06-14-2013, 03:04 PM
As always, LRRPF52 gives us the view of the military professional (or knuckle dragging mouth breather, for those of us in the know) who is going to employ the weapon in defense of the Constitution of the United States. Training comes first, and if you haven’t employed a weapon in combat, please listen to those of us who have. We aren't stupid, and our lessons are learned the hard way in the worst possible conditions.
As a fellow knuckle dragger, below are some specs I would like to see considered if we are going to have a SERIOUS conversation about the next generation assault rifle.
I am leaving them as general as I can so no one rifle/round is being pigeon-holed as a quick fix. I am also looking at it as a SYSTEM – new round, optics, ect. I am not specifying type of action, round, manufacturing materials or even projectiles. Again, this is NEXT GENERATION. These are my ideas, based on my experience shooting at non-American bad guys and doing a little analysis of what our capabilities would need to be in a system that would serve military needs for several decades, as the M16 family has. I don’t think there is anything out there right now that would meet all of the below requirements (or if it is even possible to meet with current tech), but I could be wrong. They’re in no particular order, I was just typing as it came to my little brain.
All components interchangeable between two versions - rifle and carbine
Weight of weapons system, with day optics, loaded magazine, BUIS, sling and IR/day Vis laser = 7lbs carbine, 8lbs rifle
Day optics fixed 4x with ballistic matched reticle to 800m
Capability for add on night optics
Capability for upgrades to lasers and optics
Day laser vis in full sun 150m
Night laser vis 300m
Select fire - single shot, two round burst, full auto settings
Cyclic rate of fire – 700-800 RPM
Sustained rate of fire – 15-20 RPM
Rapid Rate – 50-60 RPM
Ambidextrous controls
Magazine capacity = min 30 rds
Magazine weight loaded = max 1Lb
Penetration at 200m = Class IV Ballistic Plate
Accuracy= 2MOA at 100m
Max effective range = 500m carbine, 600m rifle on point target (12”x12’ with optics, 20”x20” with BUIS), 700 and 800 for area suppression target (2’x2’ with BUIS)
Kinetic Energy – maintain min of 500KJ at 800m (not sure if this is correct terminology or not)
Length of Rifle = not to exceed 35"
Length of carbine = not to exceed 30"
Barrel life = 20,000rds
Trigger Pull in Semi – 4-5lbs
Durable coating/corrosion preventative to current MilSpec requirements
System able to be adapted to current close combat methods (ie durable enough to deliver repeated butt strokes/bayonet strike – I know, it’s archaic, but see story of Willie Lump Lump)
Ability to maintain zero after 5’ drop test
Self cleaning (ie, weapon dropped in mud/muck, don’t need to disassemble to have weapon function as designed)
Able to fire 5000 rds in a torture test (ie no cleaning, rapid rate of fire with no failures)
I am probably missing/forgetting a few things; and may have even screwed a few things up, so feel free to critique. Again, this is just what I would like to see, but I am basing it on 25 years of infantry experience and some familiarity with how the DOD tests/evaluates weapons.
As a fellow knuckle dragger, below are some specs I would like to see considered if we are going to have a SERIOUS conversation about the next generation assault rifle.
I am leaving them as general as I can so no one rifle/round is being pigeon-holed as a quick fix. I am also looking at it as a SYSTEM – new round, optics, ect. I am not specifying type of action, round, manufacturing materials or even projectiles. Again, this is NEXT GENERATION. These are my ideas, based on my experience shooting at non-American bad guys and doing a little analysis of what our capabilities would need to be in a system that would serve military needs for several decades, as the M16 family has. I don’t think there is anything out there right now that would meet all of the below requirements (or if it is even possible to meet with current tech), but I could be wrong. They’re in no particular order, I was just typing as it came to my little brain.
All components interchangeable between two versions - rifle and carbine
Weight of weapons system, with day optics, loaded magazine, BUIS, sling and IR/day Vis laser = 7lbs carbine, 8lbs rifle
Day optics fixed 4x with ballistic matched reticle to 800m
Capability for add on night optics
Capability for upgrades to lasers and optics
Day laser vis in full sun 150m
Night laser vis 300m
Select fire - single shot, two round burst, full auto settings
Cyclic rate of fire – 700-800 RPM
Sustained rate of fire – 15-20 RPM
Rapid Rate – 50-60 RPM
Ambidextrous controls
Magazine capacity = min 30 rds
Magazine weight loaded = max 1Lb
Penetration at 200m = Class IV Ballistic Plate
Accuracy= 2MOA at 100m
Max effective range = 500m carbine, 600m rifle on point target (12”x12’ with optics, 20”x20” with BUIS), 700 and 800 for area suppression target (2’x2’ with BUIS)
Kinetic Energy – maintain min of 500KJ at 800m (not sure if this is correct terminology or not)
Length of Rifle = not to exceed 35"
Length of carbine = not to exceed 30"
Barrel life = 20,000rds
Trigger Pull in Semi – 4-5lbs
Durable coating/corrosion preventative to current MilSpec requirements
System able to be adapted to current close combat methods (ie durable enough to deliver repeated butt strokes/bayonet strike – I know, it’s archaic, but see story of Willie Lump Lump)
Ability to maintain zero after 5’ drop test
Self cleaning (ie, weapon dropped in mud/muck, don’t need to disassemble to have weapon function as designed)
Able to fire 5000 rds in a torture test (ie no cleaning, rapid rate of fire with no failures)
I am probably missing/forgetting a few things; and may have even screwed a few things up, so feel free to critique. Again, this is just what I would like to see, but I am basing it on 25 years of infantry experience and some familiarity with how the DOD tests/evaluates weapons.