The Marine Corps is Experimenting With a New Service Rifle

greentips

Administrator
Moderating Team
Rating - 100%
261   0   0
Location
Pluton
The biggest white elephant in the USMC rifle squad is that the HK 416 IAR is essentially an off the shelf rifle. When the IAR itself can put down more substantive fire power and can be as accurate, if not more accurate, than the M4 / M16A2, with no loss in mobility, it begs the question why isn't every rifleman equipped with the same weapon. The USMC has already taken 1 step to solve the glaring paradox by replacing all the A2 with M4 so that the riflemen are carrying a "lighter and shorter weapon" than the IAR. But when the IAR itself is only just a bit heavier and could do more(and everyone wants to be the guy who carries the IAR), it raises questions whether placing M4 in the fighting companies is just a step to avoid picking a new service rifle.

It is not the weapon itself that determines the role, it is how the weapon is used and deployed that matters. These experiments are really just "eye wash" when they talk about "tactics", etc. The USMC is setting itself up to buying HK IAR to replace M4, by concluding that they need to change the TOE to have more "automatic riflemen" at the end of the experiment. They will then legitimately buy HK416 without running a competition for a new rifle, which everyone knows will take forever.




ww.military.com/daily-news/2016/11/18/marine-corps-experimenting-new-service-rifle.html

The Marine Corps is Experimenting With a New Service Rifle

Military.com | Nov 18, 2016 | by Hope Hodge Seck

On the heels of a widely praised 2015 decision to issue the more maneuverable M4 carbine in lieu of the M16A4 to Marines in infantry battalions, the Marine Corps may be on the cusp of another major weapons decision.

The Marine Corps' experimental battalion, the California-based 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines, has been conducting pre-deployment exercises with the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle to evaluate it as the new service rifle for infantry battalions, the commander of 1st Marine Division, Maj. Gen. Daniel O'Donohue told Military.com Thursday.

The battalion is set to deploy aboard the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit this spring. As part of its workup and deployment, it has been charged with testing and evaluating a host of technologies and concepts ranging from teaming operations with unmanned systems and robotics to experiments with differently sized squads.

"When they take the IAR and they're training out there with all the ranges we do with the M4, they're going to look at the tactics of it. They'll look at the firepower, and they'll do every bit of training, and then they'll deploy with that weapon, and we'll take the feedback to the Marine Corps to judge," O'Donohue said.

Marines in 3/5 used the IAR as their service rifle during the 28-day Integrated Training Exercise held this month at Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center 29 Palms, California. The exercise, also known as ITX, is the largest pre-deployment workup for deploying battalions, and typically one of the last exercises they'll complete. O'Donohue said the ubiquity of ITX would give evaluators ample data as they contrasted results with the different weapons.

"All you have to do is compare this battalion to the other battalions going through ITX," he said.

The M4 carbine and the M27 IAR handle very similarly as they share a number of features. However, the M27 has a slightly longer effective range -- 550 meters compared to the M4's 500 -- and elements that allow for more accurate targeting. It has a free-floating barrel, which keeps the barrel out of contact with the stock and minimizes the effect of vibration on bullet trajectory. It also has a proprietary gas piston system that makes the weapon more reliable and reduces wear and tear.

And the the IAR can fire in fully automatic mode, while the standard M4 has single shot, semi-automatic and three-round burst options.

Currently, each Marine Corps infantry fire team is equipped with a single IAR, carried by the team's automatic rifleman.

"I think the fundamental is the accuracy of the weapon, the idea that you're going to use it for suppressive fires. And at first contact you have the overwhelming superiority of fire from which all the tactics evolve," O'Donohue said. "So it starts with the fire team and the squad, if you give them a better weapon with better fire superiority, you'll just put that vicious harmony of violence on the enemy."

But officials do see some potential drawbacks to equipping every infantry Marine with the weapon.

"One of the things we're looking at is the rate of fire," O'Donohue said. "You can burn off too much ammo, potentially, with the IAR. We have a selector, a regulator [showing] how many rounds the Marines shoot. So that's one area we're examining with experimentation."

Another variable is cost.

Chief Warrant Officer 5 Christian Wade, the gunner, or infantry weapons officer, for 2nd Marine Division, told Military.com the M27 costs about $3,000 apiece, without the sight. Because the Marine Corps is still grappling with budget cutbacks, he said he was skeptical that the service could find enough in the budget to equip all battalions with the weapons. He said a smaller rollout might be more feasible.

"To give everyone in a Marine rifle squad [the IAR], that might be worth it," he said.

O'Donohue said feedback would be collected on an ongoing basis from the Marines in 3/5 as they continued workup exercises and deployed next year. Decisions on whether to field a new service weapon or reorganize the rifle squad would be made by the commandant, Gen. Robert Neller, when he felt he had collected enough information, O'Donohue said.

If the Marine Corps can sort out the logistics of fielding, Wade said he would welcome the change.

"It is the best infantry rifle in the world, hands down," Wade said of the IAR. "Better than anything Russia has, it's better than anything we have, it's better than anything China has. It's world-class."
 
Last edited:
So they wasted years and millions and millions of dollars testing new rifles as a replacement for the M4, multiple, multiple times, and have come to the conclusion every single time that new rifles in 5.56x45mm don't really have a lot of benefits over the standard fleet of modernized M4s, which is why cased telescoped ammo has gone forward many steps.

So they now want to replace their AR with... an AR that costs 5x as much?

The fact that people don't constantly lose jobs over this very expensive and wasteful Mickey Mouse bull**** surprises me.
 
Sounds like a big waist of money for little to no gain...


That's why they are running these experiments to give the command a reason to change TOE. If they can demonstrate that every riflemen in a rifle squad can interchange among different roles with just 1 weapon, that will demonstrate an increase in flexibility, versatility and therefore lethality of the rifle squad. Basically the squad commander can assign anyone in the rifle squad as the IAR as situation dictates, without limitation of the weapon that is on hand by the particular rifleman. So no more the squad commander has to more the IAR guy around because he is the only IAR guy. Any fire team can be the IAR if everyone has a weapon that is capable of being the IAR.

It does makes sense. It is an obvious conclusion since day 1 the IAR was adopted when the IAR is shorter, more accurate and as manoeuvrable as the rifle. Why will a riflemen carry a longer bang stick that is doing less?
 
Last edited:
If we have relegated ourselves to the current trend of being a third world police department, and the IAR keeps more of our guys alive, then upgrade to this rifle. If what we are preparing for is future warfare, then the IAR is as useless as the M4 on the modern battlefield. Money is better spent on advancing satellite/drone/robot/stealth/space/cyber etc etc
 
Gentle men its just a rifle, phasing HK416's in is no big deal, For big armies the 416 would be a better system for ease of maintenance alone. But it doesn't really matter much for modern militaries. I own HK416's and they are built ground up to a very formative rifle that addressees many issues.

1. Suppressors
2 High volume FA fire
3. CQB short barrels
4. High round counts.

Quality of HK barrels are awesome.

All this being said for IAR role they are great, but really having both DI Colt/FN and HK for IAR and some cqb or water operations is fine. Supply chain is no big deal either.
 
Why not just replicate the 15.7 inch heavy barrel of the C8 and a full auto selector?
Easier yet, just buy these C8s?

Because HK 416 piston system is superior in these categories, it can handle more abuse. Remember when Hk made the 416, C7/8's were used as a comparison before they even started developing the 416 in prototypes. Hk416 was built in direct competition with the best Di could offer at the time. After the initial HK416 success all the other companies had to play catch up like Colt Canada, KAC, Colt USA, LMT etc etc. Companies like DD and BCM were probably just thought at the time by there owners.
 
The HK 416 was marketed as the wonder gun and turned out to be a mediocre rifle at best. The HK system is over gassed so it can run a suppressor, which slams the BCG back into the receiver and causes accelerated wear on the inside of the receiver. My cousin in Norway is a weapons tech in the Army and they are having to constantly replace upper receivers that wear out prematurely. A certain PD on the west coast bought HK 416 and are having the same problem. SOCOM has taken the rifle off line too.
 
The HK 416 was marketed as the wonder gun and turned out to be a mediocre rifle at best. The HK system is over gassed so it can run a suppressor, which slams the BCG back into the receiver and causes accelerated wear on the inside of the receiver. My cousin in Norway is a weapons tech in the Army and they are having to constantly replace upper receivers that wear out prematurely. A certain PD on the west coast bought HK 416 and are having the same problem. SOCOM has taken the rifle off line too.

Huh? Adding a suppressor increases the pressure on the gas system. You wouldn't need to overgas the base platform to accommodate a suppressor, just the opposite.
 
The HK 416 was marketed as the wonder gun and turned out to be a mediocre rifle at best. The HK system is over gassed so it can run a suppressor, which slams the BCG back into the receiver and causes accelerated wear on the inside of the receiver. My cousin in Norway is a weapons tech in the Army and they are having to constantly replace upper receivers that wear out prematurely. A certain PD on the west coast bought HK 416 and are having the same problem. SOCOM has taken the rifle off line too.

Every contact I have in Norway and other units around the world disagrees with this post. You are actually fueling the end of DI ARs.
Your Bias shows no limits. You are just plain wrong on all accounts. I fail too see how so many units like Delta would use a mediocre system. Seriously statements like this are ridiculously obsurd. Its like Colt fan boys loose their minds when HK 416 comes up.

I find there are alterior motives involved.
 
Every contact I have in Norway and other units around the world disagrees with this post. You are actually fueling the end of DI ARs.
Your Bias shows no limits. You are just plain wrong on all accounts. I fail too see how so many units like Delta would use a mediocre system. Seriously statements like this are ridiculously obsurd. Its like Colt fan boys loose their minds when HK 416 comes up.

I find there are alterior motives involved.

The French said that the 416 lost the competition, but H&K sold them the 100,000 gun order for nearly 1/2 price of the winning systems.

Initial price was 336,000,000, final price has been quoted as 188,000,000...
 
The French said that the 416 lost the competition, but H&K sold them the 100,000 gun order for nearly 1/2 price of the winning systems.

Initial price was 336,000,000, final price has been quoted as 188,000,000...

Yeah well that's buisness. France finally made one good decision, its about time. Gentlemen its time to face the facts, HK416/417 is a proven design with a star spangled record now. It has its place in the small arms world as a leader and massive success.

The facts and empircal evidence prove this, so get over it. All the youtube, and forum "nay sayers" are just working for other companies and that is competition in the market. Or they are just parroting what the competition repeats as belief. My opinion is based on facts, reason and evidence. Not every army needs them nor does the internets trolls but the design works extremely well, so I would suggest the usual haters too just embrace it.

If you look at CC they built many guns to compete with the HK416 because they were lossing contracts in some key areas that a DI design although was adequate was not ideal, in the end it doesn't matter there is room for other system or weapon designs. The engineering done on the HK416 by Munch and Lav to name a few adressed those needs. The newer evolutions like the A5 have adapted to market demands as well.

All firearms companies like HK,Colt variations are largely produced to meet specific standards and requirements set out by militaries of Nato. HK has done that and more.

Just go out & get one. Buy them all boys, CC,lMT, DD, COLT USA,KAC, enjoy what the wonderfull world of ARs has to offer.
 
The facts and empircal evidence prove this, so get over it. All the youtube, and forum "nay sayers" are just working for other companies and that is competition in the market. Or they are just parroting what the competition repeats as belief. My opinion is based on facts, reason and evidence. Not every army needs them nor does the internets trolls but the design works extremely well, so I would suggest the usual haters too just embrace it.

nanananananana Colt Canada is the best because SAS uses them!

article-1307528-0AF0C541000005DC-502_468x286.jpg
 
Every contact I have in Norway and other units around the world disagrees with this post. You are actually fueling the end of DI ARs.
Your Bias shows no limits. You are just plain wrong on all accounts. I fail too see how so many units like Delta would use a mediocre system. Seriously statements like this are ridiculously obsurd. Its like Colt fan boys loose their minds when HK 416 comes up.

I find there are alterior motives involved.

Says the person that is the biggest HK 416 fanboy on this board...
 
Says the person that is the biggest HK 416 fanboy on this board...

Im not a fan boy by the definition that is overly used. I base my opinions on facts empirical evidence and reason.
I own products from various companies and by that definition i would be a fanboy of CC, BCM,FN or KAC etc etc.

Hk416/417 and variants fill the roles they were intended for.

If you look at all the Supposed negatives regurgitated parroting on the internet about HK416 primarly over the last decade you would see these arguments have not held up.

1. Violent recoil impulse. Lol
2. Front heavy beyond belief. Lol
3. Cracked receivers lol
4. Hk hates you lol.
5. Heavy lol. Compared to what ?

So many other debunked stupidity pumped out by idiots over the last 10 years especially. Most of this has survived due to ignorance,and the new cycle of shooters coming into the armed civilian world that are mostly civilians repeating what they herd to justify their purchase.

Bottom line is the 416 piston system has its advantages. Suppressed is a big one.
 
The French said that the 416 lost the competition, but H&K sold them the 100,000 gun order for nearly 1/2 price of the winning systems.

Initial price was 336,000,000, final price has been quoted as 188,000,000...

Can you provide a source from a defence industry news outlet?
 
Back
Top Bottom