Light Support Weapons & Infantry Automatic Rifles

[daftandbarmy]

A C6 with a belt of 50 (and 220 in your Bergen) is silent but deadly

 

[a_majoor]

For interest, the Colt CMG-3 machine gun. A lightweight 7.62mm design which was offered to the Navy for the SEAL's, its downfall was a lack of durability. A rather interesting design with a few quirks :  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3aayF-S2ps

Certainly a weapon combining the firepower of a c-6 with only half the weight would be of interest, and modern materials should allow for a more robust weapon than the CMG-3

 

[MilEME09]

Well if any follows the RFP's that go up closely, a few years ago an RFP went up for what was basically a 7.62mm C-9, most likely for CSOR, JTF-2 types.

 

[brihard]

Well if any follows the RFP's that go up closely, a few years ago an RFP went up for what was basically a 7.62mm C-9, most likely for CSOR, JTF-2 types.

Yeah, the Mk-48. It's a scaled up C9 made by FN. Fires 7.62. I suspect it was one of those cases where CANSOFCOM knew exactly what they wanted and the RFP was rather precise as a result.

 

[a_majoor]

Going at the problem the other way, rather than having an automatic rifle at all, why not make infantry solders much more capable shooters? This US army project is designed to remove the "shake" shooters can induce in a weapon when holding it unsupported. While the illustration shows a very bulky "proof of concept", it can certainly be miniaturized with development. Aimed, accurate fire can certainly be far less resource intensive than putting down a lot of fire in the general area.

Shooters will still need to train relentlessly in the principles of marksmanship and live fire,otherwise if something goes wrong with the mechanism, they will be carrying rather large clubs into battle.

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/10/us-army-live-fire-testing-smart-gun.html

US Army live fire testing smart gun that actively corrects aim
US Army testing actively aim stabilized gun.

This month the U.S. Army's Army Expeditionary Warrior Experiments (AEWE) program tested the AimLock Stabilized Weapon Platform for the first time during a live fire exercise. This ungainly-looking gun seeks to revolutionize the average infantryman's combat effectiveness by removing human error from the equation entirely.

"An electromechanical system translates an "aiming error" signal from a target tracking system into dynamic "pointing corrections" for handheld devices to drastically reduce pointing errors due to man-machine wobble without specific direction by the user. The active stabilization targeting correction system works by separating the "support" features of the handheld device from the "projectile launching" features, and controlling their respective motion by electromechanical mechanisms."

The technology mitigates the 1.5Hz “Shooter Wobble” associated with the firing of a weapon from an un-supported position.

AEWE is part of the U.S. Army's larger Force 2025 initiative, which wants to develop the tech and strategy for future conflicts.

While the current system prototype is ergonomically problematic, the AimLock system will eventually become a standalone integrated weapon without the need for the bulky carriage shown above. Delivery of a successful AEWE system is scheduled for next summer, and while the project is not classified, the Army has yet to published reports on the live fire exercises carried out at Fort Benning, GA earlier this month.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Going at the problem the other way, rather than having an automatic rifle at all, why not make infantry solders much more capable shooters? This US army project is designed to remove the "shake" shooters can induce in a weapon when holding it unsupported. While the illustration shows a very bulky "proof of concept", it can certainly be miniaturized with development. Aimed, accurate fire can certainly be far less resource intensive than putting down a lot of fire in the general area.

Shooters will still need to train relentlessly in the principles of marksmanship and live fire,otherwise if something goes wrong with the mechanism, they will be carrying rather large clubs into battle.

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/10/us-army-live-fire-testing-smart-gun.html

That's the same philosophy that pitted the Bren/ BAR against the MG 34/42, unfortunately.

 

[Jarnhamar]

IMO our C9s should be switched out with MK48s.  3 pounds heavier but it would give sections more punch and range.  Seems logistically beneficial too to do away with the requirement for 5.56 4b1t.

Switch 20" C7s to 15.7" C8s and give everyone an extra belt of 7.62

 

[daftandbarmy]

IMO our C9s should be switched out with MK48s.  3 pounds heavier but it would give sections more punch and range.  Seems logistically beneficial too to do away with the requirement for 5.56 4b1t.

Switch 20" C7s to 15.7" C8s and give everyone an extra belt of 7.62

My hand is up... can you see it from there?

Even better if we can fix a bayonet on it.

 

[a_majoor]

That's the same philosophy that pitted the Bren/ BAR against the MG 34/42, unfortunately.

And the MG34/42 won through volume of fire. But what if the Bren/BAR gunners had the accuracy of marksmen when putting down a round or a burst?

To tell the truth, I actually see something like an evolved XM-25 to be the evolution of the section/platoon support weapon, but coupling that with a high degree of accuracy to ensure any aimed round on target is an effective round on target would make such a device totally devastating.

 

[MilEME09]

On the support weapon side, atleast I think it kinda is, apparently the CaF is looking to acquire a semi-auto sniper weapon, program designated SASW, currently in the planning phase. It's intend is a lot of volume of accurate fire at closer ranges, sounds like to me something akin to the C3 sniper rifle, 7.62 calibre.

 

[Ostrozac]

On the support weapon side, atleast I think it kinda is, apparently the CaF is looking to acquire a semi-auto sniper weapon, program designated SASW, currently in the planning phase. It's intend is a lot of volume of accurate fire at closer ranges, sounds like to me something akin to the C3 sniper rifle, 7.62 calibre.

It's just anecdotal, since I haven't seen any actual operational analysis of CF small arms engagements in Kandahar province, but from the guys I talked to, the AR-10(T) proved very effective in combat.

 

[MilEME09]

It's just anecdotal, since I haven't seen any actual operational analysis of CF small arms engagements in Kandahar province, but from the guys I talked to, the AR-10(T) proved very effective in combat.

Wasnt the 10T part of a trial to give infantry sections a DMR?

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 

[NavyShooter]

Anecdotal, based on team armourer's experience with two of the CAF's rifles in the UK last summer....AR-10(T) has a specialized trigger mechanism that is only available through Armalite.  A lack of forward planning and parts procurement resulted in the rifles having to be cobbled together to make one function. 

From the somewhat experienced Weapons Tech:  "Don't buy an AR-10"....

I will note that I was once offered one of the ex CAF AR-10(T) upper receivers (had the squared-profile Badger Ordnance fore-end) and chose not to buy it.

I understand that the rifles in the system were procured as a 'one time buy' in the early 2000's.

NS

 

[MilEME09]

Anecdotal, based on team armourer's experience with two of the CAF's rifles in the UK last summer....AR-10(T) has a specialized trigger mechanism that is only available through Armalite.  A lack of forward planning and parts procurement resulted in the rifles having to be cobbled together to make one function. 

From the somewhat experienced Weapons Tech:  "Don't buy an AR-10"....

I will note that I was once offered one of the ex CAF AR-10(T) upper receivers (had the squared-profile Badger Ordnance fore-end) and chose not to buy it.

I understand that the rifles in the system were procured as a 'one time buy' in the early 2000's.

NS

Specialized parts is nothing new for a weapons system, this just sounds like poor planning from high combined with the fact that said trigger mech will be an A class part, meaning you can't just order up a couple spares.

 

[OldSolduer]

My hand is up... can you see it from there?

Even better if we can fix a bayonet on it.

I like th bayonet idea.....

Serious, two per section? Very cool and a good idea.
Or will some big brain decide since its 7.62 then it's too expensive for two per section, and doctrine will change to one/section?

 

[Kirkhill]

I like th bayonet idea.....

Serious, two per section? Very cool and a good idea.
Or will some big brain decide since its 7.62 then it's too expensive for two per section, and doctrine will change to one/section?

Or you can drop the section to 6 (with one per) and form the other 3x2 into an MG Det with two guns or even a Weapons Group from 3x4 with an MG Det and an DFS Det (CG84s and Anti-Materiel Rifles).

 

[MilEME09]

I like th bayonet idea.....

Serious, two per section? Very cool and a good idea.
Or will some big brain decide since its 7.62 then it's too expensive for two per section, and doctrine will change to one/section?

CSOR has 7.62 C9s so why not the rest of us?

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 

[George Wallace]

CSOR has 7.62 C9s so why not the rest of us?

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

Which takes us back to this topic:

http://army.ca/forums/threads/110167.0

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Anecdotal, based on team armourer's experience with two of the CAF's rifles in the UK last summer....AR-10(T) has a specialized trigger mechanism that is only available through Armalite.  A lack of forward planning and parts procurement resulted in the rifles having to be cobbled together to make one function. 

From the somewhat experienced Weapons Tech:  "Don't buy an AR-10"....

I will note that I was once offered one of the ex CAF AR-10(T) upper receivers (had the squared-profile Badger Ordnance fore-end) and chose not to buy it.

Unless they changed something http://www.timneytriggers.com/shop/ar-replacement-triggers.aspx

I understand that the rifles in the system were procured as a 'one time buy' in the early 2000's.

NS

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

On the support weapon side, atleast I think it kinda is, apparently the CaF is looking to acquire a semi-auto sniper weapon, program designated SASW, currently in the planning phase. It's intend is a lot of volume of accurate fire at closer ranges, sounds like to me something akin to the C3 sniper rifle, 7.62 calibre.

Could go to HK and ask them to do same thing with HK417 they just did for Marines with HK416 in creating the M27 (IAR).