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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • hill37
    Warrior
    • Apr 2017
    • 636

    maybe FightLite (ARIES) is going to bring out 7.62 NATO poly ammo

    Comment

    • LRRPF52
      Super Moderator
      • Sep 2014
      • 8569

      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 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
      7.62x51 is a horribly retarded idea in every way for mass issue, and we've known this since it was first tried with the M14/M60 mix.

      An SR25 platform can't even begin to do a fraction of the job of the SAW, not even close. 20-25rd mags versus a 100-200rd sack or drum on the gun, comes off target with every shot versus tracks somewhat well on target, closed bolt vs open bolt, terrible full auto handling characteristics versus manageable full auto, no quick barrel change versus the fastest quick barrel change system of any machine-gun (one of the very few things I like about the SAW), no way to carry a basic load versus the 5.56 linked basic load...

      An AR10 is not only a non-starter as a service rifle, it's especially a non-starter as an LMG. The Dutch built a bunch of prototypes for belt-fed use, and Stoner was a big fan of a belt-fed AR10, but it's just not a viable system as an LMG, mainly because it was designed as a rifle and not a machine-gun.

      The only place I see a role for a Stoner 7.62 NATO rifle patterned after the AR10 is what they should have done from the start, which is a DM or Semi Auto Sniper System. We've done the latter already, but seem to still be spinning our wheels when it comes to accepting the necessity of a DM within the Rifle Squad and providing a permanent training program or rifle/optic/ammo system for him.
      NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

      CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

      6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

      www.AR15buildbox.com

      Comment

      • n9nwo
        Bloodstained
        • Dec 2016
        • 93

        The Marines are replacing the M249 with the Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). It is basically a M16 that is set up to be an automatic rifle.

        That was my thought if they go to the 7.62x51, even temporarily. The M240 is just too heavy to carry as a squad rifle.

        Comment

        • n9nwo
          Bloodstained
          • Dec 2016
          • 93

          Originally posted by stanc View Post
          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.
          What I read into this is that the 7.62x51 weapons would be in BCT units (combat -- infantry brigades). The rest of the Army would still have the M4 and M249

          Comment

          • LRRPF52
            Super Moderator
            • Sep 2014
            • 8569

            Originally posted by n9nwo View Post
            The Marines are replacing the M249 with the Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). It is basically a M16 that is set up to be an automatic rifle.

            That was my thought if they go to the 7.62x51, even temporarily. The M240 is just too heavy to carry as a squad rifle.
            We've been tracking the Marines IAR program for many years. These threads run better if you go through the history and see what has been discussed. Among the many duty positions I held, M60 gunner, AG, Ammo bearer, M240 gunner, SAW Gunner, and Weapons Squad Leader were included. A lot of guys with this background will let loose a litany of colorful expletives when non combat arms or civilians try to tell them about their job, but I will approach it differently.

            For those that aren't familiar with the Infantry MTO&E, understand that M4s are not the main focus for firepower or actions on the objective for most missions that a dismounted infantry unit conducts.

            Within a Fire Team, you have:

            Team Leader M4A1
            Automatic Rifleman SAW
            Grenadier M4A1/M230 (used to be M203)
            Rifleman M4A1

            You have 2 of these Fire Teams in a Rifle Squad in the Army led by a Squad Leader with an M4A1 (bad MTO&E because there aren't enough people based on After Action Reviews covering multiple conflicts over the last century, need 11 bare minimum in a Squad-we have 9 based on the Bradley Fighting Vehicle).

            The full Platoon looks like this:



            One of the main contributing factors to longevity or the ability to sustain the fight, make chance contact and still have enough ammo to continue mission, or conduct follow-on missions after expending the ammo required to take an objective, is 5.56 NATO and linked 7.62 NATO distributed throughout the Platoon.

            Once you go to 7.62 NATO rifles or carbines, you erase all of that and become a major liability on the entire system, because now you need resupply and badly. You went from a capable force, able to deliver combat power, to a liability with dozens of soldiers' lives on the line if they don't get resupplied immediately. Things are already stretched thin with reduced basic loads due to SAAPI plates, IOTVs, and the added constraints armor brings to your maneuverability, water consumption, and limited endurance.

            By increasing the weight of the soldier's load, while decreasing his hit probability and number of rounds carried, you shoot yourself in the foot. There have been multiple incidents already where units went near black or black on ammo, and barely escaped by the skin of their teeth, and these were units that had dedicated aviation support from the best rotary wing pilots in the world, not even in the conventional Army.

            There are so many more factors that are never taken into consideration when I see people looking in from the outside.
            NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

            CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

            6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

            www.AR15buildbox.com

            Comment

            • stanc
              Banned
              • Apr 2011
              • 3430

              Originally posted by n9nwo View Post
              What I read into this is that the 7.62x51 weapons would be in BCT units (combat -- infantry brigades). The rest of the Army would still have the M4 and M249
              Yes, that's my take on it, too.

              P.S. There was a discussion on arfcom about a week ago, in which one poster claims to have heard that the plan has recently been expanded to completely replacing the M4 throughout the Army. However, he provided no substantiation for that idea.

              Comment

              • LRRPF52
                Super Moderator
                • Sep 2014
                • 8569

                Originally posted by stanc View Post
                Yes, that's my take on it, too.

                P.S. There was a discussion on arfcom about a week ago, in which one poster claims to have heard that the plan has recently been expanded to completely replacing the M4 throughout the Army. However, he provided no substantiation for that idea.
                The pushback is going to be immense when units start experimenting with this.

                SOCOM has zero plans to go that direction, that's for sure.

                They're just going to more integrally suppressed 5.56 uppers with the SURG.

                6.5mm Sniper Support Rifles (Semi Auto)

                6.5mm LMGs (called an Assault Machine Gun)
                NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

                CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

                6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

                www.AR15buildbox.com

                Comment

                • stanc
                  Banned
                  • Apr 2011
                  • 3430

                  Originally posted by n9nwo View Post
                  The Marines are replacing the M249 with the Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). It is basically a M16 that is set up to be an automatic rifle.
                  That was my thought if they go to the 7.62x51, even temporarily. The M240 is just too heavy to carry as a squad rifle.
                  IMO, you may be right about the Army fielding an IAR version of the ICSR, similar to what was done to make an automatic rifle version of the M14.
                  First, I have seen no mention of a replacement for the M249, and it seems rather unlikely the squad would have 7.62 rifles and 5.56 squad autos.
                  Second, the program to develop an M249 replacement even shows the concept to be a magazine-fed automatic rifle, not a belt-fed machine gun.



                  Last edited by stanc; 09-06-2017, 06:37 AM.

                  Comment

                  • stanc
                    Banned
                    • Apr 2011
                    • 3430

                    Originally posted by LRRPF52 View Post
                    The pushback is going to be immense when units start experimenting with this.
                    Yeah, I would imagine so. It ought to be interesting.

                    Originally posted by LRRPF52 View Post
                    SOCOM has zero plans to go that direction, that's for sure.
                    They're just going to more integrally suppressed 5.56 uppers with the SURG.
                    6.5mm Sniper Support Rifles (Semi Auto)
                    6.5mm LMGs (called an Assault Machine Gun)
                    Why are you sure SOCOM does not have such plans? Page 10 of the NDIA presentation shows an Intermediate Caliber Sniper Rifle/Carbine.
                    To me, that sounds more like an M110 SASS-type sniper rifle and a "battle carbine" (for want of a better term), than a sniper support rifle.
                    That they want an Intermediate Caliber Carbine makes me think it's basically a 6.5 version of the ICSR...or the battle rifle they currently use:



                    Last edited by stanc; 09-06-2017, 12:38 AM.

                    Comment

                    • Lightning8
                      Warrior
                      • Jun 2015
                      • 136

                      When I went to Ranger school, the M14 was used to "simulate" a Squad Automatic Weapon as the M249 was not in the inventory yet. Our machine gun was the M60 and our rifles were M16A1. I made the mistake of admitting I knew how to clean a M14 so I carried an M14, the heavy steel mags, and a basic load of blanks for the Mountain phase. I am not scared to admit that carrying a 7.62x51 "battle rifle" through rough terrain as an Infantry soldier sucked. I was very happy to give up the M14 and go back to a M16A1. The Infantry carries these weapons 24-7 and the "soldiers load" is killing our mobility.

                      Comment

                      • Joglee
                        Unwashed
                        • Sep 2017
                        • 7

                        Originally posted by stanc View Post
                        Yes, that's my take on it, too.

                        P.S. There was a discussion on arfcom about a week ago, in which one poster claims to have heard that the plan has recently been expanded to completely replacing the M4 throughout the Army. However, he provided no substantiation for that idea.
                        That person was me and it comes from the same place that gave me the information that the ICSR was happening months before anyone had said anything publically.

                        Also the Army has this in mind for the NGSAR(M249 replacement).

                        "The Next Generation Squad Automatic Rifle (NGSAR) is a single incremental program to meet future force warfighting needs. It is the planned replacement for the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) in Brigade Combat Teams (BCT) and select support units during the next decade. It will combine the firepower and range of a machine gun with the precision and ergonomics of a carbine, yielding capability improvements in accuracy, range, and lethality. The weapon will be lightweight and fire lightweight ammunition with improved lethality."

                        So basically a slightly modified ICSR firing polymer cased 7.62.

                        Comment

                        • n9nwo
                          Bloodstained
                          • Dec 2016
                          • 93

                          My take on this is that it is a temporary fix until the Army figures out where they really want to go. So yes it sucks in terms of weight but is more lethal.

                          My thoughts are that long term the Army is looking at some form of 6.5mm in a CT format. But that might be 10 years out. 2025 is the target date for the "Army after Next". That is when all the trucks go electric drive train (and maybe hybrid so as to run silent in a combat zone). Several other projects are in the mix. It does appear that a new rifle/caliber is in order.

                          Comment

                          • Joglee
                            Unwashed
                            • Sep 2017
                            • 7

                            Originally posted by n9nwo View Post
                            My take on this is that it is a temporary fix until the Army figures out where they really want to go. So yes it sucks in terms of weight but is more lethal.

                            My thoughts are that long term the Army is looking at some form of 6.5mm in a CT format. But that might be 10 years out. 2025 is the target date for the "Army after Next". That is when all the trucks go electric drive train (and maybe hybrid so as to run silent in a combat zone). Several other projects are in the mix. It does appear that a new rifle/caliber is in order.
                            6.5 in the end goal. The Army is running the SAAC to decide which 6.5 is the most ideal.

                            All will be to big to fit in the AR-15, as they use modified 7.62 brass.

                            This is why the ICSR is happening. Get it fielded now for 7.62 and in 10-20 years move to the new 6.5 wunder caliber.

                            As for CT, it appears to have taken a back seat due to recent advancement in polymer 7.62 cases, which are progressing faster than LSAT is.

                            Comment

                            • LRRPF52
                              Super Moderator
                              • Sep 2014
                              • 8569

                              This picture is a perfect example of why you won't be carrying a 200rd+ basic load of 7.62 NATO effectively. Notice the shingles on shingles interfering with movement over a common obstacle. Looks like one of the pics from the unit that tried going 7.62 NATO across the board and then stashed all their loaded mags in the ASP, saying, "We've learned our lesson."



                              It's a lot easier to carry linked 7.62 NATO than mag-fed 7.62 NATO because of the weight of the mags, and linked 7.62 NATO sucks big time already because there isn't a lot of space for it, let alone its weight problem. Trying to find a place for 210rds of 7.62 NATO is a fool's errand. Jokes are already running about a combat squire (which has been done).

                              A buddy of mine attributes a lot of his spinal issues to carrying a basic load of 7.62 NATO for the M14 EBR on several deployments to both OIF and OEF, where he put as many mags as he could in an unauthorized chest rig, as well as his assault pack. He also had to carry frags and smoke, NODs, water, suppressor, optic, LRF, meals, batteries, radio, etc.

                              In the line, we used to distribute linked 7.62 NATO out to Riflemen in their buttpacks and later assault packs to augment the insane load the gun teams were already carrying. Every rifleman that didn't have an extra 100rds of 7.62 linked would carry an extra 200rd drum for the SAW, 2 rounds for the mortars, and/or a CLS bag or some other important Squad Item of equipment. AT4s would also be dished out, so dudes are laden down with a lot of weapons, munitions, and equipment.

                              In the line, when you approach an objective, the line dogs dump off their mortar rounds to the mortar section, who is setting up to provide indirect fires for your advance or assault on the OBJ. Gun teams and attached snipers will get in closer for support by fire positions, while the Rifle Platoons or Squads set up for breech, local support, assault, and security elements.

                              Trying to assault an OBJ with strictly 7.62 NATO is one of the worst possible weapon/ammunition structures you could possible conjure, because your assault elements now are lugging that crap when they need to be really agile and maneuverable cutting through the OBJ, with high round count in the mags. They would be much better served with D60s and 5.56 as part of the pre-combat checks before hitting the OBJ. Reducing their magazine capacity, increasing their recoil, increasing their weapon weight, and increasing muzzle blast is pure regression back to 1940s, but at least they had M1 SMGs and M1 Carbines to choose from back then.
                              NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO

                              CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor

                              6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:

                              www.AR15buildbox.com

                              Comment

                              • n9nwo
                                Bloodstained
                                • Dec 2016
                                • 93

                                No one is disagreeing with your observations. However when did the Army ever use good sense?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X