View Full Version : Marine Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR)
Heavier barrel and of course a bayonet lug added to an HK 416.
http://tiny.cc/ywns7
GermanSynergy
06-07-10, 15:49
Interesting to see how these are recieved by the end user....
The Marines have wanted a Browning BAR replacement for decades, looks like they finally found it (think rifle squad role and employment, not a SAW replacement).
I'm not completely sure but I thought LWRC got the contract. On future weapons Mack was doing training with it. I believe it is the M6A4. LWRC even has the Eagle, Globe and Anchor on it. Correct me if I'm wrong.
http://www.lwrci.com/p-130-m6a4.aspx
Sorry I couldn't find a better picture of the EGA but it's on the magwell.
http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/e/ef/LWRCIAR.jpg/400px-LWRCIAR.jpg
Gutshot John
06-07-10, 17:48
I'm not completely sure but I thought LWRC got the contract. On future weapons Mack was doing training with it. I believe it is the M6A4. LWRC even has the Eagle, Globe and Anchor on it. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Don't believe everything you see on "Future Weapons" I was particularly unimpressed when he was shooting an AK and claimed it used the 7.62 NATO. :rolleyes:
Shows like that are essentially gun porn with little basis in reality. When was the last time you saw a bad review of a firearm in Guns and Ammo? Same thing holds true for Future Weapons. You'll get far better/more accurate information from this board than in all the "Tales of the Gun", "Future Weapons" or "Ultimate Weapons" shows put together.
Otherwise this is old news, HK was awarded the contract several months ago. There are several threads about it floating about.
Don't believe everything you see on "Future Weapons" I was particularly unimpressed when he was shooting an AK and claimed it used the 7.62 NATO. :rolleyes:
Shows like that are essentially gun porn with little basis in reality. When was the last time you saw a bad review of a firearm in Guns and Ammo? Same thing holds true for Future Weapons. You'll get far better/more accurate information from this board than in all the "Tales of the Gun", "Future Weapons" or "Ultimate Weapons" shows put together.
Otherwise this is old news, HK was awarded the contract several months ago. There are several threads about it floating about.
Ok well thanks for informing me.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=47986
The purpose of the thread was not to say it was news but to show some pics of it with the bayonet lug and heavier barrel from the SHOT Show.
I have no idea how this is supposed to be a squad automatic rifle. Marine Corps infantry has always liked having plenty of firepower. Well aimed and controlled, but plenty of it so I don't think they would give up some of their SAWs with no other solution in sight. When I was humping hills as a grunt all of our M16's had full auto so maybe thats all they want.
I expect it to be as well liked as it is by SF.
The Marine Corps has never liked the M4. I would not be surprised to see the few Marines who use the M4 be issued this instead.
I want one.
William B.
06-08-10, 10:53
I have no idea how this is supposed to be a squad automatic rifle. Marine Corps infantry has always liked having plenty of firepower. Well aimed and controlled, but plenty of it so I don't think they would give up some of their SAWs with no other solution in sight. When I was humping hills as a grunt all of our M16's had full auto so maybe thats all they want.
It will fill the automatic rifle role just like the BAR did. The M249 SAW isn't an automatic rifle. It is a light machinegun that has been filling the automatic rifle role. Ideally, the IAR will replace the SAW at the fireteam and squad levels, but the SAW will remain in use at the platoon and company levels.
Another way we are using the SAW is to supplement some of the crew-served weapons. Because of ROE's we can't always engage the enemy immediately (or at all) with a heavy machinegun, so a lot of times turret gunners will have a SAW mounted in their turret along with a MK19, M2, TOW, etc. This way they can still be effective during firefights in which their primary weapons cannot be used.
I was a SAW gunner for 3yrs. I like the SAW, but I'm pretty amped to see how the IAR works out for us.
I was an 0311 among other MOS' for 20 yrs so yeah I get that...
The Hk416 is not a BAR in terms of level of or sustainability of automatic fire. I don't think you would want to hammer rounds through it for long periods of time as the BAR was capable of. I know the SAW is not an automatic rifle. But the SAW was still pretty new when I left and everyone had an M16 capable of full auto unlike now. So I'm still not clear on how the HK will replace some of the SAW functionality. On the other hand it doesn't sound like all that many SAWs are going away. 2,000 out of 10,000.
William B.
06-08-10, 11:24
Sweet! I'm an '11 too. I've only got 5 1/2 yrs, though.
I talked to a Lt Col and a Capt at Marine Day this year who are involved in the whole IAR T&E. From what I gather the IAR is intended to provide some suppressive fires, internally. Basically, enough to cover a fireteam or squad as they cross a danger area or to lay down enough immediate suppression to gain fire superiority. It's not really intended to be used in a support by fire pos covering platoon movements or anything like that.
Thats what I was guessing. I had many MOS's but 0311 is the one I am most proud of.
VirginiaTactical
06-08-10, 11:47
I'm not completely sure but I thought LWRC got the contract. On future weapons Mack was doing training with it. I believe it is the M6A4. LWRC even has the Eagle, Globe and Anchor on it. Correct me if I'm wrong.
http://www.lwrci.com/p-130-m6a4.aspx
Sorry I couldn't find a better picture of the EGA but it's on the magwell.
http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/e/ef/LWRCIAR.jpg/400px-LWRCIAR.jpg
I was also an 0311, and worked with the office that did all the testing for the IAR. The LWRC did not make it to the end. The HK416 D did extremely well, and we innitially were just test fire dummies that contractors got data from, but soon starting working with that office to gather more data. This included gathering data from non combat MOS and infantry marines.
The 416 D performed above and beyond. On a benched test it held a 2MOA group using MK262 ammo on full auto, and survived the torture test. (every weapon had 40,0000 rounds fired through it at one point). Weapons where replaced after the torture week.
The only negative aspect of the IAR is that they come with a grip pod(my opinion).
The FN scar was also a pretty good contendor, but it recieved many negative remarks from the test bed in regards to ergonomics. Many Marines would hurt themselves from the reciprocating charging handle, and the accuracy didn't compare to the 416.
The biggest "user" test was shooting on an Echo target with a 5 round magazine. HK416 had a higher number of hits on an echo than any other rifle. Trust me ... not only us, but there were many other people just like us traveling around doing all these tests. The 416 just performed better.
Really interesting stuff...now here do I get one? ;-)
The Dumb Gun Collector
06-08-10, 12:14
It is funny how the internet is full of stories about how the 416 is a piece of junk, or having a lot of problems, or whatever. But when you have face-to-face, non-internet comparisons, the 416 is always either tied or at the top.
VirginiaTactical
06-08-10, 12:26
It is funny how the internet is full of stories about how the 416 is a piece of junk, or having a lot of problems, or whatever. But when you have face-to-face, non-internet comparisons, the 416 is always either tied or at the top.
For sure greg. I am very new to the "internet forums", but I can imagine there is plenty of garbage. To be honest the best way to get a real good feel for any weapon is a scientific aproach.
Many times Marines survive a gunfight and they say its because of "insert nifty gear here", but we fail to see that we usually win because we are fighting an inferior enemy. Not because we are any good, but we are just good enough.
I feel very strongly that even a guy who has "hands on experience" probably does not have the right experience. I dealt with plenty of those types of people in the Marines, and I am sure i am not 100% fault free myself. I still discover things about my "ways" and how they are not as efficient as other "ways".
The Marine Corps has never liked the M4. I would not be surprised to see the few Marines who use the M4 be issued this instead.
[/LIST]
I'm not sure where you get your info from but the M4 is the prefered weapon in a rifle platoon. If you have ever worn an MTV you will realize that the fixed lenght of pull of the A4 combined with the 1.5 inch eye relief of the TA-31 combine to make an awful combination. The IAR will replace the SAW in the automatic rifleman role in the fireteam. The beauty of the SAW is that it is a light machine gun, unfortunatly most SAW gunners know almost nothing about machine gunnery. Also the flex mount that is required to attatch a SAW to a tripod is a rare find. If you attatch a SAW to a tripd you turn a weapon that was originally classified as non-fixed fires into a fixed-fires weapon. In fire and manuver this is a big bonus. But if you don't have the necessary SL-3 to employ a light machine gun as a machinegun it becomes a heavy and awkward automatic rifle.
ForTehNguyen
06-08-10, 13:19
they should just get collapsibles for their M16A4s. Easy fix to that issue
You are missing the point of the rifle.
You are referring to the M16A4. I am referring to the M4 carbine.
My information comes from a career in Marine Corps Infantry starting in the 70's.
I'm not sure where you get your info from but the M4 is the prefered weapon in a rifle platoon. If you have ever worn an MTV you will realize that the fixed lenght of pull of the A4 combined with the 1.5 inch eye relief of the TA-31 combine to make an awful combination. The IAR will replace the SAW in the automatic rifleman role in the fireteam. The beauty of the SAW is that it is a light machine gun, unfortunatly most SAW gunners know almost nothing about machine gunnery. Also the flex mount that is required to attatch a SAW to a tripod is a rare find. If you attatch a SAW to a tripd you turn a weapon that was originally classified as non-fixed fires into a fixed-fires weapon. In fire and manuver this is a big bonus. But if you don't have the necessary SL-3 to employ a light machine gun as a machinegun it becomes a heavy and awkward automatic rifle.
William B.
06-08-10, 13:59
Here is a link to some specs for the IAR:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9635882/IAR-specs
I think it's a plus that the IAR will be similar in size, weight, and ergonomics to the M4.
I wonder if they intend to use HK's mags. Also if this rifle will be made in their new US factory. i think thats a requirement for foreign weapons but am not sure.
William B.
06-08-10, 14:06
The 416 D performed above and beyond. On a benched test it held a 2MOA group using MK262 ammo on full auto, and survived the torture test. (every weapon had 40,0000 rounds fired through it at one point). Weapons where replaced after the torture week.
The Lt Col that I talked to said basically the same thing about the IAR's accuracy. He told me that it is more accurate than any "non-sniper" weapon that we have right now.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.