Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: US Army's New Mk18? SIG SPEAR ASSAULTER K

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    348
    Feedback Score
    0
    I'm tracking that the XM-7 is speced with a 13" barrel. I am not tracking that they are looking at a short barrel version at this time.

    I love Garand Thumb, he is a ton of fun to watch and he drops some interesting info, but when did he become "Future Weapons"? I keep thinking he is going to bust out a "Game Changer!" in an aggressive whisper.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    390
    Feedback Score
    0
    If we look over the introduction of new service rifles to the US Army over the past 70 years, we see certain units as the first adopters, followed by some rapid-deployment forces, then the overall Light Combat Divisions before the Mech and other Army units finally get the new system.

    For example, in the 1950s, SF’s primary issue “rifle" on an ODA was the M1 Carbine, which they replaced with the new M14, only to be replaced with the M16 very early and before the US committed large forces to Vietnam in 1965. SF Advisors were primarily using M1 Carbines and then Colt 601 AR-15s in the early days of Military Assistance to Vietnam.

    When the M16A2 was type-classified and issued to replace the M16A1 starting in 1983, USMC, SF, and Ranger Regiment were the early adopters, followed by 82nd Airborne, 101st Airborne (Airmobile), 7th ID, 25th ID, 10th Mountain, 2nd ID, etc. That process went-on throughout the 1980s and wasn’t overnight, but the Special Ops and Joint Rapid-Depolyment Forces were the first adopters.

    When the M4A1 went into production after many years of development off the Colt 723 and 727 Carbines in the 1980s-1993, JSOC, then SOCOM began issuing it to replace M16A2s, 727s, and 727s, then the M4 with S-S-B FCG began being issued to the JRDF units. We turned in out M16A2s and drew out new M4s in fall of 1997, for example in 1st Brigade of 25th ID, with Recon Platoons getting them first.

    Now we see this XM7 still undergoing changes as it’s being issued to a few units in 101st? Weird. Why isn’t it being adopted by the leads in small arms?

    In Ranger Regiment, they have 3 different belt-feds at the Squad and Platoon level already:

    M240L
    M249 PIP
    KAX LAMG

    SOCOM has gone through how many SOPMOD Block iterations (now with URGI after Block II and Block I that evolved from the original M4A1s with 727 barrels)?

    For Semi-Auto Sniper Systems and DM Carbines, SOCOM has a bunch of different weapons in various calibers even.

    For Low-Vis and ADVON, there’s the LVAW.

    But when they looked at the costs of 6.8x51 ammo, I think they just said, “Naw dog. We’re not doing that.”

    If the numbers I’ve seen are accurate, any unit that shoots and trains will reject it up-front. The EPR was over $20/rd if I recall correctly. Training non-EPR ammo was orders of magnitude higher than the most expensive match ammo you can find on the civilian market, and blanks were off the chart as well. Were the ammo costs mentioned in this video confirmed or denied?

    Last edited by LRRPF52; Yesterday at 11:55.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    348
    Feedback Score
    0
    SOF Elements are on the basis of issue plan for the XM-7. I don't where they are on the fielding plan nor could I disclose it if I did.

    Wasn't Army SOF involved with the development of the Next Gen Weapon Systems? I have read on Soldier Systems that they did acknowledge the NGSW program.
    Last edited by cd228; Yesterday at 18:37.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    390
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by cd228 View Post
    SOF Elements are on the basis of issue plan for the XM-7. I don't where they are on the fielding plan nor could I disclose it if I did.

    Wasn't Army SOF involved with the development of the Next Gen Weapon Systems? I have read on Soldier Systems that they did acknowledge the NGSW program.
    I have a lot of neighbors in 19th Group who said they were scheduled to get them 2 years ago (that’s when it was mentioned), then they haven’t heard or seen anything since.

    Just with the training ammo that isn’t an EPR, it’s $3.39/rd.

    Imagine doing just a day of CQM and DM work for one guy busting through 500rds. That’s $1,695.

    In 2016, M855A1 was $0.36/rd, so you’d be looking at $180/500rds.

    I think for any unit looking at their training ammo budget, these are going to be huge factors moving forward.

    6.8x51 seems purpose-built to shut down training.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    348
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by LRRPF52 View Post
    I have a lot of neighbors in 19th Group who said they were scheduled to get them 2 years ago (that’s when it was mentioned), then they haven’t heard or seen anything since.

    6.8x51 seems purpose-built to shut down training.
    19th, would probably be lower on the roll out then the Active Duty Groups.

    We'll see, some one on-line mentioned that a SOF element couldn't train with theirs in an indoor range because the back stop wasn't rated for it. Kind of like when M855A1 rolled out and we had to redo a number of ranges.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they pushed a SRTA at a lower cost. They are also supposed to be making some production changes to drop the cost of the round. That's a whole lotta risk IMHO.

    I'm wonder how we went from .264 USA and LSAT to what seems like a high pressure 7.62mm NATO necked down to 6.8mm. Did the ICSR crew infiltrate the NGSW when their project got cancel? What threat are we trying to defeat with the 6.8x51?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •