Direction Army is Taking with Designated Marksmen/Sniper Rifles

[LRRPF52]

So it appears that there will basically be two primary precision rifles for the battlefield:

One a derivative of the SASS, but with a shorter barrel and telescoping stock called the M110C, which is basically an evolved SR25 carbine:





How far we have come...



With the other being the dedicated bolt gun for shooting out to 1500m, namely the M2010 in .300 WinMag.

[stanc]

So it appears that there will basically be two primary precision rifles for the battlefield:

One a derivative of the SASS, but with a shorter barrel and telescoping stock called the M110C, which is basically an evolved SR25 carbine:

Cool. Pattern for a Grendel DMR?

[Michael]

Huh..LRRPF52 - do you know why they went with .300 WinMag over .338 Lapua? Not super familiar with the ballistics of either, but I thought there were some units employing the .338 with great success.

[LRRPF52]

MARSOC has purchased the M110C conversion kits, which includes a 16" barreled upper with a new URX, Magpul ACS stock, and a short suppressor. Australia is getting an HK417 variant for their Marksmanship Rifle System. Brits have been using the LMT 7.62 NATO, while New Zealand is also adopting it. 7.62 NATO carbines based on the Stoner system are becoming the standard.

MV difference between the 20" guns and 16" averages 80fps, so not worth the barrel length. With 175gr, they are supersonic plenty far. Receiving sniper-specific ammo is a problem, even for units in SOCOM when deployed.

[LRRPF52]

Huh..LRRPF52 - do you know why they went with .300 WinMag over .338 Lapua? Not super familiar with the ballistics of either, but I thought there were some units employing the .338 with great success.

A lot of people have been scratching their heads over that decision. All our coalition partners have adopted .338 LM as the go-to cartridge for distance. I'm guessing the combination of a few things:

* Remington and the PSR contract derail was able to re-barrel the M24 actions, since they're long already, and go with the .300 WM
* .300 WM was already in the system, in use with primarily Naval Special Warfare and Army SF

You would think that they would have gone with what coalition & NATO partners are using, but other factors led to the decision in favor of .300 WM. Training is the most important aspect at the end of the day.

[bwaites]

SF can still get .338 systems from what I've read, and they would be the most likely to deploy and use them. Doubtful that .338 Lapua would be deployed to the joes on the line.

Also, maybe they are waiting for Bill Alexander's new .338 SemiAuto!

[Nukes]

SF can still get .338 systems from what I've read, and they would be the most likely to deploy and use them. Doubtful that .338 Lapua would be deployed to the joes on the line.

Also, maybe they are waiting for Bill Alexander's new .338 SemiAuto!

Hmmmm.... waiting...

[LRRPF52]

While there are .338 LM Systems that have been undergoing demonstration and competition with each other for the PSR contract, (which appears dead in the water right now), they are no issue systems for the units within SOCOM.

Even the NSW guys use .300 WM, and have done so for decades, going back to no later than 1986, if not earlier.

[Guardsman26]

If 6.5 Grendel was used across the squad - everyone would have a DMR rifle as well as a carbine and LMG.

I am pretty sure that .338 Lapua will edge out .300 Winchester Magnum across all US forces in time. The .338 appears to have really proved its worth in Afghanistan. Without any NATO competition, it has established itself as a new de facto NATO sniping calibre. Which shows, when you get it right, perceived barriers to adoption fall away. The same is true for 4.6 mm as a PDW calibre and H&K's MP7. Both has seen much wider adoption than FN has managed with its own calibre 5.7 and its PDW.

I think there is a real need for a semi-automatic .338 rifle. if Bill gets AA's model right, he could easily sell it across NATO. It just has to way less than H&K's G28 which is a monster. Using a reinforced AR10 platform, it might even be possible to make a .338 weapon capable of firing short automatic bursts. A .338 light machine gun would be a welcome piece of additional firepower.

[kegs]

.338 has a significant ballistic advantage to .300 WM. However, .338 LM is $$ per shot.

[JASmith]

Why would we call the .338 LM a light machine gun?

What are the side-by-side ballistics at 2,000 metres?

[Trooper]

Why would we call the .338 LM a light machine gun?

What are the side-by-side ballistics at 2,000 metres?

Compared to the M2 .50 cal, the .338 is light.

[Michael]

There are, as I have been taught, three levels of Machine Guns - Light, Medium and Heavy. Light is in the 5.56 range, medium is in the 7.62 range, and Heavy is .50 and higher. This may vary slightly by country/doctrine.

[JASmith]

There are, as I have been taught, three levels of Machine Guns - Light, Medium and Heavy. Light is in the 5.56 range, medium is in the 7.62 range, and Heavy is .50 and higher. This may vary slightly by country/doctrine.

Michael,

Thanks for the clarification. The last sentence of Guardsman's post (#10 in this thread) reminded me of speculative discussions about the potential for the .338 LMG to replace the .50 BMG.

That could open another path for long-term easing of redundant logistics burdens.

[Guardsman26]

A .338 Light Machine Gun is probably a contradiction in terms, but such a weapon would be a lot lighter than an M2 HMG. Maybe the weight could be kept below 11 kg. Give an HE round and you could take out vehicles with ease and probably helicopters too. A ten round burst of .338 HE or WP would really make your eyes water!