Replacement for the SAW?

[Chino]

Oops ... thought I fixed the typo You're right ... it's 3 groups.

In any case, I guess your unit has a different SOP then mine. We used to strip away "support" elements into ad hoc groupings all the time.

In SOP it is always 3 groups - Gp 1, 2 & 3. But there's no reason why you can't split it into just 2 groups depending on requirement.

If you ask me, 2-man groupings is not ideal. There is simply not enough eyes, ears and firepower in a 2-man group. A 3-man group makes more sense. And in weaponry also make more sense:
- SAW gunner
- M203 gunner
- LAW gunner

In most situations esp CQB you need the 3rd man to cover the rear while the other 2 do the deeds that need doing.

But I guess it is easier to split them into 3 groups for flexibility of deployment and combine them into 2 when needed.

Most likely, the 3-group-per-section structure is a leftover from the old days of 9-men sections. SAF reduce the number of men per section but kept the 3-group structure.

So what type of unit were you from that always detach the SAW gunners? Because to me, that dangerously depletes the firepower of the assaulting elements.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I think the Ultimax 100 MK4 is the best choice for the IAR to replace the SAW. I'm impressed with the capability that the Ultrimax provides and I think its better than anything else competing for the IAR competition.

Here is a link with more details: http://www.ultimaxsaw.com/Ultimax vs. M-249.html

Also does anybody have any word on the latest news with the program? Are they still testing?

 

[lobbie111]

In order to properly asses the matter I think we need to determine section (or squad) compositions, can people who know that a country uses a multi weapon squad structure post up their numbers, weapons and structure (I know this varies but a typical squad).

The four we are currently assesing are

South Africa
Australia
United States (both Army and USMC)
Singapore

This will probably help everyone in determining a hypothetical replacement for the SAW

 

[Cutaway]

Why dot they just stick with using the SAW?, Its a reliable weapon system and still has potential in the battlefield.

 

[SuperSLime]

In order to properly asses the matter I think we need to determine section (or squad) compositions, can people who know that a country uses a multi weapon squad structure post up their numbers, weapons and structure

The UK Infantry section ORBAT is as follows:

Charlie Fire Team:

Section Comd (Cpl) - L85A2 rifle
Grenadier - L85A2 with 40mm UGL
LMG Gunner - Minimi Para
Rifleman/Marksman - L86A2 LSW

Delta Fire Team:

Section 2I/C (LCpl) - L85A2 rifle
Grenadier - L85A2 with 40mm UGL
LMG Gunner - Minimi Para
Rifleman/Marksman - L86A2 LSW

 

[sgtgunn]

The US Army Infantry Squad TO&E is pretty much the same:

Squad Leader (SSG) - M4/M16A4

Alpha Fire Team:

Team Leader (SGT or CPL) - M4/M16A4
Grenadier - M4/M16A4 w/M203 40mm GL
Automatic Rifleman - M249 SAW
Rifleman/Designated Marksman - M4/M16A4 w/ACOG or SDM-R or M-14 etc...

Bravo Fire Team:

Team Leader (SGT or CPL) - M4/M16A4
Grenadier - M4/M16A4 w/M203 40mm GL
Automatic Rifleman - M249 SAW
Rifleman/Designated Marksman - M4/M16A4 w/ACOG or SDM-R or M-14 etc...

There are a number of unit variations to this. Some units like giving the M203s to the Team Leaders. DM may be present in either team, both or occasionally none. DM weapons vary as well. Eventually all rifle caliber sniper (M24 & M21) and DM rifles will be replaced with the M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper System which is a modified version of the Knight's Armament SR-25 7.62mm. Not sure how that will work within the rifle squad for the DM as it will mean carrying a 2 types of rifle ammo - 5.56mm and 7.62mm. IMHO we should just switch back to 7.62mm and dump the 5.56mm weapons. Or switch to an intermediate caliber like 6.8mm or 6.5mm. 6.8mm would be easy as they could simply swap the upper receivers of existing M4/M16 weapons and the M249 can be converted with a change of bolt, barrel and feed tray. Once we start running into bad guys who wear body armor - 5.56mm is just not going to cut the mustard any longer.

Adrian

The UK Infantry section ORBAT is as follows:

Charlie Fire Team:

Section Comd (Cpl) - L85A2 rifle
Grenadier - L85A2 with 40mm UGL
LMG Gunner - Minimi Para
Rifleman/Marksman - L86A2 LSW

Delta Fire Team:

Section 2I/C (LCpl) - L85A2 rifle
Grenadier - L85A2 with 40mm UGL
LMG Gunner - Minimi Para
Rifleman/Marksman - L86A2 LSW

 

[lobbie111]

So in short what I think everyone is saying in this thread is the SAW does not need to be replaced but the caliber needs to be replaced, this is the ideal situation I think we need,

ALPHA TEAM

Section Commander - Bushmaster ACR (Magpul Masada) Chambered for 7.62
Grenadier - Bushmaster ACR 7.62 With M203 (or Equivalent)
LMG Gunner - Minimi 7.62mm Variant
Rifleman/Marksman - M110/M25

BRAVO TEAM

Section 2I/C - Bushmaster ACR
Grenadier - Bushmaster ACR with M203
LMG Gunner - Minimi 7.62
Rifleman/Marksman - M110/M25

Btw Australia is similar with the addition of one more section member, three teams of three (deleting the designated marksman) Like the Alpha and Bravo Teams with the addition of a Charlie Team Consisting of scouts with LAW66's and Steyr Aug/M203. (Just update the weapons with the steyr)

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Why dot they just stick with using the SAW?, Its a reliable weapon system and still has potential in the battlefield.

Becasue the USMC wants a new magazine feed automatic rifle that is more reliable than the SAW. Below is the requirements for the IAR.

In brief, the USMC, is looking for something that ...

* Weighs no more than 12.5 pounds empty
* Has MIL-STD-1913 rail interface
* Min. 36rpm sustained rate of fire -- 75rpm desired
* Feed from a detachable 100 round Drum magazine or Beta C Mag
* Accepts standard M16A4 30 round magazines
* Capable of both semi and full auto fire, with open bolt for full-auto and closed bolt for semi-auto (select fire)
* Has folding collapsible stock
* Has magazine with visible round count
* Has a bipod
* Can be operated by an individual Marine

 

[SuperSLime]

So in short what I think everyone is saying in this thread is the SAW does not need to be replaced but the caliber needs to be replaced, this is the ideal situation I think we need,

ALPHA TEAM

Section Commander - Bushmaster ACR (Magpul Masada) Chambered for 7.62
Grenadier - Bushmaster ACR 7.62 With M203 (or Equivalent)
LMG Gunner - Minimi 7.62mm Variant
Rifleman/Marksman - M110/M25

BRAVO TEAM

Section 2I/C - Bushmaster ACR
Grenadier - Bushmaster ACR with M203
LMG Gunner - Minimi 7.62
Rifleman/Marksman - M110/M25

Btw Australia is similar with the addition of one more section member, three teams of three (deleting the designated marksman) Like the Alpha and Bravo Teams with the addition of a Charlie Team Consisting of scouts with LAW66's and Steyr Aug/M203. (Just update the weapons with the steyr)

Why the Bushmaster ACR? It's an unproven design, largely cobbled together from parts of other weapons, and isn't available in 7.62 NATO which means ammo incompatibility with the other Section weapons. The SCAR isn't a general service rifle, so I would go with the HK417 or DSA58; these are mature 7.62 NATO designs with RIS etc well integrated. I would even consider (I know! Ammo issues) keeping 5.56mm as the standard infantry calibre but 7.62mm for at least one of the MGs and the DMRs. The two rifles I named would all make good DMRs; a DMR doesn't need a full-on sniper rifle. The M110 would also do, but it seems a bit heavy for a DMR.

 

[lobbie111]

Actually the rifle is avaliable in every calibre, the rifle was designed from the outset to have multiple calibres, by changing three parts (barrel, magazine, Firing Mechanism) you can use the AK or the 7.62 Nato and its very easy to do so, on youtube there is a video of the rifle being customised to suit the situation, you can build the rifle up with custom parts with only a few standard parts remaining.

I agree that it is untested, but if the quility of their "PMAGs" are anything to go by this should be a great wepaons system...

Btw, if you have used any of the M16 series this rifle is very familiar, also it has ambidextrous controls which is a major plus as I'm a lefty...

You dont have to agree with me on the ACR it was just a rifle that came to mind when writing that post

 

[SuperSLime]

Actually the rifle is avaliable in every calibre

No it isn't; it's available in 5.56mm NATO and 7.62x39. The mag well is too small to accept 7.62mm NATO.

I agree that it is untested, but if the quility of their "PMAGs" are anything to go by this should be a great wepaons system...

But what advantages does it have over the HK416 or C-7? Basically none.

 

[Cutaway]

If the USMC want a new 5.56mm SAW, I say they go for the Ameli, SS-77 or a magazine fed version of the weapons i just mentioned.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

If the USMC want a new 5.56mm SAW, I say they go for the Ameli, SS-77 or a magazine fed version of the weapons i just mentioned.

Nah the Ultimax 100 MK4 would be a better move on their part.

 

[Chino]

If the USMC want a new 5.56mm SAW, I say they go for the Ameli, SS-77 or a magazine fed version of the weapons i just mentioned.

The USMC is NOT looking for a new SAW.

They are looking for a IAR.

That's the issue where a lot of people on this thread is not on the same understanding.

 

[SuperSLime]

If the USMC want a new 5.56mm SAW, I say they go for the Ameli, SS-77 or a magazine fed version of the weapons i just mentioned.

But that's apparently not what they're looking for; they want an automatic rifle.

Why take a perfectly sound belt-fed MG and fuck it up by converting it to magazine fed? The SS-77 in particular is a full-size GPMG (therefore about a million miles away from what the USMC want); making it magazine-fed would be the act of a moron.

The Ameli is nothing special; it's certainly not as good as the Minimi or MG-4.

 

[lobbie111]

Why not put a Beta C-mag on the US M249 Saw (in the existing magazine port), it would achive the same goals and keep the same capability. I think what is needed is to lighten the minimi at best, although I have no clue how to do this.

 

[SuperSLime]

Why not put a Beta C-mag on the US M249 Saw (in the existing magazine port), it would achive the same goals and keep the same capability. I think what is needed is to lighten the minimi at best, although I have no clue how to do this.

Nope. The magazine port on the Minimi is located diagonally at the lower side of the weapon; I doubt a C-Mag would fit and, if it did, it would be as clumsy as a very clumsy thing; anyway, the mag port isn't very reliable and the ROF is too high when magazine fed. This combination would have no advantages over a Minimi with a 100-rd belt bag and would be a LOT clumsier and bulkier.

As a SAW the Minimi is just fine; any lighter and stability would start to suffer. What the USMC are after is NOT a new SAW; it's an automatic rifle. I, personally, am not sure where they got this requirement from but I think it's a mistake. Maybe it's a phase everyone has to go through; we did it with the L86 and the Russians did it with the RPK. Both of these weapons were less than successful and are slowly losing ground to 7.62mm GPMGs as Section support weapons.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Thats why they should go for the Ultimax 100 MK4. Its has good rates of fire and has both 30 and 100 round magazines.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

As a SAW the Minimi is just fine; any lighter and stability would start to suffer. What the USMC are after is NOT a new SAW; it's an automatic rifle. I, personally, am not sure where they got this requirement from but I think it's a mistake.

They got the requirement becasue the SAW is more of a burden than a valuable asset and they want a weapon that can be reloaded much faster and be more durable and reliable than the SAW. They want a automatic rifle that can use 100 round large capacity magazines for the sustained fire role plus it has to be able to use 30 round M16 mags.

As for belt feed machine guns that role will be used by the M240 7.62mm weapon as it has always should have been done. The SAW is used to be both a down-graded GPMG and squad support weapon but it not really good at ether one. The M240 and IAR will have two different roles in combat, the way it should be done.

 

[SuperSLime]

They got the requirement becasue the SAW is more of a burden than a valuable asset

That's weird, because our SAS have been using the Minimi for nearly 20 years and they love it. It became general infantry issue not long before Gulf War 2; the infantry love it too, and think it's MUCH better than the 12lb magazine-fed automatic rifle it replaced as the Section LMG.