US Army News and updates general discussion

[Big_Zucchini]

A possible MG upgrade for the US military, the 338 offers hitting power between the MG240 and the M2 but weighs less than the MG240 coming in at 21 lbs.

SIG Sauer MG 338 Machine Gun: Coming to U.S. Military?

The SIG Sauer MG 338 could fill the role for general purpose or platoon-level machine gun across both the Army and Marines.

www.19fortyfive.com

The Army wants the 6.5mm, of which 3 variants exist, for mass usage to replace both 7.62mm and 5.56mm.
What's the raison d'etre for the .338 in the Army as anything beyond sniper ammo?

 

[John Fedup]

I believe the new universal caliber choice is 6.8 mm. This NM 338 caliber MG is probably for SF applications where a mobile heavy MG could be useful but given its relatively light weight, it could become a MG replacement for the MG240 it it is decided the 6.8 mm MG doesn’t offer enough hitting power for general purpose use.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

I believe the new universal caliber choice is 6.8 mm. This NM 338 caliber MG is probably for SF applications where a mobile heavy MG could be useful but given its relatively light weight, it could become a MG replacement for the MG240 it it is decided the 6.8 mm MG doesn’t offer enough hitting power for general purpose use.

If it's decided the 6.8mm isn't good enough for general purpose use, it just won't be adopted as the 5.56mm and 7.62mm replacement, SoF or regulars.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

A possible MG upgrade for the US military, the 338 offers hitting power between the MG240 and the M2 but weighs less than the MG240 coming in at 21 lbs.

SIG Sauer MG 338 Machine Gun: Coming to U.S. Military?

The SIG Sauer MG 338 could fill the role for general purpose or platoon-level machine gun across both the Army and Marines.

www.19fortyfive.com

M240
And it remains to be seen if it, or similarly chamber MGs, will be more than a niche weapon system.
As noted some time ago in this thread, the ammunition weight and bulk honestly precludes it from realistically being considered a replacement for the M240. And to replace M2s in any large scale it's going to need to show an ability to match the .50 cal effects on a large array of target types.
Now, don't get me wrong. The possible advantages to logistics in cases of say armored vehicle uses (coax and cupola weapons sharing ammo) has great merit. As does the ability to use lighter weapons mounts on smaller vehicles.
Personally, I think it is more likely Big Army will end up replacing the M240 in the man portable role with a system chambered in the same 6.8mm ammo that is adopted for the NGSW. It could be an adaption from the selected NGSW-AR (if belt fed) that is beefed up a bit for greater durability. Or a different weapon entirely that employs many of the weight saving choices seen in the various NGSW & LWMMG development programs.

 

[Terran]

A possible MG upgrade for the US military, the 338 offers hitting power between the MG240 and the M2 but weighs less than the MG240 coming in at 21 lbs.

SIG Sauer MG 338 Machine Gun: Coming to U.S. Military?

The SIG Sauer MG 338 could fill the role for general purpose or platoon-level machine gun across both the Army and Marines.

www.19fortyfive.com

This is the second offering in this caliber for a belt fed “Light machine gun”. The first was GDLS LWMMG. In both cases they have a FN MAG (M240B, C6, L7A2... ect...) sized machine gun that weighs in closer to the M240L yet has range on par with an M2HB by use of the .338(8.6mm)Norma magnum cartridge.
The gap between the 7.62x51mm MG class and the M2 Browning has been known for decades. The 7.62x51mm round was created as an outgrowth of the 30.06 round by the US and more or less force fed down NATO’s throat by the Ordinance department of the US Army for adoption in the FN FAL, M14 and G3 rifles. It’s comfortable to shoot out to 800meters but beyond that requires a really good shooter with glass.
M2 browning is a double adaptation of late World war 1 early World War 2 technology. The gun is mor or less a heavy scale up of the M1917 browning .30 cal chambered for the 12.7x99mm inspired by the French 11mm and German 13.2mm antitank rifles built like a scaled up 30.06. Remember that in the Great War both sides German and Allied used early Tanks in fact many of the same models as most of the German tanks were captured Allied examples. That generation of tank was still susceptible to small arms fire. A dedicated Anti tank rocket system wasn’t needed until the middle of World war 2. The old Antitank rifle caliber weapons were still usable in most of WW2 against thinner skinned targets like aircraft and vehicles so the M2 having entered service around 1921 moved to anti air, anti vehicle. Its been in service ever since less for anti aircraft and more as a general mounted weapon, the problem has been that it weighs in at 84 pounds empty and without a needed tripod which will take it just shy of 128 pounds minus ammo. up side it will reach out to 1,800 m and beyond with a good shooter.
Over the last century the US has attempted to cook up lighter replacement weapons yet consistently the M2 has out lasted would be successors like the M85 and abortive XM312/307 and XM806. The former M85 did however enter service in Armored vehicles for a number of years but was found unreliable compared to M2 and tailored for commanders copulas. XM312 a modified XM307 (25mm) and XM806 were intended as more infantry weapons neither went beyond initial development stages.
The XM806 driver was operating in Afghan mountain terrain wher the Taliban and AQ fighters used older heavier fixed Soviet Machine guns to attack US and Allied forces from elevated positions using the elevation and reach of the 7.62x45 rimmed or heavier to pin down troops well moving in mortars to do damage.
The heavyweight Browning faced limitations as it could only be moved by vehicles. The XM806 came in at 40 pounds less than half that of the browning however the weight of the weapon also worked against it requiring a large reduction in rate of fire. Similarly the Russians, Chinese and Singapore have all also set to trying to create an infantry friendly 12.7mm MG with limited success. The Russian Kord in light weight configuration is about 57 pounds chambers 12.7x108mm, Norinco QJZ89 about 40lbs with the same chambering. The Singaporean STK 50 MG at about 67lbs in 12.7x99mm BMG. (Note for consistency no tripods, optics or ammunition). Though more practical for infantry still not an easy weapon to hump on foot.
Which is where the idea to use Norma comes in the 338 is all but identical to it Lupua cousin in performance yet shorter and easier to belt, Meaning it has the reach of out to 1,500 m and beyond with a good shooter well only weighing >20 lbs well seating in a less bulking weapon. So far SOCOM has taken a number of the SIG weapons into trials. The Marines seems to be interested to. Army seems on the fence as they have NGSW program going.

 

[Terran]

The Army wants the 6.5mm, of which 3 variants exist, for mass usage to replace both 7.62mm and 5.56mm.
What's the raison d'etre for the .338 in the Army as anything beyond sniper ammo?

The NGSW program is targeting a 6.8mm projectile. It’s not stated if the aim is to replace 7.62x51mm in mass but if adopted it seems like the infantry would be dropping both in favor of the 6.8mm

I believe the new universal caliber choice is 6.8 mm. This NM 338 caliber MG is probably for SF applications where a mobile heavy MG could be useful but given its relatively light weight, it could become a MG replacement for the MG240 it it is decided the 6.8 mm MG doesn’t offer enough hitting power for general purpose use.

Given the history of the weapons in the class. It seems like the .338 Norma mg would be taking a place as a platoon level infantry weapon. This said it takes decades to work weapons out of the Army. Front line units would be getting the NGSW and .338 mg. If offered. It seem highly unlikely for Socom as they tend to focus asymmetrical threats. Those types tend not to have the body armor that the 6.8mm rounds seem to be targeting.

M240
And it remains to be seen if it, or similarly chamber MGs, will be more than a niche weapon system.
As noted some time ago in this thread, the ammunition weight and bulk honestly precludes it from realistically being considered a replacement for the M240. And to replace M2s in any large scale it's going to need to show an ability to match the .50 cal effects on a large array of target types.
Now, don't get me wrong. The possible advantages to logistics in cases of say armored vehicle uses (coax and cupola weapons sharing ammo) has great merit. As does the ability to use lighter weapons mounts on smaller vehicles.
Personally, I think it is more likely Big Army will end up replacing the M240 in the man portable role with a system chambered in the same 6.8mm ammo that is adopted for the NGSW. It could be an adaption from the selected NGSW-AR (if belt fed) that is beefed up a bit for greater durability. Or a different weapon entirely that employs many of the weight saving choices seen in the various NGSW & LWMMG development programs.

Ammo weight is an issue however NGSW and other programs have been targeting ammunition weight reduction. About 20% reportedly. It’s not likely to achieve absolute replacement across all services but that’s still pretty much a step in the right direction. Clearly the .338NM is no competition to the capacity of anti vehicle and material of the .50 BMG. Anti personal absolutely vs even a Toyota Hilux not really.
Infantry weapons sections, fire support and the like are my bet for .338 Mgs. 2 per weapons squad in place of the two M240 at platoon level. The NGSW R and NGSW AR taking the bulk of the unit with M4A1 being the main weapon in reserves, NG and back to the original Carbine role. M240 and M249 would similarly phase down than out for infantry.
pin armored, vehicle mounted or aviation is the question for what happens. NGSW AR is an infantry weapon. Though I could see perhaps.338 taking some of the M240 roles for light vehicles, increasingly those are remote controlled turrets.
if anything looks like it might come close to replacing some M2 in vehicle roles it seems like a light weight auto cannon. JLTV have started sporting M230LF as XM914 in remote turrets.
The Army had in the last decade looked at the XM306 a 25mm automatic weapon for use in arming some armored vehicle commanders. Both these weapons are not quite as low velocity as a classic grenade launcher yet not quite as high velocity as a true Medium caliber weapon. Their Airburst and High explosive payload being superior to .50 their velocity being far better to. Other than on MBT where the main gun renders all other weapons on the tank primarily anti infantry I could see a major push to increasingly move to said class. The remaining vehicles would then be decided by weight and threat to either light infantry based or perhaps even moving to a Chain gun based .50.

speaking of NGSW.

SIG SAUER Completes Final Delivery of Next Generation Squad Weapon System to U.S. Army

NGSW systems consisting of the revolutionary 6.8x51 hybrid ammunition, the NGSW-AR lightweight belt-fed machine gun, the NGSW-R rifle, and suppressors.

www.sigsauer.com

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

So the future 20 mm for the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft ( FARA ) competition will be a chaingun vs gatling-gun battle.

Northrop unveils new Sky Viper chain gun as US Army considers weapons for future helos

Northrop Grumman's new Sky Viper sets up a chain gun vs. Gatling gun battle for the U.S. Army's 20mm cannon to be used on its future attack reconnaissance aircraft.

www.defensenews.com

 

[ngatimozart]

So the future 20 mm for the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft ( FARA ) competition will be a chaingun vs gatling-gun battle.

Northrop unveils new Sky Viper chain gun as US Army considers weapons for future helos

Northrop Grumman's new Sky Viper sets up a chain gun vs. Gatling gun battle for the U.S. Army's 20mm cannon to be used on its future attack reconnaissance aircraft.

www.defensenews.com

I think it's a mistake. 20 mm is to small and short ranged. You'll be putting your helos into a combat situation where the enemy 30 mm will outrange it by 1,000 metres. For example most of the PLA-GF IFVs with auto-cannon are armed with a 30 mm cannon. Yes I know that the source is Wikipedia but it's the best that I could find at the moment.

IMHO a 30 mm chain gun would be the better option and with modern technology, accuracy should not be an insurmountable issue.

 

[Terran]

I think it's a mistake. 20 mm is to small and short ranged. You'll be putting your helos into a combat situation where the enemy 30 mm will outrange it by 1,000 metres. For example most of the PLA-GF IFVs with auto-cannon are armed with a 30 mm cannon. Yes I know that the source is Wikipedia but it's the best that I could find at the moment.

IMHO a 30 mm chain gun would be the better option and with modern technology, accuracy should not be an insurmountable issue.

FARA is a scout not an attack chopper. So look back at its forerunners the Oh58 and RAH66. In the OH58 the 20mm would be an upgrade vs the 12.7x99mm Gatling gun pods. Vs RAH66 it’s on par.
Against armor even an attack chopper’s weapon of choice is the ATGM. The gun is more for use against infantry or light vehicles in which case the 20mm would be fine.
Farther the M230 which is the gun on Apache doesn’t use the full power 30x173mm but the lower velocity 30x113mm. This is justified as its not meant to take heavy armor. For a dedicated successor to Apache and Cobra it likely would at minimum have a 25mm gun, because of the availability of payload being a medium lift platform FLARA would have plenty of lift for a M230. But FARA as a light weight needs to keep the weight down. That’s a 20mm.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

And space, of course. A smaller helicopter will have less room for ammo, and a 30mm gun might not be viable in terms of stowed ammo.

 

[Terran]

New Army sniper weapon system contract awarded to Barrett Firearms

PICATINNY ARSENAL, N.J. -- The Army awarded a $49.9 million five year contract to Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Inc., Murfreesboro, Tenn. Monday, Mar....

www.army.mil

.

So the Army is shifting again. The last major Sniper rifle adopted by the US Army was the M2010 which evolved from the Remington M24 improvement program based off Remington’s work on its MSR then moved to mass production. M2010 was such a huge rework of the M24 that it qualified as a new rifle from the magazine feed action to the .300win mag chamber to the chassis system.

This is pretty much how the Army did things. It took a look at what was available asked for a few changes then had it built off a production line for thousands.
The Other two major Sniper rifle programming in the DOD worked alacarte. USMC and Socom would order the individual parts and then have their own gun smiths in their own shop build the end product. The Army only did this for its marksmanship competition team. Now however this is shifting.
Socom began the Precision Sniper rifle program looking to buy a off the shelf package. A chassis package rifle able to be moved to the four prominent military sniper rifle chambering .Remington won in 2013 but by 2018 the company was in trouble. So a recompete was launched and Barret MRAD won becoming the Mk22.
The Marines in the interim adopted the Alacart build Mk13 mod 7 .(edited by user to correct error) Yet have stated they planned to move to the same Mk22. Meaning that for the first time in decades all 3 of the US Primary sniper programs will use the same rifles.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Last week the Army held the Maneuver Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate's Industry Day at Ft Benning GA. So far only one person seems to be reporting on it, and he's putting out a new article on a different subject every day or so.
Thus far reported:
TOW missile replacement They want increased range of 10-to-10+ kilometers. It needs to get there much faster. They want to shoot on the move (keep dreaming) And given that 10K means beyond line of sight they want target lock on before & after launch. And, just to make things really difficult, they wish to retain TOW form factor. They want to utilize current launchers. Which to me is a highly questionable constraint. TOW's fire control system does not link to a missile seeker, so really can't be compatible with their engagement criteria, so will need to be replaced. But they want to retain the launchers?

New sniper ammunition Ammo currently available for the various calibers of the new MK22 PSR is basically straight commercial ammo. They want specific anti-material ammo in .338 Norma Magnum. I would assume this will include SLAP & APEI rounds. I suspect they will also want SLAP & other long range penetration rounds for .300 Norma Magnum (all this stuff is already available for the 7.62 barreled rifles). Interestingly, they also want subsonic ammo for suppressed use. Obviously won't be used for long range engagements.

Precision Grenadier Program Think follow on the XM25 CDTE. Army Futures Command is honchoing this one. Looking for air burst rounds in no specified grenade caliber, at 35-to-500 meters in a max 34 inch, 14.5 pound package. One article from last year states the range requirements are still similar to those of the XM25, while another only mentions 300-500 meters. M25 had effective ranges of 500 meters for point targets, 700 meters for area and max effective out to 1,000 meters. XM25 needed a serious recoil system to get it's 25mm grenade out to the target ranges with a generally flat trajectory. This accounted for a lot of the weapons weight. Could be interesting to watch.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

What the Army's asking is basically to develop a brand new missile to replace the TOW, and it hopes the cost savings will come from the CLUs.
Not to get an off the shelf missile to replace it.

From my POV, there is no competition. Only Raytheon can do it.
This is a very high risk and no return program IMO.
Why? Because this will essentially have the US operate 3 different infantry-serviced ATGMs:
The next gen TOW, Javelin, and whatever is used in the OMFV. There will also be 2 prior versions of the TOW still in service.

 

[ngatimozart]

The Army are testing the Spike SR at the moment, so I wonder if it would be worth their while going down the Spike track, such as the NLOS LR and ER mounted on vehicles. I note that a NLOS variant has been cleared for the AH-64E Apache.

US Army looks at Israeli precision munition for infantry squads

Rafael is making the rounds with its family of Spike missiles, recently demonstrating its short-range version at the Army Expeditionary Warfighter Experiment.

www.defensenews.com

 

[Big_Zucchini]

It certainly would be a better alternative to MBDA's MMP, seeing it has a larger user base, better foundation for development, extensive combat use more variants, and already integrated to several FCS and turrets.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

The Army are testing the Spike SR at the moment, so I wonder if it would be worth their while going down the Spike track, such as the NLOS LR and ER mounted on vehicles. I note that a NLOS variant has been cleared for the AH-64E Apache.

US Army looks at Israeli precision munition for infantry squads

Rafael is making the rounds with its family of Spike missiles, recently demonstrating its short-range version at the Army Expeditionary Warfighter Experiment.

www.defensenews.com

Spike-SR is pretty much Spike in name only. What it looks like is the abandoned USMC FGM-172 SRAW program brought to fruition . Which IMI partnered with LockMart in development. Nothing like 3 decades of US DoD funding to move a program along.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Been meaning to post about this, but kept forgetting.
Last month Raytheon successfully shot down a UAV with a Stinger missile mated to a network linked modified Javelin lightweight CLU
Even if it was just giving the MANPAD gunner the use of the long range & thermal optics to locate the target it would be a vast improvement from the Mark 1 Eyeballs currently relied on. But, they added a host of other features to assist in target acquisition. Highly recommend you read the interview

INTERVIEW: Raytheon Share Details on New Stinger/Javelin LWCLU Integration - Overt Defense

We spoke to Raytheon about their successful test fire of a Stinger missile integrated with the next-generation a Javelin Lightweight Command Launch Unit.

www.overtdefense.com

 

[Terran]

Precision Grenadier Program Think follow on the XM25 CDTE. Army Futures Command is honchoing this one. Looking for air burst rounds in no specified grenade caliber, at 35-to-500 meters in a max 34 inch, 14.5 pound package. One article from last year states the range requirements are still similar to those of the XM25, while another only mentions 300-500 meters. M25 had effective ranges of 500 meters for point targets, 700 meters for area and max effective out to 1,000 meters. XM25 needed a serious recoil system to get it's 25mm grenade out to the target ranges with a generally flat trajectory. This accounted for a lot of the weapons weight. Could be interesting to watch

The last straw of the XM25 was HK and Orbital ATK (now Northrop Grumman) started fighting each other. The Grenades came from ATK who was the primary. Bushnell was the Fire control and HK made the gun. U.S. firm Orbital sues Heckler & Koch over XM25 weapon
As such the want never went away. The program just fell part because the vendors couldn’t supply.
not sure about the recoil system but compared to K21 and the Chinese system the biggest weight factor was the gas system. Both the Chinese and Korean weapons were closer to XM29. Yet both are significantly lighter primarily as they operated by bolt actions as opposed to the semi auto.

 

[CB90]

New Army sniper weapon system contract awarded to Barrett Firearms

PICATINNY ARSENAL, N.J. -- The Army awarded a $49.9 million five year contract to Barrett Firearms Manufacturing Inc., Murfreesboro, Tenn. Monday, Mar....

www.army.mil

.

So the Army is shifting again. The last major Sniper rifle adopted by the US Army was the M2010 which evolved from the Remington M24 improvement program based off Remington’s work on its MSR then moved to mass production. M2010 was such a huge rework of the M24 that it qualified as a new rifle from the magazine feed action to the .300win mag chamber to the chassis system.

This is pretty much how the Army did things. It took a look at what was available asked for a few changes then had it built off a production line for thousands.
The Other two major Sniper rifle programming in the DOD worked alacarte. USMC and Socom would order the individual parts and then have their own gun smiths in their own shop build the end product. The Army only did this for its marksmanship competition team. Now however this is shifting.
Socom began the Precision Sniper rifle program looking to buy a off the shelf package. A chassis package rifle able to be moved to the four prominent military sniper rifle chambering .Remington won in 2013 but by 2018 the company was in trouble. So a recompete was launched and Barret MRAD won becoming the Mk22.
The Marines in the interim adopted the Alacart build Mk40 mod 7. Yet have stated they planned to move to the same Mk22. Meaning that for the first time in decades all 3 of the US Primary sniper programs will use the same rifles.

Video review of the MRAD/Mk22 with a SF sniper who has involved with the acquisition project and selection process. He provides a little bit of interesting background from the perspective of getting involved after they’d had to do a major rework of their acquisition strategy.

Insight into everything from changing strategy to compete the elements of the system separately (rifle, scope, etc) to T&E strategy of limiting testing at extreme ranges.

 

[FormerDirtDart]

The last straw of the XM25 was HK and Orbital ATK (now Northrop Grumman) started fighting each other. The Grenades came from ATK who was the primary. Bushnell was the Fire control and HK made the gun. U.S. firm Orbital sues Heckler & Koch over XM25 weapon
As such the want never went away. The program just fell part because the vendors couldn’t supply.
not sure about the recoil system but compared to K21 and the Chinese system the biggest weight factor was the gas system. Both the Chinese and Korean weapons were closer to XM29. Yet both are significantly lighter primarily as they operated by bolt actions as opposed to the semi auto.

Also a significant weight savings is that both the South Korean K11 and Chinese QTS-11/ZH-05 fire a smaller 20mm round. And that the QTS-11 doesn't utilize a magazine