C9 Replacement

[DirtyDog]

Maybe I'm a little lost here, but I've been wondering what is going to be done about our worn out (which we all know a lot of them are) C9's?

Since the C9A2 is dead it would seem that it won't be long before we are left with a bunch of worn out pieces of crap and no replacements on the way.

Am I missing something or is there any kind of plan in place?  It would seem to be somewhat important....

 

[RCDtpr]

C9A2 was scrapped? Am I missing something here?

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Thought we are using the C9-A2 over there now?

 

[Ecco]

How is the C9A2 dead?

 

[DirtyDog]

According to info I heard here, Colt Canada lost the rights to refurb the C9's and access to parts from FN as it was originally a Diemaco contract who were not such direct competitors to FN.

I looked it up:

New M249 PIP does not have a mag feed option (thank god)
  The C9A2 project is dead -- when Diemaco was sold to Colt, and became Colt Canada  - the rights to produce anything from FNH disappeared - Colt is an FN competitor - and FN was not allowing its TDP for the C6 and C9 to remain there.
*yes genius to allow that to happen - so Canada will get no new parts from Diemaco/Colt Canada for those guns - nor barrels etc. (rocket science)

The A2 barrels where an annomoly as they where just chopped C9 barrels -- they had the C9 flashhider put back on after the barrel was recrowned and threaded.  The Mk46 and M249 Para have a different thread and different flash hider.
 
The A2 stock was a copy of the Stoner 63 stock in the folding mechanism - and the standard C8 stock added -
- the US via FN now makes a Para stock like this - but with a checkpiece to improve the fit. (without the folder ability).

Not a lot of sense to buy a new C9 now -- the CF ones never had the hydralic buffer from the US M249 contract  (which is why ours wore out at less than half the round count...)  Your better off buying a Mk46 - as it has an intergral RAS - and getting an extra Para barrel (they are heavier) - it has no mag feed option (a good thing IMHO).
 However the M249 has always been a "disposable machiengun" - they have a short service life due to the design.

 

[DirtyDog]

Just to clairfy, yes some A2s were prouced and will continue to be done so until the parts inventory isn't used up (if it isn't already).

 

[Greymatters]

As reputable as Infidel-6 is, you might want to see an official news release before making it official.

But it does raise a good question.  If the C9 goes out the window, how long will replacement parts last before forcing the purchase of a new system?  And what system would be best?

 

[Ecco]

Colt Canada website still says that they are doing the C9A2 Minimi upgrades.

Weapon System Upgrades: Upgrade Programs such as the CF C7A2 Rifle and C9A2 Minimi LMG are also directed and executed through our R&O Section. With our experience and quality of workmanship behind us we are confident that we can tackle any weapons platform upgrade requested.

http://www.coltcanada.com/repair&overhaul.htm

 

[RCDtpr]

So assuming what I just read is correct...it appears we get no new parts for C6's either?  I don't know how accurate any of this is, but I can't see us scrapping the 9 and the 6.....they are pretty much the backbone weapons for all vehicles.  Just gonna have to wait and see I guess

 

[DirtyDog]

So assuming what I just read is correct...it appears we get no new parts for C6's either?  I don't know how accurate any of this is, but I can't see us scrapping the 9 and the 6.....they are pretty much the backbone weapons for all vehicles.  Just gonna have to wait and see I guess

You would have to assume that whatever affects the C9, affects the C6 as well (in this regard).

Of course, this all hinged on whether what I6 says is correct... but I put stock in his words.

 

[1feral1]

So assuming what I just read is correct...it appears we get no new parts for C6's either?  I don't know how accurate any of this is, but I can't see us scrapping the 9 and the 6.....they are pretty much the backbone weapons for all vehicles.  Just gonna have to wait and see I guess

Not only that, but both are extensively used worldwide, and to replace a MAG 58 or Minimi, well with what?

I have been in on Minimi Wksp rebuild programs here in Australia, last in 2004. Currently Thales in Lithgow is going the full on FTRs on Minimi using  US, Herstal and Aussie made components. Aussie made components are Australian marked, with 66 NSN country codes. Even NSN '21' (Canada) parts are used, and some gauges are Canadian marked also.

All Australian F89A1-P LMGs (generic Aussie version of the Minimi) have used the hydraulic buffers for over 10 yrs, and standard plastic butt. Picatinny rail ( with standard 1.5x optics) on the feed cover, and on all Australian bbl's there no front sight assembly on the gas block. The bolt is matched to the gun via serial number.

The gas regulator type of bbl is still in the system, but the newer US M249 type of glas block (direct gas type) without the reg are apparently being introduced. I ran into these new M249's made by FN (USA) at least 5 yrs ago . I found these guns more robust, even with additional reinforcing welds, and they had matt grey finish on the metal parts. 

In Iraq, we only used the Para Minimi, mainly with EOTECHs. Great for in and our of AFVs and uparmoured SUVs etc. Most of the lads removed the bipods, and even installed Surefires on their guns. Also on some of the guns was the NAD, and an RAS for a foregrip.  I scrounged up a box of US M249 heat shields for all our minimis. The guys loved them, and ya, with a heap of M16 30rd mags too for EY/backup use just in case.

Canada better pull its finger out for their FTR and parts replacement program for Minimi, or this will bite them in the ass much sooner than later. It does not take long for a backlog from hell to form.

My thoughts on the A2 are its a crap design, and I would put I6's words as good as gospel on the topic.

 

[geo]

Variations on the C6 and the C9 are used by the US ( M240 and M249 ) so replacement arms are in theory available... if not from Colt then from someone else but, we better not wait until it's too late and we become desparate and accept the 1st thing that comes along.

If the Diemaco contracts with FN are nul and void, it's a question of either COLT providing an alternative OR Canada buying direct from FN (FN USA?) thereby telling Colt Canada to pack their bags and go home... and shutting down our capacity to build and service our own arms.

 

[PJOsborne]

I remember coming across a website that had details of the US Army's SAW trials and how the M249 faired.

http://www.remtek.com/arms/fn/minimi/index.htm

On the M249 page, it explained that " A 50,000-round receiver life is expected. The Minimi's overall performance was outstanding and it was the clear winner of the SAW trials."

I have no way of knowing how accurate that information is, but if I was to use 50,000 rounds as a yardstick, I'd say a good number of the C9s in the system have probably reached this point in their service life. What's supposed to happen to the recievers at this point? Do they get sent to the Ammo Techs to get worked and refurbished, thus 'resetting' their service life, or are they supposed to get replaced as a whole unit with a new C9?

 

[MG34]

Not a big deal especially with MK 46 & MK 48 in service with the CF already it is only a matter of time before their widespread use. Then again logic has little to do with CF small arms procurement

 

[McG]

You would have to assume that ...

How about we not assume anything & then present it as fact? If you make a habit of this, someone eventually shows up knowing the truth & you end up looking the fool.

 

[Ecco]

I hate misinformation, so there it goes:

While at CANSEC, I talked about this (and other issues) with the general manager of Colt Canada.

-The contract for the mid-life upgrade of the C9 to C9A2 status was awarded to Colt Canada last month.
-They are waiting for the necessary parts and tooling to arrive.
-They intend to ramp up their production to 175 per month, for 2+ years.
-The Canadian Forces own the Intellectual Property of the C9, so there is no problem.
-Even if the CF would not have the IP rights, Colt Canada has a Technical Assistance Memorandum of Understanding with Fabrique Nationale, so they would be able to do the job anyway.
-The wear of Canadian C9A2 (with rubber insert as buffer, cost=1,50$) is the comparable to the wear of M249 (with hydraulic buffers, cost=500$).

Colt Canada disagrees strongly that Canada has lost their ability to manufacture or support their small arms fleet.  It's their job as Canada's Small Arms Centre of Excellence since 1976.

 

[1feral1]

Ok ecco, 11 posts, and you SEEM to be full of 'info', however if you are going to claim such facts as gospel, how about a link, and secondly fill in your profile.

The hydraulic buffer is far superior to the old crap one, and where does this $500 of wear come in and on what?

I think thats BS.

I know Minimi, so don't try and BS. 31 yrs as an armourer from unit level of repair to FTR experience, on all  small arms used by Canada US and Australia.

 

[McG]

Ok ecco, 11 posts, and you SEEM to be full of 'info', however if you are going to claim such facts as gospel, how about a link, and secondly fill in your profile.

If it helps, I heard the exact same think from the GM of Colt Canada.  The company will still do the mid-life upgrade of the C9.

There is no mention of $500 of wear.  $500 is the cost of the "far superior" buffer when the $ 50 "old crap one" has been shown to survive well beyond the point at which the rest of the weapon is required to undergo an overhaul. 

 

[KevinB]

FN Herstal and FNMI are both adamant that Colt Canada has no RIGHT to the TDP.  But again since when has Diemaco done anything ethically -- they tried to make rip off versions of the KAC M4 RAS for a while until a CF member outed them...

As an End User of the M249, M249 Para, Mk46, and C9, C9A1, and C9A2 -- the C9A2 is a ghetto cheapskate upgrade.  But better than nothing.

 

[McG]

I think you need to rephrase the question you are giving to your friends at FN.  It is not if Colt Canada has IP rights, the question is does the Government of Canada have the IP rights.  The back handed comments about unethical business practices in the C9A2 project is out of line because it is speculative & baseless.  If this project were in any way not above-board, then the government would have nothing to do with it (I've seen enough examples of everything coming to full stop because of a tiny possibility of IP rights in doubt).