View Full Version : REAPR 338 machine Gun for SOF
Apparently, hot with SOF, much more thump and range than 7.62, much lighter than a .50. Why not use 300 Win Mag? That's more common in the US arsenal than 338 Norma Mag I'd think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x83aQ_1QVOI
Coal Dragger
03-12-24, 18:25
Well for starters .300 Winchester magnum has a belted case that will not play nice with disintegrating links in a belt fed system. Plus it’s not as powerful.
titsonritz
03-12-24, 19:28
Why not use 300 Win Mag? That's more common in the US arsenal than 338 Norma Mag I'd think.
It wouldn’t be for long feeding belt fed machine guns.
At first glance with the OP's pic it has a sort of an MG-34/42-ish look, with a sprinkling of PKM added for good measure!
Well for starters .300 Winchester magnum has a belted case that will not play nice with disintegrating links in a belt fed system. Plus it’s not as powerful.That’s perfectly possible, believe it or not. Two existing and very popular/common designs spring to mind.
More waste of money idiotic ideas. Who is coming up with this shit? First the 6.8 sig now this? Is George Soros in charge of our arms selections now?
I'm basing this comment on the video thumb nail. A 338 in that config wouldn't be accurate beyond a few hundred yards. That much powder has to be mounted in some fashion to achieve any level of aiming after the first round.
More waste of money idiotic ideas. Who is coming up with this shit? First the 6.8 sig now this? Is George Soros in charge of our arms selections now?
I'm basing this comment on the video thumb nail. A 338 in that config wouldn't be accurate beyond a few hundred yards. That much powder has to be mounted in some fashion to achieve any level of aiming after the first round.
It’s a area weapon
Coal Dragger
03-13-24, 00:41
That’s perfectly possible, believe it or not. Two existing and very popular/common designs spring to mind.
I realize the PKM uses a rimmed case but no standardized and accepted NATO belt fed systems use similar links. Why waste time and effort needing to redesign the feed mechanism to accommodate an inferior cartridge with less range and energy?
More waste of money idiotic ideas. Who is coming up with this shit?
It actually makes sense to me, having a belt fed that is as portable as the 240B but with more than twice the effective engagement distance is really what was needed many, many times in Ascrackstan. Out enemies learned to hover just outside the range of 7.62 MGs and hit us when it was unlikely we'd have M2s on hand during things like patrols.
Of course the problem is we seem to be getting the "solution" when the problem exists and who knows where we will be during the next major deployment. I always laugh that the Beretta M9 was really the perfect sidearm for our imagined war somewhere in Eastern Europe but instead we ended up in dry, arid locations where that fully open slide was susceptible to dust.
I'm also not a huge fan of introducing yet another new caliber to the military supply chain...unless of course it proves to be the needed solution. Time will tell.
They will have to T&E the shit out of this one, to make sure their lightweight MEDIUM machine gun can handle all the challenges of combat and it's a damn shame we didn't get it 10 years ago when we could have actually tested it in the real world.
And while we are at it, might as well surplus all that 7.62x51 we won't need anymore, oh wait, Bill F'ing Clinton signed a law saying US military surplus ammo can no longer be supplied to the private sector in the US. As a person who grew up shooting surplus 5.56 from Vietnam at prices I could afford in high school let me just say "F*ck you Billy, you can't die fast enough."
It actually makes sense to me, having a belt fed that is as portable as the 240B but with more than twice the effective engagement distance is really what was needed many, many times in Ascrackstan. Out enemies learned to hover just outside the range of 7.62 MGs and hit us when it was unlikely we'd have M2s on hand during things like patrols.
Of course the problem is we seem to be getting the "solution" when the problem exists and who knows where we will be during the next major deployment. I always laugh that the Beretta M9 was really the perfect sidearm for our imagined war somewhere in Eastern Europe but instead we ended up in dry, arid locations where that fully open slide was susceptible to dust.
I'm also not a huge fan of introducing yet another new caliber to the military supply chain...unless of course it proves to be the needed solution. Time will tell.
They will have to T&E the shit out of this one, to make sure their lightweight MEDIUM machine gun can handle all the challenges of combat and it's a damn shame we didn't get it 10 years ago when we could have actually tested it in the real world.
And while we are at it, might as well surplus all that 7.62x51 we won't need anymore, oh wait, Bill F'ing Clinton signed a law saying US military surplus ammo can no longer be supplied to the private sector in the US. As a person who grew up shooting surplus 5.56 from Vietnam at prices I could afford in high school let me just say "F*ck you Billy, you can't die fast enough."
Our issued M9’s did fine, even when exposed to the harsh ME environments (sandstorms/dust/etc). The major problem was the issued/non-OEM magazine during the early GWOT years. Checkmate branded M-9 magazines were horribly unreliable.
I realize the PKM uses a rimmed case but no standardized and accepted NATO belt fed systems use similar links. Why waste time and effort needing to redesign the feed mechanism to accommodate an inferior cartridge with less range and energy?
The M2 uses disintegrating closed loop links requiring cartridges to be delinked rearward.
I’m not saying its a great idea, only that it is easily possible and that designs that would be compatible are well-vetted.
It actually makes sense to me, having a belt fed that is as portable as the 240B but with more than twice the effective engagement distance is really what was needed many, many times in Ascrackstan. Out enemies learned to hover just outside the range of 7.62 MGs and hit us when it was unlikely we'd have M2s on hand during things like patrols.
But if the gun is too powerful to control, who cares? You'd be better of with a non-machine gun.
But if the gun is too powerful to control, who cares? You'd be better of with a non-machine gun.
Did they appear to be having difficulty controlling it?
It actually makes sense to me, having a belt fed that is as portable as the 240B but with more than twice the effective engagement distance is really what was needed many, many times in Ascrackstan. Out enemies learned to hover just outside the range of 7.62 MGs and hit us when it was unlikely we'd have M2s on hand during things like patrols.
Of course the problem is we seem to be getting the "solution" when the problem exists and who knows where we will be during the next major deployment. I always laugh that the Beretta M9 was really the perfect sidearm for our imagined war somewhere in Eastern Europe but instead we ended up in dry, arid locations where that fully open slide was susceptible to dust.
Hovering outside of our range is our fault. We should be 'closing with', not 'standing off.' We've largely forgotten that doctrine.
The M9 was fine outside of some crappy mags in the beginning of Iraq.
It actually makes sense to me, having a belt fed that is as portable as the 240B but with more than twice the effective engagement distance is really what was needed many, many times in Ascrackstan. Out enemies learned to hover just outside the range of 7.62 MGs and hit us when it was unlikely we'd have M2s on hand during things like patrols.
Of course the problem is we seem to be getting the "solution" when the problem exists and who knows where we will be during the next major deployment. I always laugh that the Beretta M9 was really the perfect sidearm for our imagined war somewhere in Eastern Europe but instead we ended up in dry, arid locations where that fully open slide was susceptible to dust.
I'm also not a huge fan of introducing yet another new caliber to the military supply chain...unless of course it proves to be the needed solution. Time will tell.
They will have to T&E the shit out of this one, to make sure their lightweight MEDIUM machine gun can handle all the challenges of combat and it's a damn shame we didn't get it 10 years ago when we could have actually tested it in the real world.
And while we are at it, might as well surplus all that 7.62x51 we won't need anymore, oh wait, Bill F'ing Clinton signed a law saying US military surplus ammo can no longer be supplied to the private sector in the US. As a person who grew up shooting surplus 5.56 from Vietnam at prices I could afford in high school let me just say "F*ck you Billy, you can't die fast enough."
It makes nothing but sense, at least for some units. You want/need something that has extended range and oomph over 7.62, don't want to lug around a .50. That one model breaks down and goes into a back pack obviously offers a lot to SOF. I just wonder how robust the system is under extended use and heat, but I have no doubts SOF types would have beat on it pretty good to test that. I also wonder if use of such a niche rnd is the best idea, but I suppose if/when wider adoption takes place, it's no longer niche per se.
It makes nothing but sense, at least for some units. You want/need something that has extended range and oomph over 7.62, don't want to lug around a .50. That one model breaks down and goes into a back pack obviously offers a lot to SOF. I just wonder how robust the system is under extended use and heat, but I have no doubts SOF types would have beat on it pretty good to test that. I also wonder if use of such a niche rnd is the best idea, but I suppose if/when wider adoption takes place, it's no longer niche per se.
Even weps platoons don't pull out the M2 much anymore; most are mounted. They still have them though. A lighter .50 would be the shiznit. My issue isn't doing something like this, my issues is doing something like this SOF-centric because statistically they will use it less than infantry. They should push the concept out to infantry first, unless they are using SOF as a test bed.
But if the gun is too powerful to control, who cares? You'd be better of with a non-machine gun.
What makes you think it’s to powerful to control?
I’m thinking you don’t understand machine guns, you don’t want each round going to the same spot…you want dispersal
The sliding feed tray assembly is a significant improvement over the 240. Barrel changes look...interesting...from a crew served perspective. I can see it being a challenge to AG and swap barrels, but I have exactly zero reps doing so with this weapon and I'm likely overthinking it.
Having caliber conversions will make training at established MOUT sites and ranges easier. We ran into issues with some ranges in the first years of the move to 855A1, so having the ability to run M80 ball if needed will help overcome that potential hurdle (if it is one at all; just speculating based on the reported max effective distance and possible damage to permanent range structures).
It's a cool concept. Like the KAC LAMG that's being tested and fielded in a limited capacity, it's cool to see advancements being made in machine gun tech.
They should push the concept out to infantry first, unless they are using SOF as a test bed.
That could be a likely course of action. I can see weapons like this being tested by the Rangers and then trickling their way out of SOF.
Even weps platoons don't pull out the M2 much anymore; most are mounted. They still have them though. A lighter .50 would be the shiznit. My issue isn't doing something like this, my issues is doing something like this SOF-centric because statistically they will use it less than infantry. They should push the concept out to infantry first, unless they are using SOF as a test bed.
Are they not often the test bed for some systems at least? Some are unique to SOF, some seem to get beat on and field tested by SOF, then adopted by larger mil. I can't say where this one falls in that process.
The sliding feed tray assembly is a significant improvement over the 240. Barrel changes look...interesting...from a crew served perspective. I can see it being a challenge to AG and swap barrels, but I have exactly zero reps doing so with this weapon and I'm likely overthinking it.
Having caliber conversions will make training at established MOUT sites and ranges easier. We ran into issues with some ranges in the first years of the move to 855A1, so having the ability to run M80 ball if needed will help overcome that potential hurdle (if it is one at all; just speculating based on the reported max effective distance and possible damage to permanent range structures).
It's a cool concept. Like the KAC LAMG that's being tested and fielded in a limited capacity, it's cool to see advancements being made in machine gun tech.
What's cool to me is, it's using some of the best tech of older stuff (resembles the MG34 for a reason...), combined with new tech, vs just being new and cool for the gee wiz factor. It has less parts than a 240 vs more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gPyXHH7jDw
Out enemies learned to hover just outside the range of 7.62 MGs and hit us when it was unlikely we'd have M2s on hand during things like patrols.
While the enemy behavior was real, the root cause was far more complicated then needing a machine gun with longer range.
My son was line PL in the battalion in the 173rd airborne that two very famous incidents in the korengal were documented. He served with and for people who were in these famous incidents. (Restrepo, "Chosen Few", etc )
Their walk away after quite a bit of analysis has nothing to do with the range of the machine guns.
The root causes were:
1) bad rules of engagement which did not allow the use of mortars. Modern infantry companies have tools to deal with area situations outside the range their machine guns. Is the light mortars. At that particular time they had a very difficult time getting permission to use mortars due to concerns over villagers and such. The enemy knew this and took advantage of it.
2) bad tactics in spreading companies and even platoons too far apart where they could not assist each other and the bigger mortars could not be brought to bear. This could have been just too few of troops covering too wide of an area because doctrinally they know not to isolate platoons and companies.
3) bad habit/training scars. The light mortar that line infantryman have has a much shorter range if used handheld then with the base plate. Due to the mountainous terrain no one wanted to lug the base plate around and it became convenient just to use them handheld. But that significantly limited their range to not much further than the 249 and 240s.
During my son's time this mistake was viewed as being entirely within their unit's control in the senior NCOs hammered this point.
Any discussion of carbines and machine guns with further range is immediately met with the reality that they don't get to train with either at even the current stated range limits, much less the further ranges of super weapons.
From memory with the 249s they do shoot out to 800 at the big places like Benning/Moore which have dedicated machine gun ranges. But a lot of ranges and certainly the live fire ranges just are not set up to handle that distance as I understand it.
The other issue is combat loadouts with the superweapons in most cases you have reduced ammo for the same weight and in mountainous train they already at limits.
This is true with 6.8 SPC and Grendel, it just doesn't solve a problem they have. The range trade off would not be worth the reduced ammo loadout
While the enemy behavior was real, the root cause was far more complicated then needing a machine gun with longer range.
My son was line PL in the battalion in the 173rd airborne that two very famous incidents in the korengal were documented. He served with and for people who were in these famous incidents. (Restrepo, "Chosen Few", etc )
Their walk away after quite a bit of analysis has nothing to do with the range of the machine guns.
The root causes were:
1) bad rules of engagement which did not allow the use of mortars. Modern infantry companies have tools to deal with area situations outside the range their machine guns. Is the light mortars. At that particular time they had a very difficult time getting permission to use mortars due to concerns over villagers and such. The enemy knew this and took advantage of it.
2) bad tactics in spreading companies and even platoons too far apart where they could not assist each other and the bigger mortars could not be brought to bear. This could have been just too few of troops covering too wide of an area because doctrinally they know not to isolate platoons and companies.
3) bad habit/training scars. The light mortar that line infantryman have has a much shorter range if used handheld then with the base plate. Due to the mountainous terrain no one wanted to lug the base plate around and it became convenient just to use them handheld. But that significantly limited their range to not much further than the 249 and 240s.
During my son's time this mistake was viewed as being entirely within their unit's control in the senior NCOs hammered this point.
Any discussion of carbines and machine guns with further range is immediately met with the reality that they don't get to train with either at even the current stated range limits, much less the further ranges of super weapons.
From memory with the 249s they do shoot out to 800 at the big places like Benning/Moore which have dedicated machine gun ranges. But a lot of ranges and certainly the live fire ranges just are not set up to handle that distance as I understand it.
The other issue is combat loadouts with the superweapons in most cases you have reduced ammo for the same weight and in mountainous train they already at limits.
This is true with 6.8 SPC and Grendel, it just doesn't solve a problem they have. The range trade off would not be worth the reduced ammo loadout
Consider all of the above as accepted.
Seems to me what this potentially brings to the table is a Medium machine gun with about the same weight as a M240 but twice the range with a comparable weight penalty when it comes to ammo. That is assuming it survives in conditions like Afghanistan.
Hovering outside of our range is our fault. We should be 'closing with', not 'standing off.' We've largely forgotten that doctrine.
The M9 was fine outside of some crappy mags in the beginning of Iraq.
Hard to close with the enemy in places in Astan when you base was a bowl at the bottom of a valley. Seems like we just picked some shitty locations to establish combat outposts.
Averageman
03-13-24, 15:57
Hard to close with the enemy in places in Astan when you base was a bowl at the bottom of a valley. Seems like we just picked some shitty locations to establish combat outposts.
I remember reading about an outpost being over run while I was in Iraq. If it's the same one, yes, they picked a horrible spot to defend from.
I remember reading about an outpost being over run while I was in Iraq. If it's the same one, yes, they picked a horrible spot to defend from.
I'm assuming Combat Outpost Keating. Ash Hess was there for the first attempt. Starts at 49:46 if you just want to jump to that topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygLIA4qDAk8&t=3000s
I'm assuming Combat Outpost Keating. Ash Hess was there for the first attempt. Starts at 49:46 if you just want to jump to that topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygLIA4qDAk8&t=3000s
There were a few, but yeah Keating probably being the worst. Watching that footage for the first time was just crushing. I always wondered who thought that location was suitable and why.
titsonritz
03-13-24, 18:53
I'm assuming Combat Outpost Keating.
That was my first thought. Clint Eastwood’s son starred in the movie version.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Outpost_(2019_film)
Hard to close with the enemy in places in Astan when you base was a bowl at the bottom of a valley. Seems like we just picked some shitty locations to establish combat outposts.
Yeah, that was never my experience....
There were a few, but yeah Keating probably being the worst. Watching that footage for the first time was just crushing. I always wondered who thought that location was suitable and why.To understand the bad siting you have to understand their mission. This was the whole reconstruction era and they were supposed to be helping locals rebuild infrastructure etc.
The sites were selected due to being on crossroads, valley junctions or similar and not for any defensive tactical value. This was very common in that era.
Both the Battle of Kamdesh (COP Keating 10th mtn) and the Battle of Wanat (173rd ABN) in the Korengal suffered greatly from being too spread out and thus ended up being greatly outnumbered.
Both involved platoon size infantry elements of about 45 to 50 soldiers up against 250-300 seasoned Taliban fighters. (Some estimates are as high as 500, and the enemy death toll backs up these larger figures)
The army has tried to learn from these, both battles are majorly studied by officer candidates, but you have to point very large fingers at the Commander-in-Chief, questionable mission and unrealistic ROE.
Would really recommend three books and a documentary:
10th mtn @ Kamdesh:
Outlaw Platoon
173rd @ Wanat:
To quell the Koringal
Chosen Few
RESTREPO
Wanat was the bloodiest engagement in a'stan, made worse as the US kia were all out of one platoon.
All three books are good but tough reads, partially because you know the outcome, but also partially because you shake your head at why we would ever put soldiers into those positions.
RESTREPO is a must see documentary, closely followed by Hornet's Nest
To understand the bad siting you have to understand their mission. This was the whole reconstruction era and they were supposed to be helping locals rebuild infrastructure etc.
The sites were selected due to being on crossroads, valley junctions or similar and not for any defensive tactical value. This was very common in that era.
Both the Battle of Kamdesh (COP Keating 10th mtn) and the Battle of Wanat (173rd ABN) in the Korengal suffered greatly from being too spread out and thus ended up being greatly outnumbered.
Both involved platoon size infantry elements of about 45 to 50 soldiers up against 250-300 seasoned Taliban fighters. (Some estimates are as high as 500, and the enemy death toll backs up these larger figures)
The army has tried to learn from these, both battles are majorly studied by officer candidates, but you have to point very large fingers at the Commander-in-Chief, questionable mission and unrealistic ROE.
Would really recommend three books and a documentary:
10th mtn @ Kamdesh:
Outlaw Platoon
173rd @ Wanat:
To quell the Koringal
Chosen Few
RESTREPO
Wanat was the bloodiest engagement in a'stan, made worse as the US kia were all out of one platoon.
All three books are good but tough reads, partially because you know the outcome, but also partially because you shake your head at why we would ever put soldiers into those positions.
RESTREPO is a must see documentary, closely followed by Hornet's Nest
I kind of knew that having seen Restrepo, but it still was a shitty deal. Have also seen the Medal of Honor episode about Romesha.
Our issued M9’s did fine, even when exposed to the harsh ME environments (sandstorms/dust/etc). The major problem was the issued/non-OEM magazine during the early GWOT years. Checkmate branded M-9 magazines were horribly unreliable.
Yup. I’ve carried the M9 in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, some other places, including in brownout conditions that turn the insides red-brown (Somali dirt is a red clay). Its among the most reliable handgun available in those conditions, and I’ve also been issued M11, 1911, Glock. The open top slide has never caused me a problem. I’m very very suspicious of the M17/18 reliability in the same conditions.
Somali dirt is a key reason that Unit ditched 1911s. I can confirm that they are problematic in ME/SWA/AFRICOM.
Issued Checkmate M9 mags are hot garbage, and I’d go so far as to buy my own if I were issued those and had to rely on a 92.
That could be a likely course of action. I can see weapons like this being tested by the Rangers and then trickling their way out of SOF. ^this dude knows how that works^
Hard to close with the enemy in places in Astan when you base was a bowl at the bottom of a valley. Seems like we just picked some shitty locations to establish combat outposts.
Yeah, that was never my experience.... agreed. I think the COP Keating problem was more conventional than SOF (since we’re talking about a SOF gun). I’ve been more or less everywhere in Afghanistan, and the mountainous northern part of a bordering country, and when in mountainous terrain, we tried to use the terrain to our advantage whenever possible, usually to great effect. I also had a close friend at Keating. He got shot, but did survive to fight another day. I heard some wild stories when we lived next door to each other, and I don’t think he ever recovered from all that.
I'm assuming Combat Outpost Keating. Ash Hess was there for the first attempt. Starts at 49:46 if you just want to jump to that topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygLIA4qDAk8&t=3000severyone should watch this when Afghanistan comes up. In most of the stories I’ve heard of conventional dudes having a bad day due to “overmatch”, GPMGs were notably absent. I don’t give a **** how heavy that pig is, we’re bringing it, and a magnum bolt gun, too. AND A RADIO.
everyone should watch this when Afghanistan comes up. In most of the stories I’ve heard of conventional dudes having a bad day due to “overmatch”, GPMGs were notably absent. I don’t give a **** how heavy that pig is, we’re bringing it, and a magnum bolt gun, too. AND A RADIO.
He's a member here, don't think he's posted in a while though. Works with mod Failuretostop at KAC.
when in mountainous terrain, we tried to use the terrain to our advantage whenever possible
I remember every COP I was on was built on top of an absolute mother****er of a hill to walk up. Literally walked uphill both ways in the snow when patrolling in the winter.
In most of the stories I’ve heard of conventional dudes having a bad day due to “overmatch”, GPMGs were notably absent. I don’t give a **** how heavy that pig is, we’re bringing it, and a magnum bolt gun, too. AND A RADIO.
This was my pet peeve as WSL. Guys trying to find ways to cut corners because it sucks being on a gun team. And with comms; I get it- ASIPs and 117s suck to carry, roger. Having no comms because you, the FO, wanted to sneak an MBITR in your assault pack sucks even worse.
I remember every COP I was on was built on top of an absolute mother****er of a hill to walk up. Literally walked uphill both ways in the snow when patrolling in the winter.
This was my pet peeve as WSL. Guys trying to find ways to cut corners because it sucks being on a gun team. And with comms; I get it- ASIPs and 117s suck to carry, roger. Having no comms because you, the FO, wanted to sneak an MBITR in your assault pack sucks even worse.
Throw a 60mm HE in that pack, too, Ranger. The 60 handheld team will have WP. For marking.
Coal Dragger
05-12-24, 00:38
^this dude knows how that works^
agreed. I think the COP Keating problem was more conventional than SOF (since we’re talking about a SOF gun). I’ve been more or less everywhere in Afghanistan, and the mountainous northern part of a bordering country, and when in mountainous terrain, we tried to use the terrain to our advantage whenever possible, usually to great effect. I also had a close friend at Keating. He got shot, but did survive to fight another day. I heard some wild stories when we lived next door to each other, and I don’t think he ever recovered from all that.
everyone should watch this when Afghanistan comes up. In most of the stories I’ve heard of conventional dudes having a bad day due to “overmatch”, GPMGs were notably absent. I don’t give a **** how heavy that pig is, we’re bringing it, and a magnum bolt gun, too. AND A RADIO.
Don’t forget the tripods, and T&E’s. A GPMG without those is just an over sized SAW. And all the ammo.
The PFC’s are gonna hate their life carrying that shit, but everyone will feel pretty clever when the poo hits the fan and you have the ability to lay down serious belt fed hate at extended distances and do beaten zones and MG shit.
Are they not often the test bed for some systems at least? Some are unique to SOF, some seem to get beat on and field tested by SOF, then adopted by larger mil. I can't say where this one falls in that process.
SOF has a specific line of funding and a much more narrow T&E and equipping process than the other components. Because of that, they will often field equipment first and then maybe it’ll trickle to the conventional side. SOF were the first to use GPS in its (relatively) current state back in the Persian Gulf War. But since each component of SOCOM still falls under their respective service branch, SOF won’t typically get in on T&E of something that a branch is testing, unless they see a lot of promise in it. That’s because if the branch picks it up, it’ll come to SOF through the branch anyways. Bottom line is that if it’s a SOF program, SOF is paying for it so they’re not about to kick it out to a conventional force to get T&E’d. Plus, SOF puts this stuff through way better trials than the conventional force will anyways.
All that aside, I’m trying to figure out what this thing is going to be used for. Outside of JSOC doing JSOC things, there’s a lot of high level discussions right now on SOF’s role in GPC and LSCO and none of it involves teams getting into gunfights with medium to heavy machine guns. Cool that we have it I guess, but unless we royally screw up and get involved in another proxy war, I’m not sure what the point is.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
A 338 MG makes a lot more sense than a 6.8 M7 to me, ma deuce is getting a little long in the tooth and this will be much better for dismount use. But this is one of three guns in competition for the contract with one of them being Sig and we all know how that usually goes. I was surprised to recently learn that DSA has a lot of experience building and supplying commie weapons, they built over 300 RPD's for a USMC training mission to some African country. The PKM is a great MG for it's time but the Poles have had a lot of trouble converting them to push through links which is a much simpler and more efficient design.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.