The ideal rifle for the military to replace the M4 - Page 6

BlueTrain · February 25, 2015, 04:03 PM

In these discussions it's easy to forget that the soldiers get paid, too. The total payroll cost of an infantry battalion might be between $25 million and $50 million a year. An M1 tank runs something under $5 million. Before long you're talking real money. It wouldn't be difficult to spend $50 million to replace all the pistols in service. But it is true that the airplanes are expensive.

SPEMack618 · February 25, 2015, 04:20 PM

I don't mind that airplanes are expensive, I just get mad that the airplanes that work for us (A-10s) the Air Force wants to get rid of.

jimbob86 · February 25, 2015, 04:56 PM

Quote:

I don't mind that airplanes are expensive, I just get mad that the airplanes that work for us (A-10s) the Air Force wants to get rid of.

+1.

LOVE those things!

They work close enough to the ground that they understand what it is they are shooting at ...... they are beautiful to watch, especially when they are smashing tanks that you know could make hash out your entire unit in less than a minute .....

noonesshowmonkey · February 26, 2015, 01:44 AM

I never intended to become the 6.8 SPC II's corner man. That just sort of became how this thread went. Besides weight leading to individual warfighters carrying less total ammo, there hasn't been a significant reason outside of logistical concerns (which are every bit as important, if not more so) for why a different intermediate cartridge wouldn't be a better fit.

Full disclosure: I neither own nor plan to own a 6.8, or any other semi-wildcat cartridge, AR. My reasons are logistical: it is cheaper to own and operate a 5.56x45mm, far and away, and good hits are good hits are good hits, regardless of the size of the bean.

Frankly, I was hoping that the link posted to the USMC's plan to update the M4/M16 fleet by putting on free float rails, mounting something like a GS2, running an ambi-charging handle, and using a compensator, would have generated more discussion. It is, afterall, a helluva lot more like reality than describing the Rifle That Would Be King rather than the M4 that Rules Them All.

Jimro · February 26, 2015, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Frankly, I was hoping that the link posted to the USMC's plan to update the M4/M16 fleet by putting on free float rails, mounting something like a GS2, running an ambi-charging handle, and using a compensator, would have generated more discussion. It is, afterall, a helluva lot more like reality than describing the Rifle That Would Be King rather than the M4 that Rules Them All.

The M4A1 upgrades are getting the thicker SOCOM contour barrels and a full auto capable trigger group. That's about as far as the Army is going to go for the next gen battle rifle.

As far as I know, only 3/3 ID has free floated M16A4s built for them by the AMU for their SDM program, although I don't know if that is still the case. The USMC plan to accurize the rifle is a good one, but I don't see the US Army adopting it without some prodding from either an internal or external lobbyist.

Jimro

Brit · February 26, 2015, 04:28 AM

Whilst the A-10 is Gods gift to ground troops, especially the ones that got to a "Safe" location, and found that not to be the case, due to lower to the bad guys than say a fighter? What kind of amour are they carrying to defeat ground fire?

The Hinds have some serious armor under the belly.

jimbob86 · February 26, 2015, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Whilst the A-10 is Gods gift to ground troops, especially the ones that got to a "Safe" location, and found that not to be the case, due to lower to the bad guys than say a fighter? What kind of amour are they carrying to defeat ground fire?

.5-1.5 inches of spall linered titanium-a "bathtub" around the pilot and avionics package .... which stops direct hits from combloc 23mm and sometimes 57mm .... other parts are armored, as well as double redundant hydraulic systems and if that fails, can be flown by mechanical linkage..... the fuel lines and tanks are all self-sealing ..... the thing is desgned to be able to return to base " on one engine, 1/2 a tail, with one elevator, and half of one wing missing" ..... and be repaired there. They are the pinnacle of ground attack fighter bomber engineering.

A quick google seach for images of damaged A-10's that returned to base is pretty amazing.

Great Stuff here:

http://www.2951clss-gulfwar.com/

Pond, James Pond · February 26, 2015, 02:19 PM

I like A10s. And I've never needed cover from one.

If I had needed cover, I'd probably worship them.

Erno86 · February 26, 2015, 03:34 PM

The F35 Lightning II strike fighter should easily outclass the A10 and the F16 --- that is --- if the F35 ever becomes fully operational.

I've seen the F35 do practice dive bombing runs down at Quantico, Virginia --- while doing survey construction work for the FBI training facility --- so much that the bomb strike rattled the Spot-O-Pot that I was in while relieving myself.

I think that our U.S. troops would have a better equipped M4, if the rifle was equipped with a quick detach --- quality --- 1-6x24mmx30mm tube scope with BUIS --- LWRC's built in double ambi-magazine release and a mid-size double-ambi charging handle.

Jimro · February 26, 2015, 04:30 PM

Erno86,

No one is doubting the F-35 precision.

Everyone is doubting exactly how much precision it can bring to bear.

You get an awful lot of precision from an A-10 with one important feature you don't get from the F-35, which is the ability to operate off of "primative" runways closer to the front lines.

Jimro

SPEMack618 · February 26, 2015, 04:39 PM

If there is a S-300 guarding a nuclear reactor that needs to be taken out without damaging said reactor, I have no doubt any of the guys or girls in the F-35 can do it.

However, if I'm trying to get the guys with a Dishka 50 meters next to that big rock at the end of the valley, then that's when the A-10 reigns supreme.

rickyrick · February 26, 2015, 04:56 PM

The gun on the A10 sounds the best---
Those big ol engines look cool----
The plane looks cool
Very tough
Many soldiers pucker when there's talk of retiring the a10
Closest thing to an X-wing fighter in this solar system

Let's replace all m-4s and give soldiers remote control a10s

Pond, James Pond · February 26, 2015, 05:39 PM

Quote:

You get an awful lot of precision from an A-10 with one important feature you don't get from the F-35, which is the ability to operate off of "primative" runways closer to the front lines.

I thought the F35 had vertical lift-off capability.

Tucker 1371 · February 26, 2015, 05:41 PM

I could totally go for that! So long as they find away to give it folding wings and an arrest hook for launching off carriers so us Marines can get them too!

Bart Noir · February 26, 2015, 08:42 PM

Pond, only the US Marine Corps version has the vertical landing ability. And it needs a short role to get airborne when carrying all those loud delightful things which infantry want them to have. Same is true of the Harrier, I believe.

Bart Noir

Bart Noir · February 26, 2015, 08:53 PM

France.

Really, we should watch France as that country is right now in the early stages of replacing the FAMAS assault bullpup. And since they can't build any military guns anymore in France, due to closing the necessary government arsenals, the winner will be from another country.

I am sure that political anti-Israel bias will keep the Tavor from being in the contest. But there are many other to choose from. At one end of the spectrum is some version of the M4, and at the other (bullpup) end is, let's see, the Singapore Assault Rifle SAR 21.

SAR 21

France is not quite in NATO but will possibly stick with STANAG ammo and magazines, but that is not a certainty. Watching the contest will be fun.

Will the Chinese try to enter their 5.8mm bullpup into the contest? Why not?

Bart Noir
Who is rooting for the Czech BREN gun to win. Heck, it deserves to win just because of the classic name!

Mannlicher · February 26, 2015, 09:48 PM

The only change I'd make would be to chamber an intermediate cartridge, and yes, the 6.8 would be fine. The current M4 is just about perfect.

Jimro · February 27, 2015, 03:30 AM

Quote:

I thought the F35 had vertical lift-off capability.

The Marine F-35B does. But I'm in the Army, so we rarely get support from the Marines (the Marine Air Wing is dedicated to supporting Marine ground forces). We in the Armuy get the bulk of our support from the USAF (and sometimes the Navy to a lesser extent) which is ordering the F-35A conventional variant.

There is a lot of doctrine and processes that goes into fighting as a joint force, but one of the benefits of the A-10 is having the ability to forward stage to decrease the scramble time. This means that less fuel is used getting to the fight, so loiter time is increased. Honestly it's kind of a necessity to do that since th A-10 is so slow, but when supporting ground troops in contact "low and slow" is the way to go.

None of this has anything to do with what the next rifle the US Military should adopt, except that it highlights the competing budget priorities. After all, wars aren't won by having the best rifle, wars are won by having the right mix of capabilities on the battlefield to dominate engagements. Until a new rifle can be obviously more value added to the mix than the M16/M4, it won't get replaced. We've been in the process of upgrading our sniper rifle systems from bolt action M24s in 7.62x51 to a mix of M110, Modular Sniper Rifles (MSR) capable of 308, 300 Win Mag, and 338 Lapua (along with other cartridges because of the modular nature of the rifle system) , M24A3s and M2010s in 300 Win Mag, and trying to come up with the "arms room" concept where snipers can configure their equipment to the mission and environment in which they find themselves.

Taxpayer dollars are precious, if we don't spend them wisely it is a serious breach of trust.

Jimro

Pond, James Pond · February 27, 2015, 04:52 AM

If they do ground the A10, could they do them at a good price to Estonia?
(Only EU member to be meeting its NATO spending target as per the agreement!

)

BlueTrain · February 27, 2015, 06:11 AM

If nothing else, it certainly appears that the term "intermediate cartridge" is highly elastic.

jimbob86 · February 27, 2015, 09:03 AM

Quote:

No one is doubting the F-35 precision.

Everyone is doubting exactly how much precision it can bring to bear.

You get an awful lot of precision from an A-10 with one important feature you don't get from the F-35, which is the ability to operate off of "primative" runways closer to the front lines.

The F-35 that can loiter for just a few minutes before going bingo fuel and can carry just a fraction of the ordnance the A-10 can, even with enough precision to drop a smart bomb on a postage stamp from 15,000 feet up before being gone for the day is worth less to the guys on the ground than an A-10 that can loiter for an hour more and kill the bad guys with guns and dumb bombs at "danger close" proximities ..... and be back in an hour or two to do it again .....

Quote:

I thought the F35 had vertical lift-off capability.

For what it costs, it should be able to fly backwards invisibly, while killing the enemy at a thought of ill will from the pilot, and simultaneously give the pilot a massage and a latte' ......

Quote:

Taxpayer dollars are precious, if we don't spend them wisely it is a serious breach of trust.

This.

The top 3 words most often associated with the F-35 are "Joint", "Strike" and "Boondoggle" ......

SPEMack618 · February 27, 2015, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueTrain

If nothing else, it certainly appears that the term "intermediate cartridge" is highly elastic.

I will grudgingly cede the point that perhaps 30mm is a high powered round.

BlueTrain · February 27, 2015, 10:22 AM

Agreed; very high powered, in fact.

I was referring of course to the expression as used in rifles (not "assault rifles" and not "battle rifles"). Just rifles. Army rifles. The 7.62 NATO was described as an intermediate cartridge 60 years ago. Yet the 6mm Lee Navy wasn't, although it was certainly described as "small bore."

The point is, the definition of "intermediate" can be stretched to fit whatever we want it to mean. In other cases, we make up precise definitions where none exist and say they mean something. We get hung up on words.

I'd be happy with a .45 caliber AR-15. I'm still jungle oriented. I say that even though I'm positive a .50 caliber has more stopping power. It doesn't really matter that much but it's nice to have a choice.

SPEMack618 · February 27, 2015, 10:53 AM

Quote:

A-10 that can loiter for an hour more and kill the bad guys with guns and dumb bombs at "danger close" proximities ..... and be back in an hour or two to do it again .....

Nothing, I mean nothing, was as nice as hearing

"We got fuel to stay for as long as you need us" over the radio and a two flight of Hawgs doing lazy figure eights over head after delivering a heap ton of cannon fire on the bad guys.

gbc123 · February 27, 2015, 11:19 AM

Whatever they choose I'm sure it'll have something to do with a back pocket and no one will be 100% happy. The biggest problem is that only a handful of more highly trained soldiers ever get trigger time behind their rifle in their caliber! Most go into combat only having shot a handful of rounds through a 22! Even some of the ranger recces I trained went into combat having fired only 22 caliber and less than 200 rounds! I can't imagine what it must be like having to deal with recoil for the first time in a firefight! Scary stuff! And ppl wonder why this country has never won a war by itself.

February 25, 2015, 04:03 PM	#126
BlueTrain Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2005 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 6,141	In these discussions it's easy to forget that the soldiers get paid, too. The total payroll cost of an infantry battalion might be between $25 million and $50 million a year. An M1 tank runs something under $5 million. Before long you're talking real money. It wouldn't be difficult to spend $50 million to replace all the pistols in service. But it is true that the airplanes are expensive. __________________ Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds.

February 25, 2015, 04:20 PM	#127
SPEMack618 Senior Member Join Date: June 21, 2010 Location: Central Georgia Posts: 1,863	I don't mind that airplanes are expensive, I just get mad that the airplanes that work for us (A-10s) the Air Force wants to get rid of. __________________ NRA Life Member Read my blog! "The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig or .41 Magnum!"

February 26, 2015, 02:19 PM	#133
Pond, James Pond Senior Member Join Date: July 12, 2011 Location: Top of the Baltic stack Posts: 6,079	I like A10s. And I've never needed cover from one. If I had needed cover, I'd probably worship them. __________________ When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic. Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.

February 26, 2015, 03:34 PM	#134
Erno86 Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2012 Location: Marriottsville, Maryland Posts: 1,739	The F35 Lightning II strike fighter should easily outclass the A10 and the F16 --- that is --- if the F35 ever becomes fully operational. I've seen the F35 do practice dive bombing runs down at Quantico, Virginia --- while doing survey construction work for the FBI training facility --- so much that the bomb strike rattled the Spot-O-Pot that I was in while relieving myself. I think that our U.S. troops would have a better equipped M4, if the rifle was equipped with a quick detach --- quality --- 1-6x24mmx30mm tube scope with BUIS --- LWRC's built in double ambi-magazine release and a mid-size double-ambi charging handle. __________________ That rifle hanging on the wall of the working class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." --- George Orwell Last edited by Erno86; February 26, 2015 at 04:04 PM.

February 26, 2015, 04:30 PM	#135
Jimro Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2006 Posts: 7,097	Erno86, No one is doubting the F-35 precision. Everyone is doubting exactly how much precision it can bring to bear. You get an awful lot of precision from an A-10 with one important feature you don't get from the F-35, which is the ability to operate off of "primative" runways closer to the front lines. Jimro __________________ Machine guns are awesome until you have to carry one.

February 26, 2015, 01:44 AM	#129
noonesshowmonkey Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2014 Posts: 329	I never intended to become the 6.8 SPC II's corner man. That just sort of became how this thread went. Besides weight leading to individual warfighters carrying less total ammo, there hasn't been a significant reason outside of logistical concerns (which are every bit as important, if not more so) for why a different intermediate cartridge wouldn't be a better fit. Full disclosure: I neither own nor plan to own a 6.8, or any other semi-wildcat cartridge, AR. My reasons are logistical: it is cheaper to own and operate a 5.56x45mm, far and away, and good hits are good hits are good hits, regardless of the size of the bean. Frankly, I was hoping that the link posted to the USMC's plan to update the M4/M16 fleet by putting on free float rails, mounting something like a GS2, running an ambi-charging handle, and using a compensator, would have generated more discussion. It is, afterall, a helluva lot more like reality than describing the Rifle That Would Be King rather than the M4 that Rules Them All.

February 26, 2015, 04:28 AM	#131
Brit Senior Member Join Date: January 29, 2005 Location: Orlando FL Posts: 1,934	Whilst the A-10 is Gods gift to ground troops, especially the ones that got to a "Safe" location, and found that not to be the case, due to lower to the bad guys than say a fighter? What kind of amour are they carrying to defeat ground fire? The Hinds have some serious armor under the belly.

February 26, 2015, 04:39 PM	#136
SPEMack618 Senior Member Join Date: June 21, 2010 Location: Central Georgia Posts: 1,863	If there is a S-300 guarding a nuclear reactor that needs to be taken out without damaging said reactor, I have no doubt any of the guys or girls in the F-35 can do it. However, if I'm trying to get the guys with a Dishka 50 meters next to that big rock at the end of the valley, then that's when the A-10 reigns supreme. __________________ NRA Life Member Read my blog! "The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig or .41 Magnum!"

February 26, 2015, 04:56 PM	#137
rickyrick Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2010 Posts: 8,236	The gun on the A10 sounds the best--- Those big ol engines look cool---- The plane looks cool Very tough Many soldiers pucker when there's talk of retiring the a10 Closest thing to an X-wing fighter in this solar system Let's replace all m-4s and give soldiers remote control a10s __________________ Woohoo, I’m back In Texas!!!

February 26, 2015, 05:41 PM	#139
Tucker 1371 Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2008 Location: East TN Posts: 2,649	I could totally go for that! So long as they find away to give it folding wings and an arrest hook for launching off carriers so us Marines can get them too! __________________ Sgt. of Marines, 5th Award Expert Rifle, 237/250 Expert Pistol, 382/400. D Co, 4th CEB, Engineers UP!! If you start a thread, be active in it. Don't leave us hanging. OEF 2011 Sangin, Afg. Molon Labe

February 26, 2015, 08:42 PM	#140
Bart Noir Senior Member Join Date: August 5, 2000 Location: Puget Sound, USA Posts: 2,215	Pond, only the US Marine Corps version has the vertical landing ability. And it needs a short role to get airborne when carrying all those loud delightful things which infantry want them to have. Same is true of the Harrier, I believe. Bart Noir __________________ Be of good cheer and mindful of your gun muzzle!

February 26, 2015, 08:53 PM	#141
Bart Noir Senior Member Join Date: August 5, 2000 Location: Puget Sound, USA Posts: 2,215	The answer to the OP's question is . . . France. Really, we should watch France as that country is right now in the early stages of replacing the FAMAS assault bullpup. And since they can't build any military guns anymore in France, due to closing the necessary government arsenals, the winner will be from another country. I am sure that political anti-Israel bias will keep the Tavor from being in the contest. But there are many other to choose from. At one end of the spectrum is some version of the M4, and at the other (bullpup) end is, let's see, the Singapore Assault Rifle SAR 21. SAR 21 France is not quite in NATO but will possibly stick with STANAG ammo and magazines, but that is not a certainty. Watching the contest will be fun. Will the Chinese try to enter their 5.8mm bullpup into the contest? Why not? Bart Noir Who is rooting for the Czech BREN gun to win. Heck, it deserves to win just because of the classic name! __________________ Be of good cheer and mindful of your gun muzzle!

February 26, 2015, 09:48 PM	#142
Mannlicher Senior Member Join Date: July 8, 2001 Location: North Central Florida & Miami Posts: 3,208	The only change I'd make would be to chamber an intermediate cartridge, and yes, the 6.8 would be fine. The current M4 is just about perfect. __________________ Nemo Me Impune Lacesset "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.".........Ronald Reagan

February 27, 2015, 04:52 AM	#144
Pond, James Pond Senior Member Join Date: July 12, 2011 Location: Top of the Baltic stack Posts: 6,079	If they do ground the A10, could they do them at a good price to Estonia? (Only EU member to be meeting its NATO spending target as per the agreement! ) __________________ When the right to effective self-defence is denied, that right to self-defence which remains is essentially symbolic. Freedom: Please enjoy responsibly.

February 27, 2015, 06:11 AM	#145
BlueTrain Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2005 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 6,141	If nothing else, it certainly appears that the term "intermediate cartridge" is highly elastic. __________________ Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds.

February 27, 2015, 10:22 AM	#148
BlueTrain Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2005 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 6,141	Agreed; very high powered, in fact. I was referring of course to the expression as used in rifles (not "assault rifles" and not "battle rifles"). Just rifles. Army rifles. The 7.62 NATO was described as an intermediate cartridge 60 years ago. Yet the 6mm Lee Navy wasn't, although it was certainly described as "small bore." The point is, the definition of "intermediate" can be stretched to fit whatever we want it to mean. In other cases, we make up precise definitions where none exist and say they mean something. We get hung up on words. I'd be happy with a .45 caliber AR-15. I'm still jungle oriented. I say that even though I'm positive a .50 caliber has more stopping power. It doesn't really matter that much but it's nice to have a choice. __________________ Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds.

February 27, 2015, 11:19 AM	#150
gbc123 Member Join Date: February 13, 2015 Posts: 86	Whatever they choose I'm sure it'll have something to do with a back pocket and no one will be 100% happy. The biggest problem is that only a handful of more highly trained soldiers ever get trigger time behind their rifle in their caliber! Most go into combat only having shot a handful of rounds through a 22! Even some of the ranger recces I trained went into combat having fired only 22 caliber and less than 200 rounds! I can't imagine what it must be like having to deal with recoil for the first time in a firefight! Scary stuff! And ppl wonder why this country has never won a war by itself.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search