Geissele URG-I up for pre-order

[call_me_ski]

Has there been any information released about the contract? Quantity? Fielding dates?

What are your thoughts on the future of the MK18 and M4A1 within the Navy/NSW since the USMC has large contracts open with HK for the IAR?

Do you think the URG-I will be a limited USASOC trial? Delta / CAG seem to like the HK so I was surprised

Combat diver on TOS said that the initial purchase is enough to outfit the Ranger Battalions but not quiet enough for 2 SF groups. The plan is to field is USASOC wide. He got word to expect a 10.3 variant as well.

My understanding that that NSW has placed their eggs in the SURG and PDW baskets going forward. The specs for those read like there were looking at the MCX.

[Rhyyke]

The barrel steel is interesting. Frankly the handguard really isn’t that compelling to me compared to the MK14 but that’s just me.

The barrel alloy may not be any real benefit to those of us using regular ammo instead of M855A1.

I'm a big fan of the Mk14, but I can see the utility of the mlok slots at 9 and 3. If they ever released the rail by itself I might pick one up to try it vs the Mk14 and keep one, but definitely not interested enough to buy the whole upper.

[call_me_ski]

So is USASOC done with under barrel grenade launchers?

[Stickman]

Combat diver on TOS said that the initial purchase is enough to outfit the Ranger Battalions but not quiet enough for 2 SF groups. The plan is to field is USASOC wide. He got word to expect a 10.3 variant as well.

My understanding that that NSW has placed their eggs in the SURG and PDW baskets going forward. The specs for those read like there were looking at the MCX.

This is why sometimes someone needs to come in and lay down ground work and rules. It appears that the various branches of the service are heading out in different directions for platforms, and while I feel there is a need for different weapons at times, I question whether the need is quite so splintered.

[prdubi]

I feel they are all going in different directions purposely.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[opngrnd]

So is USASOC done with under barrel grenade launchers?

It seems that most newer versions attached through the rail on the bottom of the handguard. Think m320. I can't speak for what SOCOM is doing, but It makes sense.

[call_me_ski]

It seems that most newer versions attached through the rail on the bottom of the handguard. Think m320. I can't speak for what SOCOM is doing, but It makes sense.

Not sure that that is a great solution when you have to use Mlok to mount the rail. Seems like an extra failure point.

[TexasAggie2005]

Not sure that that is a great solution when you have to use Mlok to mount the rail. Seems like an extra failure point.

In Crane's KeyMod vs MLOK tests, the Vltor Picatinny flashlight mount pulled off of the MLOK accessory rail before the MLOK attachments failed.
(Ref: Pg41 of this PDF)

[Diamondback]

This is why sometimes someone needs to come in and lay down ground work and rules. It appears that the various branches of the service are heading out in different directions for platforms, and while I feel there is a need for different weapons at times, I question whether the need is quite so splintered.

On the other hand, when you force too much "Joint," you get TFX/F-111 (where we lost just plain STUPID numbers of men and machines making a silk purse out of that sow's ear and it never really went Joint anyway because of admirals committing mass career suicide to get the far superior Tomcat in its place) and JSF (which really should have been split into two new clean-sheet airframes, a joint fighter for Navy/AF with service-optimized variants and a STOVL attack bird for USMC). That said, stipulating that I am an outsider with zero direct experience and only the historian's-eye view of past such ventures, were I SECDEF I would order the creation of a permanent joint services-industry working group tasked with studying the M16/M4 family and finding solutions, COTS where possible and new development where not, to address the weak links in the chain to the extent that budget and cost-effectiveness allow and maintain a Common Standard for the baseline fleet and set acceptable Special Case configurations.

Example: USASOC and NSW both want new specialty rails for CQB on a "Next Gen Mk 18". The Working Group would then assemble a panel from every group that has a stake in CQB, have them define the requirements that each of their communities has in that rail and then settle on a Best Fit to become part of the new "Joint CQB Upper" spec. Possibly define a "Primary" and an "Alternate Standard" to allow for bottlenecks in the supply chain, and to keep the vendors honest via threat of competition.

Just a view from the outside looking in...

[drtywk]

Is geisssle the supplier of the entire URGI?

No. The URG-I is actually just an upgrade kit that is supplied to USASOC. The kit comes as follows: DD 14.5 midlength barrel with a low profile gas block, a gas tube and a Geissele barrel nut already installed, plus the MK16 rail. It is provided this way so that unit armorers can take existing M4 uppers, pull the rails and barrel assemblies and install the URG-I barrel assembly, MK16 rail, and Surefire SF4P flash hider. The intent is to use the existing BCG’s, charging handles and BUIS.

There is supposed to be a 10.3” version coming to replace the MK18’s currently in service. .