REAPR 338 machine Gun for SOF

[1168]

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.

[markm]

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.

[WillBrink]

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?

[chuckman]

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.

[WillBrink]

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.

[chuckman]

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.

[4325]

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

[GTF425]

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.

[GTF425]

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.

[WillBrink]

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.