M240 replacement

[Kirkhill]

M240 Medium Machine Gun Successor Now Being Sought By U.S. Army

A replacement for the M240 machine gun could offer Army infantry and other units greater range and terminal effectiveness.

www.twz.com

What's the word @KevinB ?

 

[MilEME09]

I heard Sig's 338 MMG was being looked as an option because it had about 80% of the range and stopping power of a .50, but weighs less than a M240, new ammunition also has 300 rds of 338 weighing the same as 100 rds of 50 cal

 

[KevinB]

M240 Medium Machine Gun Successor Now Being Sought By U.S. Army

A replacement for the M240 machine gun could offer Army infantry and other units greater range and terminal effectiveness.

www.twz.com

What's the word @KevinB ?

More idiots not paying attention to the range beds actually required by infantry.

SOCOM has been playing with .338NM - I'm equally unimpressed - as the gun is heavy and the ammo is heavy - and it cannot take payload like .50 can.
So it is basically a vehicle gun at that point - a 33rd belt weights 38lbs, so it isn't like you are running off to fight with it dismounted for any period of time.

 

[Kirkhill]

More idiots not paying attention to the range beds actually required by infantry.

SOCOM has been playing with .338NM - I'm equally unimpressed - as the gun is heavy and the ammo is heavy - and it cannot take payload like .50 can.
So it is basically a vehicle gun at that point - a 33rd belt weights 38lbs, so it isn't like you are running off to fight with it dismounted for any period of time.

Rate of fire? 600 rpm? 33 rounds = 3 seconds of suppressive fire?

If that then why not the 50 and if the 50, and a vehicle, then why not the M230LF for light vehicles?

....

You would stick with the M240 for the rifle platoons?

 

[MilEME09]

More idiots not paying attention to the range beds actually required by infantry.

SOCOM has been playing with .338NM - I'm equally unimpressed - as the gun is heavy and the ammo is heavy - and it cannot take payload like .50 can.
So it is basically a vehicle gun at that point - a 33rd belt weights 38lbs, so it isn't like you are running off to fight with it dismounted for any period of time.

sigs 338 belt weight is 33lbs for 300 rds, the weapon weighs 21lbs which is less than say a 240G at 24lbs. Not huge differences, and I agree, still more a mounted weapons.

 

[Kirkhill]

sigs 338 belt weight is 33lbs for 300 rds, the weapon weighs 21lbs which is less than say a 240G at 24lbs. Not huge differences, and I agree, still more a mounted weapons.

But, unlike the M230LF, dismountable (no external power source necessary) and at least as humpable as an 81 mortar, a 50 or a C16. No?

 

[MilEME09]

But, unlike the M230LF, dismountable (no external power source necessary) and at least as humpable as an 81 mortar, a 50 or a C16. No?

I mean a 50 is over 50lbs just for the gun, a C16 is 64lbs just for the gun. So I'd take a 338 mmg over that any day

 

[Kirkhill]

I mean a 50 is over 50lbs just for the gun, a C16 is 64lbs just for the gun. So I'd take a 338 mmg over that any day

So if you had a platoon mounted in Senators? 3-4 x 338 and a C16? Or do you need a C-UAS capability (M230 LF)? Is the C16 potentially adequate?

UAV Killers: 40mm Programmable Grenade System Downs UAVs – Small Arms Defense Journal

sadefensejournal.com

 

[Kirkhill]

What the Aussies are using for domestic security patrols by their Light Horse.

Apparently the brakes need fixing. Same supplier as the LSVW perhaps?

 

[Kirkhill]

And, of course, the Bushmaster PMV,