Sig Sauer win US Army contract

[Skullchewer]

Expect to see a lot more SIG clones.
Following a rigorous 27-month prototype evaluation phase, the Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon competition has come to a close with the Army announcing SIG Sauer as the contract winner on April 19, 2022. The company’s submissions have been designated the XM5 Rifle and XM250 Automatic Rifle and are chambered in SIG Sauer’s proprietary 6.8x51mm Fury cartridge. Valued at $20.4 million, the Army’s initial order includes weapons, ammo, accessories, spare parts, and contractor support. Moreover, the contract allows other DOD services and, potentially, Foreign Military Sales countries to purchase the NGSW weapons.
https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/sig-sauer-won-the-armys-new-rifle-and-machine-gun-contract-for-20-4-million/

Edited April 21, 2022 by Skullchewer

[Asomodai]

Of course they went for the one that closest resembles an M4. Yet it's 10/20% heavier then the rifle it replaces.

 

Aesthetically I didn't like any of the three rifles, Though it would have been cool to the GD with Plastic ammo. 

Edited April 21, 2022 by Asomodai

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

It's interesting that its chambered in what is basically a necked down .308 case and uses a 135 or 140gr .270 calibre bullet.  

 

That's a hundred years old bullet design, albeit at a huge case pressure. 

 

Jack O'Connor would be proud. 

 

[EvilMonkee]

I wonder how long till it becomes the NATO standard calibre.....

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

38 minutes ago, EvilMonkee said:

I wonder how long till it becomes the NATO standard calibre.....

Displays of cynicism have to be accurate...   

[Speedbird_666]

6 hours ago, EvilMonkee said:

I wonder how long till it becomes the NATO standard calibre.....

 

Not for some time methinks - there's the small issue of the millions of 5.56mm rounds knocking around in NATO member stocks.

 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

There were millions of 7.62 around when the 5.56 was adopted.   I expect that the US is able to impose its will still. 

 

 

[Floperator]

Bit of a white elephant this. Troops already rarely engaging or rarely successful at max range for 5.56 - due to deficiency in marksmanship rather than the calibre - so just because this caliber/rifle combo can shoot 'twice as far' doesn't mean dick; average engagement will still be 100-150m. And the requirement for armour piercing due to the proliferation of cheap chinese body armour, the real impetus behind this program, could be achieved within existing weapon systems with modifications to existing calibres.

3 hours ago, Speedbird_666 said:

 

Not for some time methinks - there's the small issue of the millions of 5.56mm rounds knocking around in NATO member stocks.

 

 

1 hour ago, Tactical Pith Helmet said:

There were millions of 7.62 around when the 5.56 was adopted.   I expect that the US is able to impose its will still. 

 

 

7.62 is still a NATO calibre though, IIRC Turkey uses it as standard in their service rifles. So just because a new calibre is added to the NATO roster doesn't mean the previous ones get mothballed.

[Cannonfodder]

10 hours ago, EvilMonkee said:

I wonder how long till it becomes the NATO standard calibre.....

Quite a while probably. It took about 20 years from the US adopting it till it became the NATO standard round. Also with various militaries recently upgrading or replacing their infantry weapons will here would be alot of resistance.

[RostokMcSpoons]

2 hours ago, Floperator said:

Bit of a white elephant this. Troops already rarely engaging or rarely successful at max range for 5.56 - due to deficiency in marksmanship rather than the calibre - so just because this caliber/rifle combo can shoot 'twice as far' doesn't mean dick; average engagement will still be 100-150m. And the requirement for armour piercing due to the proliferation of cheap chinese body armour, the real impetus behind this program, could be achieved within existing weapon systems with modifications to existing calibres.

 

7.62 is still a NATO calibre though, IIRC Turkey uses it as standard in their service rifles. So just because a new calibre is added to the NATO roster doesn't mean the previous ones get mothballed.

I read an interesting treatise on infantry combat recently, which concentrated on lessons learned from Afghanistan and Iraq.   It may have formed (or coincided with) the the thinking that drove the move to the new calibre.

Basically (and I'm paraphrasing my crappy memory), engagement distances were found to be noticeably longer than expected for much of the time, and an increase in both long-range stopping power and accuracy were required.   Special mention was made of how 5.56mm squad weapons delivering high-volume but low accuracy fire at range were ineffective at providing suppression at the longer ranges the combat typically occurred at.   A DMR rifle firing at a steady rhythm was much more effective at that than a SAW.

 

No doubt they could have reverted back to the 7.62mm, but the weight of ammo and heavy recoil still count against that calibre.

So the consequence is an intermediate calibre plus improved optics to improve the number of lethal rounds on target.

 

 

[Floperator]

1 hour ago, RostokMcSpoons said:

I read an interesting treatise on infantry combat recently, which concentrated on lessons learned from Afghanistan and Iraq.   It may have formed (or coincided with) the the thinking that drove the move to the new calibre.

Basically (and I'm paraphrasing my crappy memory), engagement distances were found to be noticeably longer than expected for much of the time, and an increase in both long-range stopping power and accuracy were required.   Special mention was made of how 5.56mm squad weapons delivering high-volume but low accuracy fire at range were ineffective at providing suppression at the longer ranges the combat typically occurred at.   A DMR rifle firing at a steady rhythm was much more effective at that than a SAW.

 

No doubt they could have reverted back to the 7.62mm, but the weight of ammo and heavy recoil still count against that calibre.

So the consequence is an intermediate calibre plus improved optics to improve the number of lethal rounds on target.

 

 

What I'm hearing from serving and ex-service members is that the limiting factor is not the ballistics and 'stopping power' of 5.56, which barring the body armour issue is perfectly adequate out to and beyond the distances at which you could actually reliably make a hit in combat conditions, but the quality of infantryman marksmanship.

Basically soldiers are already failing to utilise the potential of the current calibre, and giving them a snazzy new rifle and sci-fi optic isn't going to compensate for fundamental deficiencies in marksmanship.

 

In airsoft terms, there's a lot of talk about guys complaining that targets aren't 'taking their hits' when they are being engaged badly and/or at silly ranges, and it's more likely that they are missing altogether rather than Terry Taliban has suddenly developed an immunity to 5.56.

I suspect a lot of grunts are going to regret complaining about their M4s not hitting the enemies they are plinking at at 700m, once they've dragged this new thing around for a few dozen miles.

 

[Cannonfodder]

2 hours ago, RostokMcSpoons said:

A DMR rifle firing at a steady rhythm was much more effective at that than a SAW.

I've heard this was the reasoning behind the USMC switching to the M27, which makes me wonder if we'll see a return of the L86 LSW

[Lozart]

21 hours ago, Skullchewer said:

Valued at $20.4 million, the Army’s initial order includes weapons, ammo, accessories, spare parts, and contractor support. 
 

 

That's really not a lot of money. I'd be assuming this will go the same way as the SCAR and only make it to SF units to try out. The main reason the M4/M16 still hasn't been replaced is the sheer volume of them that they need to change out.

From here: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/04/19/army-picks-its-replacement-m4-and-saw.html

 

Quote

It's unclear how many weapons the Army aims to buy over the decade, or how quickly soldiers will totally ditch the decades-old SAW and rifle. In its proposed 2023 budget, the force is requesting 29,046 new weapons. But that budget still needs to be approved by Congress.

 

Given that the M4 to M4A1 upgrade plan was originally budgeted for 300,000 weapons and you'll see where I'm going with this.

[Rogerborg]

Memes are back on the menu, boys.

 

Eh.  20,000 rifles, they're just putting the tip in at the moment.  That Vortex optic though, I can't wait for the "need dat 4 airsoft!!!!!".

 

 

[Cannonfodder]

5 minutes ago, Rogerborg said:

I can't wait for the "need dat 4 airsoft!!!!!".

Along with the frothing at the mouth when someone says "nice M4" 

[Davegolf]

I do like it I must say, the 416 rail height is good. And it’s a pretty colour ?

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

12 hours ago, Floperator said:

7.62 is still a NATO calibre though, IIRC Turkey uses it as standard in their service rifles. So just because a new calibre is added to the NATO roster doesn't mean the previous ones get mothballed.

5.56 can remain a standard too.   It's horses for courses.   

 

The and a are different subjects. 

[Floperator]

12 minutes ago, Tactical Pith Helmet said:

5.56 can remain a standard too.   It's horses for courses.   

 

The and a are different subjects. 

I can't see widespread take-up inside the next 10 years, everyone else is pretty heavily invested in existing systems. If its a wild success for the US, maybe after that. 

That said the L85 is due for replacement very soon, and this is exactly the kind of stupid fly by night thing the MOD would lean into and then get lumbered with once the yanks get bored of it, rather than just doing the sensible thing and buying 150,000 M4s. 

[Cannonfodder]

Hasn't the L85 just gone through a massive update to the A3 model? I would say the bean counters wouldn't be happy, but having seen the way the civil service likes to waste money it wouldn't surprise me if it was binned.

[Floperator]

We've been throwing money at it for years, but it is scheduled to be replaced in 2025. The L85 is the very definition  of Sunk Cost Fallacy. We should have binned the cursed little object off years ago.

 

Yes it does *work* now, after we paid H+K to fettle every individual gun, but it's a fundamentally flawed platform.

Edited April 23, 2022 by Floperator

[Cannonfodder]

6 minutes ago, Floperator said:

scheduled to be replaced in 2025.

So we can probably expect to stay in service till at least 2035

 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

On 23/04/2022 at 07:56, Cannonfodder said:

I would say the bean counters wouldn't be happy,

They're never happy...

 

Miserable cunts.  

[Cannonfodder]

7 hours ago, Tactical Pith Helmet said:

They're never happy...

 

Miserable cunts.  

Till they come come up with a policy which doubles everyone's work load and costs more in the longer term 

[Rogerborg]

Have the Ackchyually mob decided what's most technically correct yet?

 

 

 

I see it can take 7.62mm as well with just a barrel change.  Almost like... a modernised M14. Meanwhile, the Troy Industries CAR-14 never made it beyond Shot Show because nobody wants a heavy gun with a folding stock, 13" barrel, and 20 round clipazines with >5.56mm calibre rounds.

 

 

 

 

[Tactical Pith Helmet]

 

Explains where the new cartridge sits re: max PBR etc.