autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons, particularly in larger calibres (12.7+mm).

  • 3173
    MEMBERS
  • 180206
    MESSAGES
  • 3
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

What is the US Army up to?   Ammunition <20mm

Started 8-Aug by autogun; 4408 views.
RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

18-Aug

N9NWO said...

The question is what to do with the millions of M4s in the system.

Keep them in 5.56mm and use them until they wear out and are replaced?

Use the new rifles on the front line and either expand that until it’s general issue or maintain the old rifles as second line equipment?

Greg (N9NWO)

From: Greg (N9NWO)

18-Aug

much of the support troops do not need an infantry rifle.  However a pistol is too under powered.  Thus a folding stock PDW with short barrel that could hit out to 300 m would be a better option.

RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

18-Aug

Indeed, but you have a large amount of M4s which are probably issued anyway.

Greg (N9NWO)

From: Greg (N9NWO)

18-Aug

a large percentage need to have their upper receivers replaced.  Barrel wear and such.

RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

18-Aug

If you need to refurbish things rather than use those made available by the NGSW I would have thought it would be cheaper to use existing supply lines to replace what you have rather than go to the bother of qualifying a new system, ammunition, armourers etc.

 

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

18-Aug

The Army is keeping the M4 in service for rear echelon roles.

The Army has just adopted brand new 9mm handguns and a brand new 9mm Subcompact Weapon (SCW). They are not going to do some foolish thing like spend a ton of money to convert old shagged out rifles to replace the brand new guns they just bought. Silly.

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

18-Aug

One would assume you might designate such a rifle as a "Carbine". Perhaps a compromise barrel length, say between 14-15"?

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

18-Aug

So if your proposal is to replace the entire upper receivers, stocks, pistol grips, optics, caliber, magazines, etc, then what are you saving? A $50 hunk of aluminum?

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

18-Aug

Perhaps I am prematurely becoming a cranky old man, but where is the use in such an idea? You reuse little more than a serial number, introduce an entirely new caliber, and a dangerous one at that, and you don't fill any niche that's currently unfilled. The only benefit to such an idea that I can see is that on the surface it seems fairly clever. But only on the surface.

In reply toRe: msg 17
QuintusO

From: QuintusO

18-Aug

We also hear that "replace the pistol" line again... What person decided that pistols were no longer useful? Hell, they're so useful that the Army went out of its way to solicit a compact version of its new handgun. You could argue there is a gap, sure, but between SCW and the M4A1 that field seems pretty well filled by now.

TOP