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.

  • 3324
    MEMBERS
  • 188536
    MESSAGES
  • 8
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

USMC now fielding VCOG 1-8X for M27   Small Arms <20mm

Started 15-Dec by gatnerd; 16438 views.
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

15-Dec

In 2020, the USMC selected the Trijicon VCOG 1-8x as the 'Squad Common Optic':

https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/gearscout/beltfed/2020/02/26/trijicon-vcog-1-8x28-selected-as-usmc-squad-common-optic/

The VCOG is a First Focal Plane (FFP) 1-8x with a integrated scope base, that weighs 31.5oz:

https://www.trijicon.com/products/details/vc18-c-2400001

Well, browsing AR15 forum someone shared that their son has now been issued the 1-8x, so they are now out there in circulation. Notably we also see that the M27 is issued with a KAC NT-4 suppressor as well:

In this configuration, we see the M27 evolve into a sort of 'Universal Infantry Weapon' (UIW) that combines Assault Rifle + Automatic Rifle + DMR into a single unit that is issued to each soldier, and allows each member to use any one of those capabilities as needed. 

While the M27 was a bit dubious as an Automatic Rifle, in its present configuration its very promising as this combination weapon/ UIW. To my knowledge this is the most capable / sophisticated standard issue infantry weapon in the world as of Dec 2021. 

The biggest downside is weight.

M27 UIW:

-7.85lb + 1.97lb + 0.619 + 0.688 + 1.5

= 12.63lb / 5.73kg empty

stancrist

From: stancrist

15-Dec

gatnerd said:

While the M27 was a bit dubious as an Automatic Rifle, in its present configuration its very promising as this combination weapon/ UIW. To my knowledge this is the most capable / sophisticated standard issue infantry weapon in the world as of Dec 2021.

I'm not sure that being issued with more bells and whistles necessarily makes the M27 a more capable weapon, especially considering the limitations of its caliber.

Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

15-Dec

(Insert "DO YOU EVEN LIFT, BRO?" meme here)

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

16-Dec

stancrist said:

I'm not sure that being issued with more bells and whistles necessarily makes the M27 a more capable weapon, especially considering the limitations of its caliber

I think a weapons accessories / optics absolutely do contribute to its 'capability rating.' 

The first use of the ACOG certainly made the M16 and M4 more capable in Iraq:

https://www.1stmardiv.marines.mil/News/News-Article-Display/Article/540346/little-scope-making-a-big-difference-on-the-battlefield/

And then theres this tidbit that always impressed me:

"In Fallujah, Iraq Marines with ACOG-equipped M16A4s created a stir by taking so many head shots that until the wounds were closely examined, some observers thought the insurgents had been executed."

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

16-Dec

While the weight is far from ideal, LPVO's actually do provide some pretty serious benefits Stan.

The thing I'm glad to see is that they went with a 28mm exit tube. The 24mm tubes are just too tight and tiny to get the full benefits from in my experience.

I have a much cheaper brand of 1-8x28 that I like enough to have bought more than one of and it's surprising how much benefit they give.

One of the great things about LPVO's even as a civilian is the ability to glass things at a distance even if you aren't going to shoot at them since it's legitimately easier and more intuitive to hold the reticle on what you're trying to get a better look at as you move the flipper between magnification levels.

In a military setting with the current standard rules of engagement which all but hard require you to identify that a potential target is holding a weapon etc this has to be even more of an advantage.

There's many people who have issues with the ROE etc but for now this is the reality for these guys and the lpvo will meaningfully improve their ability to do target identification etc.

Also LPVO's keep getting lighter and shorter for a given magnifying range which is nice. (JSSAP is putting quite a bit of money this year into fielding some true game changing optics tech that may drastically accelerate the pace of this too)

I've been pretty strongly considering moving up to a 1-10 instead of a 1-8 at some point in the next couple years myself but even 1-8 is just world's better than something like a fixed magnification acog.

In reply toRe: msg 4
stancrist

From: stancrist

17-Dec

gatnerd said:

I think a weapons accessories / optics absolutely do contribute to its 'capability rating.' 

The first use of the ACOG certainly made the M16 and M4 more capable in Iraq...

roguetechie said:

While the weight is far from ideal, LPVO's actually do provide some pretty serious benefits Stan.

One of the great things about LPVO's even as a civilian is the ability to glass things at a distance even if you aren't going to shoot at them since it's legitimately easier and more intuitive to hold the reticle on what you're trying to get a better look at as you move the flipper between magnification levels.

I have no experience with LPVO sights -- my military service was in the iron sights era, and of my personal rifles, only the AUG had an optic -- so I'll take your word on LPVO effectiveness.

roguetechie said:

In a military setting with the current standard rules of engagement which all but hard require you to identify that a potential target is holding a weapon etc this has to be even more of an advantage.

Except we're no longer conducting COIN operations in Afghanistan.  The concern now is "near peer" combat, which -- if we can judge by previous wars -- is unlikely to have those restrictive ROEs.

In any case, what I question is the idea that the M27 as a "Universal Infantry Weapon" -- a combination Assault Rifle/Automatic Rifle/DMR -- is truly more capable than single-purpose weapons.

When considering infantry vs infantry combat:

- Is the M27 going to deliver noticeably greater hit probability than lighter rifles like the Gevaer m/10, MARS-L, and QBZ-191?

- Will the M27 be able to equal, let alone exceed, the performance of 7.62mm marksman rifles like the New Zealand DMW?

- Can the M27 in the automatic rifle role provide anywhere near the level of supporting fires as the M60E6, Maximi, and PKP?

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

17-Dec

I'm not going to disagree with anything you've said tbh.

I love my LPVO's, especially the large tube ones, and I even think that they definitely have a place in full on big boy combat.

But, you're not going to catch me even TRYING to vouch for the m27 itself because frankly I detest the gun and have lost much of my respect for the USMC over things that have been done in the name of "defending the m27's and thus the marine corps' honor"

The m27 program is emblematic of the problems baked into US military procurement sadly and is not only the wrong gun for it's current job But also a liability I fear will bite us going forward.

ETA: The m27 was adopted in a time period and military procurement climate where we could afford to do dumb shit without meaningfully impacting our ability to win wars. A time when we had overwhelming and near across the board advantages over anyone we were realistically going to face off against. Neither of those things are true anymore as our advantages have eroded across the board while our potential opponents have only gotten better more formidable and better equipped to face us and live to tell the tale.

Complacency and arrogance have no place in the threat atmosphere of today much less the fights of tomorrow

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

17-Dec

stancrist said:

In any case, what I question is the idea that the M27 as a "Universal Infantry Weapon" -- a combination Assault Rifle/Automatic Rifle/DMR -- is truly more capable than single-purpose weapons. When considering infantry vs infantry combat: - Is the M27 going to deliver noticeably greater hit probability than lighter rifles like the Gevaer m/10, MARS-L, and QBZ-191? - Will the M27 be able to equal, let alone exceed, the performance of 7.62mm marksman rifles like the New Zealand DMW? - Can the M27 in the automatic rifle role provide anywhere near the level of supporting fires as the M60E6, Maximi, and PKP?

The way I view the UIW concept is that its a lot like a Multitool or Swiss Army Knife - its the never the perfect tool for the job, but its a handy tool that can perform a lot of jobs in a single package.

For dedicated knife or screwdriver or plier use, the Leatherman is meh. A dedicated screwdriver or knife or pliers is much better. But if you need a screwdriver, and then a bit later need pliers...the leatherman ends up a lot better then just having one better tool. 

I see the UIW in the same vein. Individually 

-Its inferior to an assault rifle because its both heavier and longer

-Its inferior as a DMR because its in 5.56 firing standard ball (as opposed to match) ammo

-Its inferior as a LMG/Automatic rifle because its magazine fed, and uses standard 30rd mags 

But, where it shines is that the UIW can perform all of those roles decently, and when the entire squad has them, theres a weight of numbers advantage. 

So for example, if a situation occurs where the Squad really needs a DMR capability, rather then 1 guy with a DMR, and the rest of the guys providing marginal capability, the UIW allows the entire squad to put in DMR work. 

On the flipside, it allows an individual soldier to switch roles as needed. For example, in urban combat, the UIW allows the soldier to have an assault rifle as he clears a building, and then once he's fought his way to the roof / a elevated window, he can then switch to a DMR configuration to begin peering into the windows of surrounding buildings. Or with bipod engaged and selector set to FA, he can then cover a street corner and pour a bit of FA into anyone entering the street.

So all these situations can be covered by a single weapon (at the expense of not being ideal for any one)

That said, the M27 is not the ideal UIW. As I've said before, its FA ability appears very marginal, in that it both has only 30rd mags, and it has no FA optimization (reduced RPM and reduced bolt impact.) When I had envisioned the UIW 'ideal' it would be something like a SCAR 16 with 'constant recoil' Ultimax FA system + 40rd mags.

For the M27, a hydraulic buffer + 40rd mags would really be an improvement. For example, a 'mil grade' version of the 40rd Torkmag, which uses a coil spring to reduce magazine length while retaining capacity. 

Torkmag 40 left, PMAG 40 right:

EmericD

From: EmericD

18-Dec

gatnerd said:

see the UIW in the same vein. Individually  -Its inferior to an assault rifle because its both heavier and longer -Its inferior as a DMR because its in 5.56 firing standard ball (as opposed to match) ammo -Its inferior as a LMG/Automatic rifle because its magazine fed, and uses standard 30rd mags  But, where it shines is that the UIW can perform all of those roles decently, and when the entire squad has them, theres a weight of numbers advantage. 

+1.

ONE M27 will be inferior to ONE 7.62 mm DMR, but between 0 and 600 m TWELVE M27/M38 (11 with ACOG and 1 with 1-8x LPVO) will be immensely superior to a single DMR... and if the M38 is issued with Mk262 ammo, then longer range is possible.

The main limitation I see is that the 5.56 mm is lacking the capability to defeat intermediate barriers, and no 5.56 mm AP can defeat anything close to 16 mm of RHA at 200 m or up, so you need to rely on 40x46 mm HEDP, then 84 mm launchers...

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

18-Dec

EmericD said:

ONE M27 will be inferior to ONE 7.62 mm DMR, but between 0 and 600 m TWELVE M27/M38 (11 with ACOG and 1 with 1-8x LPVO) will be immensely superior to a single DMR... and if the M38

From my understanding, they seem to be doing away with the M38 'DMR' and rather converting all 12x M27's into 1-8x LPVO + Suppressor rifles. 

Under the 'Squad Common Optic' the entire Squad gets their 3.5x ACOG's replaced with the 1-8x VCOG.

https://taskandpurpose.com/military-tech/marine-corps-squad-common-optic-trijicon/

So it would look something like this; still waiting to see how the 84mm ends up integrated.

TOP