New Sniper Rifle


PDA






280PLUS
November 9, 2007, 09:19 PM
http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/video/20071026_rc_m110sniperrifle

If you enjoyed reading about "New Sniper Rifle" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Nolo
November 9, 2007, 09:24 PM
Neato...
I want one.

Brother in Arms
November 9, 2007, 09:48 PM
Oh great, its a semi-automatic 7.62NATO rifle with a 20 round magazine that is capable or being suppressed. Hmmm reminds of a sniper rifle already in use by the U.S Military and has been since around 1967 or so. Perhaps the M21 just isn't stylish enough. I guess we just didn't spend enough taxpayers dollars on it.

Seems like the army is reinventing the wheel. They started using the XM21 in vietnam and it did very well then in the 1980's they started replacing it with the M24 now they are going to try to replace the M24 with a new AR-10 basically.

Not saying its a bad rifle....just sorry to see how they learn and forget all the lessons learned.

Brother in Arms

Nolo
November 9, 2007, 10:04 PM
From what I know, the AR-10 series is significantly more accurate than the M14 series, but I'm not sure of that.

GunTech
November 9, 2007, 10:05 PM
The M110 is far more accurate than the old M21 and easier to maintain. When the army transitioned from the M21 to the M24 many thought it was a bad move to give up the fast follow up shot. The M110 is the result. The similar platform to the M16 makes for a nice fit logistics and training wise. No need to resurect a 1940's design that was never meant to have optical sights.

I love my M1A, but my AR-10T will shoot rings around it.

Walkalong
November 9, 2007, 10:38 PM
Very nice. I could get used to that.

tnieto2004
November 9, 2007, 10:45 PM
I'll take 5 of em!!

Jeff White
November 9, 2007, 11:47 PM
Hmmm reminds of a sniper rifle already in use by the U.S Military and has been since around 1967 or so. Perhaps the M21 just isn't stylish enough. I guess we just didn't spend enough taxpayers dollars on it.

No the M21 failed in it's mission as a sniper weapon because we spent too much money on it. They were all essentially hand built and not maintainable at the user level. They required so much maintenance to keep in action, maintenance that was beyond unit capability that the program was dropped. The M1D was the sniper rifle that was in most unit arms rooms until the adoption of the M24 in 1988.

Jeff

james_bond
November 10, 2007, 01:26 AM
Can I have just one of the old M-24 kits

Zundfolge
November 10, 2007, 01:38 AM
I find it ironic that the "New" M110 Sniper Rifle is older than the M24 its meant to replace (and basically the same age as the M21).

Geronimo45
November 10, 2007, 01:39 AM
Is it just me that gets a kick out of seeing a military item saying "Stoner Rifle"?

collateral
November 10, 2007, 02:07 AM
Nice to see that our tax dollars are still fixing things that arent broke!

Don't Tread On Me
November 10, 2007, 02:18 AM
Looks like the Russian doctrine was right all along.

Never No More
November 10, 2007, 03:41 AM
Bolt guns can so out distance that thing.

Ill stick with my M700

lencac
November 10, 2007, 05:08 AM
I think it's pretty cool. Most of you are all correct. The M21 is most stylish, the AR10 (M110) is a badass and I'd like to have one or two of them, and yes a bolt rifle will out shoot both of them. I think the point is though that the new model does quite well and is able to whack more terrorist scumbags in a shorter time. And I'm all for that. But make not mistake my national match
M1A will shoot with the best of them, is capable of producing awesome groups and at my range will ring the gong (top 18 inches of an acetylene tank) at 600 yrds. repeatedly in a very short period of time. I'd rather spend my tax money on killing terrorist than unborn babies.

280PLUS
November 10, 2007, 07:42 AM
Nice shooting! How many yards are we talking on that target?

LittleLebowski
November 10, 2007, 09:46 AM
You naysayers are stuck in the Vietnam era of sniping. The SR-25/AR10 rifles are needed for quick follow up shots. Our snipers are in urban combat, not stalking in ghillie suits and taking the shot from one thousand yards away.

Here's (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2326273110617707549) my brother taking a shot with the SR25 at over 400 yards. He's a Marine Scout Sniper who's got over 50 kills and been to Scout Sniper School and the Advanced Course. He swears by the SR25 after two tours in Iraq as a Scout Sniper. He's shown halfway through the video, with the reporter talking behind him as he takes the shot.

aloharover
November 10, 2007, 09:59 AM
As mentioned, the M14 platform is more expensive and harder to maintain.
One benefit of the 'new' platform is that it mimics the M16 in form and function.
And you can build an AR10 that will match the M21 in accuracy for a lower cost and it's not as finicky over the long term.
I still prefer the M21 for asthetics(sp) :D

ojibweindian
November 10, 2007, 10:17 AM
Lebowski

Impressive footage. Kudos to your brother; you must be very proud of him.

LittleLebowski
November 10, 2007, 10:31 AM
I am :D You should see his award commendation.

Don't Tread On Me
November 10, 2007, 11:32 AM
Bolt guns can so out distance that thing.

Ill stick with my M700


I'll agree with that. But...


That's not what's needed as much as an SVD type rifle. Think about it. Iraq.


The M700 is the kind of rifle where you make long-range surgical strike. That is for a different type of sniping. For stalking. That implies a totally different type of engagement. It is more of an ambush/assassination type strike on a higher value target. That implies you expect a target in a certain area, and that you've been surveying the area waiting for opportunity. Have the time to prepare for the shot and the target is not expecting it.


In urban guerilla war, that's not the case. In combat no targets are just standing there, or typically are not standing there. Distances are not often going to be 1,000m.


What is more useful is an "accurate-enough" semi-auto. Something to drop badguys fast. Something with quick followup shots. Something you can deliver lead with down 600-700m with good accuracy (center of mass shots) and do so quickly on multiple targets.


That applies to open terrain also. You get a group of insurgent/terrorist fighters on a hill like in Afghanistan, and you need something accurate, with range and fast. They've been fiddling with these 77gr 5.56's...but the 308 outclasses it at distance.


I think this is a good move. They go through the trouble of getting a match-grade barrel, freefloating, adding a Leupold, custom stock and all this stuff on a 5.56 to shoot out to 600m ...why not just build a good .308 Stoner? That's what it was originally suppose to be. Hits harder, better downrange with less wind effects. I think the .308 takes more advantage of all the accurizing and customizations and optics.

GunTech
November 10, 2007, 01:09 PM
Don't pooh-pooh the accuracy of AR-10 type rifles. Fed the right ammo and with a good barrel they aren't that far behind bolt gun. Mine will shoot 1/4 MOA with handloads, and 3/4 MOA all day long with FGMM. When you consider the Leupold M3 had a elevation knob in 1 MOA increments, that more than adequate to hit a man sized target at 1000 yards.

The fact of the matter is that bolt action sniper rifles in the 308 class are not that much more accurate, and the difference is accuracy is probably not significant for most precision shooting on the modern battlefield.

lencac
November 10, 2007, 01:51 PM
280PLUS that target was @ 100yrds. from bench in optimum conditions and perfect ammo. But it will consistantly still shoot these types of groups.
And I do like the fact that at the ground pounder level the military recognized the change in environment and tactics and has made adjustments. Besides think about when the CMP makes those rifles available :D

280PLUS
November 10, 2007, 06:22 PM
Very nice! Now I want one!! :p

What caliber are they?

LittleLebowski
November 10, 2007, 06:41 PM
.308

Brother in Arms
November 10, 2007, 06:46 PM
7.62X51mm

Brother in Arms

280PLUS
November 10, 2007, 10:48 PM
Thanks, I have a Saiga in .308, hefty round...

elmerfudd
November 10, 2007, 11:40 PM
It seems to me that someone should just go the extra step and make an AR in .300 WM.

cpttango30
November 11, 2007, 12:16 AM
OH OH OH OH OH OH can I have one please please. (Stomps feet and holds breath).

Bad Company
November 11, 2007, 12:22 AM
there are a couple good reasons for this

a. it's harder to identify a designated marksman
b. familiarity, muscle memory is the same, the weapon is set up the same all around, makes training easier

Rem700SD
November 11, 2007, 12:35 AM
It seems to me that someone should just go the extra step and make an AR in .300 WM.

Armalite and DPMS make uppers in .300 RSUM.

lencac
November 11, 2007, 02:50 AM
The caliber is refered to by the military as 7.62 NATO, commerical is 308 Winchester. One like this will set you back about 3k with all the stuff.

IV Troop
November 11, 2007, 06:20 AM
I am on my 5th tour in Iraq and work out in "Indian" country, not sitting on some FOB. While home on break, the Government sent me to Reed Knights to attend the SR25/M110 armorers and operators course. I can personally attest to the effectiveness of the SR25 system over the M24 in practical application.


As much as I enjoy fine bolt action precision rifles, the SR25 has them beat hands down when it comes to use in the field.

280PLUS
November 11, 2007, 07:25 AM
IV, I'm glad to see you guys are getting what you need over there. Can't thank you and all your brethren enough for what you are doing for us back here at home. We'll keep the light on. ;)

Now, where can I dig up $3,000? :D

1911shooter
November 11, 2007, 08:34 AM
elmerfud, hey Dpms does make a 300wsm AR they shoot for crap.
its the millitary trying to fix what isnt broke again. the M24, M40-A1 are all very capable of the mission they are built for, the fast follow up shots are for the new age recruit who's rifle and marksmenship are not what they once were, its they mass produced single minded training the military wants. i served not that long ago and although i respect and admire anyone willing to volenteer for the armed services but every year you see it:banghead: less and less emphisis on riflery it drives me crazy. well we got to make everyone feel special,

LittleLebowski
November 11, 2007, 08:48 AM
1911shooter, have you actually been out there? You're actually saying that these "new age recruits" have substandard marksmanship and therefore aren't capable of using the M24 and M40A1 (it's been replaced by the M0A3) to make quick follow up shots? So when did they lower the standards in sniper school? Right after you got out?

You really need to wake up and stop spewing such nonsense. I could post more but I'm seeing red at this point.

280PLUS
November 11, 2007, 10:47 AM
let's not go crashing down in flames here please... :D

280PLUS
November 11, 2007, 10:49 AM
I'll take IV's word for it...

How has reliabilty been so far, anyone know?

oops, please to excuse double post... :o

IV Troop
November 11, 2007, 10:54 AM
Little Lebowski,

Don't bother getting upset over vitriolic diatribe. For starters, one should consider that the vast majority of the armed forces deployed to theaters do not actually do the war fighting. They are there to support the small handfull of war fighters.

I get the impression that 1911 shooter is/was not a sniper or designated marksman. I also get the impression that E101 is a class he has not yet taken.

This is not to say that the support elements do not serve a critical role, because they do. Without the support of good mechanics, engineers, etc, etc, it would not be possible for those who actually do fight, to do so effectively.

Good mechanics are my personal heros. Having a vehicle go down while on a mission is ugly and puts everyones lives at risk.

That being said, I read a lot of nonsense from active or former service members on the internet who think that because they are/were in Iraq that that somehow makes them salty combat vets:rolleyes: and somehow qualified to make statements like the garbage that was posted above.

That sounds like possibly the case here.

In my humble opinion, they should simply be proud of the non combat job they do and do it to the best of their ability.

Here is something to ponder relative to the discussion on the semi automatic sniper system:

Perhaps the idea of a semi auto precision rifle is not to shoot more, but to have to manipulate the rifle less in a compressed time frame, with multiple adversaries.

lencac
November 11, 2007, 11:24 AM
IV Troop
Well put. I too must say thanks for your "taking care of bidness"
A fact that is all to often forgot is that the rights and privilges we today enjoy, and as Americans take for granted were not won by lawyers, attorneys, lobbyists, politicians or even reporters. Our rights and privilges were won and protected by Americans with guns! Thanks again IV Troop and all those like you, past , present and future.
What do you get when you combine courage, compassion, understanding and righteousness?
THE USA !
GOD BLESS AMERICA AND ALL OUR SOLIDERS

LittleLebowski
November 11, 2007, 11:33 AM
Thanks IV Troop for reminding me to be tactful and a good post all together.

4v50 Gary
November 11, 2007, 12:34 PM
One thing about the Stoner system is that its gas impingment system has fewer moving parts than the M-14. This makes the harmonics more consistent and the more consistent, the more reliable. I'm glad we're getting an AR type 7.62mm Nato weapon into the hands of our snipers. I hope the day will come when each platoon has one. This doesn't mean we should discard our bolt guns and they should also be retained.

BTW, I concur with IV Troop in that non-frontline soldiers also play a crucial role in the war. Whether its a fuel specialist or truck mechanic, all contribute to the winning team we know as our Armed Forces.

God Bless all those who have served and all those who are currently serving.

LittleLebowski - I enjoyed that clip that had your brother. My thanks to him. If you've got time, print out Bedtime Stories or Sharpshooter Tales (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=36853) and send it to him (it's easier than reading it on-line as access time is limited). He'll enjoy the stories of his predecessors picking off their adversaries from afar.

ALS
November 11, 2007, 02:19 PM
It's nice to know other people feel the way I do about the advantages of the Armalite and Knights over the M14. I got banned by a website for speaking heresy of the advantages of the AR platform over the older M-14.
I love my M1A's but after owning an Armalite M4 in .308 for the last year I have to say the Armalite is wonderful platform for a combat sniper rifle.
I am planning on getting a full length version with the flat top in the next few months. :evil:

possum
November 11, 2007, 03:02 PM
its the millitary trying to fix what isnt broke again. the M24, M40-A1 are all very capable of the mission they are built for, the fast follow up shots are for the new age recruit who's rifle and marksmenship are not what they once were, its they mass produced single minded training the military wants. i served not that long ago and although i respect and admire anyone willing to volenteer for the armed services but every year you see it less and less emphisis on riflery it drives me crazy. well we got to make everyone feel special,

it is a fact that the army and other branches don't focus on shooting, and trainning with thier assigned weapons like the should, but the above posters are correct the m24 have thier place but the sass is where it is, precision semi auto is the way to go in the urban enviornments, and of all the time that i have spent in the sandbox has been in urban areas, i would rather have the 20rd mag semi auto over the bolt gun in any of the sittuations in which i have been. good shooting skills or not there are better tools for the job sometimes.

LittleLebowski
November 11, 2007, 03:12 PM
Speaking from personal experience, the Marine Corps takes marksmanship seriously.

SpeedAKL
November 11, 2007, 04:28 PM
I got to poke around a SR-25 at a gun show the other week. Seems like a very nice piece; however, it is worth the extra $$$ over an Armalite or DPMS that does the same thing?

HorseSoldier
November 11, 2007, 04:50 PM
Speaking from personal experience, the Marine Corps takes marksmanship seriously.

Outside of SOCOM units, none of the services, USMC included, was very serious about combat marksmanship prior to the GWOT, but they've all been trying to play catch up in a pretty big way since 9/11.

LittleLebowski
November 11, 2007, 04:52 PM
I can't speak for all other services or units but 3/1 and 1st LAR did alright in my book, Horse Soldier.

SpeedAKL, nope. Get the DPMS. SR25s are way behind on production and not worth the extra money or hassle.

lencac
November 12, 2007, 01:41 AM
USMC gun fighting rule # 9
9. Accuracy is relative: most combat shooting standards will be more
dependent on "pucker factor"
than the inherent accuracy of the gun.
#10
10. Use! a gun that works EVERY TIME. "All skill is in vain when someone
pisses in the flintlock of
your musket."

elmerfudd
November 12, 2007, 02:45 AM
elmerfud, hey Dpms does make a 300wsm AR they shoot for crap.
its the millitary trying to fix what isnt broke again. the M24, M40-A1 are all very capable of the mission they are built for, the fast follow up shots are for the new age recruit who's rifle and marksmenship are not what they once were, its they mass produced single minded training the military wants. i served not that long ago and although i respect and admire anyone willing to volenteer for the armed services but every year you see it less and less emphisis on riflery it drives me crazy. well we got to make everyone feel special,

I love bolt actions myself and generally am not too enthusiastic about the AR design, but I think that in the particular case of sniper rifles or DMR's it's a fantastic platform. It may not be the most reliable design, but it's the most inherently accurate semi-auto out there and our soldiers are telling us that semi-auto's give them the ability to engage more of the enemy more quickly. I'll take their word for it.

Apparently they are using these rifles more in a designated marksman role and are taking on multiple insurgents rather than as snipers assassinating a particular high value target.

Still, it seems to me that the .308 is a somewhat mediocre cartridge for a sniper rifle.

280PLUS
November 12, 2007, 07:22 AM
Right, I can see the bolt action still having it's place but I can also see a place for this new one too.

Anybody who wears a uniform is putting their ass on the line regardless of their job. Even them sailors out there having their barbeques on the fantail. ;)

ALS
November 12, 2007, 10:00 AM
Still, it seems to me that the .308 is a somewhat mediocre cartridge for a sniper rifle.

There some better cartridges but on the the battlefield how many different calibers do you want to have to supply to your forces?

As far as the .308 goes it is good sniping round for shots under 800 meters.
Have there been kills past 800 meters with a .308? Sure have lots of them.
Being that I have shot my .308's and .300 Win Mag out past 1000 yards on Blackwater's 1200 yard rang in Moyock NC. I can say under most conditions a .308 will do the job out to 1000 yards with the right man or woman behind the gun. The biggest factor is the shooter and second the gun must be built to be 1000 yard sniper rifle. Any kill shot out past 800 or so meters is 75% luck and 25% skill. That quote came from people who do this for a living. There are just so many factors that have to be factored in to the shot even before the trigger is squeezed. Wind, altitude, temperature, elevation up or down and even lighting conditions are large factors on whether the bullet will hit the mark. I have shot with lots of people who could put up nice groups out to 400 to 500 yards. As soon as we went 600-700-800-900-1000 their groups totally fell apart.
The Knights suppressed .308 would be a wonderful urban 500 or less yard sniper rifle.

GunTech
November 12, 2007, 01:47 PM
Agree that 1000 yard 308 is a tricky proposition, particularly if you are using M118LR special ball. I've switched to using 155gn Lapua Scenars for 1K 308.

ALS
November 12, 2007, 03:45 PM
That's why I use 175 gn SMK's with a muzzle velocity of 2650. They will stay supersonic out past 1000 yards.

romma
November 12, 2007, 04:05 PM
Looks Sweet to me!

Rifleman 173
November 16, 2007, 07:08 AM
Use of a decent .308/7.62 NATO bullet is a good idea. It looks like the Army is trying to come up with a practical sniper rifle that is easy to maintain and will fit into the present system using existing ammo. Not a bad idea when you consider that most snipers seldom get to shoot beyond a couple of hundred yards any way. I may have to get me an AR-10 to run some tests of my own. So we'll have 5.56 or 6.8 SPC riflemen good out to about 400 yards with a decent AR-10 type rifles good out to about 800 yards for sniping. Not a bad idea. So if an American infantry squad has a number of designated marksmen and a sniper or two, they'll OWN the battlefield to the point that the enemy will be afraid to even raise their heads to peak out and look. I like it. Fear is a great motivator.

If you enjoyed reading about "New Sniper Rifle" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!