View Full Version : M110A1 (G28) to be new Squad Designated Marksman Rifle
Surprise or no?
"Now the Army plans to start fielding the G28 in 2018 to infantry squads as the service's standard SDMR, Lt. Gen. John Murray, deputy chief of staff for Army G8, told Military.com.
The Army has money in the fiscal 2018 budget earmarked for the SDMR program, said Murray, who did not have the exact figure listed in the budget"
https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/03/06/army-plans-field-hk-g28-new-squad-marksman-rifle.html
BoringGuy45
03-07-18, 07:05
With the Marines picking up the M27 and now the Army picking the G28 for their SDMR, I can't help but think that a variant of the 416 is going to be the Army's next rifle.
I also wonder, however, if the Army is doing what the Marines did, and picked up the G28 as a backdoor way of getting their "interim battle rifle", and will eventually issue the G28 to all combat troops. That said, I don't think it's a good idea if that's what they're trying to do; too much extra weight, too much recoil, less ammo.
Would love one of those
Surprise or no?
"Now the Army plans to start fielding the G28 in 2018 to infantry squads as the service's standard SDMR, Lt. Gen. John Murray, deputy chief of staff for Army G8, told Military.com.
The Army has money in the fiscal 2018 budget earmarked for the SDMR program, said Murray, who did not have the exact figure listed in the budget"
https://www.military.com/kitup/2018/03/06/army-plans-field-hk-g28-new-squad-marksman-rifle.html
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-07-18, 09:36
$12K/rifle, for the whole contract including support.
I thought the AR15 and 556 round was the most dangerous weapon on the face of the earth...... ;)
I certainly hope the Army put a formal school in place for the guys who are supposed to be issued this thing -- instead of just handing it to the new Joe and saying, "Do good, it's just a heavy M4 with a scope -- don't f@ck this up."
I certainly hope the Army put a formal school in place for the guys who are supposed to be issued this thing -- instead of just handing it to the new Joe and saying, "Do good, it's just a heavy M4 with a scope -- don't f@ck this up."
You know it’ll be exactly like the current EBR fielding process.
Guys are handed them a month before deploying, sit through a powerpoint, zero them, and deploy.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 12:01
How much does it weigh? The handguard looks stupid also. Not sure what this does over the KAC SR25 types but whatever.
With that stupid hand guard? Wouldn't it make sense to standardize in some way and go MLok since thats what crane picked and is going on the new SOC upper. Or just stick with pic rail?
How much does it weigh? The handguard looks stupid also. Not sure what this does over the KAC SR25 types but whatever.
8.7 lbs with unloaded mag, also I am pretty sure the Army version has a Geissele MLOK rail. I am wondering what scope they are going to use and are they going to issue with suppressor, the sniper version uses the Schmidt & Bender 3-20X50 PMII Ultra Short Scope and a baffle-less OSS suppressor.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 13:32
8.7 lbs with unloaded mag, also I am pretty sure the Army version has a Geissele MLOK rail. I am wondering what scope they are going to use and are they going to issue with suppressor, the sniper version uses the Schmidt & Bender 3-20X50 PMII Ultra Short Scope and a baffle-less OSS suppressor.
It's a boat anchor. It only has a 16" barrel anyway so it's really what- an 800 meter rifle? How often is that necessary? Seems they'd be better served with having one guy carry around a carbon fiber stocked suppressed bolt rifle or an SPR upper along with some chopped down lightweight M4 variant to offset the additional weight.
8.7 lbs is a boat anchor? Also the Marines are taking the 16" M110K1 out to 1200 meters, it is surprising how well the M118LR/MK316 Mod 0 performs out of a 16". BTW this is not the G28 which uses steel receivers and weighs a lot more, IIRC the Army requirement was for a base weight of under 9 lbs so HK went with aluminum receivers.
mack7.62,
Correct, it will have a Geissele rail and optic mount.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 15:19
8.7 lbs is a boat anchor? Also the Marines are taking the 16" M110K1 out to 1200 meters, it is surprising how well the M118LR/MK316 Mod 0 performs out of a 16". BTW this is not the G28 which uses steel receivers and weighs a lot more, IIRC the Army requirement was for a base weight of under 9 lbs so HK went with aluminum receivers.
8.7 lbs without optics, magazine, or ammo is a pig. I have FAL's, G3's, and an M1A- they are all around 9 lbs, and they would suck to actually use in a CQB situation.
FromMyColdDeadHand
03-07-18, 15:23
So, what is the exact spec sheet? I've looked around and I can't see for sure what it is?
So the biggest difference will be piston vs DI, right?
We are stuck with the 5.56/7.62 duality until they get particle weapons I guess.
8.7 lbs without optics, magazine, or ammo is a pig. I have FAL's, G3's, and an M1A- they are all around 9 lbs, and they would suck to actually use in a CQB situation.
Beats doing CQB with a suppressed bolt action on your back.
whats wrong with a sr-25?
I take it that the Germans aren't as concerned with weight as we are?
Dist. Expert 26
03-07-18, 16:46
IMO this makes a lot more sense than a 5.56 SPR. It gives an infantry squad added capability over the M4/M27, more so than just throwing a better piece of glass on top. 9 lbs really isn't all that heavy when compared to a SAW, 240 or M16 with a 203 slung underneath. Yeah, its not ideal for CQB, but your DM should be on the outer cordon anyway.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 16:58
Beats doing CQB with a suppressed bolt action on your back.
If you had a lightweight carbon fiber stocked 7.62NATO take down bolt rifle, under 6.5 pounds broke down into a pack while clearing rooms with a MK 18- that would be more effective for CQB. Even the combined weight of the broke down bolt rifle and MK18 would still be less than HK's G28. Steyr makes a carbon fiber bolt rifle .308 with a 20" barrel and detachable polymer mags that weighs in at 6.3 lbs. Tweak that technology a bit, use a carbon fiber barrel shroud to reduce weigh further and take down feature to make it compact- would make it perfect for that role. Remington makes a lightweight take down .308 sniper system that fits into a small backpack with carbon fiber barrel shroud but it's slightly retarded since they utilize some goofy aluminum folding stock and steel magazines. The G28 fully loaded with optic weighs in at 14.99 pounds. That is absolutely ridiculous.
FYI, been running numbers on an M1A 22" barrel with AG Composite carbon fiber stock w/forward rail, lightweight buttplate, Sadlak alloy mount, Leupold 3.5-10x mil dot weighs in at 8.8 pounds unloaded. Probably reduce that even further going with a shorter barrel maybe even bring it under 8.5 pounds.
7n6
If you had a lightweight carbon fiber stocked 7.62NATO take down bolt rifle, under 6.5 pounds broke down into a pack while clearing rooms with a MK 18- that would be more effective for CQB. Even the combined weight of the broke down bolt rifle and MK18 would still be less than HK's G28. Steyr makes a carbon fiber bolt rifle .308 with a 20" barrel and detachable polymer mags that weighs in at 6.3 lbs. Tweak that technology a bit, use a carbon fiber barrel shroud to reduce weigh further and take down feature to make it compact- would make it perfect for that role. Remington makes a lightweight take down .308 sniper system that fits into a small backpack with carbon fiber barrel shroud but it's slightly retarded since they utilize some goofy aluminum folding stock and steel magazines. The G28 fully loaded with optic weighs in at 14.99 pounds. That is absolutely ridiculous.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180307/b8d5edff6849cab37bc669ba60b34312.jpg
At any rate I see HKmasterrace wins another one
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With the way an SDM is utilized and their role within a Squad, multiple weapons or ones that are broken down/stored are not feasible.
The reality is you need a rifle that offers an extended engagement range beyond the M4, but can also immediately integrate with a Squad as you maneuver and close distance. Multiple weapons (and especially bolt actions) are more suited to the traditional sniper role (static shooting from an FFP) and not that of an Infantry squad that is constantly in motion and typically engaging 10-15 combatants that are also moving.
Bolt guns are basically antiquated with the capability of modern semis. The rate of fire and ease of use make a semi an easy choice over a bolt gun.
The shared manual of arms with the issued M4 will make crucial operation simpler for Joes to adapt to, and at less than 9lbs, it’s only roughly a pound heavier than the M4A1 weighing in at 7.7lbs with only a sling and BUIS.
Just thinking out loud. This is a massive step up from the EBR.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 17:21
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180307/b8d5edff6849cab37bc669ba60b34312.jpg
At any rate I see HKmasterrace wins another one
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's not that hard to read what I wrote. If you have one or two guys with dedicated take down 6.5 pound .308 sniper systems that fit into a small pack- arm them with lightweight chopped down 6 pound MK18 carbines. This way they aren't hindered for CQB/patrol use. Not to mention the two systems (take down sniper rifle/MK18) combined still weigh less than the 15 pound G28. It's completely doable with our current technology and several manufacturers are already producing bolt guns under 6.5 pounds with carbon fiber technology. Steyr makes a .308 carbon fiber stock rifle with detachable polymer magazines that weighs 6.3 pounds in a 20" barrel. Just chop the barrel to 16", thread it, and re-design the system as a take down/back pack rifle- there you go, sub MOA to 1000 meters in a 6.5 pound rifle.
With the way an SDM is utilized and their role within a Squad, multiple weapons or ones that are broken down/stored are not feasible.
The reality is you need a rifle that offers an extended engagement range beyond the M4, but can also immediately integrate with a Squad as you maneuver and close distance. Multiple weapons (and especially bolt actions) are more suited to the traditional sniper role (static shooting from an FFP) and not that of an Infantry squad that is constantly in motion and typically engaging 10-15 combatants that are also moving.
Bolt guns are basically antiquated with the capability of modern semis. The rate of fire and ease of use make a semi an easy choice over a bolt gun.
The shared manual of arms with the issued M4 will make crucial operation simpler for Joes to adapt to, and at less than 9lbs, it’s only roughly a pound heavier than the M4A1 weighing in at 7.7lbs with only a sling and BUIS.
Just thinking out loud. This is a massive step up from the EBR.
The G28 weighs 8.7 pounds without optic or magazine, fully loaded with optic it weighs 14.99 pounds and with OSS 7.62 suppressor weighs 16.21 pounds.
7n6
It's not that hard to read what I wrote. If you have one or two guys with dedicated take down 6.5 pound .308 sniper systems that fit into a small pack- arm them with lightweight chopped down 6 pound MK18 carbines. This way they aren't hindered for CQB/patrol use. Not to mention the two systems (take down sniper rifle/MK18) combined still weigh less than the 15 pound G28. It's completely doable with our current technology and several manufacturers are already producing bolt guns under 6.5 pounds with carbon fiber technology. Steyr makes a .308 carbon fiber stock rifle with detachable polymer magazines that weighs 6.3 pounds in a 20" barrel. Just chop the barrel to 16", thread it, and re-design the system as a take down/back pack rifle- there you go, sub MOA to 1000 meters in a 6.5 pound rifle.
7n6
Big army isn’t going to do this because it’s not realistic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 17:29
Big army isn’t going to do this because it’s not realistic
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How is not realistic? I just showed you the technology already exists.
7n6
I don't understand how a 8 lb M4 and 6.5 lb bolt action is better than a 10 lb M110A1?
How is not realistic? I just showed you the technology already exists.
7n6
Because it’s not
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dist. Expert 26
03-07-18, 17:48
How is not realistic? I just showed you the technology already exists.
7n6
Technology doesn't equate to practicality.
Outlander Systems
03-07-18, 17:51
My CoD loadout says otherwise.
:laugh:
Technology doesn't equate to practicality.
How is not realistic? I just showed you the technology already exists.
7n6
I'll try to break down how the two rifle SDM concept works, given I spent a 10 month deployment pulling double duty as an SDM+Team Leader and hated it.
With two rifles, you will need to carry a basic load of ammunition that supports the needs of your mission. In our case, I had to carry an M4 and the EBR with a full 210 round basic load for the M4 and 120 rounds for the EBR.
To keep it simple, let's round down the 1.14lb per 30rd magazine of 5.56 and say 1lb even.
An M4A1 (7.7lbs) with TA31 (10oz), PEQ-15 (8oz), and Surefire M952V (14oz) comes in at just under 10lbs unloaded. To be specific, it's 9.7lbs. Add in a basic load of 5.56 at 1lb per mag and you're up to 16.7lbs of M4.
Now, let's take a 6.5lb bolt action. Let's say that the magazines weigh air, and your unit require you to carry 100rds of 7.62. So using my WSL math, 100rds of linked 7.62 is 7lbs, so let's say 6lbs of loose 7.62. Without optic or laser, you're at 12.5lb of iron sighted bolt action 7.62 with only 100 rounds of ammo.
So without any glass or no light capability on that bolt action, you have a combined load of 29.2lbs with over 12 of that in a pack on your back. Which then we can go into the unfortunate fact that carrying an assault pack up and down mountains over a plate carrier sucks. Ask the guys carrying the Wolfhound how that feels. And all of this weight isn't even taking into account pyro, medical, comms, water, food, etc.
We can dive into the reality of combat and that it is chaotic and synchronized mayhem, and that a rifleman isn't going to have the time to get into a static position, assemble a rifle, engage with accuracy one shot at a time on a target that is likely in motion, and then he still has to be able to immediately maneuver and engage at the speed of war with his Squad.
Having done the dual rifle SDM thing, it's not feasible.
This is the best solution for this problem we have at this time, and is a massive step forward over the EBR.
Outlander Systems
03-07-18, 18:04
When u innathicc of battle and your primary goes down...
https://youtu.be/TugGeimG0y4
It's not that hard to read what I wrote. If you have one or two guys with dedicated take down 6.5 pound .308 sniper systems that fit into a small pack- arm them with lightweight chopped down 6 pound MK18 carbines. This way they aren't hindered for CQB/patrol use. Not to mention the two systems (take down sniper rifle/MK18) combined still weigh less than the 15 pound G28. It's completely doable with our current technology and several manufacturers are already producing bolt guns under 6.5 pounds with carbon fiber technology. Steyr makes a .308 carbon fiber stock rifle with detachable polymer magazines that weighs 6.3 pounds in a 20" barrel. Just chop the barrel to 16", thread it, and re-design the system as a take down/back pack rifle- there you go, sub MOA to 1000 meters in a 6.5 pound rifle.
The G28 weighs 8.7 pounds without optic or magazine, fully loaded with optic it weighs 14.99 pounds and with OSS 7.62 suppressor weighs 16.21 pounds.
7n6
When u innathicc of battle and your primary goes down...
https://youtu.be/TugGeimG0y4
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180308/3f9aec758ef9b239f7ed48ece96f9336.jpg
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'll try to break down how the two rifle SDM concept works, given I spent a 10 month deployment pulling double duty as an SDM+Team Leader and hated it......
.......Having done the dual rifle SDM thing, it's not feasible.
This is the best solution for this problem we have at this time, and is a massive step forward over the EBR.
Aw, what do you know, you've only done it. (sarcasm)
I can imagine it now: 'Cover, I got to assemble my two piece carbon rifle.' 'On you Johnny' 'I'm up' 'Too late, Jake hosed him with a mag of M4' 'Well, shit, cover me while I disassemble and pack this 5,000 dollar piece of shit.' ' Got you Johnny.'
Am I close?
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 18:24
I'll try to break down how the two rifle SDM concept works, given I spent a 10 month deployment pulling double duty as an SDM+Team Leader and hated it.
With two rifles, you will need to carry a basic load of ammunition that supports the needs of your mission. In our case, I had to carry an M4 and the EBR with a full 210 round basic load for the M4 and 120 rounds for the EBR.
To keep it simple, let's round down the 1.14lb per 30rd magazine of 5.56 and say 1lb even.
An M4A1 (7.7lbs) with TA31 (10oz), PEQ-15 (8oz), and Surefire M952V (14oz) comes in at just under 10lbs unloaded. To be specific, it's 9.7lbs. Add in a basic load of 5.56 at 1lb per mag and you're up to 16.7lbs of M4.
Now, let's take a 6.5lb bolt action. Let's say that the magazines weigh air, and your unit require you to carry 100rds of 7.62. So using my WSL math, 100rds of linked 7.62 is 7lbs, so let's say 6lbs of loose 7.62. Without optic or laser, you're at 12.5lb of iron sighted bolt action 7.62 with only 100 rounds of ammo.
So without any glass or no light capability on that bolt action, you have a combined load of 29.2lbs with over 12 of that in a pack on your back. Which then we can go into the unfortunate fact that carrying an assault pack up and down mountains over a plate carrier sucks. Ask the guys carrying the Wolfhound how that feels. And all of this weight isn't even taking into account pyro, medical, comms, water, food, etc.
We can dive into the reality of combat and that it is chaotic and synchronized mayhem, and that a rifleman isn't going to have the time to get into a static position, assemble a rifle, engage with accuracy one shot at a time on a target that is likely in motion, and then he still has to be able to immediately maneuver and engage at the speed of war with his Squad.
Having done the dual rifle SDM thing, it's not feasible.
This is the best solution for this problem we have at this time, and is a massive step forward over the EBR.
The G28 unloaded with optic, without suppressor weighs 14.99 pounds which is nearly the same as an EBR unloaded around 11.24 pounds plus optic. So there really isn't any difference there, it's just another toy in the same role weighing the same. I get what you are saying about not wanting to assemble a weapon to engage targets at say distances beyond 800 meters where the SPR role might be better served. Just seems like there is a better solution overall, which is why I suggested a break down lightweight bolt rifle for use beyond those distances if needed.
Aw, what do you know, you've only done it. (sarcasm)
I can imagine it now: 'Cover, I got to assemble my two piece carbon rifle.' 'On you Johnny' 'I'm up' 'Too late, Jake hosed him with a mag of M4' 'Well, shit, cover me while I disassemble and pack this 5,000 dollar piece of shit.' ' Got you Johnny.'
Am I close?
I can hear it now:
"I'm up, he sees me, I'm opening my assault pack to stash my folding rifle while he shoots me in the ****ing face"
The G28 unloaded with optic, without suppressor weighs 14.99 pounds which is nearly the same as an EBR unloaded around 11.24 pounds plus optic. So there really isn't any difference there, it's just another toy in the same role weighing the same. I get what you are saying about not wanting to assemble a weapon to engage targets at say distances beyond 800 meters where the SPR role might be better served. Just seems like there is a better solution overall, which is why I suggested a break down lightweight bolt rifle for use beyond those distances if needed.
The CSASS has a dramatic advantage with its simpler and familiar manual of arms and portability compared to the EBR, in addition to the big improvement in glass it's packing.
Weight is a non issue. I have had joes clearing multiple houses with M320s mounted under their M4s and not a single one ever said "Man, I wish this were lighter" while they were wielding the ability to remove your bloodline from the Earth out to 350m under their barrel.
No one who is serious about fighting will ever sacrifice capability for the sake of comfort.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 18:33
You got SPR's for range but want to shoot past say 800 meters, then I guess I don't understand why they would replace the "heavy" EBR with the G28 that weighs the same- other than it's a newer rifle system obviously. However we already have the SR25 for familiar manual of arms- so not sure what's being gained. I guess a better way of putting it, what does the G28 offer over the SR25 for that specific role?
Dist. Expert 26
03-07-18, 18:34
The G28 unloaded with optic, without suppressor weighs 14.99 pounds which is nearly the same as an EBR unloaded around 11.24 pounds plus optic. So there really isn't any difference there, it's just another toy in the same role weighing the same. I get what you are saying about not wanting to assemble a weapon to engage targets at say distances beyond 800 meters where the SPR role might be better served. Just seems like there is a better solution overall, which is why I suggested a break down lightweight bolt rifle for use beyond those distances if needed.
It's not a better solution.
You can't just hand someone a precision rifle and expect them to use it effectively. A semiautomatic platform allows for some leeway in that as a solider can just keep shooting until something hits.
Adding another weapons system includes more weight than just the gun itself, as GTF425 mentioned. It also takes up space that's needed for other mission essential equipment.
Carbon fiber is awesome for weight savings, but it's stupid expensive and the barrel becomes incredibly sensitive. As in a blade of grass touching the barrel puts you 2 mils off target at 700m. I've seen it happen.
You got SPR's for range but want to shoot past say 800 meters, then I guess I don't understand why they would replace the "heavy" EBR with the G28 that weighs the same- other than it's a newer rifle system obviously. However we already have the SR25 for familiar manual of arms- so not sure what's being gained. I guess a better way of putting it, what does the G28 offer over the SR25 for that specific role?
No one in the Infantry Squad is shooting past 800m. You're laughing and walking away while calling in mortars/arty/CAS.
The SR-25 was not an option, as the Big Army does not issue the SR-25. Units that have access to the SR-25 do not have EBRs.
The EBRs published weight of 11.2lbs is sans optic. They're closer to 13lbs with optic and mount and still have a new manual of arms to learn and that killer, bleeding edge 1990s tech glass up top with turrets that don't match the reticle.
RetroRevolver77
03-07-18, 18:45
It's not a better solution.
You can't just hand someone a precision rifle and expect them to use it effectively. A semiautomatic platform allows for some leeway in that as a solider can just keep shooting until something hits.
Adding another weapons system includes more weight than just the gun itself, as GTF425 mentioned. It also takes up space that's needed for other mission essential equipment.
Carbon fiber is awesome for weight savings, but it's stupid expensive and the barrel becomes incredibly sensitive. As in a blade of grass touching the barrel puts you 2 mils off target at 700m. I've seen it happen.
To be honest, I was talking primarily about the stock being carbon. I was just pointing out that they can build a .308 bolt rifle for instance with say a steel 20" barrel and carbon fiber stock under 6.5 pounds. However I get them not wanting to assemble a rifle when needed but that goes back to the what exactly does the G28 offer over say existing systems like the SR25 without any real weight savings etc.
Anyway, I solved all the problems;
This:
https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product1.php?id=VCOG
+
This:
https://fnamerica.com/products/rifles/fn-m16a4/
Done.
7n6
When u innathicc of battle and your primary goes down...
https://youtu.be/TugGeimG0y4
That's awesome! Much more practical than just having a sling.:confused:
SeriousStudent
03-07-18, 20:25
I certainly hope the Army put a formal school in place for the guys who are supposed to be issued this thing -- instead of just handing it to the new Joe and saying, "Do good, it's just a heavy M4 with a scope -- don't f@ck this up."
I am very curious about this myself. If you were recalled to active duty and asked to be Chief of Staff, how would you accomplish it?
Have the AMU design the course, or ask the School of Infantry? I know the SF folks have very nice schools as well, would they run it as trainers that went to the various installations? Or maybe a train the trainer course?
It's really an interesting riddle you pose, I would enjoy reading anything you chose to share. Thank you.
That's awesome! Much more practical than just having a sling.:confused:
Plus the added feature of having to look at the holster to get the mag/magwell into the holster. Because nothing bad ever happens when you take your eyes off the threat. :jester:
IMO this makes a lot more sense than a 5.56 SPR. It gives an infantry squad added capability over the M4/M27, more so than just throwing a better piece of glass on top. 9 lbs really isn't all that heavy when compared to a SAW, 240 or M16 with a 203 slung underneath. Yeah, its not ideal for CQB, but your DM should be on the outer cordon anyway.
If you have to pull the DM from each line squad and add them into weapons squad to clear a building... Why not just have a position in weapons where they can be more effectively used at all times? At some point you run out of guys to kick doors, an Army squad is only 8 deep.
Dist. Expert 26
03-07-18, 21:47
If you have to pull the DM from each line squad and add them into weapons squad to clear a building... Why not just have a position in weapons where they can be more effectively used at all times? At some point you run out of guys to kick doors, an Army squad is only 8 deep.
I wasn't aware their squads were that small. We had 12-14 guys so generally one team would be clearing while the other two held security.
How would you suggest employing a DM clearing rooms?
ClearedHot
03-07-18, 22:02
Army squad is 9 while a Marine squad is typically 13.
I think the Army wanted a piston 7.62 instead of another DI system. The SR-25 and KAC M110 weren't exactly ultra reliable, especially when they're exposed to moon dust.
Army squad is 9 while a Marine squad is typically 13.
I think the Army wanted a piston 7.62 instead of another DI system. The SR-25 and KAC M110 weren't exactly ultra reliable, especially when they're exposed to moon dust.
The current crop of SR-25's are ultra reliable, the M110 had some issues with being used as a battle rifle but it was not designed for that purpose, it was a sniper rifle. The M110K1 solved those problems, I don't really think the piston was that big a selling point I am just beginning to think Army procurement is just made up of contrarians "everyone is happy using Glock's f**k it we're going to pick FN's" "D Force likes their M110K1's f**k it were going to pick HK's".
I think the really important issue is are those old useless KAC rifles going to be sent to the CMP or not?
vicious_cb
03-08-18, 00:30
With the Marines picking up the M27 and now the Army picking the G28 for their SDMR, I can't help but think that a variant of the 416 is going to be the Army's next rifle.
I also wonder, however, if the Army is doing what the Marines did, and picked up the G28 as a backdoor way of getting their "interim battle rifle", and will eventually issue the G28 to all combat troops. That said, I don't think it's a good idea if that's what they're trying to do; too much extra weight, too much recoil, less ammo.
Pretty much. They basically said it themselves, "Equipping squads with a new 7.62mm SDMR is the first step in a two-phase effort to ensure units have the capability to penetrate enemy body armor."
Its not about range, it about having something to shoot their fancy new XM1158 ADVAP round out of.
sidewaysil80
03-08-18, 04:06
Would have been nice if they bought American. Kind if shitty that the Marines and Army are using foreign made weapons. Unless those are manufactured here (doubtful). It’s not like this or the M27 is cutting edge/proprietary tech. I get it, they should have the best regardless of where its from. However there are domestic alternatives that will perform the same and have kept that money here.
BoringGuy45
03-08-18, 04:19
Would have been nice if they bought American. Kind if shitty that the Marines and Army are using foreign made weapons. Unless those are manufactured here (doubtful). It’s not like this or the M27 is cutting edge/proprietary tech. I get it, they should have the best regardless of where its from. However there are domestic alternatives that will perform the same and have kept that money here.
I say just use what works the best. The "wasn't made/invented here" has led to us rejecting or missing out on some very good pieces of technology. Plus, we've been using a mishmash of foreign and domestic weapons for close to a hundred years. The Garand was invented by a Canadian, our standard issue military pistol was from an Italian company until recently. The M249 and 240 are both Belgian, as is a huge crop of our M16s. JSOC has been using the the HK416 for nearly a decade (maybe longer). The majority of our police departments are carrying an Austrian pistol. All great gear. Some of it is made in foreign factories, and some of it is made in American factories. I see nothing shitty about it. Whether the weapon was made here or imported, at some point, an American company had to get paid for something. So it's not like domestic working man is getting completely screwed.
At the end of the day, you'll probably get your wish; HK is planning on expanding manufacturing operations over here, so U.S. jobs will be created and the guns will likely come from a U.S. factory.
platoonDaddy
03-08-18, 07:26
School me what is a SDM? When I was in the squad had two teams consisting of: TL, G, AR & R.
EDIT: of course I forgot the SL
Squad Designated Marksman. It’s typically a rifleman or, sometimes, a TL who cross trains and is equipped with an M14 EBR to supplement their Squad with as needed.
The SR-25/Mark 11 is a SOCOM weapon. No line doggie (infantry or cav) is going to be issued a SOCOM weapon. He might steal it or recover it from a site where all the SF-Ranger guys are dead, but it is NOT a Big Army weapon.
There are not enough snipers (formal school or local post-division school-certified) to fill all the Army's requirements let alone filling squad manning holes. Passing out Compact Semi Automatic Sniper Rifles is a waste of money and capabilities.
The Army started the term "Designated Marksman" in the Stryker manual. That term basically comes down to "Hey you -- you shoot good, you're the marksman." Maybe the squad leader would give him an RFI ACOG if it hadn't already been bogarted by a 1SG, lieutenant, or squad leader because it has magnification or it's cool.
Making a squad or fire team leader the marksman while expecting him to be a team leader as well is like saying, "Naw, Joe's a better shooter -- TL, take his 203 or SAW and do double duty. Keep your M4 as well."
If I was the CSA or Chief of the Maneuver Center I'd make DM a separate four or five day track in his OSUT or AIT after BRM. If he fails he's still a rifleman. If he passes he should be able to hit a man at 600, turtled in a hard plate vest or carrier, day or night.
So a 7.62 or two in every squad makes us ready to shoot guys with plates. Mmmkay. Good thing we're ready. That brand-new gun comes out of the box and waxed kraft paper, Joe looks through the scope, and it's the Hog Staring at a Wrist Watch look. How do it work?
platoonDaddy
03-08-18, 12:42
Squad Designated Marksman. It’s typically a rifleman or, sometimes, a TL who cross trains and is equipped with an M14 EBR to supplement their Squad with as needed.
The SR-25/Mark 11 is a SOCOM weapon. No line doggie (infantry or cav) is going to be issued a SOCOM weapon. He might steal it or recover it from a site where all the SF-Ranger guys are dead, but it is NOT a Big Army weapon.
There are not enough snipers (formal school or local post-division school-certified) to fill all the Army's requirements let alone filling squad manning holes. Passing out Compact Semi Automatic Sniper Rifles is a waste of money and capabilities.
The Army started the term "Designated Marksman" in the Stryker manual. That term basically comes down to "Hey you -- you shoot good, you're the marksman." Maybe the squad leader would give him an RFI ACOG if it hadn't already been bogarted by a 1SG, lieutenant, or squad leader because it has magnification or it's cool.
Making a squad or fire team leader the marksman while expecting to be a team leader as well is like saying, "Naw, Joe's a better shooter -- TL, take his 203 or SAW and do double duty. Keep your M4 as well."
If I was the CSA or Chief of the Maneuver Center I'd make DM a separate four or five day track in his OSUT or AIT after BRM. If he fails he's still a rifleman. If he passes he should be able to hit a man at 600, turtled in a hard plate vest or carrier, day or night.
So a 7.62 or two in every squad makes us ready to shoot guys with plates. Mmmkay. Good thing we're ready. That brand-new gun comes out of the box and waxed kraft paper, Joe looks through the scope, and it's the Hog Staring at a Wrist Watch look. How do it work?
Thanks didn't believe we in the Inf would see a 12K firearm.
I don't like this at the squad level. At all. Make it an M4 or M16 with ACOG (maybe 1x6 or 1x8), and shoot out to 5-600 after a couple days or 1 week class. Something you can still kick doors with.
I'd put two of these in weapons squad. Expand the hell out of sniper school. DM would be an all shooting pre-req to sniper. Sniper would add teaching shooting skills and going back to DM as an instructor assistant. To stay current sniper qual NCO's put in short stints as instructors every few years.
Build the skills not just to shoot, but to teach.
I don't like this at the squad level. At all. Make it an M4 or M16 with ACOG (maybe 1x6 or 1x8), and shoot out to 5-600 after a couple days or 1 week class. Something you can still kick doors with.
I'd put two of these in weapons squad. Expand the hell out of sniper school. DM would be an all shooting pre-req to sniper. Sniper would add teaching shooting skills and going back to DM as an instructor assistant. To stay current sniper qual NCO's put in short stints as instructors every few years.
Build the skills not just to shoot, but to teach.
I whole heartedly agree with this and Sinister's assessment of current fielding of the SDM.
I should have never put hands on the EBR as a TL. It came down to the fact I had a grenadier and a SAW gunner in my team, and the other team wasn't any better off. Being the only guy in the Squad with any reasonable shooting experience made my SLs mind up for him.
I believe we would be better served going to something like a LPVO for all carbines and raising the standard of marksmanship across the conventional force. Small improvements to the M4 would go a long way when combined with additional quality training.
I'm not a B4, so I can not comment on what's taught in the school house. That is for snipers to discuss any changes that can or should occur there. However, I think Train The Trainer for junior NCOs would be the best investment we could make, given they'll grow up with their unit for a few years and are the first line supervisors for young Soldiers. This would allow a culture of marksmanship to grow from inception in their unit and carry on as they fill their first real leadership positions.
But given we have no choice in this weapon coming to the line...compared to the EBR, it's an improvement.
I don't like this at the squad level. At all. Make it an M4 or M16 with ACOG (maybe 1x6 or 1x8), and shoot out to 5-600 after a couple days or 1 week class. Something you can still kick doors with.
I'd put two of these in weapons squad. Expand the hell out of sniper school. DM would be an all shooting pre-req to sniper. Sniper would add teaching shooting skills and going back to DM as an instructor assistant. To stay current sniper qual NCO's put in short stints as instructors every few years.
Build the skills not just to shoot, but to teach.ACOGs are the norm in my son's platoon (Line IN ABN unit). I don't know if it's the new norm now, or just their unit. (They were also just issued and trained on stingers at the platoon level, are issued things based on mission)
General tone from him is they are not currently hardware limited, feels the real improvement would be with more training and time shooting at 300 yards and beyond. And they probably have better than average range access and optempo relative to other line units.
Makes me think of some old F2S comments about software vs hardware.
Dist. Expert 26
03-08-18, 13:48
ACOGs are the norm in my son's platoon (Line IN ABN unit). I don't know if it's the new norm now, or just their unit. (They were also just issued and trained on stingers at the platoon level, are issued things based on mission)
General tone from him is they are not currently hardware limited, feels the real improvement would be with more training and time shooting at 300 yards and beyond. And they probably have better than average range access and optempo relative to other line units.
His PSG, 1SG, and CPT are all ex regiment with serious combat experience. When I asked him what the group consensus was on the M27, his comment was it didn't solve any problems they had, and made some problems they do have worse. And nearly everyone is adamantly opposed to getting rid of the SAW for M27s, don't understand the Marine's thinking. Not opposed to a better rifle, just not at the expense of weight and firepower.
The SAW is really their primary standoff capability, and doctrine / tactics would have to be significantly reworked if you didn't have suppressive fire capability like it provides.
I've not ever ask them recently about the DMR, though did about the proposed 762 carbines when that was the buzz. They are all for better range /power, though not if it comes with a price of significantly increased weight and 1/3 less ammo capacity.
So for line usage, simply not interested. Again, until Joe can shoot better at 200-300m, it's pretty moot anyway. And he grow up shooting and hunting with my old H&K 91 before I sold it, so has a pretty good feel for 7.62 rifle capability at longer ranges.
Their groupthink was also not positive on Piston rifles, based on a'stan experience with their senior guys. Not that they were bad, just that if they go down they usually have to be sent off. Where they can get the direct injection stuff going very quickly without help.
Makes me think of some old F2S comments about software vs hardware.
USMC company commanders can still elect to issue SAWs. A lot of people raised the same point about needing a belt fed weapon at the squad level. The M27 is a good augment to the SAW, but by no means a replacement.
Training is an area where we seriously lack, unless things have changed in a major way since I've been out. The only real training time we got was shooting CMP ranges, almost always rushed and with no real emphasis on improving skills. I was actually chastised by a rather dull SNCO for not yelling at our boots enough, but rather trying to help them improve their techniques.
Fixing that issue would require a series of changes, all of which are contrary to the way line companies tend to operate.
USMC company commanders can still elect to issue SAWs. A lot of people raised the same point about needing a belt fed weapon at the squad level. The M27 is a good augment to the SAW, but by no means a replacement.
That's good to hear, and I think that will ultimately be the long-term test.
I mostly managed to keep quiet for most of the inane M27 internet debates.
But an observation my son made stuck with me: the USMC went exactly the opposite direction with the M27 that everyone is clamoring for with anti-tank capability... With anti-tank the trend is for a slightly heavier improved squad weapon, and everyone carries (lighter) ammo for it. Which is lighter overall then the individual disposable anti-tank weapon. The opposite argument was made for the m27. Increases max individual weight for all, and thus total squad weight. But reduces the extreme Auto Rifleman weight.
I've also heard the passionate defenses that a squad of Marines with M27 will outperform the old setup with saws even for suppressive fire.
Sorry to drift from the DMR discussion. To bring it back, I just don't believe the new H&K DMR is intended as a path towards issuing the same for line units.
I'm not sure a lot of feelings are gonna be hurt when you have a heavier rifle in the squad (albeit with optics), but I honestly don't believe we're going to be fighting peer-outfitted enemies real soon. Does he need a suppressor adding weight and length?
You don't gain capability if the troop isn't trained to the capability of the weapon. An M16 or M4 with a free-float, ACOG, and 77s is pretty capable (although maybe not a hard-plate breaker) out to farther than a lot of first-term NCOs are capable of training-teaching in their own squad.
Not many posts out there with E-type steel farms, either.
I have taught ROTC Cadets to be pretty darn good shots with A2 muskets and M4s (both with irons and ACOGs shooting the new M855A1 steel-tip) to 500.
You don't gain capability if the troop isn't trained to the capability of the weapon. An M16 or M4 with a free-float, ACOG, and 77s is pretty capable (although maybe not a hard-plate breaker) out to farther than a lot of first-term NCOs are capable of training-teaching in their own squad.
Absolutely. Money would have been better spent on extending ranges, more training, and putting FF handguards and new barrels on some rifles.
There actually has been a big improvement to the training programs. It doesn’t make news as easily and is even harder to really pinpoint, but it’s getting there. Infantry units do have far more ACOGs than anything else, but condition of the weapons really depends on the division. As much as I appreciate the capabilities of a 1-4, I’ve seen far too many people struggle with CCOs to think that’s a good idea for the big army.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm not sure a lot of feelings are gonna be hurt when you have a heavier rifle in the squad (albeit with optics), but I honestly don't believe we're going to be fighting peer-outfitted enemies real soon. Does he need a suppressor adding weight and length?
You don't gain capability if the troop isn't trained to the capability of the weapon. An M16 or M4 with a free-float, ACOG, and 77s is pretty capable (although maybe not a hard-plate breaker) out to farther than a lot of first-term NCOs are capable of training-teaching in their own squad.
Not many posts out there with E-type steel farms, either.
I have taught ROTC Cadets to be pretty darn good shots with A2 muskets and M4s (both with irons and ACOGs shooting the new M855A1 steel-tip) to 500.
I don’t know who we’ll fight next, but I do know that they’re really pushing hard to steer the conversation, and training, in one direction. It’s interesting, to say the least.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The SR-25/Mark 11 is a SOCOM weapon. No line doggie (infantry or cav) is going to be issued a SOCOM weapon. He might steal it or recover it from a site where all the SF-Ranger guys are dead, but it is NOT a Big Army weapon.
There are not enough snipers (formal school or local post-division school-certified) to fill all the Army's requirements let alone filling squad manning holes. Passing out Compact Semi Automatic Sniper Rifles is a waste of money and capabilities.
The Army started the term "Designated Marksman" in the Stryker manual. That term basically comes down to "Hey you -- you shoot good, you're the marksman." Maybe the squad leader would give him an RFI ACOG if it hadn't already been bogarted by a 1SG, lieutenant, or squad leader because it has magnification or it's cool.
Making a squad or fire team leader the marksman while expecting him to be a team leader as well is like saying, "Naw, Joe's a better shooter -- TL, take his 203 or SAW and do double duty. Keep your M4 as well."
If I was the CSA or Chief of the Maneuver Center I'd make DM a separate four or five day track in his OSUT or AIT after BRM. If he fails he's still a rifleman. If he passes he should be able to hit a man at 600, turtled in a hard plate vest or carrier, day or night.
So a 7.62 or two in every squad makes us ready to shoot guys with plates. Mmmkay. Good thing we're ready. That brand-new gun comes out of the box and waxed kraft paper, Joe looks through the scope, and it's the Hog Staring at a Wrist Watch look. How do it work?
M110 is a SR-25, I have not seen any details on what the plan is yet, are they going to issue the full sniper kit or just the rifle with a different kind of scope? I agree the S&B and suppressor might not be needed for a DMR, but a 7.62 and ACOG or LPV might add something useful to the mix. Also will it be one per squad or one per fire team? About the price, the $12,000 figure being thrown around is for the sniper kit with S&B and suppressor and I am sure a fancy box, the rifle alone would be a lot less if they go that route.
Failure2Stop
03-09-18, 09:58
Kinda surprising that all the smart folks here didn't immediately focus on this statement.
Equipping squads with a new 7.62mm SDMR is the first step in a two-phase effort to ensure units have the capability to penetrate enemy body armor.
Interested to hear how the physics work out that a 16" barrel give better armor penetration than a 20" barrel with an armor piercing projectile that was developed around a 25" barrel.
vicious_cb
03-09-18, 20:02
Kinda surprising that all the smart folks here didn't immediately focus on this statement.
Interested to hear how the physics work out that a 16" barrel give better armor penetration than a 20" barrel with an armor piercing projectile that was developed around a 25" barrel.
Unfortunately the DoD been so tight lipped about the capability of the ADVAP round that we can only speculate about its magical plate busting properties. Except its $13 a round price tag of course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sh1gNW4yeI
Kinda surprising that all the smart folks here didn't immediately focus on this statement.
Interested to hear how the physics work out that a 16" barrel give better armor penetration than a 20" barrel with an armor piercing projectile that was developed around a 25" barrel.
Also begs the question will this round be compatible with AR type rifles or will it be a repeat of the early M855A1 with insane pressures and mag presentation issues. The video by Chuck was an eye opener also.
I was a SDM in 2005 and had one of the SDM-R modified M16s. From my experience a 5.56 DMR was a great rifle. The M262 and the free floated Douglas barrel gave great accuracy and more useful range over the M16A4 and M4 rifles. My only hindrance was have a TA31 ACOG. A good 1-6 or 1-8 on top of a Recce or Mk12 type rifle would be my choice for a DMR.
In my experience I was needed as a plain jane rifleman much more that I was needed as a SDM. Because of that I think sticking with 5.56 would be a better choice.
Failure2Stop
03-13-18, 07:49
I was a SDM in 2005 and had one of the SDM-R modified M16s. From my experience a 5.56 DMR was a great rifle. The M262 and the free floated Douglas barrel gave great accuracy and more useful range over the M16A4 and M4 rifles. My only hindrance was have a TA31 ACOG. A good 1-6 or 1-8 on top of a Recce or Mk12 type rifle would be my choice for a DMR.
In my experience I was needed as a plain jane rifleman much more that I was needed as a SDM. Because of that I think sticking with 5.56 would be a better choice.
The problem with this is that all of us that were SDMs/DMs/Precision Whatevers with 5.56 back in the day bear no relevance on the ACTUAL capability gains that they want. It isn't about getting hits on target, it's about getting hits through armor at distance, and no 5.56 is able to meet that objective. Another ammunition type HAS to be implemented, and any discussion that isn't centered around that ammunition is missing the point.
This is somewhat dated, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of 7.62mm ammo that meets the long-range penetration criteria:
http://peoammo.army.mil/mas/Products/PmMasHandbook.aspx
Full speed ahead.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-army-is-getting-ready-to-field-new-squad-marksman-rifle-2018-3
"The US Army will begin fielding roughly 6,000 Heckler & Koch G28E rifles as the service's new Squad Designated Marksman Rifle before the end of fiscal 2018."
"That is exactly what it is designed to do, replace the EBR 14," Easlick said. "Because it was based on an operational needs statement, there were never any fielded for home-station training. You fell in those weapon systems in theater."
The CSASS weighs just under nine pounds without its optic or magazine and features a 16-inch barrel, he said.
But in its SDMR version, the G28E will not be a sniper rifle, Easlick said, explaining that the Army doesn't intend to equip designated marksman with a sniper optic.
"A sniper optic is intended to be used by a very highly trained sniper," he said. "It is suitable for sniper engagements; those aren't necessarily rifleman engagements.
"For close-quarters battle, stuff like that, you don't want to have to clear a room with a weapon that has a sniper optic on it," he added.
The CSASS is equipped with a Schmidt and Bender 3-20 variable power sniper optic. The SDMR will likely be equipped with simpler optic capable of quick adjustments between zero and 600 meters, Easlick said.
"What we are looking at would be in the realm of a 1-6, variable-power illuminated reticle," he said. "The concept would be if I am doing anything under 50 meters or even 100 meters, I am on one power and I can execute those tasks that I would normally do with a [close combat optic] very well."
RetroRevolver77
03-28-18, 01:33
Kinda surprising that all the smart folks here didn't immediately focus on this statement.
Interested to hear how the physics work out that a 16" barrel give better armor penetration than a 20" barrel with an armor piercing projectile that was developed around a 25" barrel.
Just focus on bringing back the SR 25 ECC.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.