Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 117 of 117

Thread: 1st ID soldiers receive upgraded M4s

  1. #111
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,476
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by sinlessorrow View Post
    I know the SCO will be something like the Trijicon VCOG. It serverly limits placement of the optic in regards to NV. When you take into account eye relief of variable optics that are 1x-6x your only mounting options are a front mounting NV devide and it would sit on the handguard.

    The VCOG and any variable are also large optics and mounted in the foremost slot on the upper your still hogging 6 slots of the picatinny rail of the handguard(if the handguards top rail extends to the receiver). If you have any handguard shorter than 12" you would be severly cramped with a PEQ and NV and probably be impossible to have a variable, NV, and PEQ on amything shorter than a 12" rail.

    I am all for longer rail, but honestly IMO to call the FRAK destined to fail or not a good solution because it may not allow use of thr SCO, a NV device and a PEQ doesn't seem fair. Because let's be honest how many standard small arms have a super long rail that extends to the muzzle device?

    At least they are working on getting a free floated rail.
    As Kevin says, if the guys in charge of the different components of the procurement don't talk to each other, you will get a suite of accessories that might work very well independently, but do not integrate as a system.
    This is true not only for weapons, but body armor, load bearing (packs and vests) and other components of soldier system equipment as well.

    It should be no more difficult than adding a requirement for the SCO to integrate with NV/thermal, and the FWS-I must integrate with the SCO.
    A mounting system using a dovetail or other interface negates the neccessity of mounting the NV to the front rail. It does, however, give the gun a larger/taller profile, dependant on the system chosen, of course. This might not be acceptable.
    It's not about surviving, it's about winning!

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    NoVa
    Posts
    2,906
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Front Sight Gas Block will block about 22% of the FWS-I viewing window.

    - clip on inline night vision is vastly superior to optic mounted NV. No one is doing SIMRAD type stuff anymore for good reason...

    Part of the problem is no one is acting as a System's Integrator - as the systems are not integrated -- the integration is done by the 11B on the ground...

    The problem is no-one has empowered any program to be the lead sled dog.

    M4 PIP had some great potential -- however it got shoe-horned into meeting M4 KPP, meaning it needs to mount legacy items or items that should have been looked at and discarded.
    Kevin S. Boland
    Manager, Federal Sales
    FN America, LLC
    Office: 703.288.3500 x181 | Mobile: 407-451-4544 | Fax: 703.288.4505
    www.fnhusa.com

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    1,476
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    Front Sight Gas Block will block about 22% of the FWS-I viewing window.

    - clip on inline night vision is vastly superior to optic mounted NV. No one is doing SIMRAD type stuff anymore for good reason...

    Part of the problem is no one is acting as a System's Integrator - as the systems are not integrated -- the integration is done by the 11B on the ground...

    The problem is no-one has empowered any program to be the lead sled dog.

    M4 PIP had some great potential -- however it got shoe-horned into meeting M4 KPP, meaning it needs to mount legacy items or items that should have been looked at and discarded.
    Not disagreeing with you on that. Just presenting it as one solution, of many.

    And I agree with the rest; I am working two tenders now for the police, with officer components that really should be part of a system, but is procured as piecemeal.
    Frustrating....both for the officers, and us as suppliers.
    It's not about surviving, it's about winning!

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NM
    Posts
    3,988
    Feedback Score
    10 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    Part of the problem is no one is acting as a System's Integrator - as the systems are not integrated -- the integration is done by the 11B on the ground...

    The problem is no-one has empowered any program to be the lead sled dog.
    If I can find a way to use this quote for my Systems Engineering master's thesis, I shall. It really is the biggest issue with all these, is that by the time requirements mapping is completed by a higher echelon of decision making which IS empowered to make those calls, major mistakes have already been made, because system of systems interactions are ignored, and RFPs go out for stuff that's doomed to fail.
    عندما تصبح الأسلحة محظورة, قد يملكون حظرون عندهم فقط
    کله چی سلاح منع شوی دی، یوازي غلوونکۍ یی به درلود
    Semper Fi
    "Being able to do the basics, on demand, takes practice. " - Sinister

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,154
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by NORTEXED View Post
    It would seem to me that an AUG style trigger with an approx. 4-5 lb semi pull, followed by a 8-10 lb full auto pull would be ideal in giving the operator access to both without searching for the selector.
    Oh, nooo . . . And this is coming from someone who owns an AUG and ARs.

    The first time I fired a select fire AUG I wound up letting up off a burst by accident even though I knew the way the trigger worked. Foreign military users report similar things occurring.

  6. #116
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    100
    Feedback Score
    33 (100%)
    In regards to the disadvantages of ambi controls-When moving/climbing/fast roping the rifle is turned outboard to prevent the safety selector from getting caught on gear.
    Last edited by rickmy; 05-28-14 at 06:33. Reason: Lack of quote

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    2,177
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by KevinB View Post
    M4 PIP had some great potential -- however it got shoe-horned into meeting M4 KPP, meaning it needs to mount legacy items or items that should have been looked at and discarded.
    Unfortunately, this is par for the course in most military acquisition programs.

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •