The USMC is trying to get another 11,000 IAR

greentips

greentips

Administrator
Moderating Team
Rating - 100%
261   0   0
Location
Pluton
soldiersystems.net/2017/02/10/usmc-begins-process-to-issue-m27-iar-to-every-rifleman-issues-rfi-to-industry/

It is fast becoming an open secret the USMC wants to have HK416 as their fighting rifle for the people that actually need to shoot.
 
Waiting for the DI fan boys to start saying USMC doesn't know what they are doing......I myself am a DI fan boy, only I recognize that if price isn't too much of a concern, the HK416 just enhances a great rifle design.

Rich
 
I was wondering where all the external piston fanboys were. Looks like a dying breed.

USMC definitely knows what they are doing. After all, their outfit bought 1911s recently.
 
It's just a way to get a better rifle by using something already in service instead of going through another trial just to get to the end and come up with the conclusion while there maybe something better it's not better enough to warrant the cost of replacing the M16A4/M4/M4A1 this was the fate of the Mk16/SCAR-L. Since the M4 PIP was killed the M27 has most of the items from the M4PIP Heavier barrel profile, free floated barrel, safe semi full auto instead of safe semi burst, 16" barrel, more ergonomic stock & grip etc.

yohann160 said:
USMC definitely knows what they are doing. After all, their outfit bought 1911s recently.
Click to expand...

Which they promptly dropped for the G19:
https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/articles/marines-opt-for-9mm-over-45-caliber-pistols-for-special-operators
 
This time they seem more lenient with their timeframe. I wonder if they will stick to quads or go for a more modern handguard setup.
 
TinkerBell said:
also as more and more of the services are requiring silencers as part of their ppe the di will limit gas blowback and a cleaner system.
Click to expand...

I'm struggling to understand the move, I'm always hearing about Marines complaining about tight budgets and being stuck with Army Hand-me-downs, so how do they justify replacing all their rifles for a slightly better but much more expensive model?

But they've also been experimenting with outfitting entire battalions with sound suppressors, so have a suppressor friendly system makes sense.

USMC definitely knows what they are doing. After all, their outfit bought 1911s recently.
Click to expand...

Which they replaced with G19s, so I would agree they seem to know what they're doing.
 
Jarvy said:
I'm struggling to understand the move, I'm always hearing about Marines complaining about tight budgets and being stuck with Army Hand-me-downs, so how do they justify replacing all their rifles for a slightly better but much more expensive model?

But they've also been experimenting with outfitting entire battalions with sound suppressors, so have a suppressor friendly system makes sense.



Which they replaced with G19s, so I would agree they seem to know what they're doing.
Click to expand...

Probably selling their m4/16? Or selling back as army reserves for a chunk of change to buy the m27 from army funds. Their new secdef is a marine. The move makes sense to me. And iirc they are trying to negotiate the costs down.
 
r34skyline said:
Probably selling their m4/16? Or selling back as army reserves for a chunk of change to buy the m27 from army funds. Their new secdef is a marine. The move makes sense to me. And iirc they are trying to negotiate the costs down.
Click to expand...

That is not how DoD purchasing works at all. Also this isn't going to happen the Marine Corps doesn't have the money currently and while the M27 is objectively better than the M4A1 it's not better enough to warrant a change seeeing as how they just changed from the M16A4 MWS to the M4A1 for infantry marines. Plus I don't think HK has the manufacturing capacity to even be able to fill this, the new French 416F and finish the 416N for Norway at the same time so even if it was financially possible it would be some time till every infantry marine was being issued an IAR.
 
Jarvy said:
I'm struggling to understand the move, I'm always hearing about Marines complaining about tight budgets and being stuck with Army Hand-me-downs, so how do they justify replacing all their rifles for a slightly better but much more expensive model?

But they've also been experimenting with outfitting entire battalions with sound suppressors, so have a suppressor friendly system makes sense.



Which they replaced with G19s, so I would agree they seem to know what they're doing.
Click to expand...

The USMC rifle squad has 12 people and 3 fire teams, and each team has 1 team leader, 1 grenadier, 1 IAR-man and 1 "rifleman".

The IAR is actually used as both IAR and DMR by the USMC, because the HK is accurate and robust enough to do both.

By adding one IAR-man and delete one "rifleman", ( read, adding one HK and dumping 1 M4/M16A4) on paper the team has much more firepower and the entire squad has much more tactical flexibility. Now every team can work either as fire base or assault. There is less need to shuffle people around if the squad or the platoon need to have a bigger firebase - because every fire team has the firepower, with no loss to maneuverability, to do both.

This translates to that things happen faster at squad and platoon level.
 
More firepower? Do they use other magazines than the 30 rounders? 60 round surefires?

Sounds like the IAR role can be filled by the new M4 with the heavier barrel for extended strings of fire. In fact, sounds like they want a C8SFW-like gun as per original SAS requirements.

None of this changes the fact that they are pushing a support role onto a closed-bolt operated weapon without quick barrel change capability. Barrels overheat before gas tubes fail.
 
Well put Greentips,

Now I need to help explain for all the DI fan boys (which includes me, love my DI's)!
FBI SWAT = Colt M4
FBI HRT = HK 416
ATF Agents = Colt M4
ATF SRT = HK 416
US SF = Colt MK18 (I know Navy Term, whatever Army wants to call it then)
US CAG = HK 416
US SEAL = Colt MK18
US DEV...SEAL....= HK 416

Anyone see a pattern? pay attention, those small highly specialized units that have a choice and do not have to accept what the larger organization is giving out
Choose HK 416.....and....they do it for very good reasons.
I love my DI AR's...right now my first choice for playing gun games...but let's get real people.
These discussions about how great DI AR's are and how deficient the HK 416 is....are often had by those who do not have operational experience
with anything other than a Colt M4 / C8 DI.....or no operational experience at all.

And while we are talking about DI guns:
Side note to all you AR DI lovers.....when shooting non-toxic, dirty frang ammo...to the tune of several hundred rounds a day training....DI AR's plug up and stop functioning very quickly, usually around noon on the first day of a course.....G36, HK 416 and Swiss Arms chew through that dirty frang ammo without any issues and never quit functioning. Before someone starts posting on here about how their AR DI is the greatest most reliable gun ever please note the above statement...and discuss your training experiences with non-toxic frang ammo. This has been experienced by me several times on courses firing 2k per week. By the way I own DI AR's and love them, they are just not as reliable with all training ammo and under all brutal conditions as the HK G36 / 416 or Swiss Arms gas systems. If I want to win an accuracy trophy I still want to shoot a DI AR though.

Rich
 
Last edited:
yohann160 said:
More firepower? Do they use other magazines than the 30 rounders? 60 round surefires?

Sounds like the IAR role can be filled by the new M4 with the heavier barrel for extended strings of fire. In fact, sounds like they want a C8SFW-like gun as per original SAS requirements.

None of this changes the fact that they are pushing a support role onto a closed-bolt operated weapon without quick barrel change capability. Barrels overheat before gas tubes fail.
Click to expand...

Aiming at the centre, consistent 2 ( sometimes 3) hits in 3rd burst at a man-size steel silhouette at 200m when I shot the IAR. This is precision automatic fire and exactly what the USMC asked for in an automatic rifle. The thing is extremely easy to shoot in burst, and compact

It has been said a few times by the people involved in the IAR program, the USMC wants an IAR because they believe volume and noise don't suppress enemies. Precision fire does. C9/Mimini puts out lots of noise and bullets, but it sucks as an IAR.

Some people may not agree with it, but that is the reason the USMC is willing to dump a LMG for an IAR. After shooting the C9/minimi at a range with a radar that actually showed where the rounds landed and practicing using the C9 as an IAR, I have not much confidence i can hit anything for sure unless it is a big vehicle unloading people or it is for covering an area. This dispersion is so big there is a good chance nothing gonna get hit at all beyond 200m even with a 3 round burst if the target is standing right there. While people will argue dispersion is good because the cone of fire is bigger and so is the beating zone, there is not enough bullet density to make it actually threatening. Couple of aimed short bursts from a HK IAR is way better than a long burst from a C9 IMHO.
 
Jarvy said:
I'm struggling to understand the move, I'm always hearing about Marines complaining about tight budgets and being stuck with Army Hand-me-downs, so how do they justify replacing all their rifles for a slightly better but much more expensive model?

But they've also been experimenting with outfitting entire battalions with sound suppressors, so have a suppressor friendly system makes sense.



Which they replaced with G19s, so I would agree they seem to know what they're doing.
Click to expand...


At one time I owned both a Glock 17 and a Glock 19. There was no comparison, I got much better accuracy with the 17.
Aside from that point, yes, the USMC knows what it's doing.
 
Not to get in the middle of this and derail........but for someone not up to speed on the HK416, what makes it better than a "regular" M4/C8? Is it simply due to the piston system?
 
The HK's are excellent guns and have their merit but at the end of the day they do not outperform a good DI AR.

Their hype originates from HK's aggressive marketing against the M4's in the early 2000's when they were pressed into the first line battle rifle role from what was originally supposed to be a PDW carbine for non-infantry types. The M4's had shortcomings in the early years of the war on terror and Colt was guilty of poor QC (bolts breaking and barrels bursting and etc.). When the M4's were fixed and Colt got its act together, the issues disappeared. The fate of the SCAR light is also indicative of this fact.

I would argue that the HK guns carry out the same job as well as a good DI gun but with more parts and weight. Therefore, the simpler/lighter DI gun is IMHO the better gun. Just look at what the SAS are using (all the SF quoted above are modeled after them so I would argue that they know what they are doing).
 
Melnibonean said:
Not to get in the middle of this and derail........but for someone not up to speed on the HK416, what makes it better than a "regular" M4/C8? Is it simply due to the piston system?
Click to expand...

The hk416 has shown certain outright performance advantage mostly when used in supressed conditions but also massively underlogistical conditions with higher bolt life along with some other small parts. Some are saying barrel life is greater some are saying its the same as the c8 pattern rifles. The system also allows multiple different barrel lengths to be installed without adverse effects to performance which with a good weapons tech on hand again streamlines logistics and cuts overall system costs.

yohann160 said:
The HK's are excellent guns and have their merit but at the end of the day they do not outperform a good DI AR.

Their hype originates from HK's aggressive marketing against the M4's in the early 2000's when they were pressed into the first line battle rifle role from what was originally supposed to be a PDW carbine for non-infantry types. The M4's had shortcomings in the early years of the war on terror and Colt was guilty of poor QC (bolts breaking and barrels bursting and etc.). When the M4's were fixed and Colt got its act together, the issues disappeared. The fate of the SCAR light is also indicative of this fact.

I would argue that the HK guns carry out the same job as well as a good DI gun but with more parts and weight. Therefore, the simpler/lighter DI gun is IMHO the better gun. Just look at what the SAS are using (all the SF quoted above are modeled after them so I would argue that they know what they are doing).
Click to expand...

The uksf iirc runs a mix of both c8/m4 and hk416 so I'm not sure where you're going with this.

The 416 has a definite advantage under suppressed conditions.

All that being said a di system does have the weight advantage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom