Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle

>>35170048
>Is .30 cal the way of the future?
Were you born in 1885?

>>35170048
just give everyone .50 BMG pistols with optional barrel extensions and be done with it

officer gets a pocket BOOM, rifleman gets a briefcase BOOM, autorifleman gets a guitar BOOM, MRAP gunner gets a BOOM BOOM

This will be as successful as the Individual Carbine program

or the XM8

or the OICW

or the

>He also told lawmakers that not every soldier will need a 7.62mm rifle.

It's going to be some prototype shit that might result in a new rifle that goes to SOCOM and maybe DMR roles for units like those on GRF.

That's about it.

File: DSUvOae.jpg (21KB, 500x332px)

21KB, 500x332px

>>35170066
https://youtu.be/FLV2ji61arE?t=92
PISTOL IS FINE

>>35170071
Trials are already going on right now.

The is the fastest acquisition program ever done by the US army. It will be in service by 2019.

File: Capture.jpg (162KB, 868x653px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 868x653px

>>35170131
The US Army and Congress view this rifle as a "need to have" capability in order to defeat future armored threats from Russia and China.

>>35170131
Uh huh. It will be "150 rifles ordered by super spooky units and used (?) maybe, and this marine grunt says that he totally saw a SEAL with one this one time."

So, technically yes. But replacing the M4/M16?

>>35170181
>But replacing the M4/M16?
Not a total replacement. Some will use an M4, some will use an ICSR, depending on the environment and potential threats.

>>35170201
>Splitting the logistical chain

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

>>35170211
WE WWII NOW

>>35170048
>Those article comments.

Jesus Christ people are retarded.

File: img_0698.jpg (293KB, 1200x857px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1200x857px

>>35170211
You laugh now, but I'm telling you this is happening.

The brass has finally pulled their heads out of their asses and realized that one rifle for every soldier was a big fucking mistake. A small carbine may be good in the jungle or dense urban environments but it doesn't do so well in wide open desert.

>>35170283
>ITS HAPPENING!

It's never happening. If happenings actually happened we'd be fielding troops using All-Over-Brush camo with XM8s and Dragon Skin armor by now.

Just like with telescoping stocks we need telescoping ammo.
Just extend the shell to the length you need for targets you feel like you'll be engaging.
Need to carry a lot? collapse them down just like an M4 for easier carrying.
Need better shots at long range? extend it just like an M4 stock!

File: img_0703.jpg (305KB, 1200x862px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 1200x862px

>>35170324
Those are both garbage that was over hyped by their manufacturers.

This is a real next gen requirement.

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/04/jim-schatz-a-path-to-overmatch-next-generation-individual-weapon-system/

>>35170324
>XM8

Why you niggas sing and praise to the gun that proved to be an unreliable piece of shit?

>>35170397
The rifle in that slide is a POF Revolution with Steiner ICS, and OSS suppressor.

https://pof-usa.com/revolution/

>>35170281
>The M14 is the best battle rifle ever developed.
> The M16 wasn't designed to kill people, it was designed to inflict casualties
> buy the Mini-14 in 7.62

...i hurt myself today...

>>35170397
>Schatz
>HK shill who wrote an overmatch theory to sell HK417's to the army

Into the trash it goes.

File: 1504936208192.jpg (97KB, 915x960px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 915x960px

>>35170492
>muh HK shill
But that's wrong.

If this does actually get off the ground, what are the most likely contenders?

>>35170516
What part was wrong? He was a former HK employee who tried to sell the army on an HK product and along the way introduced a overmatch principle that functionally is one step forward and two steps backwards.

>>35170131
uh-huh

Ground Combat Vehicle was a big must-have urgent program too

and so was Future Combat Systems, flushing ten billion dollars there really got us a lot to show for it

and remember Land Warrior, shooting around corners with a video camera and shit? That went well

and good thing we have those RAH-66 Comanche helicopters doing overwatch

>>35170539
M110, M110A1 (G28), Mk17 (SCAR-H)

>>35170539
CZ Bren 806 like GIGN

>not really, but a boy can dream

File: navy-seal-photo-079.jpg (2MB, 2832x3384px)

2MB, 2832x3384px

>>35170539
It's already off the ground. Entrants have been submitted and testing is occurring right now. The Army is looking for a COTS solution, they want this rifle and they want it NOW. They're only doing an initial test of 210 rounds in order to narrow the competition to 7 rifles.

>pure speculation
FN SCAR
POF Revolution
Colt CM901
HK 417
Sig 716

Savage MSR10????(it's lightweight, reliable, meets specification, and is stupid cheap compared to it's competitors)

>>35170583
I believe GIGN's 806s are in 7.62x39

>>35170602
>HK 417
DING DING DING

Marines got new HK 416 toys. Army wants something new too.

File: img_1959.jpg (93KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 640x427px

>>35170578
>Land Warrior
This original program died but the technologies it developed are part of a new more streamlined program that is very much practical and likely to be adopted in the near future.

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/05/24/us-army-introducing-heads-up-display-with-tactical-augmented-reality/

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/09/08/elbit-systems-unveils-smartrack-a-situational-awareness-system-for-dismounted-forces-in-gps-denied-environments/

>>35170614
They are, although I think the idea is to eventually convert them to .300 blk down the road.

>>35170659
No they want 308 now, and they will later be converted to a 6.5 caliber.

>>35170602
>want COTS solution NOW
>PowerPoint slides all talk about the non-existent .264 USA round, which doesn't fit in any COTS receivers

What did they mean by this?

>>35170602
If the army wanted it NOW they wouldn't have an open competition and would simply dole out a sole source contract.

>>35170674
Try reading the post chain you are responding to more thoroughly.

Just give everyone an SR25

File: 264_zpsp1nz5jby.jpg (67KB, 1024x367px)

67KB, 1024x367px

>>35170680
.264 is real but .260 Remington is more likely to adopted as it is based on .308. Also FN already makes a .260 conversion kit for the SCAR/

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/05/19/260-remington-conversion-fn-scar-mk-20-spotted-sofic-2017/

>>35170147
>in order to defeat future armored threats
Odd. It's more the bullet material vs. the armor material and the velocity of that impact that matters. I guess a round producing greater energy would require fewer hits to degrade the armor, but the ceramic materials are what they are.

>>35170104
>forgot earpro
>.50BMG

>>35170851
My theory is that they're going with 308 and then 6.5 because it it will retain more energy after penetrating, compared to a 5.56

The pentagon supposedly has a new super secret round called XM1158 ADVAP that is able to penetrate level IV ceramic armor.

>>35170900
>The pentagon supposedly has a new super secret round called XM1158 ADVAP that is able to penetrate level IV ceramic armor.
I guess. I mean, they already have m993/995 bullets that do the same thing. They do it with tungsten. I'm not really sure what XM1158 would bring to the table apart from not using tungsten, in which case I'd be interested in knowing how they are reliably defeating level IV.

File: latest[1].jpg (155KB, 640x480px)

155KB, 640x480px

>>35170104
if they ever make a live action Outlaw Star.

>>35170900
They are going with .308 because they plan on replacing 7.62 with a 6.5 range caliber in the future, .260 Remington is widely speculated to be the choice because conversion is basically just a barrel swap on a 7.62 rifle.

>>35170048
>Is .30 cal the way of the future?
6.5 is the way of the future

308 just means more weight and less ammo. They'd be better off sticking w/ 5.56 until they have one of the caseless/telescoping 6.5 or 6.8 rounds available.

>>35170048

Yes. 5.56 has held back small arms development long enough.

>>35170602
I'll get a hard-on of legendary proportions if POF wins

>>35170089
This, they are looking for an M-14 replacement, which is not unreasonable, it is a good gun but is clearly at the end of its developmental rope in the current EBR format. Combine that with expensive and limited parts support and the age of the weapons themselves and the search for a new 7.62 rifle makes perfect sense.

>>35170539
100% gonna be a scar since they already have a small amount of them. maybe FN threw out a wild card as well like a 6.5 creedmoor scar.

>>35171053
you only need a barrel swap for 6.5 creedmoore too.

File: sexym14.jpg (475KB, 1200x438px) Image search: [Google]

475KB, 1200x438px

Why not, /k/?

>>35172755
because they still have a nasty taste in their mouth after they bit into it last time.

Everything after the Enfield was a mistake

>>35172313
>MSRP: $2669

Good luck with that.

SCAR in .260 Remington

Screen cap this post

>>35172664
>SCAR fangirl delusions

The Army already has several 7.62 rifles.

>>35173233
If they go with the SCAR-H (in any caliber) the program will get cancelled at fewer than 1000 units

Screenshot this poast

>>35172664
6.5 Creedmore is unsuitable as a military caliber

>DPMS Classic AR-10 in .243 Winchester.

>>35174266
bullshit

>>35170990
I was thinking the same thing

Why don't they go back to 20' barrels ?

>>35170131
So like the pistol trials, this is getting a trimming of the testing?

>>35174527
The shoulder angle is too extreme for reliable feeding at full auto. 6.5 Grendel has a similar problem

This is why the serious proposal is .264 USA instead

>>35174553
That's actually a possibility for this rifle.

One of the requirements is 16" or 20" barrel.

I still can't believe DoD is worried about armored Russian and Chinese troops when there is no way we will ever get into a war with them. Full nation sized war is a thing of history. The world is too connected and the international market has brought us closer together via economic interaction.

>>35174610
This is literally what everyone said riiiiight before World War 1

>>35174556
The pistol trials had all the testing they were supposed to.

>>35174610
DoD is worried about the proliferation of body armor to proxy forces, like ATGM's in Ukraine, Syria and Yemen.

>>35174622
How many nukes did each side have in 1914?

>>35174696
Doesn't matter. Nuclear powers have fought each other before.

>>35172755
Exposed action, op rod, heavy, necassary accurizing, inventories mostly shot to shit already.

>>35174700
A few penny ante border skirmishes here and there, sure, but all-out war? No.

>>35174710
But we can just buy some new ones from the good old Springfield Armory.

>>35174266
.260 Rem is not though.

>>35174722
A - Fuck SA
B - Exposed action, op-rod, heavy, necessary $$ accurizing...

An AR10 variant makes the most sense...
So they'll pick some expensive ass Eurorifle.

>>35174622
Nobody said that. pre WWI era was rife with extremely strict alliances and a breakdown in communication between the alliance countries.

They also didn't have nuclear weapons as a deterrent and didn't have the level of interconnections in economies as we have today. America may not have a deep economic relation with Russia, but its NATO allies have a strong tie to Russia through its oil. And while those same NATO allies may have no deep connection to China, America is tied to China through a large chunk of its foreign debt and many Chinese products that enter the US. Of course, SOME people would rather have an America where only American things are made and we pay out the ass for them and have no economic relations with other nations but those people don't have enough power yet to make their delusions a harmful reality.

>>35174668
Ah I see, that makes sense. But doesn't Allah provide protection?

>>35174756
>Nobody said that

You ready to eat crow?

>>35174756
>Nobody said that
You are an absolute fool. Not only did many people say that, it was a extremely comment belief held by many, even in the military.

File: 1504581523533.jpg (19KB, 320x320px)

19KB, 320x320px

>>35170131

>>35170147
Hahahahaha look at the rest of that chart, it's basically all "hey guys, what if we replace 5.56 with 6.5 and 7.62 with .338"

Yeah, they're going to replace every rifle cartridge simultaneously

>>35175311
>5.56 with 6.5
not happening

>>35175328
Neither one is happening, obviously, but they're definitely not fucking happening at the same time, that's why it's so funny

It's basically some major's "baby's first PowerPoint program of record"

Nothing to see here, move along

>>35175343
You're so dumb it hurts.

>>35170283
>not listening a polymer cased 556

Schatz was so openly blatant with his shilling.

>>35175407
explain

>>35175363
What, because I can spot a fucked program in Army acquisitions? Look, it's not like that's hard, almost every program they have is fucked

>>35175416
Polymer cased 556 would allow another 40+ rounds for the same weight, which would undercut the argument being presented in that graphic.

>>35175458
But it would still be 5.56

>>35175473
Your point being?

>>35175481
The point of switching to 6.5 is increased range and lethality.

File: 1500447039606.png (384KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 512x512px

>>35170397
>>35170492
But 5.56 already overmatches soviet 7.62x54R. Soviets admitted that in their secret document themselves (but schatz was too dumb to read them)
Effective range of PKM=600m.
Effective range of M249=800m.
Slavshit BTFO.

>>35175505
No, that is Schatz overmatch theory, which uses emotional appeals and outright lies to shill a product.

If the army was concerned about range it would train soldiers to shoot farther than 300 yards.

>>35175550
>emotional appeals and outright lies to shill a product
Are you really saying that 6.5mm hype is based on emotional appeals and outright lies?

>>35175542
>Effective range of M249=800m
5.56 effective range is more like 500m max

>>35175542
The 249 isn't even our pkm equivalent, you should be comparing the 240 which has an effective range on a bipod of 800m and 1100m on a tripod.

>>35170707
They'd never get away with that for a service rifle contract. Every company with a 7.62mm rifle in production would be filing complaints instantly.

>>35175591
550m point target 800m area target

>>35170147
>ask for new rifle to """defeat future armored threats """
>test and field this rifle with M80A1 round that can't defeat armored threats
What did they mean by this?

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=8c4837edfd54e4dbe3879a4699e50692&_cview=0

>>35175620
And maximum range soviets engaged targets from PKM during training and qualification is 600 meters, most common ranges are 400-500 m (from bipod, they didn't train to use PKM from tripod). How 7.62x54R can even compete?

>>35175645
XM1158 ADVAP

>>35175311
>what if we made everything bigger
It's the Halo Solution.
I am totally okay with it.

>>35175591
>Are you really saying that 6.5mm hype is based on emotional appeals and outright lies

The idea that individual soldiers need a DMR service rifle is built on emotional appeal and outright lies.

>>35175803
Or perhaps the "everyone needs loads of small bullets" turned out to not be as practical in reality as expected, hence the push back upwards towards bigger bullets, and that the clinging to small bullets is based on an irrational emotional attachment to the past few decades of small bullet propaganda?

>>35175591
>5.56 effective range is more like 500m max

Stop using 55 grain ball out of a carbine as your basis.

>>35175839
>Or perhaps the "everyone needs loads of small bullets" turned out to not be as practical in reality as expected

Good thing that is not the case.

>>35175842
We're never going back to 20" rifles you old fudd.

>>35175839
As opposed to the past few decades of anti 556 propaganda.

>>35175865
I like how you only half read that post.

File: 1503674926574.jpg (140KB, 850x790px)

140KB, 850x790px

>>35170048

ARbabbies btfo

>>35175909
How so?

>>35170048
No. They're being idiots just like they were in the '50s.

But this program will be canceled just like every other one.

>>35172755
>going back to the worst rifle ever adopted by the US military because muh traditionalism
yeah, that sounds like something the US Army would do.

>>35175839
congratulations, you're wrong

>sir we can't hit them, they moved behind a cinder block wall

>oh well pack it up boys some autist on the internet said we don't need .30 caliber weapons, and AR15 is the only gun you ever need

>>35170147
Why didn't M855A1 solves this problem?

>>35176172
Not as good as new 7.62 and 6.5mm ADVAP

>>35176172
>>35176186
That's the thing, neither M855A1 or M80A1 will defeat NIJ 4 armor, but M995 and M993 can.

7.62 ADVAP (there is no 6.5) is most likely a steel core round instead of tungsten so that it can see widespread use.

File: FB_IMG_1504657464626.jpg (17KB, 360x395px)

17KB, 360x395px

>be me
>SCAR fanboy
>saving up for one
>hear news
>mfw I know they won't go for it

>>35176487
>SCAR fanboy
serves you right

File: FB_IMG_1505417091146.jpg (15KB, 558x499px)

15KB, 558x499px

>>35176513
>he doesnt understand that the SCAR H is the finest battle rifle of our time

>>35176545
It could be the finest noodle cup of diarrhea of our time, doesn't make it good.

And the AR-10 is better anyway. Less putrid-looking, more aftermarket.

>>35175701
>chances that it would be ever used by anyone besides SOF
>0 (zero)

>>35176545
>rationalizing purchasing a $2 rifle for $3k plus the aftermarket parts necessary to fix the flaws

>>35174756
are you from an alternate timeline? Trump is the president because he pandered to all the isolationism and leftover sense of manifest destiny in america

>>35176439
>steel core
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZjBK5J6mNg
lol

>>35176666
I wonder how .260 Remington AP would perform.

>>35176666
What is a video of NIJ 4 plate defeating M2 AP and M80A1 bullets supposed to show?

>>35176545
your post doesn't deserve to bear the face of Fuhrer Tron

>>35176666
what a waste of quads

>>35176553
>looks

>>35176794
Show that there's no benefit to AP capacity from a caliber change to .30, maybe?

>>35176620
like?

File: 1486154528915.jpg (104KB, 400x972px)

104KB, 400x972px

>>35175839
>just give soldiers bigger bullets, that'll suddenly turn them into super snipers, all their current accuracy problems are just due to the bullets they're firing
This cult of gear bullshit needs to stop. It doesn't matter if you give every soldier a rifle in .408 Cheytac, you aren't going to see a significant increase in accuracy at longer ranges without better training, and that training would benefit them just as much if you stayed with the same rifle.

>>35175550
Some new ceramic armor stops 556 with no problems. So they say.
Also the parameters for the rifle state that it should have a 20 round detachable mag. So I don't think a lighter round is what they're looking for.

File: 1505322268355.gif (231KB, 250x257px)

231KB, 250x257px

>>35176553
>Less putrid-looking
Get a load of this homo

>>35172554
Did they not pick up the SCAR-H and SR25 for exactly this purpose?

>>35170337
You mean extend them by filling in more powder, right? how would this be done in the field?

>>35177305
He's trolling, retard

File: 1430783521610.gif (4MB, 270x263px)

4MB, 270x263px

>>35177089
This. This shit right here. So many wonderful advances in training techniques and equipment over that last 15 years and the Pentagon's solution is still "Well find them a new rifle, with two thousand dollars worth of aftermarket shit slapped onto it, and they'll shoot better. Just make sure they know how to slowfire from prone in a controlled environment."

File: mk_17.jpg (26KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 300x200px

Don't SOCOMfags already use the mk17? Couldn't we just issue out mk17's to infantry units?
>x1 Scar-H per squad, doubles as both DMR and Rifleman
The reason why I'd choose this is because the only "AR-10" style rifle in use is the m110 sr-25(same thing desu). Scars have 16 inch barrels and bolt carriers the size of tyrones cock which enables it to still be used in the capacity of a carbine while still not knocking limp dick private Sanchez over every time he pulls the trigger.

Am I wrong?

>>35177572
Squad level is too much. Just make the Afghanistan TOE standard with 1-2 DMR per platoon, that's all you need. Civilians don't seem to get that the smallest normal combat element size is platoon.

A SCAR is a perfectly reasonable and modern choice to replace the smashed together DMR that is the EBR. I think you'll find that this is what will actually end up happening.

>>35177779
Or they could just use existing M110/A1 rifles, something you don't seem to be aware of.

I don't understand, aren't the plates that everyone uses nowadays going to stop a 7.62 anyway?

>>35178072
The arguments in favor of a 7.62 service rifle are heavily flawed, which is why it's advocates are trying to rush this through.

>>35178305
>Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, asked if the new bullet will require a new rifle.

>Milley said, "It might but probably not," adding that weapons can be chambered for various calibers.

>However, the M4 would require a new barrel, bolt carrier group, buffer system in addition to a new lower receiver to shoot 7.62mm ammo, experts maintain.

Sounds to me like the army is just bullshitting everybody so they can spend some money.

>>35178405
>we wouldn't need a new rifle, we just need a new upper and lower for our M4

>>35178419

Exactly. This guy is just going around in circles with technical weaselspeak.

Wtf are they asking for? A new DMR? Fair enough. Bit why the fuck are they going on about "new bullet development" and modifying the M4? We already have AR-10 style rifles in service. So wtf are they actually asking for? What role are they trying to fill?

It's a load of horse shit to blow some tax revenue under the guise of r&d

>>35170048
don't they say something to this effect every ~4 years?
>hurr we need .30 cal
>start program
>program is too retarded/expensive
>cancel it
>determine 5.56 is fine
>repeat in a few years

>>35178537
It's laying the groundwork for a unified rifle/GPMG wunderwaff cartridge.

>>35178576
you mean the ones that don't work?

>>35178576
>unified rifle/GPMG wunderwaff cartridge
You mean something that will always result in more weight being carried and will always be a bad thing for soldiers?

>>35170066
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3BzgsrYanQ

>>35178558
It keeps the money rolling in.

>>35178749
>if we don't spend all of the money they gave us this period, they won't give us as much during the next one!

>>35178576
But what about SMGs?

>>35178805
What about SMGs? They have extremely limited applications in the military.

>>35178805
Already going extinct due to short barrel rifles in intermediate cartridges.

>>35178805
>>35178819
By "extremely limited" you mean they're only good for when you need something concealable or need something suppressed with subsonic ammunition where use past 100 yards isn't on the table. Subguns have been passed in every other way by regular rifles with shorter barrels.

>>35178805
M4 is the SMG

File: NotThisShit.png (55KB, 280x210px)

55KB, 280x210px

dam it here we go again

>>35170744
6.5 CMore is a better chamber profile, high bc .264 bullets in .260 don't fit in SR-25 pattern mags. 6.5 CMore offers the same power but fits in the SR-25 mag with bullets up to 160 grain.

File: 1488687526917.jpg (36KB, 640x467px)

36KB, 640x467px

>>35170147
this chart looks a like a clusterfuck, one rifle with 7,62 cartridge a carbine type rifle or hell a bullpup might be a good idea. a new LMG to replace the SAW and if they want it a 338 win GPMG. handgun wise go NATO standerd over this as much as peole will scream about it Glock is a solid choice chambered in new better catridge BAM problem solved

>>35175865
M855A1 out of an M4 has at least 1 800m+ single shot kill in Afghanistan that I know of.

The DM asked a LT to help him judge the wind, and as it turned out, there wasn't any.

>>35176115
how is it not a direct upgrade from the Garand

>>35172755

Modern tech can make a rifle that does the same thing the M14 does in a lighter, sleeker package.

>>35178885
>or need something suppressed with subsonic ammunition where use past 100 yards isn't on the table
9mm subsonic ammunition and .300 BLK are actually mostly comparable for maximum point blank range, given that they start at about the same velocity and the differences due to ballistics coefficient aren't really realized inside maximum point blank range. After running the numbers in a ballistics calculator, at most you'll see a 10 yard difference in MPBR from 186 yards with 9mm to 196 yards with .300 BLK if you consider a max impact distance above and below point of aim of 10" to be acceptable. For something more reasonable such as a maximum impact distance above and below point of aim of 5" the difference drops to 5 yards with a MPBR of 138 yards with 9mm and 143 yards with .300 BLK. If you're planning on shooting outside of MPBR then .300 BLK starts making sense, but inside MPBR a suppressed subgun is as relevant as ever.

>>35179112
effective range isn't based on anecdotes. 5.56, 54R and .308 will all kill at 1000 yards if it hits right. It's about probability of such a hit.

File: tirdy cal.jpg (76KB, 880x440px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 880x440px

>>35170048

>>35179473
Winddrift?

>>35177779
They're replacing the M110 with the G28, are they still using the EBR?

>>35179530
Considering the short MPBR, it isn't much of an issue. The 9mm experiences 2.8" of drift at 100 yards vs the .300 BLK's 1.1" (1.7" difference) and at 150 yards (just outside of MPBR assuming you chose a sane MPBR) you get 6.1" for 9mm vs 2.4" for .300 BLK (3.7" difference). It isn't until about 200 yards where you start seeing a significant difference with 10.6" for 9mm and 4.2" for .300 BLK (6.4" difference).

I'm using the JBM ballistics calculator if you want to try running anything yourself:
http://www.jbmballistics.com/cgi-bin/jbmtraj-5.1.cgi

>>35176647
>Trump is president because
senpai, I voted for him because he's not Hillary, he pisses off lefties, and he's not some jerkoff career politician. The people who voted for him for a wall and keeping their factory jobs were going to vote Republican anyway. Besides that, the fuck is wrong with a little isolationism for this country? We've been sending people thousands of miles away to kill sand niggers for almost two decades. Pretty soon, we'll be sending kids who weren't even alive when our reason for going there happened.

It's like people saying roads, police, and food stamps are socialist ideas. Muh socialism isn't what gave us municipal resources. Muh isolationism isn't what will give us a boost to job growth. Fuck Mexico and China. The United States is not here to employ citizens of other nations.

File: qv8cu.jpg (10KB, 320x235px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 320x235px

>>35179707
>Pretty soon, we'll be sending kids who weren't even alive when our reason for going there happened.
And there is no end in sight.

>>35179774
>And there is no end in sight.
haven't you caught on yet
that's the point

>>35179052
The shape of the case for both creed and grendel exclude them from military use.

>>35179692
Shit, forgot to mention that those numbers are for a 10 MPH crosswind.

>>35179707
Sorry, but when the US deliberately displaced the British Empire in the politicking during and after WW2, we took on responsibility for keeping shit in order. If we pull out, other nations will expand to fill the gap; just look at China's plans to basically wrap up the entire east coast of Africa and use Pakistan and Africa to control the Indian Ocean.

>>35179707
>The United States is not here to employ citizens of other nations.
We'd best start employing Chinese. China has a population of 1.379 billion compared to the 323 million in the US. If only 1% of their population is capable of PHD level thinking, that's equivalent to 4.2% of the US population. We won't be able to compete just due to sheet numbers, and it will only get worse. China has been heavily investing in higher education since the early 2000s. Meanwhile in the US, anti-intellectualism and economic class warfare The most economical way for us to compete is by poaching their higher educated populace.
>Hurr durr stealin' our jerbs
Make more technically rigorous jobs. Bill Gates is "partnering" with the Chinese to try and build a Thorium reactor because our populace and government won't. Congress shutdown a super collider in Texas because it was "expensive." You know what super fucking expensive? Losing. It pays to be a winner. All of the money and expertise that didn't go into the Texas site went to CERN in Europe instead.
>PHDs and Bachelors and shit don't mean anything to the "average American"
Education is a direct benefit for society, and therefore an indirect benefit for you, believe it or not.
>>35179052
6.5 Creedmore is a meme. If you're target shooting it's a great flat shooter but if you actually want to have energy left by the time you reach your target you'd be using .300 Win Mag or .338 something. 6.5 grendel has some great ballistics, but it's stretching the limits of the AR-15 sized platform. End result is sheared bolt lugs sooner rather than later, which is something the military really cares about. On top of that we won't see a new cartridge adopted until we replace the M16/M4. Maybe then we'll see a 6-6.5 mm projectile adopted when we replace those, maybe not.

>>35180063
Dude wtf are you talking about.

>>35170048
Explain to me why it won't be some sort of AR-10.

>>35173146
By that logic every gun in that list is disqualified, specially the SCAR

>>35177089
The shooter can only determine where his shots will go, not what his boolet will do when it actually hits. Half of the Army's reason for calling for this switch is for a better effect against armor, which is something that can only be influenced by gear. And no, teaching the average grunt to aim for heads is not a good alternative.

Future Gear Cult when?

>>35180540
5.56x45mm M995 AP can already penetrate ESAPI/NIJ IV plates out to ~100 meters if you need AP ability in a CQB scenario. Past that you can just use regular ammo since rifle plates cover very little of the target, and certainly don't cover the entire torso like some people seem to think. Also, where bullets impact on the body tends to be more random outside of CQB distances.

>>35180599
>le tungsten meme
>ever being standard issue
Also the armor coverage issue is why exoskeletons are such a big thing. You have to address it sooner or later, and better to address it with a bigger rifle sooner (that can be more easily chambered downwards) instead of being stuck on the 5.56 AR-15 platform right until trouble occurs.

>>35180627
>>le tungsten meme
>>ever being standard issue
Nothing else will penetrate ESAPI/NIJ IV/other equivalent plates while fitting in something soldiers might reasonably be expected to carry. If you want to penetrate ESAPI/NIJ IV plates with steel core ammunition out to a decent range, then you're going to have to start issuing soldiers rifles in .338 Lapua magnum or other similar calibers.

>Also the armor coverage issue is why exoskeletons are such a big thing.
None are in service currently, and there will be ample warning when one does actually go into service during which time the 5.56x45mm M995 AP will serve as a good enough stop gap if they end up having current level armor. Besides that, any plates that will stop the 5.56x45mm M995 AP (like the XSAPI level of protection that the US TALOS program is supposed to be able to use) will be designed to stop the 7.62x51mm M993 AP or similar as well and will need some sort of APDS loads to penetrate. You're talking about threats that are far enough out that they could very well end up exceeding the reasonable counters offered today.

>>35180719
>If you want to penetrate ESAPI/NIJ IV plates with steel core ammunition out to a decent range, then you're going to have to start issuing soldiers rifles in .338 Lapua magnum or other similar calibers.
Penetration in one shot is one option, penetration after multiple hits is another. A level 4 plate is defined by its ability to resist multiple hits on the same spot from intermediate calibers and at least one hit from an AP full power rifle round. In the standard case that would be black tip .30-06.

A more reasonable proposal than upgrading to magnum rifle calibers is to issue full power or "high intermediate" rounds like 6.5+mms and focus on getting multiple hits in order to penetrate armor. This way, they can still have enough ammo to perform suppression, which they can't do if they are seriously carrying around .338 Lap guns. Unless you're the guy with the LWMMG, then I guess you're just the biggest baddest dude in the whole group anyway.

>You're talking about threats that are far enough out that they could very well end up exceeding the reasonable counters offered today.
Yes, that is why soliciting for a new bigger platform right now so that we have more options later on is a good move. A bigger receiver means a lot more leeway in what kind of calibers it can work with. Maybe something will come along that can penetrate XSAPI in one hit while still suitable for mass production, or maybe we go with the strategy above and do it with magdumps of 7.62 Real NATO. Down-chamber for existing threats.

Currently the only people with actual working exos is the USA but that's just what we know publicly. I'm sure that other superpowers like China are at least considering them even if they are technologically and logistically far behind. There is a lot of money spent on things that are supposed to deal with very advanced threats in other services (F-22s, F-35s as an example) yet a comparative small pittance for some new rifles gets everyone's panties in a bunch?

>>35181220
Russians have used unpowered exoskeletons for load bearing purposes in Syria.

>>35181220
>Penetration in one shot is one option, penetration after multiple hits is another. A level 4 plate is defined by its ability to resist multiple hits on the same spot from intermediate calibers and at least one hit from an AP full power rifle round. In the standard case that would be black tip .30-06.
ESAPI plates are rated for 2 rounds of .30-06 M2 AP. Getting 3 hits on the small area that rifle plates cover with a battle rifle before the target moves or you need to stop exposing yourself isn't practical or even a realistic expectation.

>There is a lot of money spent on things that are supposed to deal with very advanced threats in other services (F-22s, F-35s as an example) yet a comparative small pittance for some new rifles gets everyone's panties in a bunch?
Because the advantages of things like the F-22 and F-35 are immediate, while adopting a rifle based on a hypothetical future threat that may change by the time it actually materializes and dealing with all the logistics and training costs related to issuing that new rifle while seeing no immediate advantage is ridiculous. The US military may have a lot of money to piss away, but they don't have unlimited money. Also, when it comes to adopting a new rifle immediately, there is still the LSAT program that is almost certainly going to develop something that is actually a significant advancement over current options and in blowing their load now and adopting something immediately for general issue the LSAT program would likely risk being shut down.

>>35181327
>Because the advantages of things like the F-22 and F-35 are immediate
How many times have F-22s and F-35s have been in battle ever?
How many times have infantry fought, bled and died in the past decade?

I rest my case.

The LSAT is certainly an important factor to consider though. The solicitation is for an "intermediary" rifle but we know how the last few intermediary acquisitions ended up. Maybe internally the manufacturers have been given a directive to prepare to modify their rifle entries for LSAT ammo in the future.

>>35181616
>How many times have infantry fought, bled and died in the past decade?
How many of those who died would have actually been saved by issuing a different rifle?

>Maybe internally the manufacturers have been given a directive to prepare to modify their rifle entries for LSAT ammo in the future.
That's not how it fucking works you mongoloid. Go and look up how the guns the LSAT program involves function. The ammo from the LSAT program can't just be dropped into existing platforms.

File: 1418863214573.jpg (10KB, 169x200px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 169x200px

>>35170642
>original program
>technologies it developed
>streamlined
>near future

>falling for marketing speak

>>35182592
>essentially saying that failed procurement off of R&D programs does not mean the R&D is lost, is marketing speak

What a failure the seal wolf class is.

Git out.

File: dust-tm.jpg (27KB, 450x341px)

27KB, 450x341px

>>35170403
>unreliable piece of shit

>>35172755

Because the last time they tried to reintroduce the M14 in a DMR role it turned into stripped down M14s sitting in storage with the odd dude occasionally using it with irons in the streets of Ramadi for the hell of it because all the optics have been redistributed to the M4s and M16s.

>>35181220

When they introduced ESAPI plates they sat in storage gathering dust because dudes would rather risk getting hit by the odd dragunov round than carry the extra bulk of ESAPI compared to SAPI. XSAPI plates weren't even issued because even the Army realized it would be straight up negligence to issue things that no one would use and if they did you'd have 50% more heat casualties and exhausted soldiers that can't fucking move.

>>35170492
>>Schatz
>>HK shill who wrote an overmatch theory to sell HK417's to the army
Stop spreading the same bullshit over and over again in every thread. Start educating yourself for once. Overmatch is a brainchild of General Martin Dempsey:
http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA587318

>>35170048
So why don't they just adopt the SCAR-H? Aren't loads of different groups already using it?

>>35182712
It's a candidate (and in my opinion, the preferred one they're driving towards), but FN has displayed a lot of production issues driving up unit cost.

>>35182699
If you would read back through the post chain rather than just replying to one post without context, you would see that XSAPI plates were brought up in the context of the possible use of powered exoskeletons in the near future (given things like the TALOS program that are already being worked on) and not as something regular soldiers would be using.

>>35174756
>Nobody said that.

>A 1910 best-selling book, The Great Illusion, used economic arguments to demonstrate that territorial conquest had become unprofitable, and therefore global capitalism had removed the risk of major wars. This view, broadly analogous to the modern factoid that there has never been a war between two countries with a MacDonald’s outlet, became so well established that, less than a year before the Great War broke out, the Economist reassured its readers with an editorial titled “War Becomes Impossible in Civilized World.”

>“The powerful bonds of commercial interest between ourselves and Germany,” the Economist insisted, “have been immensely strengthened in recent years … removing Germany from the list of our possible foes.”
http://blogs.reuters.com/anatole-kaletsky/2014/06/27/world-war-one-first-war-was-impossible-then-inevitable/

How does it feel to be this dumb?

File: 1485720214884.jpg (166KB, 500x400px)

166KB, 500x400px

from:

>>35174756
>America is tied to China through a large chunk of its foreign debt and many Chinese products that enter the US. Of course, SOME people would rather have an America where only American things are made and we pay out the ass for them and have no economic relations with other nations but those people don't have enough power yet to make their delusions a harmful reality.

to:
>>35179707
>I voted for him because he's not Hillary, he pisses off lefties, and he's not some jerkoff career politician. The people who voted for him for a wall and keeping their factory jobs were going to vote Republican anyway. Besides that, the fuck is wrong with a little isolationism for this country?

File: 1485920227205.gif (2MB, 400x206px)

2MB, 400x206px

>>35182958

>>35170403
Probably because it looked cool in Global Storm and RB6-Vegas I guess. I always thought it looked like a toy.

>>35182670
>using a test where the testers didn't understand how the 3 round burst trigger worked

>>35182731
Given the Army's procurement history an HK417 is more likely what they are pushing for.

File: 423423.jpg (99KB, 806x558px)

99KB, 806x558px

>>35180599
>Past that you can just use regular ammo since rifle plates cover very little of the target, and certainly don't cover the entire torso like some people seem to think.

>>35183096
>missing the point
The M4 performance wasn't the topic, retard.

>>35170048
Related question: How does 25-06 fare against high level body armor?

It's a tiny projectile with a massive amount of powder, so I'd think it would be excellent at armor piercing but I can't find any tests of it.

>>35172004
Its only going to be used as a dmr for now. The reason we need it is because of the new threat from all 7.62r squads in the middle east out ranging M4 carbines.

>>35174259
Is it really that expensive?

>>35174566
>.264 USA

That sounds way too american.

My ideal scenario:

defaults:
5.56 carbine
6.5/6.8 CT LSAT, dual roled for both SAWs and GPMGs [since sectional density gives the same benefit at 7.62 vs wind, most barriers, and for ant-personnel purposes]

Expansion pack:
a DMR using the same 6.5-6.8 CT cartridge for issue more mountainous areas
potentially a .338 GPMG for super mountainous areas

>>35183903
Fuck yo metric system

>>35175542
5.56mm out of an M4 will only go out to 500m. PKMs and SVDs will reach 700m to 800m. In Syria we've been seeing no rigid squad layouts. It's not uncommon for groups to all have SVDs and PKMs. They use these weapons and the open spaces of the environment to gain an advantage. It's a very clear advantage, too. This is unacceptable, so we need to adapt.

>>35177045
watch any serious and indepth user review of the scar17 on YT.
alot of shit get replaced/upgraded to make actually good.
$3000 for rifle
$2000 for upgrades

>>35183947
>DMRs and SAWs have a longer range than carbines, especially when limited to harassment
>get rid of carbines!

Yeah nah. The solution is call for fire. A 120mm mortar has 7km range before RAP rounds and the prox fuse gives a 50m kill/100m wound radius.

>>35180219
actual real world issues that are obviously above your head

>>35175839
Small and fast bullets are still great. 5.56mm kicks ass in urban fighting. It's just that big open spaces are not its strong suit.

>>35183947
>PKMs and SVDs will reach 700m to 800m.
Too bad soviet soldiers couldn't hit targets at 800m even at range conditions :^)

> It's a very clear advantage, too.
No slavshit is at range disadvantage. This is fact.

>>35183947
M249 effective ranges are 600 to 800m. M240 effective ranges are 800 to 1100m. M110 effective range is 800m.

So what adaptation do we need to make m8t?

>>35183987
You can't call for fire when you're a black ops team operating without artillery support.

>>35184070
Our squads only carry one of those weapons at most. That one person doesn't do so well against all the members of the enemy squad targeting him. So the adaption would be to make everyone use them. That's not happening because not everyone can carry LMGs or use sniper rifles. So, something that can reach out while also being useful in closer engagments is wanted. A 7.62mm battle rifle fills that role.

>>35183368
But using a flawed test was?

>>35183772
I will take Fictional Scenarios for $500 Alex.

>>35184090
'Black ops' teams are not limited to Mk18 rifles.

>>35184105
Except the part where 556 carbines are lethal farther than 99.9% of soldiers can shoot.

>>35184132
Yeah, well not everyone has 120mm on tap, either.

>>35170879
they both have earplugs in dingus

>>35184139
It doesn't matter if it becomes a matter of chance past a certain distance. ISIS didn't care. They flung 7.64r from out of range and the bullets at happened to hit their mark still had hitting power, while anything that came back their way was non lethal.

>>35184199
see >>35184122

>armchair generals and basement dwelling ballistic experts argue about how the Army is dumb and should be doing X, Y, or Z

>>35184241
Not an argument.

>>35182958
Those aren't the same person.

>>35184250
Stay made basement dweller

>>35177045
stock brekas after abuse, kills optics due to rifle harmonics, loer needs to be changed out ot accept sr-25 m110 ar-10 style mags, all in all that exra 1000 on top of what yuo already spent don't believe me
watch this and next video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqpEsoHY2iQ

>>35184234
Still missing the point, I see. Would you have us go back to SMGs? Soldiers tend to hit a lot better with them. Of course, that's only because they use them at the proper range. Use an SMG at carbine ranges, and they tend to fall short in both accuracy and killing power. Just like when using a carbine at battle rifle ranges. That's all it's about, really. We need a little more range and power for the common solider right now.

>>35184258
stop projecting basement dweller

>>35179707
Good goy and go (((Trump)))!

>>35184351
Hello demotivation shill, keep it in /pol/.

>>35170104
>Loads .50 BMG flatnose "yer fockin ded m8" shell.
>Proceeds to IMMEDIATELY muzzle sweep the other guy.
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

New to this whole shitstorm.
Why don't they just use one of the 7.62 platforms already available? AR10s would share parts and operate just the same as what we currently have. And wouldn't require developing a whole new thing

>>35176620

The AR has had over half a century to fix its shit. Support will not end if another gun like the SCAR gets a big contract.

>>35184766
That wouldn't grease any palms.

>>35184871
What shit needs fixing on the AR platform? I don't own an AR, only an AK and handgun.

>>35184930
It isn't paying any soon-to-be-retired generals a pension.

>>35184766
That's one of the reasons an HK417 based rifle is so likely, as it's the current DMR rifle (M110A1/G28).

In all serious though 1) don't be surprised if something completely random like the MDR is selected and 2) don't be surprised if this gets canned.

>>35184269
>flimsey stocks are an unfortunate trend it seems
>Dont really plan on sticking any low quality optics on anyway
>couldnt give less of a fuck about sr25/ar10 magazines

yeah, I believe you. I just don't really care

>>35185376
Bartocci suffers from that thing where people who know more than the average pleb think they know more than they actually do. His video claiming the MHS trials were fucked are a great example of this.

File: image.jpg (63KB, 880x440px)

63KB, 880x440px

>>35170048
Hmmm, y'know if I didn't know better I would think that the senior military officials who make these decisions don't actually know anything about guns beyond the basic rifle qual most of them haven't done in years. Nah what are the odds of that.

>>35185128
>MDR next 7.62 service rifle
Anon stop I'm trying to stop fapping so much

File: f9114240cc2c1cfb4b53e37c318098af.jpg (256KB, 720x540px)

256KB, 720x540px

>>35179690
>are they still using the EBR?
Jah.

>>35185128
>MDR next service rifle
Yes please.
Yes.

>>35175606
Except the 240 has like 10lbs on a PKM?

>>35175740
There is a recoil limit though. Too big of a caliber and quick follow up shots for engagements less than 100m becomes harder.

>>35180063
>anti-intellectualism
This meme needs to die.

>>35184034
+1
We would be wise no to forget the importance of recoil control.
Exos will change that however.

>>35184139
This isn't true IMO. Lethality is a gradient like most ballistic performance. 5.56 lethality is significantly reduced outside of 300m.
Area of aim engagements are happening well beyond that in the middle east.

>>35185867
>>35186469
Watch the MAC video. The recoil is pretty massive. It would put soldiers at a significant disadvantage inside of 100m.

7.62x51 without some novel recoil management system is too hot for general service rifle usage because it see significant issues at urban ranges.

>>35170048
Just make a good quality ak clone

>>35184115
IF you don't know then why don't you follow the post chain back up and read?

>>35186720
Yeah that's why it's a
>7.62 service rifle
Not talking about general service. DMR roles.

>>35183947
How about we adapt by playing to our strengths? Call for fire, or use weapons (Carl, Pike, 60mm mortars, etc.) designed to reach out that far.

>>35186720
>Except the 240 has like 10lbs on a PKM?

Yeah. Which is part of what makes it a more stable firing platform that outranges the PKM.

When will you advocate for upgunning insurgents to match American weapons ranges?

>>35183892
Compared to what they get M4/M16's for, yes.

>>35185562
He also claims that M855A1 is a terrible round and that we should stick with M855.

>>35184090
They call for Hellfires and 500lb JDAMs instead, anon. USAF air crews trip over their dicks to support SOCOM for those sweet patches. And if you're taking fire from 800m, you're already compromised anyway.

>>35188563
Don't forget that we have APKWS2 now, for Danger Close 2: Dangerer Closer.

>>35185562
>His video claiming the MHS trials were fucked
you dense, noguns, basement dwelling, armchair warrior cretin.
The MHS trials were a fucking joke, the paperwork is there to prove it. Its not a claim or unsubstantiated speculation its fact.
Go read up first; sure the ginger gnome king waffles on like a god given authority on everything, but even broken clock is right twice a day.

>>35192940
Glock lost.

Get over it, faggot.

>>35192940
Except that's wrong you asshurt Glockfag.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/07/09/mhs-failure-sig-vs-glock-depth-analysis/

>>35179774
100 years and we should be worried

>>35185562
if you listened to his video it makes sense about the MHS trials, they where a joke the armies choice of handgun is poor choice. I am no Glock fanboy but they would have been better served by a Glock or ven the M&P series of handgun, instead they o with a brand new design that has no parts availability and will only live on the basis of this contract if the army can't get out it

File: 1503718554859.jpg (15KB, 640x640px)

15KB, 640x640px

>>35193919

>>35193919
Try reading >>35193711

>>35193957
>In-Depth
>TFB
>choose wisely

Entire poorly written article comes down to: "Bid Sample Test (BST) and not the Product Validation Test (PVT)", concludes with fuck all data.
>Wannabe /Kommando's don't even read the authors own points on timing with contract wins or multiple other sources siting lack of completed testing.

>>35193568
>>35193711
>Kek, for these COD faggots.
I dont give two shits about glock or any other manufacturer in the trials, what I do care about is keeping testing procedures and fielding the best possible firearm for service personal.
Take your petty brand loyalty to elsewhere.

Facts are the trials were shit, and should have been to higher standards for (try say this slowly), everyone involved.

One last tidbit for the masses:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU_emAFbXGI
This is the in-depth author that I want to take military testing or firearm advise from? May as well go back to nutnfancy videos or fpsrussia?

>>35193919
Is that you, Gaston Glock?

>>35194036
>petty brand loyalty
Nigger I only own Glocks and I think the MHS decision was the right one.

GLOCK MADE NO ATTEMPT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS LAID OUT BY THE ARMY

The Glock was only kept in the trial for comparison testing, much like how the Luger "competed" against Browning's 1911.

>>35194036
>claims to not be a glockfag
>desperately spins non arguments to try and discredit the MHS selection

>>35187935
A Carl has one shot against a PKM's 100 and an SVDs 10. A mortar is big and heavy. A pike is a long spear, but it's not 700m long. Calling for an artillery strike is not always possible and takes too much time when the enemy is already engaging you from out of range.

>>35194595
>A pike is a long spear, but it's not 700m long
You're right, it's actually a 2,000 meter weapon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pike_(munition)

>>35194082
>>35194191
are you motherfuckers so dense as to think only glockfags have an issue with the trials?

>>35194082
fuckboi, nobody is defending glock, their submission was the same attempt your father had at straight sex (piss poor soft effort, but it still went bang). The test however was a fuck up, plain and simple.

[>spoilersonk].280 British[>spoilersonk]

>>35195310
We think you are a Glockfag because you are regurgitating their damage control.

>>35195411
The more someone advocates .280 British the less they actually know about it.