15. #115
    Super Moderator LRRPF52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,491
    Everything I'm seeing intends to keep 5.56 NATO as a staple for PDWs and lightweight, suppressed carbines with he SURG uppers that drop on to existing M4A1 lowers.

    With the addition of 6.5mm SSRs and 6.5mm AMGs, you can task-organize and tailor the unit structure per mission requirements, the terrain, and collateral effects considerations.

    Units in SOCOM have been using an Arms Room approach for a long time now already, where each Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine has had a variety of individual shoulder-fired weapons to choose from for the mission.

    This includes:

    MP5SD 9mm SMG

    14.5" M4A1 SOPMOD upper
    10.3" CQBR upper
    Mk.12 Mod 0 and Mod 1 SPR (most uppers have been pulled from service)
    SOPMOD Block II upper with 14.5" barrel, free float handguard
    Unit-level built SOPMOD Block II upper with precision barrel for DM work

    M203 40mm GL equipped upper
    M320 40mm GL
    M79 40mm GL

    SR25 7.62 NATO SASS (Sniper Trained personnel)
    Mk.14 EBR 7.62 NATO DMR (pulled from service, support discontinued)
    M110 7.62 NATO SASS

    Mk.16 SCAR-L 5.56 NATO with 13" and 16" barrels (support discontinued)
    Mk.17 SCAR-H 7.62NATO with 13" and 16" barrels (support discontinued)

    Mk.46 SAW 5.56 NATO belt-fed
    Mk.48 7.62 NATO belt-fed

    M240B 7.62 NATO GPMG
    M240L 7.62 NATO LW GPMG

    Mk.13 .300 Win Mag Sniper Rifle

    M107 .50 BMG Semi-Auto Interdiction Rifle

    Commanders and key leaders have the most influence in most units as to who will carry what for the mission. 5.56/M4 SOPMOD will continue to be the staple individual carbine, but not everybody carries M4s.
    NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

    CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

    6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks can be found here:

    www.AR15buildbox.com

  16. #116
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393

    Cool And we're off...

    U.S. Army weapon officials just opened a competition for a new 7.62mm Interim Service Combat Rifle...according to an Aug. 4 solicitation posted on FedBizOpps.gov.

    "The Government has a requirement to acquire a commercial 7.62mm ICSR to field with the M80A1 Enhanced Performance Round (EPR) to engage and defeat protected and unprotected threats," the solicitation states.

    The competition will consist of live-fire testing and evaluate the following:

    Dispersion (300m - function, 600m - simulation)
    Compatible with Family of Weapon Sights - Individual and laser
    Weapon length (folder or collapsed)/ Weight (empty/bare) / Velocity (300m and 600m calculated)
    Semi-Automatic and Fully Automatic function testing (bursts and full auto)
    Noise (at shooter's ear) / Flash suppression
    Ambidextrous Controls (in darkness or adverse conditions) / Rail interface
    20-30 round magazine to support a 210 round combat load

    http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...bat-rifle.html
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  17. #117
    Super Moderator LRRPF52's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    4,491
    Quote Originally Posted by stanc View Post
    U.S. Army weapon officials just opened a competition for a new 7.62mm Interim Service Combat Rifle...according to an Aug. 4 solicitation posted on FedBizOpps.gov.

    "The Government has a requirement to acquire a commercial 7.62mm ICSR to field with the M80A1 Enhanced Performance Round (EPR) to engage and defeat protected and unprotected threats," the solicitation states.

    The competition will consist of live-fire testing and evaluate the following:

    Dispersion (300m - function, 600m - simulation)
    Compatible with Family of Weapon Sights - Individual and laser
    Weapon length (folder or collapsed)/ Weight (empty/bare) / Velocity (300m and 600m calculated)
    Semi-Automatic and Fully Automatic function testing (bursts and full auto)
    Noise (at shooter's ear) / Flash suppression
    Ambidextrous Controls (in darkness or adverse conditions) / Rail interface
    20-30 round magazine to support a 210 round combat load

    http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...bat-rifle.html
    I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

    Full auto, huh?
    20-30rd mags that support a 210rd combat load?

    Somebody has obviously never tried to carry 7.62 NATO mags to that round count, and especially has never done it with plates.

    Cue the SF unit that tried an all-7.62 NATO mix within their first few weeks on deployment, then stashed everything in their ASP and said, "Never again will we be that dumb. F that noise." These are guys with physical fitness and endurance levels that exceed the median in other combat arms units measurably, who frequently conduct movements that are 3-5x what a regular infantry unit will ever do, with heavier rucks, evasion plan contingencies in enemy territory that cover many map sheets and national borders even.

    Someone needs to shoot all the 7.62 NATO out of the system and be done with that albatross cartridge once and for all.

    The Army's Interim Combat Service Rifle should have either 16-inch or 20-inch barrels, a collapsible buttstock, an extended forward rail and weigh less than 12 pounds unloaded and without an optic, according to a May 31 Army request for information.
    All weapons should include items such as a suppressor, cleaning, specialized tools and enough magazines to support the basic load of 210 rounds.
    Milley told lawmakers in late May that the Army does not believe that every soldier needs a 7.62mm rifle. These weapons would be reserved for the Army's most rapid-deployable infantry units.

    "We would probably want to field them with a better-grade weapon that can penetrate this body armor," Milley said.
    Last edited by LRRPF52; 08-05-2017 at 10:07 PM.
    NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

    CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

    6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks can be found here:

    www.AR15buildbox.com

  18. #118
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by LRRPF52 View Post
    I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
    Yeah, I figured you'd like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by LRRPF52
    Full auto, huh?
    20-30rd mags that support a 210rd combat load?
    Looks like fun. Definitely needs more mag capacity than 20 rounds.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=him6JW_mRZs
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

  19. #119
    Bloodstained
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by stanc View Post
    U.S. Army weapon officials just opened a competition for a new 7.62mm Interim Service Combat Rifle...according to an Aug. 4 solicitation posted on FedBizOpps.gov.

    "The Government has a requirement to acquire a commercial 7.62mm ICSR to field with the M80A1 Enhanced Performance Round (EPR) to engage and defeat protected and unprotected threats," the solicitation states.

    The competition will consist of live-fire testing and evaluate the following:

    Dispersion (300m - function, 600m - simulation)
    Compatible with Family of Weapon Sights - Individual and laser
    Weapon length (folder or collapsed)/ Weight (empty/bare) / Velocity (300m and 600m calculated)
    Semi-Automatic and Fully Automatic function testing (bursts and full auto)
    Noise (at shooter's ear) / Flash suppression
    Ambidextrous Controls (in darkness or adverse conditions) / Rail interface
    20-30 round magazine to support a 210 round combat load

    http://www.military.com/daily-news/2...bat-rifle.html
    Is there any update on this? First we heard that the Army was looking at the 6.5 Creedmore then just going to 7.62x51 rifles. That the purchase would be 50,000 weapons. I would gather that would be combat units (BCT).

    I could see why they would want a 7.62x51 rifle. There is ammo enough for it. It would reach out as well as higher penetration of buildings. Plus some of the rifles, if based on a SR25 or AR10 design, could be set up as an IAR platform to replace the SAW. This would solve the short term problems giving the military time to figure out what they really want.

    Support personal would still have M4s and M249 along with the M240B/G

  20. #120
    Chieftain stanc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,393
    Quote Originally Posted by n9nwo View Post
    Is there any update on this? First we heard that the Army was looking at the 6.5 Creedmore then just going to 7.62x51 rifles. That the purchase would be 50,000 weapons. I would gather that would be combat units (BCT).
    I haven't seen any updates, yet.

    Bid samples are due by 6 September, so maybe we'll hear something late this year, or early 2018.

    The purchase is for "up to 50,000" so the actual buy could be less than that number.

    My understanding is that the ICSR would go to select infantry units, probably first issue would be to units facing Russki troops.
    If at first you don't succeed, give up.
    Anything that can't be done easily, probably isn't worth doing.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •