The Army Has Ditched Its Plans for a New, Short-Term Rifle Replacement

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
The Army has officially scrapped its search for a short-term replacement for the M4/M16 rifle platform. These weapons have been criticized for jamming and overheating, and officials say that the range and stopping power of the 5.56 mm round currently in use underperform that of rounds used by adversaries.

The Army’s Interim Combat Service Rifle program’s funds have been reallocated to its longer-term goal to create the Next Generation Squad Weapon, according to an Army posting on the federal business opportunities website this week. The program, launched in August, originally sought up to 50,000 commercially available, 7.62 mm rifles to bridge the reported small arms overmatch and new 5.56 mm-resistant body armor being fielded by adversaries.
 
p-the-terminator-linda-hamilton.jpg
 
Last edited:
Megalith, ever actually, um, use an M16 or M4? If you had, you would have put scare quotes around your "overheating and jamming" link. Vietnam called, and it wants its myth back.

5.56 is still a decent round, especially with the newer projectiles and loads, and what the article doesn't mention is that our troops already field body armor than can stop 7.62x39 rounds (AK47 family of rounds), and that the bad guys have access to that stuff as well. And 7.62x51(.308) isn't the answer either.

That said, there are better, more modern alternatives to 5.56 that bridge the gap between lethality, penetration and weight, but none of them solve the logistics problem of replacing billions (seriously) rounds of 5.56 in inventory and millions of weapons. And that doesn't include the problems this would present to our allies, most of which all use 5.56 now too.
 
ZeqOBpf6 said:
What does this have to do with computers
Click to expand...
Kyle and others here like guns. A replacement platform isn't as necessary with improved ammo, i.e. M855A1. I know there are "better" calibers out there, but 5.56 still has some legs. As Croak pointed out it, it is ingrained in most every nation's fighting force/s.
 
Other articles on the subject mention the real issue is that a lot of the weapons the anti-US forces have are old bolt action rifles that were considered obsolete in WWII. While old, these weapons were designed in the era of long range marksmanship and can be effective and accurate man killers in the 500~1000 yard/meter range. Most of the M4 variants just can't effectively return fire at those ranges. One article mentioned that some US units have managed to acquire one or more of the old M14s to deal with those situations.

The real issue the military doesn't seem to want to acknowledge is there is no one perfect weapon. The M16/M4 makes a good jungle/urban weapon. Not so good at long range accuracy duels in the mountains. The M14 is better at the long range duels but both it and the ammo weigh more, which cuts into the amount of other carried gear.
 
 
If I ever needed a combat style rifle for the zombie apocalypse, I'd probably take the AK even if the ammo weighs more. Bury the thing in mud and it will still fire.
 
Jim Kim said:
That myth even made it to Afghanistan and Iraq where it became fact.

In 2008 Afghan firefight, U.S. weapons failed: M4 rifle criticized as jam prone
“We hated it,” said Marine veteran John Culbertson. “Because if it got any grime or corruption or dirt in it, which you always get in any rifle out in the field, it’s going to malfunction.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/gun-trouble/383508/
Click to expand...

kirbyrj said:
If I ever needed a combat style rifle for the zombie apocalypse, I'd probably take the AK even if the ammo weighs more. Bury the thing in mud and it will still fire.
Click to expand...

Yea, shit happens to all rifles if not maintained.



 
Dead Parrot said:
Other articles on the subject mention the real issue is that a lot of the weapons the anti-US forces have are old bolt action rifles that were considered obsolete in WWII. While old, these weapons were designed in the era of long range marksmanship and can be effective and accurate man killers in the 500~1000 yard/meter range. Most of the M4 variants just can't effectively return fire at those ranges. One article mentioned that some US units have managed to acquire one or more of the old M14s to deal with those situations.

The real issue the military doesn't seem to want to acknowledge is there is no one perfect weapon. The M16/M4 makes a good jungle/urban weapon. Not so good at long range accuracy duels in the mountains. The M14 is better at the long range duels but both it and the ammo weigh more, which cuts into the amount of other carried gear.
Click to expand...

The M16 with the right twist rate, right ammo, and the right barrel length (especially with modern optics) does the job out to 500-600 meters quite well. The short-barreled M4, not so much, and that's one reason the Corps kept the 20" barrel M16 in frontline service for quite some time after the Army went all-in on the stubby 14.5" barrel M4.

As for the M14, it never really went out of service...after the M16 replaced it as the standard-issue rifle in the early 60's, it was turned into a sniper rifle system by the Army, and then during the GWOT it got tweaked into a designated marksman rifle version for the Army and Marines, and the Navy always kept more than a few of them shipboard for various uses (not to mention low-production or one-off SEAL variants).
 
gaphiltfish said:
I hope they switch to 6.5mm. It really is the best cartridge out there at the moment.
Click to expand...
I agree.
But 6.5 Creedmore not the 6.5 Grendel.

Also they should use the FAN FAL design not the AR-10 in my opinion.
 
gaphiltfish said:
I hope they switch to 6.5mm. It really is the best cartridge out there at the moment.
Click to expand...

There's a new kid on the block that looks pretty promising. .224 Valkyrie.

"Well then, that sure seems definitive, doesn’t it? The .224 Valkyrie has 5.56mm Mk. 262 beat for velocity by 200 meters; the .22 Nosler it has whupped by 250 meters, and all with a bullet that’s 17% heavier. In terms of muzzle energy, it leads the pack of .22s to start, but clings bitterly to every Joule to such a degree that by a kilometer it’s even nipping at the heels of the much-touted 6.5 Grendel. Yet, where the Grendel disappoints in drop and drift, the Valkyrie pulls ahead, earning a massive lead in drop and drift over everything on the chart by the time kilobuck range rolls around. (In fact, although not included on the chart, the .224 Valkyrie approaches the 6.5 Creemoor in both respects at this range).

So, wait, the .224 Valkyrie is an AR-15 compatible round that gives you .22 Nosler performance up close, 6.5 Grendel energy retention, and 6.5 Creedmoor drop and drift at 1,000m? Well, these are just estimates, but… Yeah, looks that way."​

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...6-5-grendel-modern-intermediate-calibers-025/
 
Croak said:
Megalith, ever actually, um, use an M16 or M4? If you had, you would have put scare quotes around your "overheating and jamming" link. Vietnam called, and it wants its myth back.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I strongly recommend reading the book, The Gun.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Its not like our adversaries were using lower caliber rounds than 7.62 when the m16 came out, so being "outclassed" is hardly a compelling reason to upgrade when we were aware of this when the weapon was first introduced. As for jamming up, i was over in Iraq twice and had very few jams with my m16. Sure i might have had to clean it a couple times a day but there is sand everywhere and what weapon wouldn't need cleaning.
 
Croak said:
The M16 with the right twist rate, right ammo, and the right barrel length (especially with modern optics) does the job out to 500-600 meters quite well. The short-barreled M4, not so much, and that's one reason the Corps kept the 20" barrel M16 in frontline service for quite some time after the Army went all-in on the stubby 14.5" barrel M4.

As for the M14, it never really went out of service...after the M16 replaced it as the standard-issue rifle in the early 60's, it was turned into a sniper rifle system by the Army, and then during the GWOT it got tweaked into a designated marksman rifle version for the Army and Marines, and the Navy always kept more than a few of them shipboard for various uses (not to mention low-production or one-off SEAL variants).
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. I blew out the peg on my shot spotter at 500m M16 does just fine at that range.
 
After the Korean war the Western militaries looked up all the ballistics/battle and injury reports it could find going back to WW2 to see what infantry weaponry really did.

Basically the stats said that over 50m range in a combat situation you are as likely, if not more so to be hit by a random round or shrapnel as you are an actual aimed bullet.

Hence why large rounds with massive effective ranges fell from favour.
 
gaphiltfish said:
I hope they switch to 6.5mm. It really is the best cartridge out there at the moment.
Click to expand...

Nope, long range catridge that is too hot. Wears out barrels after just 2500 rounds. Very accurate but better suited to DMR use
 
The bean counters will decide what is done. It is never based on the extensive studies the military has carried out.

The 5.56 was chosen because it was considered the most cost effective. Not the most kill effective.
 
Dead Parrot said:
One article mentioned that some US units have managed to acquire one or more of the old M14s to deal with those situations.
Click to expand...

some members of SFODD have used customized M14s over the years in lieu of the lighter M4/M16 platforms because 5.56 simply will not reliably drop a hostile in one or two shots center mass, even point blank CQB with max muzzle velocity without armor. 5.56 is inexpensive & comparably light, thats the only positive thing i can say about it...has unimpressive ballistics at best. that being said, i still have ~1k rounds of it (mainly because...cheap)

anyway hope the army bucks up & picks a proper platform with the NGSW program. 2022 is a long way off & its a little disconcerting that more effective platforms exist in ready supply but remain ignored due to...contract money...when other aspects of military spending (like half of R&D & logistics) as a whole are, well, the opposite of streamlined
 
Last edited:
54% of America's discretionary budget is spent on military spending, over $700 BILLION a year, $212 million of which is currently being spent buying new M4's with a delivery date of 2020. The Intermin Combat Service Rifle program that was just canceled was the answer to another failed program that cost hundreds of millions and had funds transferred to this new and now canceled program, and has had the funds transferred to the Next Generation Squad Weapon program... These companies are making a big profit off of taxpayers while playing their games. The increasing ineffectiveness of our 5.56mm weapons is a serious problem, but the private corporations only care about milking as much money as they can. They don't care about America and never have. Had they not be taken under public ownership during WW2, they would've did the same games they're doing today, as Eisenhower infamously warned about. Meanwhile, the CEO's laugh on their way to the bank, all happy about the new tax cuts they're getting all while on their way to the bank driving pass their workers children in understaffed, overcrowded, and falling apart schools that are in need of desperate repair, and people suffering because the richest nation in history can't "afford" to provide healthcare like poorer nations have done for decades, or house the homeless when we have more vacant and ridiculously priced homes than citizens.
 
and officials say that the range and stopping power of the 5.56 mm round currently in use underperform that of rounds used by adversaries.
Click to expand...
I thought the whole point of the 5.56 platform was that it wounded more than killed, and in war a wounded guy is worth 2-3 dead ones as far as enemy are concerned.
 
Dead Parrot said:
Other articles on the subject mention the real issue is that a lot of the weapons the anti-US forces have are old bolt action rifles that were considered obsolete in WWII. While old, these weapons were designed in the era of long range marksmanship and can be effective and accurate man killers in the 500~1000 yard/meter range. Most of the M4 variants just can't effectively return fire at those ranges. One article mentioned that some US units have managed to acquire one or more of the old M14s to deal with those situations.

The real issue the military doesn't seem to want to acknowledge is there is no one perfect weapon. The M16/M4 makes a good jungle/urban weapon. Not so good at long range accuracy duels in the mountains. The M14 is better at the long range duels but both it and the ammo weigh more, which cuts into the amount of other carried gear.
Click to expand...

Immagine that, a weapon with a 20+ inch barrel is accurate at long range while a weapon with a 10-12" barrel is not. Who'd of thought.
 
Croak said:
There's a new kid on the block that looks pretty promising. .224 Valkyrie.

"Well then, that sure seems definitive, doesn’t it? The .224 Valkyrie has 5.56mm Mk. 262 beat for velocity by 200 meters; the .22 Nosler it has whupped by 250 meters, and all with a bullet that’s 17% heavier. In terms of muzzle energy, it leads the pack of .22s to start, but clings bitterly to every Joule to such a degree that by a kilometer it’s even nipping at the heels of the much-touted 6.5 Grendel. Yet, where the Grendel disappoints in drop and drift, the Valkyrie pulls ahead, earning a massive lead in drop and drift over everything on the chart by the time kilobuck range rolls around. (In fact, although not included on the chart, the .224 Valkyrie approaches the 6.5 Creemoor in both respects at this range).

So, wait, the .224 Valkyrie is an AR-15 compatible round that gives you .22 Nosler performance up close, 6.5 Grendel energy retention, and 6.5 Creedmoor drop and drift at 1,000m? Well, these are just estimates, but… Yeah, looks that way."​

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...6-5-grendel-modern-intermediate-calibers-025/
Click to expand...

My newest AR is 6.5 Creedmoor, my last newest AR is .300 Blackout, previous couple were .223 Wylde (I know...not a caliber as much as a chamber configuration but it's still worth mentioning). Keep updating the ammo and I'll keep adding rifles to my safe...I don't understand the dilemma here lol.
 
motqalden said:
Its not like our adversaries were using lower caliber rounds than 7.62 when the m16 came out, so being "outclassed" is hardly a compelling reason to upgrade when we were aware of this when the weapon was first introduced. As for jamming up, i was over in Iraq twice and had very few jams with my m16. Sure i might have had to clean it a couple times a day but there is sand everywhere and what weapon wouldn't need cleaning.
Click to expand...

An AK47?

But seriously, the M16 does have a provably higher jam rate then other competing rifles. It was compared to other rifles a few years back (AK, SCAR (both variants), HK416) and it's jam rate was *significantly* higher then the competition. In addition, 5.56 NATO has a tendency to not do a ton of internal damage on it's way through a target, that's one reason why the US purchases the SCAR-H over the SCAR-L.
 
gaphiltfish said:
I hope they switch to 6.5mm. It really is the best cartridge out there at the moment.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, as someone who lives in a gun free part of the world and has never held a firearm, why is this the best at the moment?
 
Having put a brand new M4 Carbine (that's the burst fire version) through its paces and have it jam- the 'M16 Weapon System' had might as well be called the 'Self-Jamming Weapon System'.

US Army should follow SOCOM's lead and pick up HK416s.
 
Croak said:
Megalith, ever actually, um, use an M16 or M4? If you had, you would have put scare quotes around your "overheating and jamming" link. Vietnam called, and it wants its myth back.

5.56 is still a decent round, especially with the newer projectiles and loads, and what the article doesn't mention is that our troops already field body armor than can stop 7.62x39 rounds (AK47 family of rounds), and that the bad guys have access to that stuff as well. And 7.62x51(.308) isn't the answer either.

That said, there are better, more modern alternatives to 5.56 that bridge the gap between lethality, penetration and weight, but none of them solve the logistics problem of replacing billions (seriously) rounds of 5.56 in inventory and millions of weapons. And that doesn't include the problems this would present to our allies, most of which all use 5.56 now too.
Click to expand...

good points! Agree for the most part.

Chunder said:
54% of America's discretionary budget is spent on military spending, over $700 BILLION a year, $212 million of which is currently being spent buying new M4's with a delivery date of 2020. The Intermin Combat Service Rifle program that was just canceled was the answer to another failed program that cost hundreds of millions and had funds transferred to this new and now canceled program, and has had the funds transferred to the Next Generation Squad Weapon program... These companies are making a big profit off of taxpayers while playing their games. The increasing ineffectiveness of our 5.56mm weapons is a serious problem, but the private corporations only care about milking as much money as they can. They don't care about America and never have. Had they not be taken under public ownership during WW2, they would've did the same games they're doing today, as Eisenhower infamously warned about. Meanwhile, the CEO's laugh on their way to the bank, all happy about the new tax cuts they're getting all while on their way to the bank driving pass their workers children in understaffed, overcrowded, and falling apart schools that are in need of desperate repair, and people suffering because the richest nation in history can't "afford" to provide healthcare like poorer nations have done for decades, or house the homeless when we have more vacant and ridiculously priced homes than citizens.
Click to expand...

Call the wambulance! The proletariat are calling u to your Antifa meeting!
 
They already have the perfect .30 cal platform with the SCAR MK17. Throw a can on it and the recoil impulse is a dream. Accuracy is top notch. Can fill multiple roles including conversions to .556 if needed. Short stroke piston in the gas block increases reliability to FAL / AK levels (just gotta check those seals). It's a great platform and we already have it.

M14...I carried them in the Navy. Great rifles, but extremely LONG and HEAVY.

M16 / M4... Great rifles. You have to keep them clean. .556 can be really good when the right rounds are used. I prefer .30 cal.
 
The Lamb said:
Out of curiosity, as someone who lives in a gun free part of the world and has never held a firearm, why is this the best at the moment?
Click to expand...

The 6.5mm bullet itself has inherent benefits whatever cartridge it is put into. It has a large enough cross section that it can be accelerated to a decent velocity with less powder. It does a good job of retaining that velocity due to its high ballistic coefficient. The high BC also helps it fight drift due to cross wind.

The 6mm is also a good bullet.
 
The Lamb said:
Out of curiosity, as someone who lives in a gun free part of the world and has never held a firearm, why is this the best at the moment?
Click to expand...

The 6.5mm bullet has one of the best ballistic coefficients of all projectiles (it is rocket science, so you could have fun researching what that means) which allows for exceptional accuracy. A larger mass also allows for greater energy displacement, which is commonly but inaccurately called "knock-down power."

The statement itself is not a good one, as there are many different calibers that use the 6.5mm bullet. The Swedes, Japanese, and Italians had all varying, incompatible ammunition using the 6.5 mm bullet. For the civilian market, there's 6.5x57, 6.5 Remington, 6.5 Grendel, 6.5 Creedmoore, 6.5 Weatherby Magnum, and more. Each one of these has their advantages and disadvantages, so the statement to simply "switch to 6.5mm" is a very complicated subject when discussing the implementation in the infantryman's rifle.
 
The Lamb said:
Out of curiosity, as someone who lives in a gun free part of the world and has never held a firearm, why is this the best at the moment?
Click to expand...

Sectional density. There is a length to diameter sweet spot. Lead has a certain mass. Combining all that you end up with a certain size which works better than others, when juxtaposed with chamber pressures and other factors. That high sectional density gives that sized bullet the good ballistic coefficient. Then you just need to stick on top of a cartridge. 6.5 Grendel is the 6.5 bullet on an AR15/5.56 cartridge; 6.5 Creedmoor is a 6.5 bullet on a .308 cartridge (bigger than the 5.56, so more powder, more speed.) The 6.5G is a shorter bullet, in general, than the 6.5C. (Typical "working" bullet weights are 123gr for 6.5G vs. 140gr for 6.5C.) There's more to it... ;)

Edited because only dolts misspell "Creedmoor". Damn autocorrect...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top