Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 61

Thread: The Commandant has doubts about replacing SAW with HK M27 IAR

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    9,246
    Feedback Score
    28 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by variablebinary View Post
    You don't think both a high volume of fire and marksmanship both have the capacity to control movement, produce high causalities and deter aggression, acting as force multipliers?
    They most certainly do, no argument.
    The problem is that it requires both (high volume of fire and marksmanship), where most SAW gunners are only really able to provide 1, and it generally isn't the latter.

    To be quite frank, the only people consistently caipable of first-burst mid-range effective fire with machineguns are school-trained machinegunners with A-gunners. It has been proven enough times to make me sick.

    Imagine a world in which every person issued an M249 went off to a 4 week course to learn and master the weapon and its employment. That would be great. Unfortunately we do not live in that world.

    Now imagine a world in which every person is issued an M4 or M16 and goes through rigourous and standards-based training that covers topics from basic weapons handling to long-range precision fire to multiple rapid shots and automatic bursts at close range from the first moment they touch the weapon until the day they EAS. What if that weapon was now more controllable in auto and could maintain higher rates and duration of fire? What if we could get 2 of those weapons per fireteam? Because that is the world we live in.
    Jack Leuba
    Director, Military and Government Sales
    Knight's Armament Company
    jleuba@knightarmco.com

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Arizona Free State
    Posts
    58
    Feedback Score
    0

    More Grist for the "IAR vs SAW" mill

    For your consideration:

    Defense Industry Daily:

    IAR What IAR: The USMC’s SAW Substitution
    06-Jul-2010 17:41 EDT

    HK wins; Commandant skeptical, but authorizes limited buy and combat test. (July 1/10)
    The US Marines are looking to replace their M249 5.56mm light machine guns in their infantry and Light Armored Reconnaissance (LAR) battalions. Many have become worn from use, and can be more hindrance than help in some of the close-quarters urban warfare situations dominating current battlefields. They also have a reputation for jamming, and at 15-17 pounds empty, these belt-fed weapons are rather heavy.

    In its initial 2005 FedBizOps.com solicitation for an “Infantry Automatic Rifle” (IAR), the Marines wanted two big things. First, the gun had to fire from either the open or closed bolt position. This would give it the single-shot and “first through the door” capabilities that the M249 lacks, while allowing for more sustained fire than an M16 can handle without risking ammunition “cook off” in a heated barrel. It also had to be considerably lighter than the M249, at just 12.5 pounds maximum and 10.5 pounds desired weight. In exchange, the Marines decided they were willing to trade the SAW’s belt-fed design for switchable 30 round magazines, which are used up much more quickly but can also be changed in battle much more quickly.

    The result was not a true light machine gun, but something in between an LMG and an assault rifle. That shift in the 13-man Marine squad has its advocates and detractors. DID offers more background concerning the USMC’s IAR contenders, contracts… and controversy.
    The Contenders

    The winning bids went to a set of long-established competitors.
    Colt. The current manufacturer of the M4 carbine, who also makes some of the Marines’ M16 rifles. Colt publicly touts a variant of its CAR design, which is called the LSW by Colt Canada and serves with customers that include the Netherlands. It’s basically an M16, with some modifications including a new hydraulic buffer assembly and a heavier barrel. Elsewhere, Defense Review has a complete review of the Colt IAR, which appears to be a different design than the CAR. It uses a direct gas impingement system rather than a gas piston system, and adds a large heat sink to the front which makes the 9.5 pound weapon a bit front-heavy.
    Interestingly, Colt won 2 contracts for the IAR’s development and testing phase. It is not yet clear if this represents CAR and IAR awards, or if the twin contracts have a different set of dual competitors. Regardless, neither won.

    FN USA. The US Marines are already a customer beyond the M249 SAW, as FN USA manufactures many of the Marines’ M16 rifles. For the IAR competition, the firm is entering a version of the SCAR Mk16 rifle that has become US Special Operation Command’s weapon of choice. FN’s SCAR family of rifles has a wide set of innovative features developed with SOCOM’s assistance over the last several years, and a 10-year production contract was awarded in November 2007. FN USA’s IAR entry is interesting, in that it retains the accuracy and performance of closed-bolt firing until the barrel reaches a certain temperature, whereupon it automatically switches to safer open-bolt firing.
    With MARSOC operating as part of SOCOM, a number of Marines may already be familiar with this weapon. Since the Marines plan to rotate personnel back to regular Marine units after MARSOC, a rifle that’s shared with SOCOM offers certain advantages to the force.

    That’s no longer true, however – in June 2010, SOCOM decided to cancel further SCAR-L Mk.16 purchases on cost and efficiency grounds, and will probably recall the 850 fielded weapons, rather than continue to support them. SOCOM will be adding to their stock of 750 SCAR-H Mk.17 7.62mm riles, however, and will fielded an extended SCAR-H Mk.20 with sharpshooter enhancements.

    Heckler & Koch. The HK416 is an M16/M4 with a modified upper receiver. US SOCOM and other special forces around the world have been using them for several years now, after the standard Colt M4 design proved itself unable to meet SOCOM’s needs.

    H&K replaced Colt’s “gas-tube” system with a short-stroke piston system that eliminates carbon blow-back into the chamber, and also reduces the heat problem created by the super-hot gases used to cycle the M4. Other changes were made to the magazine, barrel, et. al. The final product was an M4 with a new upper receiver and magazine, plus H&K’s 4-rail system of standard “Picatinny Rails” on the top, bottom, and both sides for easy addition of anything a Special Operator might require. In exhaustive tests with the help of the USA’s Delta Force, the upgraded weapon was subjected to mud and dust without maintenance, and fired day after day. Despite this treatment, the rifle showed problems in only 1 of 15,000 rounds – fully 3 times the reliability shown by the M4 in US Army studies. The H&K 416 was declared ready in 2004, and there is also an HK417 version in 7.62mm NATO caliber.

    In October 2009, H&K’s 416-based design won.

    Unsuccessful

    Some firms that were expected to be contenders for the IAR did not make the shortlist.

    General Dynamics. The firm had partnered with Singapore’s ST Kinetics to offer a Mk5 version version of the Ultimax 100 5.56mm light machine gun, whose accuracy and control have deeply impressed many military observers and analysts [watch video – AVI format]. Part of the weapon’s secret is that it was originally designed for Singapore’s smaller soldiers, and the 11 pound Ultimax LMGs (when empty) now serves with a number of militaries around the world.

    The Ultimax was not ready in time to dislodge FN’s M249 in the original SAW competition, but the Marines had maintained a simmering interest in the weapon ever since. General Dynamics hoped that this time will be different, but the IAR’s specifications and focus appear to have handicapped this entry, and it was not selected for the IAR development contracts.

    LWRC This firm has done a lot of work refining and improving the M16/M4 for military, law enforcement, and personal use. This includes the introduction of more reliable mechanisms, designated marksman weapons, and even different calibers like the superior but magazine-compatible 6.8mm. Their 5.56mm “M6A4 IAR” candidate was not selected for additional development and testing.

    IAR What IAR: The Choice

    The larger questions around these weapons boil down to doctrine. Light Machine Guns can be used for sustained “suppressive fire,” but often pay a price for doing so. The price is paid in weight and accuracy. The benefit is that keeping the enemy’s head down has considerable defensive value, and frees up your own side to maneuver.
    Until recently, the Ultimax 100 has been the closest thing to an LMG that could comfortably switch over into “heavy assault rifle” mode, without losing its basic function. The IAR is that magazine-fed heavy assault rifle, but its 30 round magazine can make sustained suppressive fire difficult unless several IAR operators are on hand.

    Drum magazines can be used to increase the number of available rounds, but loading them is difficult, many drum magazines have reliability issues, and carrying multiple drum magazines is a lot bulkier than carrying multiple 30-round ‘flat’ magazines. In practice, therefore, the IAR is likely to be a 30 round weapon that depends on accuracy for suppression.

    A recent USMC battle at Shewan, Afghanistan indicates that this may be possible. In addition, marksmanship and the ability to bring a weapon to bear very quickly are hallmark requirements of the urban battlefield, where the Marines and militaries around the world expect to do a lot of their fighting over the next few decades.
    On the other hand, there’s a psychological dimension to combat. Crossbows fired faster than muskets, and were much more accurate. They were replaced by muskets because the musket’s psychological effect had that much value in a real fight. In a similar vein, USMC Commandant James Conway has expressed concerns about giving up the light machine gun’s lower accuracy coupled with suppressive and psychological value.

    In the military world, as in the world of finance, options have value. The Marines’ decisions to date have indicated the priority they place on more optimized IAR designs, which may not be true LMGs but offer other advantages in compensation. That stance has now come into some question, and the questions emanate from the very top of the Marine Corps. The encouraging signal in all of this is that the question will be settled by combat trials, not bureaucratic infighting.

    Contracts and Key Events

    In September 2008, Gannett’s Marine Corps Times reported that only some of the USMC’s M249 SAW weapons would be replaced. The eventual contract announcements, however, specifically mention the option of replacing all M249 SAWs used by the USMC’s infantry and LAR battalions.

    July 1/10: Media outlets report that in April 2010, USMC Commandant Gen. James T. Conway gave Corps officials the green light in April to issue approximately 450 H&K M27 IARs, enough to replace every M249 squad automatic weapon in 4 infantry battalions and 1 light armored reconnaissance (LAR) battalion. Each company in the 3 active infantry battalions and reserve battalion will receive 28 M27s: 1 for every SAW gunner, and 1 extra for the unit. These companies will also retain 6 M249s. The LAR battalion will receive 14 M27s, and completely replace its M249s.

    The Corps intends to give these units 4-6 months of pre-deployment training with the new weapons, and they are expected to be in Afghanistan around November-December 2010.

    Assessments from the Marines in theater will determine whether or not the IAR program resolves the Commandant’s doubts, and continues into full production of about 4,476 M27s. Marine Corps requirements officials hope that Conway will decide whether or not to take the IAR into full-rate production by late 2011, after the field reviews are in.

    The biggest issue may turn out to be a factor that hasn’t featured much in debates so far. The US Army (M14) and the British (L129A1) are both turning to 7.62mm IAR-type heavy assault rifle/ marksman weapons in Afghanistan. Its wide open spaces are creating long-range firefights where 5.56mm rounds become ineffective, but the enemy’s 7.62mm rounds remain so. The HK417 is the 7.62mm variant of the HK416, and a 7.62mm IAR could indeed trump short-range LMG suppression – but a decision to change calibers would almost certainly re-open the competition.

    Gannett’s Marine Corps Times | Military.com
    June 8/10: The Firearms Blog highlights magazine maker Magpul’s recent patent application (#20100126053) for a quad stack AR-15 compatible magazine, complete with diagrams. A central partition separates 2 dual round stacks, with an asymmetric transition area. This could give the IAR its 50 round magazine, joining Russia’s new AK-200 Kalashnikovs with their 60 round quad-stack magazines. The Firearms Blog | Military.com Kit Up!
    Dec 28/09: The IAR is facing skepticism at the very top of the Marines Corps. The issue is not performance to spec, but the trade-offs that the program has chosen to make. USMC Commandant Gen. James T. Conway, at a press conference:

    “I do have concerns, and those concerns have not been abated at this point…. In terms of accuracy, there’s probably no comparison…. Let’s step away from accuracy for a moment and talk about suppression, and the psychology of a small-unit fight, that says if other guy’s got a light machine gun and I’ve got an automatic rifle, I’m going to be hard-pressed to get fire superiority over him, you know, to keep his head down instead of him keeping mine down, because that 200-round magazine just keeps on giving…. let’s talk about what it does to squad tactics…. every 30 rounds, you gotta change magazines. Well, you’re probably not gonna do that, y’know, in an exposed position… fire superiority is fleeting…. I’m concerned that moving at night… the other squad members carrying those additional magazine for that automatic rifleman, might in a spread formation be hard pressed to get him what he needs in a timely fashion….

    I don’t want to get so far in the weeds… but it’s a big deal when you start changing how a Marine infantry squad fights, and, and, we’re gonna treat it as a big deal [raps table for emphasis], and I’m gonna have to be convinced that we’re making the right move before we start to purchase another system and change that whole dynamic…. [especially when the Army is not taking this approach]. So there’s another additional burden of proof here that has to be met….”

    Nov 24/09: Gannett’s Marine Corps Times reports that the USMC is re-thinking its decision to drop the IAR’s requirement for a high-capacity magazine. A recent solicitation for a high-capacity magazine that could hold 50 or 100 rounds and fit “the M16/M4/HK 416 family of weapons” seems tailor-made for the IAR.

    The magazine adds that the Modern Day Marine 2009 exposition saw FN Herstal display a 100-150 round magazine for its FN-SCAR IAR variant, while Armatac Industries has approached the Corps about a compatible 150-round 2-drum magazine that it says is compatible with each of the finalists weapons.

    Early in the evaluation process for the IAR, the Corps’ requirement called for the weapon to use 100-round magazines. That was eventually eliminated in favor of using the same 30-round magazines, as Marine officials sought to cut weight from the SAW’s replacement.

    October 2009: Marine officials pick Heckler & Koch’s HK416 derivative IAR over Colt and FN Herstal’s designs, and order another 24 additional weapons for more testing at various USMC facilities including Twentynine Palms, CA; Fort McCoy, WI; and Camp Shelby, MS. The award is framed as a “downselect” rather than a contract win, which indicates that Keckler & Koch’s design is a front runner for now, rather than an ultimate winner. Media reports began in December, and Gannett’s Marine Corps Times adds that:

    “A formal protest was filed with the Government Accountability Office by FN Herstal to a Marine contract decision on Oct. 30 and updated on Nov. 23, but GAO officials declined to discuss whether the protest was related to the IAR decision. Colt currently has no contract protests filed with GAO.”

    The new “M27 IAR” reportedly weighs 7.9 pounds unloaded, which is very close to a regular HK416, and much less than the M249 LMG’s 17 pounds. It uses a short-stoke gas piston, which is far more reliable and resistant to fouling than the M4/M16’s direct gas system. What it doesn’t have is a quick-change spare barrel to prevent overheating, which will limit it to 65 rounds per minute using 3-round bursts, compared to the M249’s recommended 85 rounds per minute, firing continuously while the trigger is depressed. Gannett’s Marine Corps Times report, GearScout blog entry, and Update | The Firearms Blog and Update.

    Sept 21/10: Marine Corps Times quotes MARSYSCOM’s IAR project officer, Maj. John Smith, the IAR project officer. He says that testing is complete, and:

    “I’m on schedule to have a decision on the program to move forward. Maybe within three weeks or so, there will be a lot more information…. Smith acknowledged that Commandant Gen. James Conway has questioned how the IAR will fit into fire teams but said that concern was “answered in short order.”

    IAR candidate reliability testing reportedly took place in April and May at Marine Corps Base Quantico firing 20,000 rounds per weapon over 3 weeks. The Corps also reportedly held limited user evaluations for about 3 weeks in April in Hawthorne, NV, using Marines from Camp Pendleton, CA.

    Dec 22/08: Under the initial contracts issued by US Marine Corps systems command in Quantico, VA, the winning competitors will supply up to 10 samples of their IAR design for testing, plus spare/repair parts, and various support services. The USMC will select a winner at some point, and plans to order up to 6,500 IARs via follow-on delivery orders, but there are no guarantees. Initial contracts, see also: Gannett’s Marine Corps Times | Defense Tech | Military.com | StrategyPage | The Firearm Blog.

    Dec 22/08: Colt Defense, Inc. in West Hartford, CT received a 5-year indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract with possible delivery orders up to $14 million for the production, delivery, and associated support of the Marine Corps’ Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). Colt’s production facility is in West Hartford, CT (RFP M67854-08-R-1000, proposal 6940, contract number M67854-09-D-1035).

    Dec 22/08: Colt Defense, Inc. in West Hartford, CT received a 5-year indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract with possible delivery orders up to $14 million for the production, delivery, and associated support of the Marine Corps’ Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). Colt’s production facility is in West Hartford, CT (RFP M67854-08-R-1000, proposal 6940H, contract number M67854-09-D-1036).

    Dec 22/08: FN Herstal, S.A. in Herstal, Belgium receives a 5-year indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract with possible delivery orders up to $27.9 million for the production, delivery, and associated support of the Marine Corps’ Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). FN Herstal’s production facility is in Herstal, Belgium (M67854-09-D-1037).

    Dec 22/08: Heckler and Koch Defense, Inc. in Ashburn, VA received 5-year indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract with possible delivery orders up to $23.6 million for the production, delivery, and associated support of the Marine Corps’ Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). Work will be performed in Oberndorf, Germany. (M67854-09-D-1038).

    Additional Readings
    FedBizOpps (2005) – Initial IAR solicitation
    Modern Firearms – Heckler-Koch HK M27 IAR Infantry Automatic Rifle (USA / Germany)
    Military.com (June 25/10) – Spec Ops Command Cancels New Rifle. It is a blow to FN Herstal, whose SCAR lost the USMC IAR and the British 7.62mm L129 competition.
    Fred
    Semper Fi * * * Stupid Should Hurt

    “To lead untrained men in to war, is to waste them.” - Confucious

    “We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality” - Ayn Rand

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    7,469
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JSantoro View Post
    Corps' getting the M110, too. I await with bated breath...

    ...the slough of articles about how it's going to "replace" the M40A5 (also not going anywhere, BTW, before the grist-mill of innerweb rumor starts grinding away), the DARPA rifle, penicillin, remove warts and make espresso, based on the statements of somebody who's leaving his twilight posting and can say whatever the hell he wants to with little or no repercussion.
    Well said

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Locust Grove Ga
    Posts
    854
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JSantoro View Post
    To reinforce this, I'll reiterate in different words for the LOS-logic-impaired......

    -The SAW isn't going away.

    -The SAW isn't leaving the USMC inventory.

    -The SAW will remain in the USMC inventory.

    -The SAW will be available for USMC warfighter use.

    -Ammo for the SAW will be available for use in the SAW (I know, that's just crazy!).

    -USMC warfighters will be allowed to take SAW ammo, put it in the SAW, point the SAW at booger-eaters, and use said ammo to encourage them to leave or lay down and bleed for a while.

    I don't get what's so difficult to understand about this, and why folks seem to forget that the SAW is not I say again NOT the only belt-fed weapon in the inventory. The SAW is particularly not the belt-fed that's carrying the weight of the engagements warfighters are getting in; do some research.

    If you think the JamMaster 5000 is still the center of gravity of the fights we're in, I don't know who's sig-event sheets you're looking at, but they're not the American ones.

    How many other "Instant Mountain: Just Add Water to Molehill!! As Seen on TV!!" topics can we come up with?
    I'm sorry but that is about the best post I've seen in ages.
    "Unfortunately 87.26% of the quotes and statistics on the internet are lies." - Abraham Lincoln
    Stupid should hurt
    I carry a gun cuz cops are too heavy!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    637
    Feedback Score
    0
    JSantoro, thanks for the response.

    I do understand the role of the IAR and was not questioning that. I was interested in why the Marines chose the HK. I have read many threads on the DI vs Piston debate. I was just wondering if the Corp.had a new reason I had not heard or thought of and I was not trying to turn it into a new debate. Just wanted to understand their logic. Sorry for the use of the term "heavy machine gun" barrel. What I meant was a heavier barrel intended for sustained full auto fire.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    273
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Still, 100 or 200 rounds ready to go is better than 30. 30 rounds goes quickly in semi auto and would go even quicker with a few long bursts. It is nice knowing that the M249s and M240s can go a while without reloading. Of course, reloading is slower but happens way fewer times than using 30 round mags. If they use Beta mags with the IAR, then it wouldn't be that bad.
    Dustin

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    757
    Feedback Score
    47 (100%)
    I believe there have been a lot of reliabilty issues with the Beta mags. They have been working on a new drum mag for the IAR, though. The new Quad-Stack P-Mag looks like it would a pretty good contender to me as well.

    http://www.defensereview.com/armatac...wlmg-look-out/
    Last edited by William B.; 07-08-10 at 09:13.
    Owner/Instructor at Resolute Response
    Assistant Instructor at Protective Shooting Concepts

  8. #18
    Dano5326 Guest
    Well... geez, where to start.

    I think the romanticism attached to the original Browning BAR is funny. The utility of weapons and tactics are relative, as is "volume of fire".
    No doubt the 30-06 BAR certainly had it's proponents in the Pacific theatre, pitted against 6.5mm bolt action wielding opposition hiding behind trees & bunkers. In europe against magazine fed semiauto opposition, the guys were probably pissed at the weight and mag capacity. Esp if running across MP/STG-43/44's

    Belt fed vs magazine fed. How to quantify....??
    Down time between reloads? 200rd drum vs 30rd mag.. well maybe consider you divide the 7mag changes by the time it takes to re-drum a SAW? For me about 8 seconds MK46(SAW) 2.5 sec M4.. of course gear optimized for either.

    Ease of reloading on the fly? I can reload a mag fed form factor at a full run, not so much a SAW. If you issued the upcoming magpul 40 rd mags, or some of the evolving 50-100 rd doublestack or drum magazines the viability of a "IAR" comes out.

    Weight: Belt feds generally weight more than mag-fed varients. A mature ARES, KAC, or Ultimax varient would bridge this gap. I must say the form factor on the KAC LMG is sweet, to bad it's not a mature product. For infantry use in urban areas the weight need come down. You average grunt isn't capable of effectively shooting a 20-25lb pill slinger in a 360degree sphere.

    WWDD? Yep, what would Dano do?
    -A gas piston m4-esq upper
    -Heavy barrel 16.5" barrel, dimpled, ribbed, heatsinked, whatever to increase surface area. Make sure it passes the pour water from canteen/piss on it when stupid hot test
    -Non-handguard removal required for cleaning (ala LMT MRP)
    -make sure the magwell takes all NSN's mags to include magpul (HK416 not so much)
    -put a closed bolt/open bolt trigger group on it (ala LWRC) for extreme circumstance
    -more properly spring it for a nice auto recoil impulse and consistent action (ala Vltor A5 stock)
    -compensate, for accurate full auto use, with a KAC Triple/BattleComp-esq muzzle device
    -push industry for immediate 40-45rd mags (fine for the urban fight you low pro snipers)
    -push industry ASAP for double wide mags and 75rd+ drums(HK G8-esq)

    Well crap, how about someone throws: a Vltor stock, LWRC "OBA" trigger group, and a muzzle device on a heavy barrel LMT MRP (monolithic is a defacto heat-sink) and gives it a whirl.

    IMO the salient point.. is positive forward momentum by the USMC for a more mobile, accurate, persistent base of fire weapon that fits the weight & ergonomic requirements of the actual warfighters laden with gear. Good on em.
    Last edited by Dano5326; 07-08-10 at 16:03.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    992
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by JSantoro View Post
    How many other "Instant Mountain: Just Add Water to Molehill!! As Seen on TV!!" topics can we come up with?
    Quote Originally Posted by JSantoro View Post
    Critical thought processes = Not for everyone.
    HAHA! You're killing me over here...I just spit coffee on my keyboard.
    --Nick
    Owner, Reptilia & Side Project, LLC

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,438
    Feedback Score
    12 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by montrala View Post
    It is very dense, cold hammer forged barrel (that means more mass in same dimension - so can soak more heat than classic barrel of sime size) that is 1" thick from extension to gas block and 0.750" from gas block to muzzle. This is same barrel that HK uses for civilian version of 416 -> MR223 (MR like Match Rifle). It is of course not same as quick change LMG/MG barrels but (as tests prooved) surpasses needs of IAR for sustained fire.
    Here comes the HKPro crowd singing HK IAR uber alles. The weapon system hasn't really been tested yet. When the 0311's get their grubby mits on them and really put coal to the fire without being under the watchful eye of the HK engineers in a controlled environment, we'll get a better look at how good, or bad, the system really is. It amazes me that this system has reached iconic status and the ink isn't even dry yet...
    Last edited by MarkG; 07-08-10 at 13:38. Reason: Spelling

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... 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
  •