gatnerd said...

Yes, the feed device is unusual.  It appears to be an open top box, similar to a regular LMG ammo box.

But, it appears to have a vertical "feed tower" in order for it to be inserted into a mag well on the LMG. If that's the case, I suspect the ammo boxes are going to be unnecessary bulky in pouches, due to the need to accommodate the ~2" vertical feed tower. Similar to the problem with storing AR compatible drum mags.

Perhaps.  We would need to see what the feed device looks like by itself.  If it does have a bulky tower, that could be problematical, since it appears to be a belt-fed-only weapon, unable to use box magazines.

Those are great pics Stan. Is there another release of pics from Sig?

gatnerd said...

Those are great pics Stan. Is there another release of pics from Sig?

It would seem so.  The pics are from this article:  https://www.gunsamerica.com/digest/sig-sauer-army-ngsw-machine-gun-rifle-contract/

gatnerd said...

But as their NGSW submission has a 13" barrel, and the goal of the NGSW is a M4 replacement, I imagine that while its probably impractically powerful and recoiling to be a Assault Rifle, that is what they are submitting it as.

To pick a nit, it's being submitted as a Rifle, not an "Assault Rifle".

"Perhaps.  We would need to see what the feed device looks like by itself.  If it does have a bulky tower, that could be problematical, since it appears to be a belt-fed-only weapon, unable to use box magazines."

Thank you for the Gunsamerica link.

Per the article:

"The machine gun looks fairly compact and feeds from a linked belt of ammunition as well as from detachable magazines."

This makes sense, as from past coverage, it seems the Marine's are wedded to the 'IAR' mag fed machine gun idea. And weapons like the M249 also include a provision for feeding from magazines as a backup.

So this configuration kills to birds with one stone. It offers a palatable IAR (really more BAR at this point) weapon for the Marine's, while also allowing a true LMG configuration should they come to their senses. And it also allows LMG gunners to use rifle mags in an emergency.  

It also explains the weird 'feed tower' box attachment system. Hopefully they design the feed tower to 'fold' for storage, and then snap into a locked vertical configuration in use. Similar to a modern car key:

gatnerd said...

Per the article:

"The machine gun looks fairly compact and feeds from a linked belt of ammunition as well as from detachable magazines."

This makes sense, as from past coverage, it seems the Marine's are wedded to the 'IAR' mag fed machine gun idea. And weapons like the M249 also include a provision for feeding from magazines as a backup.

So this configuration kills to birds with one stone. It offers a palatable IAR (really more BAR at this point) weapon for the Marine's, while also allowing a true LMG configuration should they come to their senses. And it also allows LMG gunners to use rifle mags in an emergency.

Yes, I saw that remark.  I would caution against assuming that just because it says so in a non-technical article, does not mean that it is a factually correct statement.

I think the author erroneously assumed that the LMG can feed from rifle magazines, because the weapon lacks a proper mag well, and there is no visible mag release.

I meant that it is similar to SiG recent range of assault rifle products, with a different back receiver than AR-15 and with the possibility of mounting a folding stock

poliorcetes said...

I meant that it is similar to SiG recent range of assault rifle products, with a different back receiver than AR-15 and with the possibility of mounting a folding stock

Okay, you've got me very confused.  Your responses seem completely unrelated to your original comment.

You:  "SiG's carbine entry looks like a short barrel marksman rifle more than an assault rifle."

Me:   "To me, it looks pretty much like a beefier version of the improved M4 carbine used by SOCOM."

You:  "Look at the back of the receiver"

Me:   "I don't see anything unique about the back of the receiver, and the whole rifle still looks to me like a M4 URGI on steroids."

You:  "As any other recent SiG design, the back of the receiver protudes far from the grip."

Me:   "How does the shape of the back of the receiver make it look like a DMR?"

You are right. I didn't develop it enough. Sorry, Stan, I mixed the two issues.