# Canadian modular assault rifle project, a C7 replacement?



## MilEME09 (19 Mar 2021)

For those of you who have read Advancing with a purpose. The outline for the army of 2025 and beyond, you may have noticed a project mentioned in the implementation section called the "Canadian modular assault rifle" project. My own research via the DWAN and internet hasn't turned up anything. Anyone know about this project?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Mar 2021)

I was involved in tests back in the 1960's


----------



## Haggis (19 Mar 2021)

No one needs an assault rifle.


----------



## Ostrozac (19 Mar 2021)

There are a few (minimal) details published in the Defence Capabilities Blueprint.






						Assault Rifle Project - Defence Capabilities Blueprint
					

Assault Rifle Project - Defence Capabilities Blueprint




					dgpaapp.forces.gc.ca
				




In addition, the General Manager of Colt Canada gave a presentation to RCMI about 5 years ago that discusses what sort of technologies might be in the C7/C8 replacement.


----------



## TacticalTea (24 Mar 2022)

6877-Colt-Canada| FrontLine Defence
					






					defence.frontline.online
				




Is this what this is about?


----------



## dangerboy (24 Mar 2022)

Not a lot of info but here is the actual project in the investment plan: Assault Rifle Project - Defence Capabilities Blueprint


----------



## Spencer100 (24 Mar 2022)

I was thinking after seeing it seems like every Ukrainian soldier or militia man carrying around a NLAW, AT-4, RPG, or something.  Will that change some of the thinking what an infantryman carries?  Yes there will be a place for the rifle but will that be the prime weapon?  Just thinking out loud.  Is the tank dead?  Are we going to go full Starship Trooper?   

I think there will be a ton rethinking what the modern battlefield will be going forward.  Is this the wave change like WW1 that ended the mass infantry lines to the tank?  Now from the tank back to the individual infantry?  (I know that is very generalized)


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Mar 2022)

TacticalTea said:


> 6877-Colt-Canada| FrontLine Defence
> 
> 
> 
> ...


New M-Lok fore end and a paint job. How does this make the C7/C8 any more modular than it already was?


----------



## KevinB (24 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> New M-Lok fore end and a paint job. How does this make the C7/C8 any more modular than it already was?


The ability to mount a laser and without sticking it way out as a curb feeler…


----------



## Fabius (24 Mar 2022)

I would settle for incremental advancement instead of these bleeding edge prototype projects.

free float MLOCK vs hand guards and tri mount
LPVO vs elcan
14.5 inch barrels vs 20
1500 lumen WML Vs nothing or old M3X insights
MAWL vs PEQ2/PAQ4

Oh well


----------



## Dale Denton (24 Mar 2022)

Gift Ukraine a whack of C7s of all ages, build X number of new build Colt Canada products per year to keep the plant open and busy. 

Effectively free weapons to Ukraine, Belgium and many others have done it. Publicity win for gov't, CAF gets a C8A4, industry gets some scratch, JOBS.


----------



## Haggis (25 Mar 2022)

Dale Denton said:


> Gift Ukraine a whack of C7s of all ages, build X number of new build Colt Canada products per year to keep the plant open and busy.
> 
> Effectively free weapons to Ukraine, Belgium and many others have done it. Publicity win for gov't, CAF gets a C8A4, industry gets some scratch, JOBS.


Before we give away any more weapons, can we buy new pistols first?


----------



## MilEME09 (25 Mar 2022)

Haggis said:


> Before we give away any more weapons, can we buy new pistols first?


Or may get the problems with the C6A1 sorted out?


----------



## Dale Denton (25 Mar 2022)

You know you can do all at the same time right? We are just cheap. My plan requires us to buy things that we dun wanna buy in the first place, so ya, my way is focused more on convincing a PM that doesn't care for any of this.

Tout it as a wholesale "remodernization" or something silly like that. Buy a wide range of modern AT/AA, everything. Build and fund a Canadian Munitions program. Small industries we can keep open and at arms length without forking over an arm and a leg or buying overseas. A NSS but for munitions and small arms, and hopefully AFVs. Just buy new equipment to replace the old and gift the old to Ukraine for diplomatic 'points'. Not like anyone is tracking the package. Send UKR all of them over time, more new ones for the CAF and UKR might wanna keep them for their NATO standardization/post-war rebuild (knock on wood it happens).


----------



## Haggis (25 Mar 2022)

Dale Denton said:


> You know you can do all at the same time right?


No, we can't.  We can't even manage to buy just pistols.  We're on our third attempt to do so and this one may fail as well.


Dale Denton said:


> Tout it as a wholesale "remodernization" or something silly like that. Buy a wide range of modern AT/AA, everything.


How do we sell that to the Canadian public?  Canada is back in the peacekeeping and convening business, says our PM and MND.


Dale Denton said:


> Build and fund a Canadian Munitions program. Small industries we can keep open and at arms length without forking over an arm and a leg or buying overseas.


The Liberals are going to great lengths to kill the firearms industry in Canada.  Ask the owners of Wolverine Supplies and Alberta Tactical Rifle how supportive the Liberal government is to their business.


Dale Denton said:


> A NSS but for munitions and small arms, and hopefully AFVs.


We already build AFVs in London, ON. In the past few years we have exported more than we've bought for the CAF.


----------



## Dale Denton (25 Mar 2022)

I know, and agree^. It's still just my idea for what we _should _do, very unlikely unfortunately.

Sell it to the public would be easy, its not like there aren't everyday examples throughout the CAF inventory. Or you could just say "just ask that cousin who was in the Army to explain what fiscal limitations the CAF has". 

Maybe even a whistleblower on the state of the CAF, if one existed I can think of.


----------



## Weinie (25 Mar 2022)

Dale Denton said:


> I know, and agree^. It's still just my idea for what we _should _do, very unlikely unfortunately.
> 
> Sell it to the public would be easy, its not like there aren't everyday examples throughout the CAF inventory. Or you could just say "just ask that cousin who was in the Army to explain what fiscal limitations the CAF has".
> 
> Maybe even a whistleblower on the state of the CAF, if one existed I can think of.


Folks have been blowing fog horns and air-raid sirens on the state of the CAF for years. The whistles get lost in the din.


----------



## ArmyRick (26 Mar 2022)

Following


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

Haggis said:


> Before we give away any more weapons, can we buy new pistols first?


Well buying new C7s as an upgrade means we don’t require it to be bid on so it’s actually a much quicker process.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (26 Mar 2022)

Out of all the kit we need as a military a rifle is pretty low priority. We have good rifles, they are solid reliable pieces of kit. We lack in many more important things, supply vehicles, AA, Ships, Planes, AT, etc. 

We could still be using the original C7s and I would still say there is much more important things to invest in. Just wasting money buying a new rifle because its shiny at the moment.


----------



## KevinB (26 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Out of all the kit we need as a military a rifle is pretty low priority. We have good rifles, they are solid reliable pieces of kit. We lack in many more important things, supply vehicles, AA, Ships, Planes, AT, etc.
> 
> We could still be using the original C7s and I would still say there is much more important things to invest in. Just wasting money buying a new rifle because its shiny at the moment.


Disagree, the CAF has no useful method of mounting MFAL and Lights outside CANSOF.
  You can’t do shot at night without suppressors, lasers and NODs. 

Only chumps chose to fight in the day.


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

I actually disagree. Our small arms are largely refurbished 30 yr old receivers. I’ve been witnessing, and I realize this is anecdotal, a definite increase in failing parts, especially extractors, and I suspect metal fatigue is starting to creep in. It’s worse in the C9s, and the C6A1 is it’s own fiasco. While I agree supply vehicles are important, they exists to support the guys holding the rifles and if those don’t work what’s the point?


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> Disagree, the CAF has no useful method of mounting MFAL and Lights outside CANSOF.
> You can’t do shot at night without suppressors, lasers and NODs.
> 
> Only chumps chose to fight in the day.


You’d hate to read 3 VPs AAR from Ft Polk, we are behind peer and near peer adversaries and should not try to fight them at night.


----------



## KevinB (26 Mar 2022)

markppcli said:


> You’d hate to read 3 VPs AAR from Ft Polk, we are behind peer and near peer adversaries and should not try to fight them at night.


Yes Chumps  

It’s sad and criminal that the CAF are effectively half blind (at best) at night


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Mar 2022)

markppcli said:


> I actually disagree. Our small arms are largely refurbished 30 yr old receivers. I’ve been witnessing, and I realize this is anecdotal, a definite increase in failing parts, especially extractors, and I suspect metal fatigue is starting to creep in. It’s worse in the C9s, and the C6A1 is it’s own fiasco. While I agree supply vehicles are important, they exists to support the guys holding the rifles and if those don’t work what’s the point?



I mean new rifles are great but if you cant move people or material to the battlefield nor sustain them in contact the rifles quickly become baseball bats.  And the pointy breaks. 

Step one stop making this 1 vs the other and realise all this stuff is needed.  As when one link in th chain fails the chain it's self is useless.


----------



## KevinB (26 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> I mean new rifles are great but if you cant move people or material to the battlefield nor sustain them in contact the rifles quickly become baseball bats.  And the pointy breaks.
> 
> Step one stop making this 1 vs the other and realise all this stuff is needed.  As when one link in th chain fails the chain it's self is useless.


Meh, there is a L in PPCLI, Mark can walk


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> Meh, there is a L in PPCLI, Mark can walk


These days a limp is more accurate.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> Disagree, the CAF has no useful method of mounting MFAL and Lights outside CANSOF.
> You can’t do shot at night without suppressors, lasers and NODs.
> 
> Only chumps chose to fight in the day.





markppcli said:


> You’d hate to read 3 VPs AAR from Ft Polk, we are behind peer and near peer adversaries and should not try to fight them at night.


You can night fight without that equipment, it just isn’t ideal. For example flares are a option. My concern is we spend so much time trying to get every little bit we can out of a few platforms to the detriment of all others. 

We lack the equipment to bring bullets, lack the equipment to protect those bringing the bullets, lack the arty to provide a effective firebase for any length of time in a sustained fight (as Ukraine is proving towed arty is effective against the Taliban, not nearly as effective when the enemy can return effective fire), and a basically have a complete inability to protect against AA and armour.

Not to mention the ships we need to replace, planes we need to replace, and all the other items that seriously need a update. 

Ideally we would have all the kit we need, but realistically we need to pick some areas we are critical/completely lacking and improve it before we update and upgrade a system which is already fairly modern. Its much like the pistol modernization, I would rather see that money spent on something else which shall bring much more for the CF than a pistol will.


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> You can night fight without that equipment, it just isn’t ideal. For example flares are a option.



Yikes, no thank you.


----------



## KevinB (26 Mar 2022)

Flares?  Dude you are dead before you can put them up. 


I’m getting really heated about some utterly dated opinions that clearly haven’t been fighting in the past 10 years or even bothered to stay abreast of what’s happening currently.


Yes the CAF is broken currently and maybe could fight a near peer action against Swaziland. 

It can’t be viewed as this or that at this point in time - there is a massive shopping list the CAF needs of kit, if it plans to even be viewed as moderately useful in a coalition.


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

Eaglelord17 said:


> You can night fight without that equipment, it just isn’t ideal. For example flares are a option. My concern is we spend so much time trying to get every little bit we can out of a few platforms to the detriment of all others.
> 
> We lack the equipment to bring bullets, lack the equipment to protect those bringing the bullets, lack the arty to provide a effective firebase for any length of time in a sustained fight (as Ukraine is proving towed arty is effective against the Taliban, not nearly as effective when the enemy can return effective fire), and a basically have a complete inability to protect against AA and armour.
> 
> ...


Flares? Jesus Christ.

The pistol procurement is a requirement because the existing stocks are failing, dated, and are the number one source of accidental discharges.

Yes we have other shortfalls, no one questions that, but capital procurement isn’t a matter of one or the other.

Fundamentally every conflict breaks down to the soldiers ability to apply violence to the enemy, so those tools need to be sorted out.


----------



## brihard (26 Mar 2022)

For those better informed- is there any lingering argument for regular line infantry in this day and age to be using 20” barrels? Who’s at the front of the pack for figuring out what line infantry need these days, and issuing it?

Someone upthread mentioned ubiquitous SRAAW and MANPADS that will have to be carried. More argument in favour of carbines I would think.

The discussion of night fighting is compelling. That, plus optics and illumination, means several items of shit-stuck-to-gun. Rails add weight; a system like M-LOK shaves a bit of that.

There seems to be an increasing argument for regular troops to have suppressors as well. I’d heard USMC is going that way across the board?

While this kit adds up in costs, it would still seem to be a drop in the bucket compared to major equipment like jets and ships.

Dead troops are expensive too.


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> For those better informed- is there any lingering argument for regular line infantry in this day and age to be using 20” barrels? Who’s at the front of the pack for figuring out what line infantry need these days, and issuing it?
> 
> Someone upthread mentioned ubiquitous SRAAW and MANPADS that will have to be carried. More argument in favour of carbines I would think.
> 
> ...


My understanding is we’re moving towards carbines for all. I’d previously spoken to some DLR types and the arguments about loosing 20 fps seem to have finally been killed.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 Mar 2022)

markppcli said:


> My understanding is we’re moving towards carbines for all. I’d previously spoken to some DLR types and the arguments about loosing 20 fps seem to have finally been killed.


Thank F!


----------



## KevinB (26 Mar 2022)

My personal opinion is if you need a barrel longer than 11.5” on a 5.56mm gun you probably should not be using a 5.56mm gun.
I’d rather have a 11.5” with can and a 1-6x variable optic than a 14.5” or 16” barrel TBH, but I understand that’s a bridge to far at this point in time, as the only way that works if if you have either two uppers to chose, or section/team level 14.5” 6.5CM guns too (or both).

USASOC is currently going to a 11.5” carbine standard (removing the 10.3” Mk18 and 14.5” M4), retaining the 14.5” mid length gas system URGI upper - and adopted the 14.5” and 22” 6.5CM uppers for the M110. 
  LAMG is on hold currently (better spelled LWGPMG) in SOCOM while companies rework some of their guns because apparently only 1 company read the SOW. 



The 20” barrel is ludicrous in this day and age.



USMC and US Army are going 100% suppressed for the small arms fleet (outside of pistol).


----------



## markppcli (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> My personal opinion is if you need a barrel longer than 11.5” on a 5.56mm gun you probably should not be using a 5.56mm gun.
> I’d rather have a 11.5” with can and a 1-6x variable optic than a 14.5” or 16” barrel TBH, but I understand that’s a bridge to far at this point in time, as the only way that works if if you have either two uppers to chose, or section/team level 14.5” 6.5CM guns too (or both).
> 
> USASOC is currently going to a 11.5” carbine standard (removing the 10.3” Mk18 and 14.5” M4), retaining the 14.5” mid length gas system URGI upper - and adopted the 14.5” and 22” 6.5CM uppers for the M110.
> ...


I’ve had my eyes opened about the effectiveness of an 11 inch barrel at 1-300 m by a friend at the RCMP. He also showed me what white phosphorous dual tubes look like and I and overcome with jealousy.


----------



## Haggis (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> The 20” barrel is ludicrous in this day and age.


But... the Drill Manual!!!


----------



## Remius (26 Mar 2022)

Haggis said:


> But... the Drill Manual!!!


Is already moving to carbine drill.


----------



## KevinB (26 Mar 2022)

Haggis said:


> But... the Drill Manual!!!


I know you are being sarcastic, but the CAF could easily retain some rifles for certain applications- the USMC and US Army retain old M1903 Springfield 30-06 bolt action rifles for those purposes.  

Rest on your arms reverse is a little tough with a carbine


----------



## ArmyRick (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> I know you are being sarcastic, but the CAF could easily retain some rifles for certain applications- the USMC and US Army retain old M1903 Springfield 30-06 bolt action rifles for those purposes.
> 
> Rest on your arms reverse is a little tough with a carbine


Or we look at it in reverse. Officers can carry swords into battle in 2022, no? Saves on small arms for them


----------



## brihard (26 Mar 2022)

markppcli said:


> I’ve had my eyes opened about the effectiveness of an 11 inch barrel at 1-300 m by a friend at the RCMP. He also showed me what white phosphorous dual tubes look like and I and overcome with jealousy.



Sounds like one of their ERT guns. That’ll shoot .300 Blackout, as opposed to 5.56.


----------



## Haggis (26 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> I know you are being sarcastic, but the CAF could easily retain some rifles for certain applications- the USMC and US Army retain old M1903 Springfield 30-06 bolt action rifles for those purposes.
> 
> Rest on your arms reverse is a little tough with a carbine


I am. But only because sometimes the most ridiculous equipment and dress requirements are born in a cubicle or the Mess.

We are hard pressed to maintain our operational weapons. Adding ceremonial weapons to the fleet is more work for nothing.

If the Brits can drill with the SA-80 and the French with the FAMAS, we can certainly drill with an AR platform carbine/SBR.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> The ability to mount a laser and without sticking it way out as a curb feeler…


What if we changed all the barrels to 11.5" with one of silencerco's flash hider mounts and a M-LOK fore end? Would that be an acceptable option for the rifle? All the mods could be done at unit level. Or just buy complete top ends? Maybe a piston buffer to get rid of the spring noise?


----------



## KevinB (27 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> What if we changed all the barrels to 11.5" with one of silencerco's flash hider mounts and a M-LOK fore end? Would that be an acceptable option for the rifle? All the mods could be done at unit level. Or just buy complete top ends? Maybe a piston buffer to get rid of the spring noise?


Lowers are cheap - while a logistical issue (the S/N) getting a complete weapon versus an upper isn’t significantly different in price (at Government levels) unless someone is screwing you.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Mar 2022)

KevinB said:


> Lowers are cheap - while a logistical issue (the S/N) getting a complete weapon versus an upper isn’t significantly different in price (at Government levels) unless someone is screwing you.


PSPC has entered the chat….


----------



## KevinB (27 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> PSPC has entered the chat….


Colt Canada has its own pricing schedule as well.   
  Years ago, Colt Canada quoted Garry Crocker the then LCMM for small arms $750 for RAS rails for CAF C7 and C8’s.  
  I went and send an email from my CAF account to LtCol Dave Lutz (USMC RET.) who was VP of Military Operations at KAC, and got a quote for $225 for the same item. 
*I already knew Dave and had a good relationship. 
 I sent the quote to Gary and we had a very interesting chat. 
Gary went to work for Colt Canada on his retirement and I went to work for Knight’s Armament…

When I worked at KAC spent the better part of 4 years trying to pull the CAF small arms into the modern age from 2009-2013, including on talking to DLR staff about programs that had nothing to do with anything related to me, just trying to help them see ‘other options’. 
  I gave up as I was just banging my head against a brick wall.  

1) The fact the CDN Gov has Colt Canada in the position they are without it being a crown corporation just boggles my mind…
2) Quite often obsolete items are acquired due to DLR etc just wanting to get more of the same (SIMRAD has entered the chat) when other part of the CAF had acquired much newer items (and cheaper) was baffling to me. 
3) The Triad pitchfork, ended up costing Canadian Taxpayers a fortune - sure it was cheap, but it caused a slew of lost or damaged PEQ and PAC lasers.  Also as it mounts directly to the front sight has block heat from firing gets transferred into the Triad and laser and light - About as dumb as one can be there - plus it puts a lot of weight out front - awkward for shooting etc.  

4) After 1 specific trial, I just decided that I was doing nothing but raising my stress level and focused on programs for militaries that seemed to care.


----------

