Grendel LMG

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • LRRPF52
    Super Moderator
    • Sep 2014
    • 8569

    I look at the units that actually have a say in what LMGs they choose for their missions, particularly raids.

    Common to both the UK and US high priority SOF units who can literally adopt whatever they want, the FN Minimi has been pretty popular dating back into the 1980s.

    They have dedicated, world-class armorer support that conventional units can't even dream of though. Even Ranger Regiment enjoys armorer support that would shock a regular unit's leadership.

    SFOD used them in Panama
    SAS has been using them for decades

    I often wonder what would have happened if they had been able to get the Ultimax or Stoner LMG made in the US or Canada.

    I will say that having served as a SAW gunner in operational units, as well as filling that duty position in one of the Army's premier Small Unit Tactics schools when I wasn't be graded in a leadership position, and later managing my SAW gunners as a Fire Team Leader and Squad Leader, I don't want to lose the belt-fed capability for the reasons stated, but I do want the weapon weight to come down significantly, with constant-recoil principle operation.





    Last edited by LRRPF52; 12-08-2017, 04:16 AM.
    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

    • BluntForceTrauma
      Administrator
      • Feb 2011
      • 3897

      Does the Ultimax have a quick-change barrel? If so, convert it to belt feed and call it done. Or have we just re-created the Stoner LMG?
      :: 6.5 GRENDEL Deer and Targets :: 6mmARC Targets and Varmints and Deer :: 22 ARC Varmints and Targets

      :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

      Comment

      • dobrodan
        Bloodstained
        • Feb 2014
        • 37

        Yes it does have a QCB.

        But I do not believe a QCB should be a requirement for a SAW.

        To have the QCB functionality adds a little bit weight, but to actually bring an extra barrel adds much more weight.

        I would rather double the number of SAWs in the squad. That way the SAW gunners would be a bit more mobile, and the squad would have a bit more firepower.

        Of course this is not a good solution if the SAW is heavy and difficult to handle when standing. But with Ultimax, Stoner LMG, or the lighter Minimi-versions, it should be possible.

        This is BTW how the SAS were outfitted in GW1 (B20).

        Comment

        • LRRPF52
          Super Moderator
          • Sep 2014
          • 8569

          Originally posted by dobrodan View Post
          Yes it does have a QCB.

          But I do not believe a QCB should be a requirement for a SAW.

          To have the QCB functionality adds a little bit weight, but to actually bring an extra barrel adds much more weight.

          I would rather double the number of SAWs in the squad. That way the SAW gunners would be a bit more mobile, and the squad would have a bit more firepower.

          Of course this is not a good solution if the SAW is heavy and difficult to handle when standing. But with Ultimax, Stoner LMG, or the lighter Minimi-versions, it should be possible.

          This is BTW how the SAS were outfitted in GW1 (B20).
          SOG did a similar thing with Hatchet Forces when they were expecting contact, or planning to do ambushes. They used cut-down RPDs, XM177E2s, AKs, light mortars, M79s, M203s, and B40s. They had a pretty sick IAD where they would all deploy online upon frontal contact and unleash hell with that weapons mix, then break contact via Aussie Peel. Imagine making contact with that element, even as a Company-size unit filled with conscripts or 1st-term soldiers.



          It is interesting that the Soviets got rid of the RPD in favor of the RPK around the same time they added the SVD to the Infantry Platoon, bringing us back to the discussion about the roles combined weapons play with each other.

          More precise fires from an SVD seemed to offset the need for the RPD, but they still retained the PKM in the LMG role in Motorized Infantry Platoons, with Snipers and PKM gunners often filling the support groups (Support By Fire position in the US) during attacks or ambushes.

          When they switched to the SCHV Rifle cartridge system and dumped the AKM to reserve unit status, they updated the RPK to the RPK-74, kept the SVD and PKM.

          The biggest failure we have in the US in both the Army and USMC is lack of a dedicated, MTO&E'd Squad Designated Marksman with a specific rifle, ammo, optics, and MOS training pipeline.

          Our selection of a 5.56 LMG that weighs as much or more than the 7.62x54R PKM was just another self-inflicted hinderance.

          That 6mm SAW would have been interesting, especially in the Ford Aerospace or Stoner LMG configuration, using constant-recoil instead of AK "beat myself to pieces" operating system, which the SAW does superbly.

          As to Ultimax use by units with short duration mission profiles, it makes a lot of sense even with drums. Peruvian Special Forces used it in a mix with Colt Commandos, USAS-12 Shotguns, and South African rotary grenade launchers in the jungle.

          For conventional forces, I think the QBC makes a lot of sense. You can choose whether or not to take spare barrels or not based on METT-TC. At one time, we had 4 different barrels for the Para-SAWs in 82nd, 2 Commando barrels and 2 20" barrels before the 20s got turned in.

          The Israeli Negev is another great little LMG that can fire from the belt or STANAG 5.56 mags, one-handed QBC, compact little pig. It still weighs about what the original M249E1 weighed though.

          If you could use the Negev feed system on the Ultimax, now we're cooking with crisco. Linked or STANAG mags, constant-recoil, Ultimax lightweight, chambered in something with a much higher BC/SD.
          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

          • dobrodan
            Bloodstained
            • Feb 2014
            • 37

            Originally posted by stanc
            I strongly disagree.


            There's an extremely simple solution to that problem: Don't bring an extra barrel!!!


            That could still be done with a QCB. Having a QCB incurs negligible weight penalty, as proven by the Steyr AUG, Ultimax 100, and Stoner LMG.
            Plus, having a QCB avoids the need to constantly remove SAWs from service to replace worn out barrels, since QCBs can be changed by users.
            What I actually meant was that a QCB-functionality is nice to have, but not strictly necessary. I would like to have a way to swap barrels in the field, but not necessarily while hot.

            I know everything about the simple solution of not bringing the extra barrel. However, when I have mentioned that it is not necessary to bring a spare barrel for a fire-ambush ( surprise the enemy, then get away), I have always been told to toughen the beep up and lift more weights...

            So, my conclusion to that is that if you could mount a kitchen-sink to it, and one was available, you would have to bring that too...

            Comment

            • Essayons
              Unwashed
              • Oct 2015
              • 22

              I've read the .224 Valkyrie cartridge is based on the 6.8 SPC casing. Would the M68 links work with that round? I'd love to hear what Stanc, LLRPF52 and other contributors to this thread think about the potential of the .224 Valkyrie firing 90 or 100 grain bullets as a SAW round.

              Comment

              • Essayons
                Unwashed
                • Oct 2015
                • 22

                Originally posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
                Article may be flawed, but DID get me thinking. What is the proper premise for a squad level belt-fed?

                Going back to WWII, isn't it true the MG34/42 was acknowledged as the primary killing machine, and the bolt-action rifles were basically support?

                How does that change in the era of assault rifles/automatic rifles with full-auto fire? Does one need a burst longer than 30 rounds? Mag changes are quick. Even if one has a belt, machine gunners are taught to use short bursts, right?
                Do you have access to a copy of Sturmgever: From Firepower to Striking Power by Hans-Dieter Handrich (Collector Grade Publications)? FWIW, it says (in Chapters 9 and 11) the Germans actually considered equipping all members of the squad with assault rifles and eliminating the squad LMG. After some experimentation, it looks like they concluded that platoons consisting of two 7-man assault squads equipped with assault rifles and one 7-man MG squad equipped with two MGs (along with an HQ platoon consisting of the platoon leader, two messengers, a liter bearer and three rifle grenadiers) worked best (page 274, under the heading "Configuring the Optimum MP-Platoon). That was in 1944.

                I can't find the exact passage I was looking for. It may be in another Collector Grade book, Full Circle, about the Stg 45, CETME, G3 and other roller-locked and roller-delayed designs.

                Comment

                • BluntForceTrauma
                  Administrator
                  • Feb 2011
                  • 3897

                  Essayons, good info. Thanks. I'm curious what their rationale for their decision was.
                  :: 6.5 GRENDEL Deer and Targets :: 6mmARC Targets and Varmints and Deer :: 22 ARC Varmints and Targets

                  :: I Drank the Water :: Revelation 21:6 ::

                  Comment

                  • LRRPF52
                    Super Moderator
                    • Sep 2014
                    • 8569

                    Originally posted by Essayons View Post
                    Do you have access to a copy of Sturmgever: From Firepower to Striking Power by Hans-Dieter Handrich (Collector Grade Publications)? FWIW, it says (in Chapters 9 and 11) the Germans actually considered equipping all members of the squad with assault rifles and eliminating the squad LMG. After some experimentation, it looks like they concluded that platoons consisting of two 7-man assault squads equipped with assault rifles and one 7-man MG squad equipped with two MGs (along with an HQ platoon consisting of the platoon leader, two messengers, a liter bearer and three rifle grenadiers) worked best (page 274, under the heading "Configuring the Optimum MP-Platoon). That was in 1944.

                    I can't find the exact passage I was looking for. It may be in another Collector Grade book, Full Circle, about the Stg 45, CETME, G3 and other roller-locked and roller-delayed designs.
                    By 1944, they were running into serious issues of manpower loss from the failed Eastern campaign, where 2/3 of the Wehrmacht actually spent its effort under the Strategic bungling of Hitler.

                    The Wehrmacht Infantry Squad in the beginning of World War II included 10 men, a Squad Leader and 9 Infantrymen, all initially armed with Karabiner 98 Kurz. In 1941, the MP40 SMG was issued to Squad Leaders. The MG team had a gunner, AG, and AB initially.

                    I can see why they would be forced to make do with two 7-man Squads and one 7-man MG section. The Eastern Front cost them 1.106 million KIA, 1.018 MIA, and 3.5 million wounded/sick.

                    The North Africa/Italy campaign alone cost the German Army 50,481 KIA.

                    In contrast, the US military entire death toll for all branches during WWII was 407,316, with US Army sustaining 318,274 (234,874 battle, 83,400 nonbattle), including North Africa, the Pacific, and ETO.

                    So it's an interesting discussion because you start to see the connection between strategic limitations of manpower and how it's connected down to operational Squad sizes, which is really one of the biggest problems for us currently.
                    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

                    • Essayons
                      Unwashed
                      • Oct 2015
                      • 22

                      Originally posted by BluntForceTrauma View Post
                      Essayons, good info. Thanks. I'm curious what their rationale for their decision was.
                      LLRPF52 the book is consistent (if not as concise) as LRRPF52's reply, above. There's a lot of discussion about the Eastern Front. I recall one passage in particular that suggested that in some cases the squad LMG was knocked out or out of ammo by the time the Russians and Germans closed with each other, leaving a partial squad to fight with their personal weapons. The book also says that the fact that the Russians were equipping most of their infantrymen with SMGs also influenced the Germans. I'm out of my depth here. Your post just reminded me of something I'd read.

                      I'd still love to get some opinions on the potential of .224 Valkyrie (or something similar) as an LMG round. It seems reminiscent of the 6mm SAW in some ways (IIRC 6mm SAW used bullets that were just a little heavier and fatter). Somewhere in between 5.56x45 and 6.5 Grendel, and probably compatible with those M68 links discussed above.

                      Comment

                      • stanc
                        Banned
                        • Apr 2011
                        • 3430

                        Originally posted by Essayons View Post
                        I've read the .224 Valkyrie cartridge is based on the 6.8 SPC casing. Would the M68 links work with that round?
                        Since case diameters are the same, the .224 Valkyrie should certainly fit into M68 links. But, I'm not sure if it would work with M68 links.

                        The possible issue I see is that the Valkyrie case shoulder would not extend much farther past the front edge of the link than would the Grendel case shoulder. Whether or not the Valkyrie case shoulder protrusion would be sufficient to avoid the problems noted in post #163, I can't say.

                        Below, l. to r.: .224 Valkyrie; .22 Nosler; .223 Remington; 6.5 Grendel


                        Originally posted by Essayons View Post
                        I'd love to hear what Stanc, LLRPF52 and other contributors to this thread think about the potential of the .224 Valkyrie firing 90 or 100 grain bullets as a SAW round.
                        The 90gr and 100gr bullets currently used in .224 Valkyrie are of lead-core construction.



                        A military Ball round would require lead-free construction, which would significantly increase projectile length, as seen below.



                        Even if the L/D ratio of lead-free .224" bullets weighing 90-100 grains would not be too great to pose stability issues, there would still be the matter of the bullet base extending deep into the propellant space, thereby reducing MV compared to that achieved with a shorter, lead-core bullet of the same weight.

                        IMO, for use as a SAW round, it might be better to neck it up and make a 6mm Valkyrie...

                        Comment

                        • LRRPF52
                          Super Moderator
                          • Sep 2014
                          • 8569

                          Originally posted by Essayons View Post
                          LLRPF52 the book is consistent (if not as concise) as LRRPF52's reply, above. There's a lot of discussion about the Eastern Front. I recall one passage in particular that suggested that in some cases the squad LMG was knocked out or out of ammo by the time the Russians and Germans closed with each other, leaving a partial squad to fight with their personal weapons. The book also says that the fact that the Russians were equipping most of their infantrymen with SMGs also influenced the Germans. I'm out of my depth here. Your post just reminded me of something I'd read.

                          I'd still love to get some opinions on the potential of .224 Valkyrie (or something similar) as an LMG round. It seems reminiscent of the 6mm SAW in some ways (IIRC 6mm SAW used bullets that were just a little heavier and fatter). Somewhere in between 5.56x45 and 6.5 Grendel, and probably compatible with those M68 links discussed above.
                          That makes sense given the RoF for the MG34 and MG42.

                          German units acquired a lot of Soviet self-loaders like the SVT and PPSh-41. http://www.smallarmsreview.com/displ...darticles=3842










                          For close combat of that era, the PPSh-41 in 7.62x25 with 71rd drum backed by 35rd box mags was the portable firepower platform to beat. There were German Commando units that issued/fielded the PPSh-41 for their assault groups as SOP, as well as Finnish units that did the same.

                          Since their 7.92x57 GPMGs ate ammo so fast and the ammo occupied a lot of space with substantial weight, it's only logical to see why they ran black on it before final assaults.

                          The battle rifle cartridges of the late 1800s/early 1900s once again proved to be a hinderance to mobility and sustainability to continue the fight. Having humped linked 7.62 NATO all over this planet, I can feel what these guys were going through, and why.

                          The US Army tried fielding the M60, which is one of the most maneuverable GPMGs ever produced due to its half-bullpup layout, down into the Infantry Rifle Squad as a Light Support Weapon before and during Vietnam, which was a failed approach due to weapon and ammo weight, and the necessity of an Assistant Gunner. The SAW program was born from this problem, which hinges around the infeasibility of battle rifle sized cartridges for dismounted soldiers.
                          Last edited by LRRPF52; 12-12-2017, 09:44 PM.
                          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

                          • LRRPF52
                            Super Moderator
                            • Sep 2014
                            • 8569

                            One of the main driving factors of the 6mm SAW is that they wanted beyond 800m effective range and tracer burn.

                            Nothing in the .224 bore could provide that for them at the time, hence the need for increased projectile mass/volume.

                            They wanted effective range more like 7.62 NATO, but with cartridge carrying capability, maneuverability, and recoil more like 5.56 NATO.
                            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

                            • Sticks
                              Chieftain
                              • Dec 2016
                              • 1922

                              IIRC the Govt stepped on his nuts....or he was discredited here.
                              Sticks

                              Catchy sig line here.

                              Comment

                              • Sinclair
                                Warrior
                                • Feb 2018
                                • 344

                                That happens a lot in America, the Government stepping on some inventors nuts to protect the good-old-boys already in the Club! I just saw a news flash thingy that popped up on my screen that the Serbian Army was in the final testing phase and was all but certain of adopting the latest version of the AK chambered for the 6.5 Grendel. They call it the 6.5 x 39, but CIP standard's for the 6.5 x 39 are identical (?) to the SAAMI standard 6.5 Grendel. I also read several days ago that the Russian military is now exporting the latest AK's chambered in the 6.5 Grendel, Hmm? I am not an expert on Russian military weapons, but I believe that they have a belt/clip feed light machine gun in 7.62 x 39. If so then the short case length of the Grendel would not be a problem. Wouldn't that knock the rag off the bush? Bill Alexander and others develop the Grendel and the rest of the world adopts it as their military round.
                                "A Patriot must always be ready to defend his Country against his government"
                                Edward Abbey

                                "Stay out of trouble, Never give up, Never give in, Watch you're six, Hold the line, Stay Frosty."
                                Dr. Sabastian Gorka, Hungarian by birth, American Patriot by Beliefs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X