Future US Small Arms Inventory (2

[Q_ARMM]

Here is a speculative future TO&E for the Ghost Recon era - 2008 to 2009: (Updated 1/07/2007)

Regular Army Units:

- M16A4 (5.56x45mm; 0-1-3; flat-top receiver; KAC M5 accessory rail forearm; M68 CCO, XM150 MCO, ACOG, or Land Warrior-related optics)
(Update: Due to be replaced by Future Combat Rifle (FCR), later relabeled as the '5.56mm Modular Weapon System,' and then OICW Increment I. OICW-I has been cancelled, but may yet be replaced by Joint Service rifle yet to be designated. )
- M203A2 (40x46mm; 0-1); or
- M320 (40x46mm; 0-1)

- M16A4 SDM (5.56x45mm; 0-1; Daniel Defense free-float rail forearm; ACOG, XM150 MCO) Squad Designated Marksman Rifle built by USAMU
(Update: Due to be replaced by Future Combat Rifle (FCR), later relabeled as the '5.56mm Modular Weapon System,' and then OICW Increment I. OICW-I has been cancelled, but may yet be replaced by Joint Service rifle yet to be designated. )

- M24 SWS (7.62x51mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M110 SASS (7.62x51mm; 0-1; 3.5-10x day optic)

- M25 Air Burst Weapon (HEAB: 25mm LV; 0-1) OICW Increment II: Stand-alone grenade launcher based on HE module from M29 OICW

- M249 (5.56x45mm; 0-F; optic rail on feed cover; accessory rail forearm (probably a KAC unit); M68 CCO, M145 MGO, or Land Warrior-related optics)
(Update: Items such as the Para-style short barrel and a new M4-style collapsable buttstock are currently filtering down to regular units.)
(Update: Due to be replaced by AR/LMG variant of Future Combat Rifle (FCR), later relabeled as the '5.56mm Modular Weapon System,' and then OICW Increment I. However, OICW-I has been cancelled. )

- M240B (7.62x51mm; 0-F; optic rail on feed cover; accessory rail forearm; M68 CCO, M145 MGO, or Land Warrior-related optics)
(Update: May be replaced by M240E6, a lightweight variant with a Titanium receiver.)
(Update: Work is underway to field a short barrel and collapsable buttstock for the M240B.)

- M9A1 (9x19mm; 0-1; accessory rail added under frame dust cover)
(Update: Scheduled to be replaced by Future Handgun System. FHS later rolled into the Joint Combat Pistol in .45 ACP. However, the Army pulled out of the JCP program.)

- M107 SASR (12.7x99mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M109 AMR (25x59mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M2A1 (12.7x99mm; 0-1-F) The latter is upgraded with the QCB kit, manual safety, flash hider, and accessory rails

- M312 ACSW (12.7x99mm; 0-1-F) The latter is a conversion of the XM307 ACSW, sharing all but five parts in common.

- Mk 19 Mod 3 (40x53mm; 0-1-F)

- M307 ACSW (25x59mm; 0-1-F) ACSW: Advanced Crew Served Weapon - Formerly known as OCSW

- M136 Viper (84mm HEAT; disposable)


Airborne and Stryker Units:

- M4 (5.56x45mm; 0-1-3; flat-top receiver; KAC M4 accessory rail forearm; M68 CCO, XM150 MCO, ACOG, or Land Warrior-related optics)
(Update: Due to be replaced by Future Combat Rifle (FCR), later relabeled as the '5.56mm Modular Weapon System,' and then OICW Increment I. OICW-I has been cancelled, but may yet be replaced by Joint Service rifle yet to be designated. )
- M203A2 (40x46mm; 0-1); or
- M320 (40x46mm; 0-1)

- M4 SDM (5.56x45mm; 0-1; Daniel Defense free-float rail forearm; ACOG, XM150 MCO) Squad Designated Marksman carbine built by USAMU
(Due to be replaced by Future Combat Rifle (FCR), later relabeled as the '5.56mm Modular Weapon System,' and then OICW Increment I. OICW-I has been cancelled, but may yet be replaced by Joint Service rifle yet to be designated. )

- M24 SWS (7.62x51mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M110 SASS (7.62x51mm; 0-1; 3.5-10x day optic)

- M25 Air Burst Weapon (HEAB: 25mm LV; 0-1) OICW Increment II: Stand-alone grenade launcher based on HE module from M29 OICW

- M249 (5.56x45mm; 0-F; optic rail on feed cover; accessory rail forearm; option of M5 buttstock - Minimi Para unit; M68 CCO, M145 MGO, or Land Warrior-related optics)
(Update: Items such as the Para-style short barrel and a new M4-style collapsable buttstock are filtering down to regular units.)
(Update: Due to be replaced by AR/LMG variant of Future Combat Rifle (FCR), later relabeled as the '5.56mm Modular Weapon System,' and then OICW Increment I. However, OICW-I has been cancelled.)

- M240B (7.62x51mm; 0-F; optic rail on feed cover; accessory rail forearm; M68 CCO, M145 MGO, or Land Warrior-related optics)
(Update: May be replaced by M240E6, a lightweight variant with a Titanium receiver.)
(Update: Work is underway to field a short barrel and collapsable buttstock for the M240B.)

- M9A1 (9x19mm; 0-1; accessory rail added under frame dust cover)
(Update: Scheduled to be replaced by Future Handgun System, later Joint Combat Pistol in .45 ACP. However, the Army pulled out of the JCP program.)

- M107 SASR (12.7x99mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M109 AMR (25x59mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M2A1 (12.7x99mm; 0-1-F) The latter is upgraded with the QCB kit, manual safety, flash hider, and accessory rails.

- M312 ACSW (12.7x99mm; 0-1-F) The latter is a conversion of the XM307 ACSW, sharing all but five parts in common.

- Mk 19 Mod 3 (40x53mm; 0-1-F)

- M307 ACSW (25x59mm; 0-1-F) ACSW: Advanced Crew Served Weapon - Formerly known as OCSW

- M136 Viper (84mm HEAT; disposable)


Army SOF Units:

- Mk 16 Mod 0 SCAR-L (5.56x45mm; 0-1-F; CQC, Carbine, & Sniper Variants; ECOS-CQB, ECOS-C, & ECOS-SPR) SOF Combat Assault Rifle-Light
- Mk 13 Mod 0 EGLM (40x46mm; 0-1)

- Mk 12 Mod 0 SPR (5.56x45mm; 0-1-F; flat-top receiver; PRI free-float accessory rail forearm; Leupold 3-9x & ECOS-SPR)

- Mk 12 Mod 1 SPR (5.56x45mm; 0-1-F; flat-top receiver; KAC free-float accessory rail forearm; Leupold 3-9x & ECOS-SPR) - Rangers only

- Mk 17 Mod 0 SCAR-H (7.62x51mm; 0-1-F; CQC, Carbine, & Sniper Variants; ECOS-CQB, ECOS-C, & 10x day optic) SOF Combat Assault Rifle-Heavy
- Mk 13 Mod 0 EGLM (40x46mm; 0-1)

- Mk 11 Mod 2 (7.62x51mm; 0-1; 3.5-10x day optic)

- M24 SWS (7.62x51mm; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- Mk 13 Mod 2 (.300 Win Mag; 0-1; 10x day optic)

- M25 Air Burst Weapon (HEAB: 25mm LV; 0-1) OICW Increment II: Stand-alone grenade launcher based on HE module from M29 OICW

- Mk 46 Mod 1 (5.56x45mm; 0-F; optic rail on feed cover; accessory rail forearm; shorter barrel - slightly longer than M249E3; Optional M5 buttstock - Minimi Para unit; ECOS-CQB, ECOS-C, or M145 MGO) - Unlike the M249 and M249E3, the M249E4/Mk 46 deletes the ability to use M16 magazines along with other weight saving measures.
(Update: The Minimi Para collapsable buttstock (the M5) will either be replaced by a new M4 carbine-style collapsable buttstock designed by ARDEC-Picatinny or one designed by FNMI on behest of SOCOM.)

- Mk 48 Mod 1 (7.62x51mm; 0-F; optic rail on feed cover; accessory rail forearm; ECOS-CQB, ECOS-C, or M145 MGO) - May float over from SEAL units.
(Update: May use a new collapsable buttstock designed by FNMI on behest of SOCOM.)

- M9A1 (9x19mm; 0-1; accessory rail added under frame dust cover) May also see use of SIG M11 (P228) and Mk 24 Mod 0 (P226) in the same caliber.
(Update: Due to be replaced by Joint Combat Pistol in .45 ACP, now known simply as the Combat Pistol.)

- Mk 23 Mod 0 (.45 ACP; 0-1) May also see use of modified M1911A1 in the same caliber.
(Update: Due to be replaced by Joint Combat Pistol in .45 ACP, now known simply as the Combat Pistol.)

- Combat Pistol (.45 ACP; 0-1) Model yet to be selected.

- M107 SASR (12.7x99mm; 0-1; 10x day optic) - Perhaps the day optic will be replaced by the 16x AN/PVS-12.2 day/night optic

- M109 AMR (25x59mm; 0-1) - Optic will probably have more in common with the M29's multi-role sight due to air-burst capabilities of ammunition

- M2A1 (12.7x99mm; 0-1-F) The latter is upgraded with the QCB kit, manual safety, flash hider, and accessory rails.

- M312 ACSW (12.7x99mm; 0-1-F) The latter is a conversion of the XM307 ACSW, sharing all but five parts in common.

- Mk 47 Mod 0 Striker (40x53mm; 0-1-F)

- M307 ACSW (25x59mm; 0-1-F) ACSW: Advanced Crew Served Weapon - Formerly known as OCSW

- M3 MAAWS (84mm; reloadable; various warheads)

- M136 Viper (84mm HEAT; disposable) - May be upgraded to the AT4(CS) standard to allow safe firing within confined spaces

- M72A4/5/6 LAW (66mm HEAT; disposable) - Improved versions of the older M72A3...still preferred when the M136's extra penetration (and weight) is not needed. The three versions (A4-A6) differ in exact penetration and after-armor effects, in an inverse ratio.
(Update: Navy documentation indicates development of a new M72A7 variant. Details concerning the new warhead and rocket are not known. There are also E8-E10 variants in advanced development along with a separate thermobaric variant currently under research. The E8 is a confined space version, the E9 is a high penetration model, and the E10 is a dedicated antipersonnel variant.)

Accessory rail programs for all small arms in current inventory are in the works, and these will probably be universal for most units by 2009. This will accept either the accessories from the SOPMOD kits or the Land Warrior program. For instance, the AN/PEQ-2 Infrared Target Pointer/Illuminator/Aiming Laser will probably be a fairly universal attachment on long-arms. (FWIW: RFPs have been let recently for add-on accessory rails for the M9 and M11 pistols.)

Before 2009, the M60 should be gone in all forms from US military inventories. There is a major push to get the FN M240 (aka: the MAG58) fielded for all of the roles which the M60 is still retained, such as pintle mounts in HMMWVs and helos. The US Army is trying to get FN to cut the weight of the M240 even more, say four pounds or so, knocking it down towards the M60's weight. In addition, the SEALs through SOCOM have adopted a similiar project, as the Mk 48 Mod 0. It is not a lightweight M240B, but a variant of the Minimi/M249 design instead. In released documents from the Crane Naval Surface Warfare Center, the lightweight 7.62x51mm MG project was structured like the previous lightweight 5.56x45mm MG project: the Mk 46 Mod 0. (This led to the adoption of a modified FN M249E4 SPW (Special Purpose Weapon).)

The M145 MGO (Machine Gun Optic), a variant of the ELCAN C79, is already in front line units on the M240B, and there is no reason to expect that it won't filter down eventually to the M249. While there was an initial intent to use a 6x ELCAN as the MGO, the issue M145 is actually 3.4x. The M145 differs from the C79 by eliminating range adjustments from the mount. Instead, the M145 uses a range-finding reticule pattern.)

Any modification or replacement proposals for the M24 sniper rifle have not been extremely vocal. Arguably to stay current with Land Warrior accessories, a conversion along the lines of the USMC's M40A3 may be in order. However, I suspect that they will quibble over the extact details instead of adopting the USMC's improvements as is. McCann Industries was awarded a contract by NSWC-Crane for a MIRS (Multiple Interface Rail System) for the M24. The US Army subsequently released a requirement for a 7.62mm Semi-Auto Sniper Rifle (SASS), given the designation XM110. It appears to be intended as a full replacement for the M24. (KAC won with a variant on the Mk 11 Mod 0.) Of course, this requirement is also covered by the sniper variant of the new FN SOF Combat Assault Rifle-Heavy (SCAR-H).

Reportedly, some Army SF units have had a few of their M24 upgraded to the .300 Win Mag configuration...the reason behind the Army's choice of a Remington 700 long action, instead of the 700 short action used by the USMC's M40-family. Navy SF already have their own in-house version as the Mk 13 Mod 2. This uses the Accuracy International AICS stock. One of the original planned features for the new SOF Combat Assault Rifle-Heavy (SCAR-H) was a .338 'Short' Magnum. Details were never announced; however, the USAMU has been playing with Armalite AR10 conversions using the Remington Short Action Ultra Mag (SAUM) in small calibers.

The decision to adopt the bolt-action Barrett M95M as the XM107 .50 BMG sniper rifle was reversed in favor of the semi-auto M82A1M, classified as the M107. This is a variant of the USMC's product improved M82A3. However, it is not out of the question that some SF units may yet buy a few M95M for the accuracy gain (and size reduction) over the 'pogo stick' M82. SOCOM is now looking for a new rifle to cover both the long-range anti-personnel sniping role of the .300 Win Mag with the anti-materiel role of the .50 BMG.

In a few years, we'll see the XM116 SAFCS II (Small Arms Fire Control System) for the M2HB and Mk 19 Mod 3. The 5x SAFCS II is similiar to the high tech, multi-role optics used with the ATK XM29/XM25 OICW (XM104 Individual Weapon Fire Control) and the General Dynamics XM307/XM312 ACSW.

Depending on how fast the project is accelerated, the XM25 Airbursting Weapon and the XM307 (ACSW) might be rushed into service prior to earlier projections of 2009 and 2011, respectively. However, the 40x53mm Mk 47 Mod 0 Striker will already be in the field with SOCOM units, possessing similiar programable air-burst capabilities. The original XM29 is effectively dead given its weight issues. It is being held back as OICW Increment III.

The Objective Sniper Weapon (OSW) program has played with a Barrett M82 modified to fire the 25x59mm OCSW cartridge. Much work has had to be done to moderate the recoil as the Barrett's original muzzle brake is not as effective with the larger cartridge. Now classified as the XM109, the Payload Rifle appears to have been granted a limited safety release. However, users are to be limited to no more than 25 shots fired in a day.

Crew served weapons from the MGs to the automatic grenade launchers will find themselves afixed on the CROWS vehicle mount. CROWS is short for Crew Remote Operated Weapons System. The CROWS will allow the user to aim and fire the vehicle's pintle/skate mount weapon without needing to poke one's head and torso outside. The first of these are mounted on the Humvee, and are different from the Remote Weapon Stations (M151 Protector) used on the Stryker 8x8 vehicle. Picatinny is also working on a lightweight remote station for lighter weapons such as the M249, M240, and the XM307/XM312. This is currently known as the "CROWS-Lightning."

Speaking of things that go 'BOOM!', a winner in the XM96 Lightweight Fragmentation Grenade program was supposed to be selected and fielded by this point. The latter was derided as a 'girl grenade', and samples never met the desired levels of effectiveness. SOCOM evidently purchased the Arges HG86, which should fit a similiar role in SF units as the old NWM V40 Mini-grenades. Oddly, after balking at concept, the "Big Army" considered issue of the same for MOUT/UO use under a "Solider Enhancement Program". The M84 stun grenade is also in the field for peacekeeping roles and other other 'pizza delivery' missions. The M203 in all of its variants is to be replaced by HK's XM320 (AG-C variant).

The HK MP5 family of submachineguns will be almost completely absent from SF use, except for extremely rare occasions. Those that do remain will have retracting stocks, 0-1-F trigger groups, and accessory rails. The Benelli XM1014 shotgun will also remain fairly scarce in the field. After an early flirtation with the C-More LSS, the XM26 MASS appears to be up for competition. The M4 Carbine family still be prominant, due to its range and versitility, particularly with the SOPMOD Block improvements.

As the SOPMOD kit transitions to 'Block 2', new variants were to be created by swapping upper receiver assemblies. Ideally, NSWC Crane wanted to buy these upper receivers complete from an outside vendor, but most were built in house. The first was a 'platform modification' (PMOD) carbine upper of similiar length and weight to the existing M4/M4A1 upper with a RAS forearm. The primary difference would be the use of a new accessory rail forearm which allows the barrel to free-float. The latter will provide at minimum a more consistant zero as accessories are attached, and hopefully, superior accuracy. Also worthy of note is KAC's development of free-float forearms in other lengths spanning the difference between the standard carbine and the standard rifle forearms. Given the SEAL's desire for more accessory rail space, the PMOD will probably use a 'medium' length forearm, giving only enough exposed barrel for a front sight mount, flash suppressor, and leeway for the installation of the optional sound suppressor. The barrel step on current M4s for M203 is not required given the attachment of the replacement EGLM directly to the freefloating forearm. Inital RIS II contracts were let to ARMS, Daniel Defense, and KAC. It has yet to be seen which will finally be used. (Daniel Defense was finally selected, but given the new model's long MRE configuration, the KAC RIS will have to be retained for the Mk 18 Mod 0.)

The second upper was known as the SPR (Special Purpose Receiver). The SPR is a a 18" barreled variant designed for use by designated marksmen or sniper team spotters. SPR prototypes assembled by USN armorers were sent to operators engaged in Operation Enduring Freedom. Feedback led to the current Mk 12 Mod 0 (Army SF) and Mk 12 Mod 1 (Other SF and Rangers). The rifles, built from surplused M16A1 lowers, are equipped with a free-float handguards (PRI or KAC), match triggers, a bipod, and Leupold optics. Originally, there was a choice between the 2.5-8x and the 3.5-10x; they have now settled on a 3-9x. An OPS Inc. muzzle brake is fitted, which serves double-duty as a thread protector for the two point mounting system of the OPS Inc. sound suppressor. The OPS Inc. sound uppressor is an additional option. (FWIW, OPS Inc. muzzle brakes and suppressors can also be found on some of the USMC's M40A3 and M14-DMR.) However, the Army has its own ideas about issuing a few SPRs within regular Army platoons as a squad designated marksman's rifle, and the regular Army version differ from the SF variant. After playing with rebuilt surplus M14, the Army AMU has produced M16A4 and M4 SDM variants for issue to the 3rd Infantry Division and the 82nd Airborne respectively. (The 82nd Airborne eventually decided against the M4 SDM and took the M14 instead.) The USMC has followed the same concept as the SAM-R: Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle, which is already seeing service in Iraq. The existing SPR produced by NSWC-Crane will eventually be replaced by a planned sniper variant of the SCAR-L.

The final upper was the CQBR (Close Quarters Battle Receiver). This was intended to be similiar in size to the Colt Commando, but still allow for the use of all current and planned SOPMOD accessories. This was eventually type-classified as the Mk 18 Mod 0. The existing CQBR produced by Colt will be replaced by a planned compact variant of the FN SCAR-L.

There was also hope for a SPR-V upper, which would accept common OPFOR ammo such as the 7.62x39mm or the 5.45x39mm. However, this spun-off into a complete weapon, the KAC SR47, which is not entirely interchangeable with standard M4 receivers, and the RobArms RAV02. (LMT reportedly did not finish their submission.) The SR47 was a M4-pattern carbine which accepts AK47/AKM/RPK mags and ammo. Yet, the SR47 still accepted SOPMOD accessories. There was speculation from KAC that they would next attempt a SR74, for use in areas where the 5.45x39mm is more prevalent. The RAV02 was more reliable than the SR47 given third-world ammo quality; however, the SPR-V are effectively dead given the adoption of the FN SCAR. However, contrary to initial reports, the caliber conversions are part of the 7.62x51mm SCAR-H requirement, not the smaller 5.56x45mm SCAR-L.

Other Block 2 upgrades included:

FMBS (Family of Muzzle Brakes/Suppressors)
ECOS (Enhanced Combat Optical Sight - ideally combines features from the 4x ACOG and Reflex)
CNVD (Clip-On Night Vision Device)
EGLM (Enhanced Grenade Launcher Module)
GLDNSM (Grenade Launcher Day/Night Sight Mount)
EIFM (Enhanced Indirect Fire Munitions - 40x46mm)

Improved barrels, bolts, extractors, magazines, and other parts are also being sought. Every part other than the stripped lower receiver is up for grabs. The latter is fairly safe for reasons of existing supply on hand; however, they did not rule out that a significant improvement to the lower receiver would be take under advisement. KAC and Lewis Machine Tool (ArmaLite) have each submitted redesigned bolts and bolt carriers. Leitner-Wise also has a new bolt in the works. The High Reliability Magazine (HRM) centers on two designs: an aluminum magazine supplied by Okay and a steel magazine from HK. The later was designed for the L85A2 upgrade. With the adoption of FN's SCAR, we may see additional use of their steel magazine for based on that of the FNC.

There was talk of adopting rate-reducing buffer/recoil springs to knock the cyclic rate down. Some wanted to go as low as possible, while others wanted to retain the current cyclic rate. The differing opinions split the difference around 650rpm. Certainly, this carried over to the cyclic rate of the FN SCAR.

KAC won out over OPS, Inc for the FMBS, which appears to be limited to the 5.56mm carbine suppressor. NSWC-Crane and SOCOM are still looking for a source for suppressors to use with the Mk 46 and Mk 48.

Early speculation was that the ECOS would end up being something like the Leupold Mark 4 CQ/T 1-3x14mm. It combines the features of a red-dot sight with a variable-power scope, eliminating the need for the Trijicon Reflex, ACOG 4x, and Aimpoint M68 CCO. Adoption of the Leupold Mark 4 CQ/T once appeared possible Army-wide as a "Soldier Enhancement Program"; however, momentum has since changed to the ACOG 4x. There are now feelers out for improved versions of the CCO and a Magnifying Combat Optic, perhaps even integrated versions of the XM8's optic packages. Over at SOCOM, Aimpoint won the ECOS-N contract to replace the Trijicon Reflex, and is now set to be supplanted by the EOTech ECOS-CQB. The ACOG 4x and a variable zoom (1-4x) ELCAN are battling it out for final selection as the ECOS-C.

KAC is now offering a device which looks like it was made to meet the CNVD requirement, and would possess an additional benefit of not requiring removal during daylight (except to save weight). In fact, it now appears that KAC has indeed won this contract.

KAC has also offered an interim GLDNSM which appears to consist of mounting a sub-compact reflex sight such as the Firepoint or Doctor Optik to a existing grenade sight. However, Wilcox Industries Corporation was awarded the GLDNSM contract for their AN/PSQ-18.

The EGLM was originally a competition between the HK AG-C (AG36) and a model from the UK vendor Istec. In particular, NSWC Crane wanted a double-action (trigger-cocking) design with a side-swinging breech to allow for use of longer 40x46mm munitions. In addition, the EGLM will not be mounted directly to the barrel like the M203, and thus, will not cause a shift in zero when mounted or removed. Early odds were on the AG-C given its adoption by the British SAS for their Diemaco C8A1 SFW. However, SOCOM threw a wrench in the works when new EGLM entries were encouraged for SCAR submissions. As a result, FN won the EGLM contract.

The 40mm EIFM appear to be headed for a medium velocity/heavy grenade solution to increase range and effectiveness. The larger grenade holds the potential of upgrades to programmable airbursting capabilities. The EGLM was also meant to allow for such upgrades in the future.

SOPMOD Block 3 and 4 upgrades were not specified, but the product was to be known as the Enhanced Carbine (EC). SOPMOD Blk 3 and 4 now appear to be limited to optics and other bolt-on enhancements suitable for the SCAR and other SOF weapons.

[thatguy96]

Wow, thanks Q. A quick question though. Is the M249E3/4 similar or identical to the SEAL mod kit for the FN Minimi SPW? The Mk 11 Mod. 0 kit (or whatever they call it, I can't remember)?

[Q_ARMM]

Originally posted by thatguy96
Wow, thanks Q. A quick question though. Is the M249E3/4 similar or identical to the SEAL mod kit for the FN Minimi SPW? The Mk 11 Mod. 0 kit (or whatever they call it, I can't remember)?

Minimi: 15.6 lbs, 40.94" OAL, 18.31" Barrel
M249: 16.5 lbs, 40.94" OAL, 20.59" Barrel
M249E3: N/A, N/A, 15" Barrel
M249E4 SPW: 12.6 lbs, 35.75" OAL, 16" Barrel
Mk 46 Mod 0: 12.6 lbs, 35.75" OAL, 16" Barrel
Para Minimi: 15.7 lbs, 35.16" OAL, 13.66" Barrel

The M249E3 is roughly a Para Minimi with a slightly longer barrel. It retains more commonality between the standard M249 than do the lightweight M249E4 and Mk 46 Mod 0.

While they have the same numerical specs, the difference between the M249E4 SPW and the Mk 46 Mod 0 is in the details. Primarily, the tradeoff is between the weight of the barrel and accessorys versus the buttstock. Because the M5 retractable buttstock is so heavy, the SPW uses a much thinner barrel and bipod. It also lacks an accessory rail over the barrel. Due to the lighter polymer buttstock, the Mk46 can still use the standard M249 bipod, have more accessory rail area, and use a thicker barrel. The polymer buttstock also allows for the use of the hydraulic buffer.

(As an aside, I just noticed that the Army is shopping around for a retractable buttstock for the M249 which will allow the use of the hydraulic buffer. From the specs, it appears that they are looking for a conversion based around the M4 Carbine buttstock...kind of like Gene Stoner's final LMG design produced by KAC.)

BTW: The Mk 11 Mod 0 is a variant of the KAC SR25 Lightweight Match rifle.

[Q_ARMM]

NSWC-Crane recently admended the FMBS requirements. Since the SPR and its suppressor are now a separate project from the SOPMOD program, the FMBS requirement now consists of the following four categories:

1) Standard M4A1 Carbine (22,000 max. order)
2) CQBR (10,000 max. order)
3) 5.56x45mm LMG (5,000 max. order)
4) 7.62x51mm LMG (4,000 max. order)

The current M4QD Suppressor exhibits the following characteristics: Length: 6.6 inches; Weight: 24 ounces; Diameter: 1.5 inches; Sound reduction: 28dB; Zero shift: up to 2.5 MOA, w/minor or no loss in instrumental accuracy; Endurance to failure: with harsh schedules 10Krds, 500rds belt fed; No Maintenance Required by the operator for the life of the suppressor.

The proposed M4A1-MBS is expected to possess the following characteristics: Length: 6.6 inches; Weight: 24 ounces; Diameter: 1.5 inches; Sound reduction: 30dB (min); Endurance: 15,000rds (min); No Maintenance Required by the operator for the life of the suppressor.

The proposed CQBR-MBS is expected to possess the following characteristics: Length: 5 inches (max); Weight: 24 ounces (max); Diameter: 1.85 inches (max); Sound reduction: 25dB (min); Endurance: 15,000rds (min); No Maintenance Required by the operator for the life of the suppressor.

The proposed 5.56mm LMG-MBS is expected to possess the following characteristics: Length: 10 inches (max); Weight: 32 ounces (max); Diameter: 2 inches (max); Sound reduction: 25dB (min); Endurance: 20,000rds (min); No Maintenance Required by the operator for the life of the suppressor.

The proposed 7.62mm LMG-MBS is expected to possess the following characteristics: Length: 10 inches (max); Weight: 32 ounces (max); Diameter: 2 inches (max); Sound reduction: 25dB (min); Endurance: 20,000rds (min); No Maintenance Required by the operator for the life of the suppressor.

[quote]The Muzzle Brake/ Suppressor shall reduce sound pressure levels by 25 decibels and decrease flash signature by 75% when mounted on the prescribed weapon system. It shall not change point of impact more than 1.25 minutes (thresholds are 10% less than objectives). The quick attach/detach type Suppressors will be suitable for precision, semi-automatic, and automatic firing. The FMBS shall be constructed of corrosion resistant materials that are abrasion, impact and battlefield chemical resistant. All external and visible surfaces shall be coated with a dull, non-reflective coating. The FMBSs shall be capable of being submerged in salt and fresh water to a depth of 66 feet for a minimum of 2 hours, surfaced, drained without disassembly and reliably function in 1-minute (T), immediately (O). The Suppressors shall not utilize replaceable "wipes" that contact the projectile and require replacement during the full capability service life of the Suppressor.

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT

[thatguy96]

Yeah, I realized about the SR-25M thing, but I knew it was another Mk Mod. style designations. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Q_ARMM]

Barrett XM109 Payload Rifle (Early Prototype)


XM29 (Former OICW)


XM96 Lightweight Fragmentation Grenade Candidates

[thatguy96]

Another quick question, where and by whom, are the Mk/Mod designations for weapon systems used? Is it only with the Navy, since that's where I keep seeing them. Except for the Mk 19...I don't know the US weapons designation system seems to confuse me every so often (because sometimes it looks to me like they can't to stick to a definite pattern all the times).

More questions, does the Springfield XM25/M25 or the Robinson Arms M96 series (including the recently created version in 7.62x39mm) have any future in this "reality."

[thatguy96]

Assault Rilfes

KAC SR-47
Update: This project is DEAD, but lessons learned from it are being included in the SCAR-L


M4A1 Carbine w/ Heckler and Koch AG-C 40mm GL (Q's probable for the EGLM competition)
More as I stumble across them...
Update: The HK AG-C has been designated XM320


A look at the possible config of the M4A2 (Above: M4A1 w/ KAC RAS II, Below: M4A1 w/ KAC FF RAS and RAS extension)

Update: With the possibility that the SCAR-L will NOT be an AR-15/M16 based weapon, and the possibility that the M4A2 will be replaced WITH the SCAR-L, these RAS systems my be irrelevant.

[thatguy96]

Service Pistols

M11 Pistol (The M11 is simply a Sig-Sauer P226; the M13 is a Sig-Sauer P228)


Hk Mk 23 Mod 0 OHWS

Shotguns

Hk/Benelli XM1014


C-More Systems LSS (Lightweight Shotgun System) attached to an M4A1 type carbine (above) and in a stand-alone config (below)

[thatguy96]

LMG/SAW's





US Ordnance/SACO M60E4/Mk. 43 Mod 0 (Probably the last model of the M60 to leave service)

Sniper Rifles/DSR's

KAC SR-25M Mk 11 Mod 0


USMC M40A3


Crane SPR (possible, unconfirmed)
Update; Confirmed, this picture is of the Crane Mk 12 Mod 0


Remington M24


Barrett M82A1 (so-called Barret M82A1A's, A3's, and A1M's are externally very similar...in fact Q, what is the difference?)
Update: This weapon system has been redesignated M107, specifically the M82A1M.


USMC DMR (For all intensive purposes an accurized M14E2/A1)


Troy Industries M14 SOPMOD

[Q_ARMM]

Originally posted by thatguy96
Another quick question, where and by whom, are the Mk/Mod designations for weapon systems used? Is it only with the Navy, since that's where I keep seeing them. Except for the Mk 19...I don't know the US weapons designation system seems to confuse me every so often (because sometimes it looks to me like they can't to stick to a definite pattern all the times).

The Mk (Mark) system is used if the Navy is the sole user, or if multi-service, the Navy was responsible for its development. To be honest, their numbering system is confusing for me as well. An incomplete guide for small arms and autocannon follows:

Mk 2 Mod 2 (M1 Garand converted to 7.62x51mm)
Mk 4 Mod 0 (M16A1 with dedicated HEL M4A suppressor)

Mk 11 Mod 0 (20x110mm aircraft cannon)
Mk 11 Mod 0 (KAC SR25-variant)

Mk 12 Mod 0 (20x110mm aircraft cannon)
Mk 16 Mod 5 (20x110mm deck-mounted cannon)
Mk 19 Mod 3 (40mm AGL)
Mk 21 Mod 0 (M1919A4 converted to 7.62x51mm)
Mk 22 Mod 0 (S&W 'Hush Puppy' pistol)

Mk 23 Mod 0 (Stoner 63 LMG)
Mk 23 Mod 0 (HK's SOCOM OHWS)

Mk 24 Mod 0 (SIG-Sauer P226)
Mk 38 Mod 0 (25mm Bushmaster)
Mk 43 Mod 0 (M60 conversion)
Mk 44 Mod 0 (30mm Bushmaster II)
Mk 45 Mod 0 (25mm Bushmaster- High ROF variant)
Mk 46 Mod 0 (FN SPW)
Mk 47 Mod 0 (40mm Stryker AGL)
Mk 48 Mod 0 (7.62x51mm lightweight LMG project)

Originally posted by thatguy96
More questions, does the Springfield XM25/M25 or the Robinson Arms M96 series (including the recently created version in 7.62x39mm) have any future in this "reality."

Honestly, I doubt it. The M14 conversions in use are not new production, but instead surplus from the '60s. Reportedly, the USMC bought the surplus rifles used for building their M14-DMR for $1 a piece from the General Accounting Agency...and then sunk tons of money into customizing them. In many ways, it is a waste of effort since the M14 is so hard on the bedding surfaces. Moreover, most of the spares for the system have long ago been sold as surplus or shipped to client states as FMS. At least something like the Mk 11 Mod 0 has a fair amount of part commonality with the standard M16 and M4.

The most likely place to find a M14-DMR in the GR timeline will be in the hands of the Lithuanian sniper specialist. I caught a blurb on the Jane's website about them acquiring some sort of M14-based sniper rifle. For that matter, I suspect that the Georgian EmmaGee specialist might have one of our surplus M60s. You see, the Baltic states are already preparing for NATO commonality, and Georgia wishes to be admitted as well. It is my understanding that the Lithuanians are now issuing M16A2 rifles, the Rheinmetall MG3, the Carl Gustaf RCL, and even the new Javelin ATGM.

BTW: I don't believe that our non-SF units will be using the FF-RAS on their M16A4 or M4A2. The Army has been ordering a lot of M4 and M5 forearms from KAC. The FF-RAS will probably be purchased SF units only for near future.

[Q_ARMM]

The following is from a May 2002 Power-Point presentation by: COL Tom Spellissy, Program Executive Office - Special Programs, USSOCOM



What is a Mk 48 MOD 0 LMG?

A

[avairlines]

Wow, I thought I knew a shitload about guns, but this stuff is making my head spin...

[BrownFoot]

Good stuff as usual Q, et. al. Going to take awhile to digest. Mmm... crunchy.

[Q_ARMM]

Originally posted by BrownFoot
Good stuff as usual Q, et. al. Going to take awhile to digest. Mmm... crunchy.

BTW: I have roughed out .gun, .prj, and .kit files for GR based on this info, along with a dedicated GR 'Spreadsheet of Doom'. I haven't played with accuracy and time constant values, but I have redone the weights, ROF, and velocities.

[Q_ARMM]

The U.S. Army Tank-Automotive and Armaments Command, Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (TACOM-ARDEC), Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 is interested in acquiring information on commercially available or non- developmental item (NDI) suppressors that will reduce the baseline muzzle flash, blast and sound signatures of the Army's XM107 Caliber .50 rifle system (also commercially available as the Barrett M82A1-M).

The XM107 is a rapid-fire; man portable, shoulder-fired, recoil operated semi-automatic system utilizing military standard .50 caliber ammunition. The primary components of the system consist of a rifle, day optical sighting system and hard carrying case(s). It is requested, but not required, that interested companies submit one (1) sample system as part of their information submission. These information samples will be used as an indication that companies have a system readily available. Information samples will be returned in, 'as tested' condition.

Potential contractors must be able to produce a minimum of 60 systems per month, with a production surge capability to 90 systems per month. The suppressor must be able to reduce the baseline signatures of the XM107 without adversely affecting or degrading weapon performance/accuracy, functionality, recoil, safety and reliability. It must also be modular enough to be quickly and easily installed and removed by the operator without requiring the use of special tools not readily available to the operator.

[thatguy96]

Since when did they stop refering to it as the M82? So the M82A1M/A1A is now going to be redesignated XM107/M107? What's up with that?

[avairlines]

Originally posted by thatguy96
Since when did they stop refering to it as the M82? So the M82A1M/A1A is now going to be redesignated XM107/M107? What's up with that?

no clue.

[Q_ARMM]

Originally posted by thatguy96
Since when did they stop refering to it as the M82? So the M82A1M/A1A is now going to be redesignated XM107/M107? What's up with that?

The XM107 .50 BMG sniper rifle trials was originally fought out between bolt-action rifles such as the Barrett M95M and the Windrunner. The Barrett M95M won, and a contract award was announced. However, this decision was suddenly reversed, with the Army deciding that they -really- wanted a semi-auto rifle instead of the original goal of a bolt-action. The end result was the M82A1M, a variant of the USMC's product improved M82A3. (The USMC has already traded in many, if not all, of their M82A1A.)

I suspect that the name change had more to do with budget requests than anything else. ("You asked for money to purchase the XM107, not the M82A1M.")

[Q_ARMM]

Originally posted by thatguy96

Barrett M82A1 (so-called Barret M82A1A's, A3's, and A1M's are externally very similar...in fact Q, what is the difference?)

Most of the visual differences comprises the length and position of the optic rail. The issued M82A1 (US Army) and M82A1A (USMC) both have short optic rails; however, the M82A1A's rail is modified to accomodate the USMC's then-prefered Unertl scope. The M82A1M (XM107) and M82A3 are equipped with long optic rails, along with various internal improvements. The major visual difference between the M82A1M and M82A3 is the rear monopod on the A1M.

Of course, Barrett complicates matters since they have typically incorporated these improvements into new production runs without changing the designation.

[DeerHunterUK]

I dread to think what the British Government has in mind for a replacement of the ubergun aka the SA80 for our Army.Hopefully a weapon that's more reliable,less prone to jamming and breakage.....a sharp stick perhaps or maybe harsh language.

[thatguy96]

There have been some good things said about the SA80A2's, but I don't know how truthful anything said on either side of that mess is. Its gotten to the point where I can't tell if somebody had it out for the SA80, whether it sucked to begin with, or a little of both.

[DeerHunterUK]

I really have issues with the SA80 ever since I 1st used it's single shot brother the L98a1 (esentially a SA80 minus the gas parts) back in the 80's.1st off I'm left handed,you can't shoot the rifle left handed.The French Army issues it's soldiers a field conversion kit for their Fa-Mas rifles so they can choose which hand they fire with.The US Army made sure they fitted deflectors to M16 so cases wouldnt end up in the left handed soldier's mouth.The Enfield company offered the British Army to convert 10% of the SA80's made so that left handed soldiers could use the weapon effectively....the British Army rejected the offer.
Ok that's not a major issue,but what is is it's appalling jam rate.I mean this rifle is bad,whenever I fired it I could guarantee that it'd jam at some point...even when using just 1 magazine.Recently in Afghanistan there have been instances where SA80 A2's have jammed,1 report stated that in 1 particular firefight all of the Royal Marines' SA80 A2s jammed whereas the company's M16s worked flawessly.This incident and others were blamed on the soldiers and their lack of rifle maintenance.We're talking about some of the best soldiers anywhere on the planet and that's the best excuse the Ministry of Defence can come up with.
BBC report
Now news reports may not be entirely accurate but 1 thing is undeniable,a mark of how good a rifle truly is must surely be how many other countries import the rifle.The Fa-Mas,H&K's G-36 and the M-16 have been exported to many countries worldwide and why? Because these are good rifles,how many countries have chosen the SA80? Exactly,Case closed.
My apologies for the rant and those few SA80 fans out there,i'm just speaking my mind and I fear for my country's soldiers using this inferior weapon.

[Lincoln Imp]

Some of the UK ARU 's have been using the G-36k for a while now, but personally, aslong as the *small* yet still quite fatal flaws in the SA80 varients can be sorted, there is no need to change it.

Perhaps the UK government is only sticking with the rifle for the patriotism and for the fact it keeps UK residents in work. It would be good to see a new rifle in our arsenal providing it comes at the right price i.e. if the cost of ironing out all the flaws in the SA80A2 would be cheaper, stick with that.

The list of the future US arsenal looks mighty impressive especially the land warior based systems. Out of interest, has anyone got any info on that "air burst" weapon? Also, does the KAC SR-47 use the same mechanism design as the AK-47 inside just with US made parts or has it got its own style internals?

[thatguy96]

Q'll probably come along a make give you a much more detailed description of this, but the XM29 (fomerly the Objective Individual Combat Weapon or OICW) is comprised of two weapons parts:

1) A 5.56x45mm rifle component with a 10" barrel (possibly longer on final versions), based on the Hk G36. This weapon can be fired by itself or as part of the system and features selective fire options: safe-semi-burst-full. It will be able to feed from any STANAG magazine, making supplied of already produced M16 mags viable for this weapon.

2) A 20mm weapon, newly designed, specifically for the OICW program. This weapon fires ammunition which is almost "smart" and which can be programmed, in the chamber no less, to either explode after it has traveled one of two (I think) pre-set distances (airburst ability) or on contact.

This weapon also comes with a high tech multi-role optic system, which is now being modified for use on other weapons systems as the XM116 SAFCS or Small Arms Fire Control System. I have no information on the exact capabilities of this equipment.

[Lincoln Imp]

Hey, cheers for that, i was trying to think of what the airburst could be, i was thinking of mortars, but hey, i guess thats what it *kinda* is, a smart grenade launcher, cool. It will give your infantry quite an advantage being able to fire indirectly.

I allready knew most of the rest about it, but thanks for the info, makes a change to find a friendly msg board

Ill wait for the all knowing Q for answers about the sr-47.

[edit] Never mind, i found the info i was after, just a slightly re-worked m4 internals. Seems like it could be quite nifty to have for all the Afgan type locations you are currently fighting in.

Speaking about that, Madbomber, did you ever get your plans off the ground to make an '47/74 with US machines parts?

[avairlines]

Originally posted by DeerHunterUK
Recently in Afghanistan there have been instances where SA80 A2's have jammed,1 report stated that in 1 particular firefight all of the Royal Marines' SA80 A2s jammed whereas the company's M16s worked flawessly.This incident and others were blamed on the soldiers and their lack of rifle maintenance.We're talking about some of the best soldiers anywhere on the planet and that's the best excuse the Ministry of Defence can come up with.

Do you really ever expect the government to take the blame itself? the SA80 was designed by committee, not by the soldiers who would use it.

[avairlines]

Originally posted by Q_ARMM
The HK MP5 family of submachineguns will be almost completely absent from SF use, except for extremely rare occasions. Those that do remain will have retracting stocks, 0-1-F trigger groups, and accessory rails. The Benelli XM1014 shotgun will also remain fairly scarce in the field. The M4 family will be most prominant, due to its range and versitility, particularly with the future SOPMOD Block improvements.

Is there going to be any SMG in the inventory?

[Malkavian^C^]

http://www.airsoftextreme.com/images...od%200%20B.jpg

I notice that is hosted at airsoftextreme.....is that a replica or the real deal then?

[avairlines]

I think it's interesting how what with all the changes in wepaonry, two weapons remain in service, with one looking to reach its hundreth year of service, albeit in limited use and in modified form.

These are, of course, the Browning M2 and the Colt M1911... Notice who was involved in the design of both.