Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 102

Thread: Commandant throws in a plug for the M16A4

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    38
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Marine Corps Systems Command is looking in to addressing the issue. A change of this magnitude and dollar value routinely requires years to finish under the rules of federal acquisition. Below is phase 1 from last year the “Sources Sought” or “Request for Information” phase:


    COLLAPSIBLE BUTT STOCK
    Solicitation Number: M67854-09-BUTTS
    Agency: Department of the Navy
    Office: United States Marine Corps
    Location: Marine Corps Systems Command
    Notice Type:
    Sources Sought
    Posted Date:
    February 27, 2009
    Response Date:
    Mar 16, 2009 4:00 pm Eastern
    Archiving Policy:
    Automatic, 15 days after response date
    Archive Date:
    March 31, 2009
    Original Set Aside:
    N/A
    Set Aside:
    N/A
    Classification Code:
    10 -- Weapons
    NAICS Code:
    332 -- Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing/332995 -- Other Ordnance and Accessories Manufacturing
    Solicitation Number:
    M67854-09-BUTTS
    Notice Type:
    Sources Sought
    Synopsis:
    Added: Feb 27, 2009 4:25 pm
    Request for Information, Sources Sought

    M67854-09-BUTTS



    This Request for Information (RFI) is the initiation of market research under Part 10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and is not a Request for Proposals (RFP). The Government does not intend to pay for any information furnished pursuant to this RFI.



    The Program Manager for Infantry Weapon (PM IW), Marine Corps Systems Command plans to solicit for a Collapsible Butt stock that is compatible with the M16A4 Marine Corps Service Rifle. This RFI is issued to allow Industry the opportunity to review the below narrative draft requirements and provide any comments, questions, or feedback to Marine Corps Systems Command. Comments/Questions/Responses are due not later than 1600 (EST) on 16 March, 2009. Both e-mail and mail submittals will be accepted. E-mail responses are preferred. Mailed responses should be sent to the following address.

    Marine Corps Systems Command

    PG-13 PMM 132 ATTN: Ramona Wilson (PM-IWS)

    2200 Lester Street

    Quantico, VA 22134





    NARRATIVE

    PM-IW intends to conduct field testing of a Collapsible Butt Stock assembly for the M16A4. This includes the buffer assembly, compression helical spring, lower receiver extension, receiver end plate, round plain nut, headless straight pin and associated butt stock that is compatible with the M16A4 Marine Corps Service Rifle. The current stock is a rigid, monolithic piece that extends eleven (11) inches to the rear of the receiver group, giving the M16A4 a total length of 40 inches. While the current stocks remain crucial for deliberate aimed engagement, it becomes an obstacle when combined with the increased bulk of improved body armor. The improvement to the body armor has made it difficult for the M16A4 Service Rifle to accommodate the various body shapes and sizes of the individual Marine. The desired solution should have the capability to reduce the length of the weapon in order to accommodate the variation in shooter size and should not degrade the reliability of the current M16A4 Marine Corps Service Rifle.



    Upon receipt of all responses to this request for information, PM Infantry Weapons intends to conduct an industry day with all respondents (date and time to be determined).





    Detailed draft requirements are:

    - The butt stock shall be collapsible (Threshold = Objective).

    - There shall be four (4) position stops in the butt stock for adjustment (Threshold).

    - There shall be six (6) position stops in the butt stock for adjustment (Objective).

    - Reliability shall be equal to the standard M16A4 Marine Corps Service Rifle (Threshold), reliability should be improved from the standard M16A4 Marine Corps Service Rifle (Objective).



    Responses to this RFI should not exceed five (5) pages and must contain the following information: a capability statement which includes the commercial availability of the item listed, the vendor’s ability to meet the stated specifications noted above, pricing information and any required lead time for purchase



    NOTE: This Request for Information is for planning purposes only and is issued in accordance with FAR Clause 52.215-3. No solicitation document exists at this time. Issuance of this notice does not constitute any obligation on the part of the Government to procure these items or to issue a solicitation. In addition, the Government is under no obligation to pay for information submitted in response to this RFI, and responses to this notice cannot be accepted as offers. Any information that the vendor considers proprietary should be clearly marked as such. Responses to this RFI that indicate that the information therein is proprietary or represents confidential business information will be received and held in confidence for U.S. Government use only.



    Contracting Office Address:
    2200 Lester Street
    Quantico, Virginia 22134-5010
    Place of Performance:
    2200 Lester Street
    Quantico, Virginia 23134
    United States
    Primary Point of Contact.:
    Ramona B. Wilson,
    Contract Specialist
    ramona.wilson.ctr@usmc.mil
    Phone: 703-432-4944
    Secondary Point of Contact:
    Crystal Caputo,
    Contract Specialist
    crystal.m.caputo@usmc.mil
    Phone: 703-432-4945
    Fax: 703-432-3336
    Opportunity History

    * Original Synopsis
    Feb 27, 2009
    4:25 pm

    It may be 1-5 years before phase 2 the “Request for Quote” happens.
    Out.
    2011BLDR

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    under a rock
    Posts
    2,138
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Katar View Post
    If this turns into a dick measuring contest, your dicks are going to get stomped.
    Ouch!!!!! put up the Measuring tape Fellows!!!! God Has Spoken

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    26
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by RogerinTPA View Post
    Agreed, however, the backward thinking mindset is not only restricted to the Marines, it is the senior NCOs and Officers across all the services. They all need to revisit critical adaptive thinking.




    Totally agree. Not enough trigger time and range estimation prior to deployment, then sustaining that skill in country. It's safe to say that the average Infantryman, cannot effectively engage Tangos beyond 300M, regardless of the Service.

    IIRC, the Army's Designated Marksman Program is training shooters to achieve hits at 500-00m with M4's. Sometimes they have ACOGS, sometimes M68s or Eotechs. I suspect that this is mostly a training issue.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    330
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by ClosetCaseNerd View Post
    I've got a little baby dick, so no need for any measuring.

    I asked about his Service and MOS simply for frame of reference to his posts.
    0311 then 11B I left in 02. What service and MOS are you? Just for frame of reference to your posts.
    I like franks & beans

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Stafford, Virginia
    Posts
    1,169
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Taran View Post
    All I know is that:
    The longest range confirmed sniper kill as of 2006 was with an M4, as per the Army Times.
    Do you have a link to that article?

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    4,859
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dookie1481 View Post
    Well I'm 5'5" and trying to shoot an A2 with armor on was ****ing laughable. I have a feeling you aren't a grunt if you think you are representative of the average Marine's size.
    He's not. Not even close. Try a mean size of 5'9" and around 170#.

    You are the trend; the smallest/newest people somehow get assigned solid stocks. No effort appears to be made to even fake the funk by saying that they're assigning them to the best shots, or ensuring that those most likely to be vehicular-mounted get the short guns.

    I've seen exactly one (1) company where the CoGySgt said that they'd assigned M4s specifically to the smaller Marines so that they could get their eye relief and use their optics without needless struggle while wearing all their deuce gear. I felt faint and had to sit down for a minute. Common sense of that level of purity probably damaged one of my heart valves.
    Last edited by JSantoro; 04-03-10 at 00:45.
    Contractor scum, AAV

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    285
    Feedback Score
    0
    Riverine, myself a former Marine SNCO, you hit the nail on the head with the common sense comment. Unfortunately it just goes down further as you move up the chain. Ret. LTCol "Freddie" Blish fought issues like this to the very end, ultimately, of his Military career.
    S/F

    Al

    "Hold on to your hate, it helps you stay focused"

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Stafford, Virginia
    Posts
    1,169
    Feedback Score
    0
    It doesn't make sense why everyone is shooting at the Commandant. He isn't some paperpusher that was promoted to his current position. All of his experience has been thrown out the window because we don't like what he said..............

    Somewhere in his almost 40 years of service from platoon commander up to his current position...he learned something. He has access to classified and unclassified intel that we don't. He talks to more Marines than anyone else on this board, he knows more Marines than anyone else on this board and yet we think or imply that he is an idiot or so out of touch with reality that he is just a figurehead wrapped up in June 1918.

    My question to those that think he is some kind of idiot is this; What exactly constitutes and 'expert'?

    To those that have decided that he is a paperpushing pogue; How has he harmed the Corps since he became the Commandant?

    To those that have determined that their subjective assessment is more quantified than the Commandant's; Why does your opinion outwiegh his?

    2011 BLDR posted a bid proposal that addresses a problem brought up in this thread. The proposal is out there, did anyone notice that the Commandant didn't stop it? Does anyone notice that MARCORSYSCOM is continously testing new gear? Does anyone really think that the Commandant would allow this to happen if he was so close minded?

    Before 3/7 deployed to Iraq the last time, they ran their Marines through rifle range qual with the RCOs on...yes, on the rifles. The end result was a slight decrease quals, not an increase. The Commandant got involved when he found out about this....he didn't stop it, 3/7 still quals with the RCOs on. Most problems that were identified linked into the fact that the Marines were not conducting training out past 100-200 yards with the RCO before they deployed.

    Something to keep in mind, the RCO wasn't built to a sniper scope requirement, it was designed for rapid target acquisition with both eyes open.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    2,331
    Feedback Score
    26 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuckatelli View Post
    What exactly constitutes an 'expert'?
    Someone more like Lt Col Asad Khan or Chesty Puller, and less like the current guy. They need to get someone with a lot more combat experience earlier in their career.
    "Life is short, but the years are long." - Robert A. Heinlein

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Fredericksburg, VA
    Posts
    4,859
    Feedback Score
    7 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuckatelli View Post
    2011 BLDR posted a bid proposal that addresses a problem brought up in this thread. The proposal is out there, did anyone notice that the Commandant didn't stop it? Does anyone notice that MARCORSYSCOM is continously testing new gear? Does anyone really think that the Commandant would allow this to happen if he was so close minded?
    Reserving opinion; promising, but I'll believe it when it stops being a bid proposal and becomes a Program of Record. Until then...suffice to say that it's likely to not survive first contact with the Gunner community.

    The Commandant's comments, in this case, are a public cop-out; blaming a gun for a systemic leadership failure on the part of the entire officer corps of the USMC, in which Marines don't get enough shooting time (with a functional weapon that's already in the inventory) to get desired results. The money is there; the ammo is there; the ranges are available.

    He may not be at fault for that, but as an officer, as THE officer, he's responsible for it. That's at the very core of what being an officer is. If he's taken a shot at a piece of gear with demonstrable failings within the idiom he made, cool. He didn't do that, and rates a dogpile. Perhaps even noogies.
    Contractor scum, AAV

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

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
  •