2013

Printable View

12-10-13, 15:35
sfsigo110

AAR: Victory First SCAR Family of Weapons 12/8/2013

After Action Review (AAR) by Rick T
Course: Victory First – SCAR Family of Weapons Lecture
Instructors: Matt Jacques
Dates: Sunday December 8, 2013
Location: F3 Tactical 13914 Metrotech Dr, Chantilly, VA 20151 (703) 378-3685

Class Overview:
This was a ~4hour in depth lecture on the SCAR family of weapons. The lion’s share of the block of instruction was a detailed description of the history and evolution of the platform with a focus on what drove the various requirements and why things were done (or not done). Matt is uniquely qualified to give this course because he not only worked on the system for FN during the development and fielding process, but he can lay claim to being one of only 4 men that taught the SOCOM new equipment training to the folks that the system was designed for in the first place: trigger pullers. It was evident from the very beginning of the class that there has been an incredible amount of internet conjecture on the platform from folks that have little to no frame of reference to comment (shocker I know). One of Matt’s stated goals for the class was to answer many of the most commonly asked questions our keyboard commando friends have brought up. A prime example is bitching about the colors the system is available in. Matt’s answer? “Because that’s what the government contract specified”, but Matt didn’t stop there. He seriously did his homework for this class and provided citation of the exact government document/requirement/color palate nomenclature that drove the end state. He did this for damn near every slide we went over and even offered to show source documentation from the masses of documents he brought to the class (before anyone cries foul, Matt only has what he was legally allowed to keep and show the public). Any question that anyone could come up with was answered thoroughly and with the kind of personal insight only someone that lived the development could have (ask Matt about the various evolutions of the 180 vs. 90 degree selector decision for a laugh). If you are at all interested in the whys and why nots or capabilities of the SCAR platform then this course is a helluva way to spend an afternoon.
The second portion of the course consisted of a hands on disassembly/assembly and capabilities discussion of the SCAR. I found this portion to be especially interesting as Matt gave many little trips and tricks that will make your life as a SCAR owner much easier. Example: Did anyone else think of using the location of the reciprocating charging handle as an indication of what issue your weapon is having in event of a stoppage? I know I had never thought of that. We were also able to lay hands on a whole table full of SCAR related unobtanium (Special thanks for FN for providing a whole smattering of really rare and cool versions of the SCAR for us to go hands on with during this portion, as well as the FN employee (whose name unfortunately escapes me) that sat in on the course to allow us to have fully automatic SCARs and the grenade launcher module on site. We were literally the first civilians to ever see and be allowed to manipulate some of these variants. If you are a gun guy, this alone was worth the price of admission
In conclusion, if you have any interest in any of the different flavors of SCAR, if you have any questions about anything even remotely connected to the SCAR, if you ever wondered why or why not FN did/didn’t include a certain feature/component/accessory on the SCAR, and if you want 100% accurate, undeniably fact based answers to these questions: there is simply no better place to go than Matt Jacques and Victory First.
Thanks go again: To Matt for putting together such an elaborately researched and informative course. To FN for supporting this endeavor (As a result you will be getting some of my hard earned money soon.) and to the 100% undisputed best tactical shop in the entire world F3 Tactical for hosting.
12-10-13, 22:35
VooDoo6Actual

Thx for the AAR.
Was he able to elaborate on why SCAR's have such a high attrition rate on NVD's / IRD's & some Opitcs etc ?
If so, what has been done to mitigate that ?

TIA
12-11-13, 00:09
fourXfour

Were they filming? I know he has a Panteo video coming out.
12-11-13, 01:57
Fox33

I hope you are willing to field or forward questions because I have a bunch

Note I have read the Sep 2011 spec sheet for the mk17 from front to back and have a pretty decent amount of time under a mk17

#1 why in the absolute **** did they not go with a SR-25 pattern magazine (or at least an FAL)

#2 why the itty bitty parts and leaf springs to retain the barrels (BTW NFW would I ever change the barrel in the ORP)

#3 how did they over come the heat issues the gun was having early on, and in my opinion still has

#4 why the polymer lower

I dont want you to think at I am drilling you, but I'd love to hear these questions answered. I think the SCAR platform is a really good gun that could be awesome once the issues it has are worked out.
12-11-13, 08:09
sfsigo110

VooDoo6Actual- I sent your question to Matt and will let you know what he says.
fourXfour- No they were not fliming. My understanding is that the Pantaeo video was already filmed elsewhere and is currently in editing.
Fox33- I had already sent VooDoo's question to Matt before I saw your post. Once I get a response I will see if I can get you any answers in round 2.
12-11-13, 15:09
VooDoo6Actual

Quote:

Originally Posted by sfsigo110

VooDoo6Actual- I sent your question to Matt and will let you know what he says.
fourXfour- No they were not fliming. My understanding is that the Pantaeo video was already filmed elsewhere and is currently in editing.
Fox33- I had already sent VooDoo's question to Matt before I saw your post. Once I get a response I will see if I can get you any answers in round 2.

My vetted sources tell me that it is / was due to severe / violent recoil impulses the BCG was inherently generating. It is understandable & acknowledged that the tasking of having a soft shooting / accurate / reliable / relatively light weight comparatively to other .308 NATO platforms of similar stature is not an easy engineering feat. I realize that they are pushing the envelope so to speak.

Curious if the newer iterations / generations of SCAR H electronics of "defecating the bed" issues have been addressed or are even on the radar ?

TIA BTW.
12-11-13, 17:23
Fox33

VooDoo

am I putting too much out there?
12-11-13, 18:42
VooDoo6Actual

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox33

VooDoo

am I putting too much out there?

I have zero issues w/ your questions.
no worries.
12-11-13, 19:29
.308holes

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox33

I hope you are willing to field or forward questions because I have a bunch

Note I have read the Sep 2011 spec sheet for the mk17 from front to back and have a pretty decent amount of time under a mk17

#1 why in the absolute **** did they not go with a SR-25 pattern magazine (or at least an FAL) ** That was FN Herstal wanted to do, we (FNH USA ) tried to sway them, but mother Herstal is the end all be all, unfortunately in this instance.

#2 why the itty bitty parts and leaf springs to retain the barrels (BTW NFW would I ever change the barrel in the ORP) **If you found the itty bitty leaf springs, you removed the barrel retention screw housing, which is not what you do to remove the barrel. The screws are retained in the housing, and are captured. There are 6 screws, 2 in the lower housing (barrel extension) and two all the way closest to the muzzle. NOTHING should come off the rifle when changing barrels.

#3 how did they over come the heat issues the gun was having early on, and in my opinion still has **There was (by Crane) deemed a real 'heat" issue per se. The firing schedule for the testing required 30 round full auto mag dumps, and while gloves were used, the heat was really an issue after a full combat load was expended, and as you could expect, the gas block and barrel were hot, much like any other rifle that has gone through that firing schedule. DO they get hot, absolutely, no question, but hotter than another, I do not have testing results to show either way, sorry. I left that information in the office when I left, it was shop property. I will inquire to find out more for you.

#4 why the polymer lower ** The original aluminum trigger module guns needed to shed weight to meet the threshold requirements for weigh, as while trying to meet the objective weight, it was realized that the same polymer used in P90's, glocks and other polymer firearms components at the time were strong enough to be used for the trigger module since it didn't take the operating stresses during operation. In addition to that, it was realized that once the molds were cut and finalized and lowers were turned out, it was more cost effective. No machining costs, aluminum costs and coatings cost.

I dont want you to think at I am drilling you, but I'd love to hear these questions answered. I think the SCAR platform is a really good gun that could be awesome once the issues it has are worked out.

With my answers in mind, I left my full time involvement in 2006, so the last 8 years are what I can keep up with. To the best of my memory, hope those answers help. Thanks for the questions.
12-11-13, 19:42
.308holes

Quote:

Originally Posted by VooDoo6Actual

Thx for the AAR.
Was he able to elaborate on why SCAR's have such a high attrition rate on NVD's / IRD's & some Opitcs etc ?
If so, what has been done to mitigate that ?

TIA

When it was a new system, all the "legacy" optics (except for the Aimpoint micros that entered the market post contract award) were not built to sustain the recoil impulse of the short stroke gas tappet system. They were all built to be able to operate on a DI gas gun or bolt gun, which both treat optics differently in recoil. Most of the optics companies since then have changed their manufacturing process to be able to operate in the range of recoil impulses the SCAR produces. Very much like Trijicon had to rewire and make the RMR a more robust system with the onset of slide mounting on handguns, it wasn't designed for that and Trijicon realized it had to make changes.
With the SCAR platform only being 10 years old, there are alot of "growing pains". Look at the Stoner design, here we are 60 years later still tweaking it to make it better, and the SCAR design somewhat forced (for the lack of a better term) optics companies to rethink manufacturing process to work on the platform.

Hope that answers your question.