Light Support Weapons & Infantry Automatic Rifles

[Kirkhill]

.338 MMG @ 24 lbs

General Dynamics Unveils New Medium-Caliber Machine Gun at Joint Armaments Conference In Seattle

(Source: General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products; issued May 15, 2012)

CHARLOTTE, N.C. --- General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products, a business unit of General Dynamics (GD), today unveiled a next-generation Lightweight Medium Machine Gun (LWMMG) at the Joint Armaments Conference in Seattle, Wash.

Identifying an unmet warfighter need, General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products conducted its own research and development program to develop the LWMMG in just over one year. The weapon is designed for low-cost production and for maximum effectiveness at the small unit level, where weight and lethality are decisive factors.

"The LWMMG is an affordable weapon that closes a current operational gap, providing .50 caliber-like firepower in range and effect at the same weight and size of currently fielded 7.62mm machine guns," said Steve Elgin, vice president and general manager of armament systems for General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products. "Weighing in at 24 pounds and featuring a fully collapsible stock, the LWMMG offers superior mobility and portability in both mounted and dismounted operations."

General Dynamics' LWMMG also offers a distinct advantage in both extended and close-in fighting by using the highly efficient .338 Norma Magnum cartridge for increased accuracy and lethality out to 1,700 meters, a distance currently gapped in the operational capabilities of warfighters.

"By employing the larger .338 NM round, the LWMMG delivers twice the range and dramatically increases lethality above the 7.62 round," said Elgin. "In addition, the LWMMG goes beyond providing suppressive fire and gives warfighters the ability to attack point targets at significantly extended ranges."

The LWMMG has a firing rate of 500 rounds per minute, a maximum range of 5,642 meters, and is equipped with quick-change barrel technology. In addition to use by dismounted infantry and on ground vehicles, the weapon can be used as the armament system aboard helicopters and littoral craft, providing greater range and effectiveness for those platforms.

"The LWMMG is a well-designed machine gun ideally suited to provide long-range lethality to U.S. and allied forces," Elgin said.

-ends-

What happens if you marry this up with a 400 round back pack and supply 4 of them to the Company Commander as a support element?

 

[Dkeh]

What happens if you marry this up with a 400 round back pack and supply 4 of them to the Company Commander as a support element?

We would pay a billion dollars a year in ammo costs for that beast!

---------------------------------------------------- Unrelated to above post----------------------------------------------------------

From my minuscule Infantry Corporals brain, the things I care about are:

-Reliability is number one. If the thing jams every time I pull the trigger, I don't care if it fires heat seaking rocket powered lightsabers with chainsaws for fins. If it doesn't fire when I pull the trigger, I'm not interested.

-Ease of stoppage clearance- If it takes me 3 full seconds to fix a minor stoppage, not interested. If it jams , so be it, but I damn well want to be able to clear it, Ricky tick.

-NO SMALL PARTS- By this, I mean no small parts I can loose while preforming basic maintenance, in the dark, in the rain, in the middle of the forest. If my weapon breaks because I lost a small pin, or because a little spring broke, I'm not going to be a happy person.

-Firepower > Weight ratio- Will I carry a C6? Yes, because for the weight, I am packing a huge punch, and, when put in the SF role, I can dish out some serious punishment. That makes humping the ammo worth it. Do I want to carry around a 7.62 rifle, with a heavy barrel, extended magazine, laser sights, optics, etc? Fuck no. It is not my job to be mobile fire support- that's what the 6's and 9's are for. Give me a basic rifle, with light ammo (which, by extension, means I can carry a lot of it), with the OPTION of a C79 Elcan OR a flip-up battle sight, and I am happy. I can do my job, which is to protect the killing machines (the 6's and 9's).

-Machine guns are a must- How fast can a C9 pour 200 rounds down range? A hell of a lot faster than I can dump a 30 round mag, change, empty a second, change, and repeat until 200 rounds have been expended. Can I change the barrels on my IAR when it overheats from said firing, and is so hot the barrel is actually translucent? No. Instead, I am left holding a boiling hot piece of metal, which is EXTREMELY effective as a weapon...as long as I am within 1 meter of the advancing enemy hordes. Sounds fun. "C" mags jam like a bastard, and make clearing a stoppage a pain in the ass. A well trained soldier on a belt fed machine gun can clear a stoppage in just over two seconds (not to mention that you can daisy chain belts of ammo together). Oh, and lets not forget the advantage of being able to set the '6 or '9 on Adverse, or "Rock and Roll" mode. I kind of like that feature when I am setting up an ambush, laying down FPF (final protective fire), or after suffering a gas related stoppage.

Grenade Launchers are an entirely different topic, and I can rant for hours about things. I wont get into it.

What I DO see the need for is a DM (designated marksman) (I am not 100% sure if we are currently using a DM or not, forgive me if we are) sporting a rifle with a big scope, chambered for the same caliber that the C6 uses (for ease of ammo acquisition, or scrounging). 1 DM per section gives a large tactical advantage to a section commander,  platoon commander, company commander, etc. Priority target- that machine gun that's pinning us down. Option 1- EVERYONE FIRE EVERYTHING, KILL THAT GUY! Option 2- Bloggins, grab your DMR, kill that guy on the .50, watch and shoot anyone who tries to get it back up and rocking.

Just my  :2c:

 

[daftandbarmy]

We would pay a billion dollars a year in ammo costs for that beast!

---------------------------------------------------- Unrelated to above post----------------------------------------------------------

From my minuscule Infantry Corporals brain, the things I care about are:

-Reliability is number one. If the thing jams every time I pull the trigger, I don't care if it fires heat seaking rocket powered lightsabers with chainsaws for fins. If it doesn't fire when I pull the trigger, I'm not interested.

-Ease of stoppage clearance- If it takes me 3 full seconds to fix a minor stoppage, not interested. If it jams , so be it, but I damn well want to be able to clear it, Ricky tick.

-NO SMALL PARTS- By this, I mean no small parts I can loose while preforming basic maintenance, in the dark, in the rain, in the middle of the forest. If my weapon breaks because I lost a small pin, or because a little spring broke, I'm not going to be a happy person.

-Firepower > Weight ratio- Will I carry a C6? Yes, because for the weight, I am packing a huge punch, and, when put in the SF role, I can dish out some serious punishment. That makes humping the ammo worth it. Do I want to carry around a 7.62 rifle, with a heavy barrel, extended magazine, laser sights, optics, etc? frig no. It is not my job to be mobile fire support- that's what the 6's and 9's are for. Give me a basic rifle, with light ammo (which, by extension, means I can carry a lot of it), with the OPTION of a C79 Elcan OR a flip-up battle sight, and I am happy. I can do my job, which is to protect the killing machines (the 6's and 9's).

-Machine guns are a must- How fast can a C9 pour 200 rounds down range? A hell of a lot faster than I can dump a 30 round mag, change, empty a second, change, and repeat until 200 rounds have been expended. Can I change the barrels on my IAR when it overheats from said firing, and is so hot the barrel is actually translucent? No. Instead, I am left holding a boiling hot piece of metal, which is EXTREMELY effective as a weapon...as long as I am within 1 meter of the advancing enemy hordes. Sounds fun. "C" mags jam like a *******, and make clearing a stoppage a pain in the ***. A well trained soldier on a belt fed machine gun can clear a stoppage in just over two seconds (not to mention that you can daisy chain belts of ammo together). Oh, and lets not forget the advantage of being able to set the '6 or '9 on Adverse, or "Rock and Roll" mode. I kind of like that feature when I am setting up an ambush, laying down FPF (final protective fire), or after suffering a gas related stoppage.

Grenade Launchers are an entirely different topic, and I can rant for hours about things. I wont get into it.

What I DO see the need for is a DM (designated marksman) (I am not 100% sure if we are currently using a DM or not, forgive me if we are) sporting a rifle with a big scope, chambered for the same caliber that the C6 uses (for ease of ammo acquisition, or scrounging). 1 DM per section gives a large tactical advantage to a section commander,  platoon commander, company commander, etc. Priority target- that machine gun that's pinning us down. Option 1- EVERYONE FIRE EVERYTHING, KILL THAT GUY! Option 2- Bloggins, grab your DMR, kill that guy on the .50, watch and shoot anyone who tries to get it back up and rocking.

Just my  :2c:

That's why I believe that the only thing that is better than one C6 per section is one C6 per fire team  :nod:

 

[Dkeh]

Hey, one of the requirements for the Infantry is fitness. If you can't run with a GPMG, then you should reconsider trades. I am all for a section made up of C6 pigs

 

[daftandbarmy]

Hey, one of the requirements for the Infantry is fitness. If you can't run with a GPMG, then you should reconsider trades. I am all for a section made up of C6 pigs

There's whole regiment out there that agrees with you, as exemplified by this guy:

http://paracharity.org/marathon-men-in-new-york/

 

[Kirkhill]

We would pay a billion dollars a year in ammo costs for that beast!

---------------------------------------------------- Unrelated to above post----------------------------------------------------------

From my minuscule Infantry Corporals brain, the things I care about are:

-Reliability is number one. If the thing jams every time I pull the trigger, I don't care if it fires heat seaking rocket powered lightsabers with chainsaws for fins. If it doesn't fire when I pull the trigger, I'm not interested.

-Ease of stoppage clearance- If it takes me 3 full seconds to fix a minor stoppage, not interested. If it jams , so be it, but I damn well want to be able to clear it, Ricky tick.

-NO SMALL PARTS- By this, I mean no small parts I can loose while preforming basic maintenance, in the dark, in the rain, in the middle of the forest. If my weapon breaks because I lost a small pin, or because a little spring broke, I'm not going to be a happy person.

-Firepower > Weight ratio- Will I carry a C6? Yes, because for the weight, I am packing a huge punch, and, when put in the SF role, I can dish out some serious punishment. That makes humping the ammo worth it. Do I want to carry around a 7.62 rifle, with a heavy barrel, extended magazine, laser sights, optics, etc? frig no. It is not my job to be mobile fire support- that's what the 6's and 9's are for. Give me a basic rifle, with light ammo (which, by extension, means I can carry a lot of it), with the OPTION of a C79 Elcan OR a flip-up battle sight, and I am happy. I can do my job, which is to protect the killing machines (the 6's and 9's).

-Machine guns are a must- How fast can a C9 pour 200 rounds down range? A hell of a lot faster than I can dump a 30 round mag, change, empty a second, change, and repeat until 200 rounds have been expended. Can I change the barrels on my IAR when it overheats from said firing, and is so hot the barrel is actually translucent? No. Instead, I am left holding a boiling hot piece of metal, which is EXTREMELY effective as a weapon...as long as I am within 1 meter of the advancing enemy hordes. Sounds fun. "C" mags jam like a *******, and make clearing a stoppage a pain in the ***. A well trained soldier on a belt fed machine gun can clear a stoppage in just over two seconds (not to mention that you can daisy chain belts of ammo together). Oh, and lets not forget the advantage of being able to set the '6 or '9 on Adverse, or "Rock and Roll" mode. I kind of like that feature when I am setting up an ambush, laying down FPF (final protective fire), or after suffering a gas related stoppage.

Grenade Launchers are an entirely different topic, and I can rant for hours about things. I wont get into it.

What I DO see the need for is a DM (designated marksman) (I am not 100% sure if we are currently using a DM or not, forgive me if we are) sporting a rifle with a big scope, chambered for the same caliber that the C6 uses (for ease of ammo acquisition, or scrounging). 1 DM per section gives a large tactical advantage to a section commander,  platoon commander, company commander, etc. Priority target- that machine gun that's pinning us down. Option 1- EVERYONE FIRE EVERYTHING, KILL THAT GUY! Option 2- Bloggins, grab your DMR, kill that guy on the .50, watch and shoot anyone who tries to get it back up and rocking.

Just my  :2c:

Well!  That was succinctly put. 

Cheers.

 

[BernDawg]

Hey, one of the requirements for the Infantry is fitness. If you can't run with a GPMG, then you should reconsider trades. I am all for a section made up of C6 pigs

:warstory: One of the reasons that 2x10's were carried out with Pl support weapons..  :warstory:

 

[OldSolduer]

Hey, one of the requirements for the Infantry is fitness. If you can't run with a GPMG, then you should reconsider trades. I am all for a section made up of C6 pigs

Go for it.

While fitness in the Infantry is a requirement, that level of fitness cannot be achieved by a sizeable portion of the Infantry.

When you come back with a suggestion that makes sense,  and get off your high horse, then talk to us.

Besides, the C6 is a crse served weapon, right?

 

[Dkeh]

I don't consider myself more fit than anyone, in fact I am significantly LESS fit than a large portion of anyone in my platoon.

However, I can still run across a field with the C6. Walking while carrying it should not be a problem for a single Infantry soldier, and the only time running is required is during Section/Platoon/Company attacks. The distance covered is minor, and on the consolidation, you have a chance to rest.

The "section of C6's" was a joke, and I see now how it can be taken out of context.

But honestly, I do feel that an Infantry soldier should be fit enough to run (not sprint, but move with haste) across broken ground, with a C6 for a short while. All things considered, everyone is carrying extra (The signaler is carrying the 522, albeit on his back, the 'carlo team is carrying a ton of weight, a C9 gunner is carrying his own gun, and ammo for god knows what else) and everyone is expected to run.

I did not mean to come off as preachy, and I should have definitely elaborated on my opinion. 

 

[OldSolduer]

I don't consider myself more fit than anyone, in fact I am significantly LESS fit than a large portion of anyone in my platoon.

However, I can still run across a field with the C6. Walking while carrying it should not be a problem for a single Infantry soldier, and the only time running is required is during Section/Platoon/Company attacks. The distance covered is minor, and on the consolidation, you have a chance to rest.

The "section of C6's" was a joke, and I see now how it can be taken out of context.

But honestly, I do feel that an Infantry soldier should be fit enough to run (not sprint, but move with haste) across broken ground, with a C6 for a short while. All things considered, everyone is carrying extra (The signaler is carrying the 522, albeit on his back, the 'carlo team is carrying a ton of weight, a C9 gunner is carrying his own gun, and ammo for god knows what else) and everyone is expected to run.

I did not mean to come off as preachy, and I should have definitely elaborated on my opinion.

Now that you have explained yourself, I am in agreement. Moving with haste is different than running or sprinting. Agreed. Besides, the C6 Crew has the best go. It may have to carry a bit more weight, however it doesn't have to perform fire and movement for the most part.

My two favorite weapons - C6 in the SF role and  the M2 .50 cal HMG. Reach out and touch someone....

 

[Dkeh]

It may have to carry a bit more weight, however it doesn't have to perform fire and movement for the most part.

Well, that depends on how much your section commander hates you  ;D

The only time I have ever even touched an M2 was in the SAT rooms (I didn't know they had M2's in the SAT's?!), and I can honestly say, I am glad I don't have to carry that thing!

 

[OldSolduer]

Well, that depends on how much your section commander hates you  ;D

The only time I have ever even touched an M2 was in the SAT rooms (I didn't know they had M2's in the SAT's?!), and I can honestly say, I am glad I don't have to carry that thing!

I take issue with the Sect Comd comment - the C6 is a Pl Sp Weapon, not a section weapon.

The M2 has a three man crew and you only really want to manpack it for short distances.

128 pounds - or 58 kg, before ammo. I want my Dodge Ram to transport that weapon.....

 

[dangerboy]

The mighty weapons det toboggan can transport the .50 cal also, as I have bad memories of doing "Weapons Det, that ridge line".  The weapon was not the bad item, it was the ammo that made the toboggan heavy.

 

[Dkeh]

3 man crew?

1 for the gun, 1 for the Barrel + ammo, and 1 for the tripod + ammo? Is that right?

 

[OldSolduer]

Dkeh PM Inbound WRT .50

The mighty weapons det toboggan can transport the .50 cal also, as I have bad memories of doing "Weapons Det, that ridge line".  The weapon was not the bad item, it was the ammo that made the toboggan heavy.

How true. 100 rounds of 4 B1T is not what you call light.

 

[a_majoor]

I’m a bit surprised the proposal didn’t mate a medium calibre round to the LSAT project.

For those of you who don’t know, LSAT uses telescoped ammunition to make the round shorter and lighter, which leads to a lighter, simpler action and so on. 5.56mm LSAT LMG’s have been fielded as prototypes and performed well. A 5.56 rifle has also been produced, to test the concept with linkless feed. The weapons and ammunition are quite light compared to C-7’s and C-9’s. (The danger is some bright person will decide if you have saved weight with the weapon and ammunition, you can now carry something else. When I was a private I carried 100lbs of heavy stuff. Now I carry 100lbs of really light stuff…)

There is no particular reason for LSAT to use 5.56 besides convenience and having a known baseline to start from, I could easily see 6.5mm LSAT weapons as the standard, providing hard hitting firepower to perhaps 1000m, and larger calibre weapons using the principle to fill the role of the GPMG and HMG (a similar project using telescoped ammunition is in progress in Europe for automatic cannons, so if you like your mayhem in 40mm…)

There is an LSAT thread in Army.ca somewhere, or you can read about it here

 

[Retired AF Guy]

If anyone is interested, here is the factsheet for General Dynamics' LWMMG (with pictures).

Lightweight Medium Machine Gun

 

[daftandbarmy]

If anyone is interested, here is the factsheet for General Dynamics' LWMMG (with pictures).

Lightweight Medium Machine Gun

Ummm.. unless I'm mistaken it's the same weight as the C6: 24 lbs. Right?

 

[Kirkhill]

Ummm.. unless I'm mistaken it's the same weight as the C6: 24 lbs. Right?

And based on higher .338 consumption rates I believe it would be safe to expect the $/round rate to decrease.  That would make sniping cheaper.....

 

[KevinB]

.338 Norma Mag not Lapua Mag.

Different Round.

Frankly while the round (either of those .338's) are good capabilities - outside of a vehicle mounted system - is a non started due to ammo weight.