I actually like the gm6 and the niche it puts itself in.

For something like a vehicle checkpoint where you may need to stop a vbied coming at you, you don't actually need more than 1k meter range as much as you need the ability to pump multiple raufoss or m8 API into something QUICKLY.

By being shorter and easier to fire quickly it does this better than other options. You can conceivably hoist this over a jersey barrier get behind it and pump rounds quickly then move if necessary.

Maybe there's something I fundamentally misunderstand here but I can appreciate the tradeoffs they're making, including the >1k meter precision sacrifice.

Put bluntly in many cases the guy nearest this gun at the time it needs to get used probably doesn't really know how to shoot past 1k effectively anyway.

I know I certainly don't have the skills necessary to do that truly well.

To a degree I think it's a weapon good for the force and enablers we have rather than the Ultimate tool for the ideal paper force that has nothing but guys trained to shoot past 1k effectively and $30,000 high end enablers like 3rd gen flir fuzed night vision and thermal optics etc that can identify and resolve a target sufficient to make it within ROE to be permissible to shoot.

I was thinking complementary to Charlie Gutsache, not instead. 
It’s a truism that there are few problems that can’t be solved with more HE, but sometimes more is too much more.

That being said, I think it’s a shame the xm109 payload rifle wasn’t further developed. 

Indeed that is the case , Lynx was always meant for use mostly in Assault rifle type distances, 1000m shots even with 50cal require accurate range finding and ballistics calculations so not something you do in a hurry. The most fascinating thing is that gun can be carried collapsed when its barely longer than an assault rifle. But so far i havent seen any adoption of the gun anywhere . would at least expect some ME customers to buy for the cool factor alone.

https://asiatimes.com/2021/09/one-shot-one-kill-sas-has-a-new-weapon/

Well, there you go!

I have some experience with the M82, and although the recoil is very mild and long when you are firing it from the typical angled rifle prone position, it certainly is not when firing it with the proper straight body-position (like a machinegun) behind the gun. You can certainly feel it.

I have never fired the M82 standing, but I have lifted it to my shoulder, and that quickly convinced me against ever trying, although the recoil would probably feel quite mild due to the lesser mass acting on the shoulder.

DavidPawley said:

I was thinking complementary to Charlie Gutsache, not instead.

I don't see how they are complementary.  The CG does the same thing as a 20mm AMR -- launch HE/frag rounds -- only better (84mm HE > 20mm HE).

Plus, the CG is far more versatile.  The AMR fires HE, but the CG has a wide variety of ammo types, including HE that can be set for air burst detonation.

And then there's the little matter that the hypothetical 20mm AMR mentioned in the NDIA presentation does not even exist...

The CG is undeniably more destructive, in a shorter and lighter package. 

I wonder how the accuracy and time of flight is at 1000-1500m? Even with the new FCS that corrects for drop, thats a hell of a ways for something firing at around 750-830fps. 

I'm curious whether they've ever tried a tripod mounted CG to improve long range accuracy. 

roguetechie said:

I actually like the gm6 and the niche it puts itself in.

What niche is that?  I'm sure that there's someone out there with a problem that would best be solved with a 23 lb. AMR that lacks the effective range of existing AMRs, but there can't be many of them.  At least in a military context, the vehicle checkpoint HIPPITY HOPPITY STAY OFF MY PROPERTY role has been served for some time by something arguably more effective:

gatnerd said:

I wonder how the accuracy and time of flight is at 1000-1500m?

HE 441D time of flight to 1000 meters = 5.1 seconds

p. A-8  ARN18072_TC 3-22x84 FINAL WEB.pdf (army.mil)

gatnerd said:

I'm curious whether they've ever tried a tripod mounted CG to improve long range accuracy.

It can be fired from a bipod, but considering the ergonomics, I don't know if a tripod is feasible.

stancrist said:

HE 441D time of flight to 1000 meters = 5.1 seconds

Excellent, thank you. 

So for zapping any type of moving target, unless the target is driving straight toward the CG, that would really be an eternity. So that could be something where an AMR would be better. 

1000m data was not shared, but the earlier slideshow had the 1500m flight time at 3.2 seconds. 

That said, with the upcoming Guided Carl G / Guided AT4, which is designed to be able to fit moving targets via semi active laser guidance... probably easier to just snag those vs setting up a dedicated AMR weapons program (despite how cool a return to AMR's might be.) 

In terms of Tripod for CG, I found this prototype...which as you predicted looks to have abysmal ergonomics. 

For ergonomics there would likely need to be some sort of offset tripod, possibly using something like a Filmaking 'Steadycam' arm attached to the CG, which is supported by the tripod. 

Like a much more robust stable version of this:

Alternatively, a tripod that clamps to the very muzzle end of the CG, allowing the gunner to stand/crouch behind the tripod to fire. 

gatnerd said:

So for zapping any type of moving target, unless the target is driving straight toward the CG, that would really be an eternity. So that could be something where an AMR would be better.

The shorter ToF would certainly be better for engaging moving targets.  The question is, how much better would a 20mm AMR be?

As best I can tell from a brief search, currently available AMRs in 20x110 and 20x102 are either single-shot or bolt-action repeaters.

I wonder just how effective a bolt-action 20mm AMR would be in a scenario like that seen here:  https://youtu.be/S4YRiJM-BLw?t=25