gatnerd

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by gatnerd

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3274
    MEMBERS
  • 185869
    MESSAGES
  • 1
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW Phase 2 Consolidation and info   Small Arms <20mm

Started 30/8/19 by gatnerd; 314256 views.
poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

12-Nov

Now I understand. But anyways, a LWMMG was not easy to integrate in any organic structure, while rifles and assault rifles are and by the hundreds of thousands. Hombre, it's a totally different scale

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

12-Nov

I can fill in the missing backstory here for you guys...

The short version is the USG has fucked GD somewhere between 5 and a dozen times in the last 3-4 decades and I suspect gd smelled a familiar smell from this program that has burned them so many times before.

This also pretty handily explains why they took the low effort bullpup route that's based off of their existing patent portfolio which the US gov has jacked them around on and cancelled programs within sight of the finish line on multiple times before this round.

While I'm sure GD didn't eat the WHOLE COST of the previous programs, the USG and big green gave screwed them every time they've tried to play in this sector.

I can give you a PARTIAL LIST of programs here 

Dover devil / lwgphmg

Lwgpmg 

Xm307, xm806, xm312, and several others I'm certain I'm forgetting but basically this comes down to 5 times bitten 6th shy.

smg762

From: smg762

18-Nov

how about a .20 caliber /5mm, with similar energies to the .224 valkirie or 220 swift.....

total size would be much smaller than 762

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

18-Nov

Textron being called out by TFB:

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/11/18/textron-ngsw-program/

A source associated with Textron’s participation in the NGSW program confirmed that ‘Textron are no longer in the project’ and that the US Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapons program is now likely to be between SIG Sauer and Lone Star Future Weapons’ submissions.

Following up on this we gained independent confirmation from a number of industry sources that Textron has withdrawn from the program reportedly due to issues with weapon and ammunition that emerged during testing.

...

In terms of the NGSW program’s progress Lt. Col. Joshua Headley, the NGW program’s new product manager, advised that it may be towards the end of the year when we hear which submission has been selected.

Alternatively, the Army Times reported that Maj. Gen. Anthony Potts, commander of Program Executive Officer Soldier (PEO), has stated that a selection is expected by mid-2022. This would be a considerable delay when the original selection announcement was planned for the second half of 2021.

Gr1ff1th

From: Gr1ff1th

18-Nov

"When we approached Textron for comment on the possibility that Textron and their weapons were no longer part of the NGSW program Betania Magalhaes, Textron’s Director of Corporate Communications, said":

"Textron Systems has completed its scope of work for the prototype phase and have delivered all our weapons for government testing; we are closely tracking the Army’s next steps."

They still haven't confirmed they're out, it sounds like they're waiting on an Army decision 

  • Edited 18 November 2021 22:28  by  Gr1ff1th
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

18-Nov

Gr1ff1th said:

They still haven't confirmed they're out, it sounds like they're waiting on an Army decision

Its still hard for me to fathom that they would be out, given that their tech seems to be the genesis for much of the NGSW program...

BruhMomento

From: BruhMomento

19-Nov

now I think sig has a chance to win because the army may want stuff from one distributor since sig already bagged the m17/m18 and the mg-338 contracts. But idk I'm no expert

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

19-Nov

BruhMomento said:

now I think sig has a chance to win because the army may want stuff from one distributor since sig already bagged the m17/m18 and the mg-338 contracts. But idk I'm no expert

I think almost all of us were betting on Textron - which now may have dropped out - so I'd say none of us are experts at this point. 

SIG does have a number of advantages:

-Already provides guns to US Mil (as you mentioned)

-SIG Spear shares M4/AR ergonomics and familiarity 

-LMG is extremely light, reportedly low recoil 

-SIG's case design is probably the lowest risk, and can also be loaded on existing ammo loading machines 

Its main downsides are

-Heaviest ammo choice 

-Metallic case does not reduce weapon heating compared to polymer 

-SIG's civilian weapons can have somewhat spotty QC, and its MHS pistol was not without some teething issues 

Overall I wouldn't bet against them, especially if Textron is out. 

Gr1ff1th

From: Gr1ff1th

19-Nov

Just a reminder that the contract stipulates that the Army can take it's pick of vendors products, both weapons and ammo, so it's entirely possible they can choose a combination of SIG guns and TV ammo, the contract also leaves open the possibility of the adoption of the TV Rifle, and then later adopting the future Lonestar LWMMG, there is also the possibility (if Textron isn't out) of adopting just the Textron NGSW-AR, which theoretically was ready to go at the end of LSAT, and then later adopting an improved/fixed NGSW-R.

Regardless of that, I still don't think Textron is out, especially not after Textron themselves says they're not, or at least they haven't voluntarily, which is contrary to the rumors of them "dropping out".

As an aside, If TV had developed a conventional layout rifle, and a lightweight machine gun (which Lonestar has started work on), firing 80KSPI ammo then they'd probably have it in the bag, even versus Textron.

The strongest competitor to CT ammo in NGSW has always been TV-Style cases, which give you damn near most of the weight savings, except with compatibility with existing actions and guns, I can't help but imagine if polymer ammo was widely fielded in the past, that LSAT/CT small arms probably would never have existed, seeing as your relative savings are so much lower when competing against composite polymer ammo vs brass that there wouldn't have been enough of a need to justify the development cost.

TOP