US Army Considers Adopting an Interim Battle Rifle in 7.62NATO: eventually adopt 6.5

[BluntForceTrauma]

The US doesn't do large wars anymore.

Sometimes large wars do us.

Since reason #1 has been answered, does that mean you'll stop objecting to EPR bullets?

I object only to politically correct decision drivers, like those mandating women in front-line combat.

I realize that you want the Army to go back to using lead-core bullets so that a 123gr bullet for 6.5 Grendel will be feasible

Nice try.

[stanc]

Sometimes large wars do us.

True. LBJ thought the North Vietnamese would be easy. That error in judgment turned into a bigger and longer war than he expected. It's always possible that DJT or a future POTUS could make a similar mistake.

In any case, to more directly address your question, apparently the DoD considers the use of copper in place of lead as a viable option. The SOST bullet used by the USMC in the Mk318 load has as much, if not more, copper than the M855A1 EPR.

I object only to politically correct decision drivers, like those mandating women in front-line combat.

Not sure if that's a yes or no?

Nice try.

Don't know what you mean. The subject of a 123gr EPR probably not being a feasible 6.5 Grendel load is what prompted your "editorializing" on the matter.

[JASmith]

Don't know what you mean. The subject of a 123gr EPR probably not being a feasible 6.5 Grendel load is what prompted your "editorializing" on the matter.

Facts not in evidence
.
Or, are we resorting to. mind reading and other magic?

The baiting is becoming tedious.

[stanc]

Facts not in evidence
.
Or, are we resorting to. mind reading and other magic?

I don't know what "we" are resorting to, but I'm just calling it the way I see it.
John's original comment (post#63):

Devil's Advocate question: Does your analysis also argue against the necessity of 7.62 NATO in a medium machine gun? Side-by-side, what does a 762N MMG in a mount do in a beaten zone at 800m, for example, that a theoretical 65G LMG in the same mount at the same range with a 123gr VLD FMJ doesn't do? (Here I am assuming very similar external ballistics to M80.)

My response (post #66):

1. Beaten zone is not the only performance criteria for machine guns.
2. A VLD shape may not be a viable configuration for a military bullet.
3. The lead-core FMJ is being superseded by the lead-free EPR design.

An EPR projectile for 6.5 Grendel seems likely to be significantly lighter than 123 grains, which will affect trajectory, wind drift, effective range, beaten zone, and terminal effects to an unknown degree. (The 125gr EPR bullet developed for 6.5 CT ammo has a very long base, which would reduce powder capacity if loaded into the 6.5 Grendel case, adversely affecting muzzle velocity.)

John's reply (post#68):

Just a side note to editorialize a bit: In a real shooting war with a real enemy — Iran, North Korea, China (God forbid) — with the grown-ups in charge for once, the ban on lead ammunition will take a back seat to actually devoting resources to winning the damn war, rather than appeasing politically-correct sensibilities.

Taking WWII as an example, these people have no idea what is involved in total war. With copper how many times the price of lead, protecting landfills will probably be low on the list of priorities. But if we'd rather "save the whales" than save the country, well, I guess that's a choice some people make. . . .

While John only quoted my point 3 in his reply, since the lead-free M855A1 outperforms lead-core M855, and because the side discussion was about 6.5 Grendel ammo for machine guns, I took his remarks to be aimed at the apparent weight limitation imposed on 6.5 Grendel military bullets due to the ban on lead.

The baiting is becoming tedious.

The only person doing any tedious baiting here is you, with your repeated accusations.

I would never intentionally bait John. If I was wrong in my conclusion about his post, it was an honest mistake.

[stanc]

There's been a name change, but apparently no other action.

Based on briefings conducted at the NDIA Armaments Conference by PEO Soldier’s PM Weapons team, along with discussions with industry, we have an update on Army plans to field a new 7.62 NATO capability within the next 24 months.

First off, although a contract has been awarded for H&K’s Compact Semi Automatic Sniper System, the weapon remains unfunded for FY17.

However, the Army is also committed to concurrently fielding an SDMR based on the same platform as the CSASS.

While there has been talk of adding up to two SDMRs per Squad, internal Army discussions continue about expanding the basis of issue of a 7.62 rifle, now referred to as the Interim Service Combat Rifle to all BCT members. However, there is still no formal requirement for the ISCR, and acquisition officials are leaning forward on the foxhole in anticipation, prepared to make this happen as quickly as possible.

Full article @ http://soldiersystems.net/2017/05/03/us-...le-update/

[stanc]

Army researchers are testing half a dozen ammunition variants in “intermediate calibers,” which falls between the current 7.62 mm and 5.56 mm rounds, to create a new light machine gun and inform the next-generation individual assault rifle/round combo.

The weapon designs being tested will be “unconventional,” officials said, and likely not one that is currently commercially available.

https://www.armytimes.com/articles/new-r...m4-and-556

[Smokehouse_83]

Seems like Grendel could be used in all 3 platforms and everybody could share ammo? 14" barrel with 80-100 grain ammo, 20" barrel scoped with 120-130 grain ammo, and a saw type platform. Really no need for a heavy machine gun. Maybe a dude with a bolt .50 for vehicles and bunkers.

[VASCAR2]

If big Army moves away from the 5.56X45 I think it will likely be with telescopic cased (TC or CT round requiring completely new rifle) or Polymer cased ammo and more traditional rifle. It'll be interesting to see if they actually settle on 6, 6.5 or 7 MM. If they go 6.5 MM I wouldn't be surprised if they don't adopt a bullet close to 107-108 grains with a M-855A1 style bullet. In any event I don't think the 6.5 Grendel as we know it today will be adopted by the US military. If the military goes for the 264 USA cartridge I'd be surprised if it uses a conventional brass case unless it for a DMR role and only a temporary solution.

[Essayons]

Army researchers are testing half a dozen ammunition variants in “intermediate calibers,” which falls between the current 7.62 mm and 5.56 mm rounds, to create a new light machine gun and inform the next-generation individual assault rifle/round combo.

The weapon designs being tested will be “unconventional,” officials said, and likely not one that is currently commercially available..

Sounds like the Lightweight Small Arms Technology (LSAT) LMG and Carbine, maybe?

[stanc]

Sounds like the Lightweight Small Arms Technology (LSAT) LMG and Carbine, maybe?

Yeah, probably. Although at first reading I thought perhaps "unconventional" meant bullpup...

[Essayons]

Speaking of unconventional/bullpups, it will be interesting to see how the Desert Tech MDR works in the real world. Lots of flexibility in that platform if it lives up to the hype.

[stanc]

Looks like the Marines are joining the Army on the battle rifle bandwagon.

An RFI has been issued for a multi-caliber rifle capable of firing .264 USA, .260 Remington, and 7.62 NATO, etc, as well as 5.56 NATO.

RFI: https://www.fbo.gov/utils/view?id=60db3a...a8a331abde

TFB article: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/...s-targets/

Colt 901, anybody?

[stanc]

USSOCOM Weapons Portfolio Overview (page 10): http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2017/armament/Owens.pdf

6.5mm Ammo Development during FY2018. Intermediate Caliber Sniper Rifle and Carbine to begin fielding late-FY2018.

6.5mm Machinegun Development FY2018-2019. Intermediate Caliber Machinegun to begin fielding mid-FY2019.

[LRRPF52]

Hmmmm, where have I seen this before....

You end up with:
Suppressed Glocks
PDW Compact
Suppressed Upper Receiver Group M4A1 SOPMOD carbines
6.5mm Semi Automatic Sniper Support Rifles
6.5mm Assault Machine Gun
Advanced Sniper Rifle with integrated systems optics
.338 Norma Magnum LW Medium Machingun

That's an appropriate small arms mix for Special Operations units across the services. You can tailor the force adequately, without having to try to pound square pegs in round holes.

You have several systems for ADVON parties (Glock w/can, PDW, SURG, 6.5 SSR).

For DA, you have PDW, SURG M4A1, 6.5 SSR, 6.5 AMG, .338NM LWMMG, ASR

For SR, you have PDW, SURG M4A1, 6.5 SSR, 6.5 AMG

This is an excellent weapons mix, something a few of you will recall being discussed many years ago here, where 7.62 NATO is slowly displaced and replaced by 6.5mm, while still keeping 5.56 M4 evolution, and developing a compact PDW, as well as a .338 Medium Machinegun with constant recoil.

[stanc]

This is an excellent weapons mix, something a few of you will recall being discussed many years ago here, where 7.62 NATO is slowly displaced and replaced by 6.5mm...

Alas, I do not recall any thread with a discussion of 7.62 NATO being slowly displaced and replaced by a 6.5mm round like .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor.

However, for the few of you who on page 1 of this thread scoffed at the report that the Army was considering adoption of a 7.62mm Interim Battle Rifle, I offer the following presentation:

Project Manager Soldier Weapons http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2017/armament/Stehle.pdf

[COLOR="#0000FF"]PM Soldier Weapons Portfolio (page 4)
Development
Directed Requirements
- Squad Designated Marksman Rifle
- Interim Combat Service Rifle[/COLOR]

[JASmith]

Alas, I do not recall any thread with a discussion of 7.62 NATO being slowly displaced and replaced by a 6.5mm round like .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor.

I participated in those discussions and, yes, gradually came to understand that replacing the 5.56 with the Grendel would ultimately not work well, but that a 6.5 caliber medium machine gun could work.

The biggest challenge at the time was that the Grendel, while outperforming the 7.62 at long range, was not very competiive inside about 400 meters. The larger cases solve that challenge.

Nonetheless, my understanding is that a number of folks are still pushing the 6.5 Grendel and .264 USA in addition to the 260 and 6.5 Creedmoor. Absent a final decision, it is therefore fair to say that we do not know what the final cartridge mix will be.

[stanc]

I participated in those discussions and, yes, gradually came to understand that replacing the 5.56 with the Grendel would ultimately not work well, but that a 6.5 caliber medium machine gun could work.

I do remember being in many discussions about replacing 7.62 NATO with 6.5 Grendel. I just don't recall any threads about replacing 7.62 NATO with .260 Remington or 6.5 Creedmoor.

[ah1whiskey]

its gonna be a tough sell whichever way they attempt to displace the 7.62x51 nato or 5.56.

now if the new "plastic' ammo can be made much cheaper then there might be progress.

its all about economy of scale.

[LRRPF52]

Everything I'm seeing intends to keep 5.56 NATO as a staple for PDWs and lightweight, suppressed carbines with he SURG uppers that drop on to existing M4A1 lowers.

With the addition of 6.5mm SSRs and 6.5mm AMGs, you can task-organize and tailor the unit structure per mission requirements, the terrain, and collateral effects considerations.

Units in SOCOM have been using an Arms Room approach for a long time now already, where each Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine has had a variety of individual shoulder-fired weapons to choose from for the mission.

This includes:

MP5SD 9mm SMG

14.5" M4A1 SOPMOD upper
10.3" CQBR upper
Mk.12 Mod 0 and Mod 1 SPR (most uppers have been pulled from service)
SOPMOD Block II upper with 14.5" barrel, free float handguard
Unit-level built SOPMOD Block II upper with precision barrel for DM work

M203 40mm GL equipped upper
M320 40mm GL
M79 40mm GL

SR25 7.62 NATO SASS (Sniper Trained personnel)
Mk.14 EBR 7.62 NATO DMR (pulled from service, support discontinued)
M110 7.62 NATO SASS

Mk.16 SCAR-L 5.56 NATO with 13" and 16" barrels (support discontinued)
Mk.17 SCAR-H 7.62NATO with 13" and 16" barrels (support discontinued)

Mk.46 SAW 5.56 NATO belt-fed
Mk.48 7.62 NATO belt-fed

M240B 7.62 NATO GPMG
M240L 7.62 NATO LW GPMG

Mk.13 .300 Win Mag Sniper Rifle

M107 .50 BMG Semi-Auto Interdiction Rifle

Commanders and key leaders have the most influence in most units as to who will carry what for the mission. 5.56/M4 SOPMOD will continue to be the staple individual carbine, but not everybody carries M4s.

[stanc]

U.S. Army weapon officials just opened a competition for a new 7.62mm Interim Service Combat Rifle...according to an Aug. 4 solicitation posted on FedBizOpps.gov.

"The Government has a requirement to acquire a commercial 7.62mm ICSR to field with the M80A1 Enhanced Performance Round (EPR) to engage and defeat protected and unprotected threats," the solicitation states.

The competition will consist of live-fire testing and evaluate the following:

Dispersion (300m - function, 600m - simulation)
Compatible with Family of Weapon Sights - Individual and laser
Weapon length (folder or collapsed)/ Weight (empty/bare) / Velocity (300m and 600m calculated)
Semi-Automatic and Fully Automatic function testing (bursts and full auto)
Noise (at shooter's ear) / Flash suppression
Ambidextrous Controls (in darkness or adverse conditions) / Rail interface
20-30 round magazine to support a 210 round combat load

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/...rifle.html