Ability and role/future of the M-27 IAR

[Collector0311]

Got my first bit of range time in with the IAR this week, just thought I'd let y'all know what I thought. 5 years in Marine infantry has gotten me beyond familiar with fire support weapons, and being an 0311 that means mostly the 249. I did have the privilege of being a machine gun section leader for a year and got re-familiarized with the M240,M2, and Mk19.
But we'll keep this on the topic of LmG's.
First impressions: glad it is sporting some of the things we were all excited to look for in a new assault rifle. Like a short stroke piston system, I was worried about the field reliability of this system in an AR package. In the SAW, tolerances between moving parts aren't as tight as you would want to find in a precision weapon (I use precision loosely) and in the goal of reliably operating under heavy debris and fouling, having room for this debris to move out of the way of moving parts is key. But after "I'm up, he sees me, I'm down"-ing for the majority of the day here in 29 Palms, the IAR performed like a champ. Having a weapon of half the weight, and increased accuracy was stellar in a training environment. That being said, having not used one personally in country, I wouldn't think that this weapon is qualified to replace the 249 on a squad level in combat. And here's why.
The goal of this weapons system is to allow automatic rifle fire from a fire-team or larger sized element, while reducing the systems weight, and the ammo load out of the automatic gunner. It does this. But in my mind, without the option of hundreds of rounds of suppression, the ability of fire and maneuver is greatly hindered. The "accuracy by volume" mantra of machine gunners is wholly accurate here. Because their targets are not only the soft bodies of the enemy, but striking fear into any enemy that dares to think of maneuvering on you. A greasy, smoking, rattling machine gun, spewing bullets all over the enemy has a certain omnipresence, this is what allows us to move forward and destroy.
Aside from the operating system, I could switch my M4 to burst and lay down a few 30 mags no problem. But that's not the point of suppression and fire superiority. But I do concede, that after having my friends targeted and killed specifically for carrying a 249 or 240, I will be glad to see the automatic gunner not being so easily identified.
I apologize for getting lengthy, but I would really love to hear the opinions you all have on this weapons current role and possible future. Thanks and God bless.
(PS: so far my regiment and others are not allowing the use of beta mags, and PMags do not get along with this operating system)

 

[Sam1911]

Thanks for the detailed write up! I don't know anyone who's gotten to play with one.

I will admit I can't quite see the gulf between infantry rifle and SAW as something that can be effectively bridged by meeting halfway in the middle. (Or in this case, maybe 1/4 of the way toward the middle, still pretty much being an M-16.)

Maybe if you could explain a bit more about what the M-27 gunner is supposed to DO, exactly, that might help.

Seems we keep playing with the LMG idea (or maybe in this case Ultra-Light MG) and never get all that happy with it before giving up and trying again later.

 

[Reloadron]

Thanks a big bunch for your views and write up. When I first heard about the SAW M249 I remember thinking what the hell is that? Needless to say different era here and not always keeping up.

I agree with Sam in that yes, they keep trying but just can't seem to get it right. However, from what I see it beats dragging a M60 around.

Thanks Again & Semper Fi
Ron

 

[gbeecher]

Progress!...

In the modern world of the infantry soldier, the bullets get smaller and they shoot more of them. I'm wondering if individual weapon and firearm development for the foot soldier should have stopped at the M14, M60 and M24 (M40 for the Marines). The M27 IAR sounds like a useable tool for special operations or airborne, but is it ideal for the grunt in the field? I'm still waiting to hear how the M855A1 'green' round is performing in real life. The more training and experience your enemy has - the less effect automatic fire has also. It's still necessary, just not as effective. I'm of the mind that better training and support of the troops is of a slightly higher priority than the capability of individual weapons. Just a thought...

 

[Detritus]

My thoughts on this... Admitedly those of someone who to his great regret was never able to serve in any capacity, much less in combat arms.

the Marine Corps seems to want a weapon that will serve the purpose that the BAR did from the last months of WW1 through to adapotion of the M14. Meaning they want a LMG that

• can maintain a high rate of fire for longer than a standard M16
• is not much heavier than same
• does not immediately mark it's user wth a sign saying "Shoot me first, I'm special"

But based on this

(PS: so far my regiment and others are not allowing the use of beta mags,

and asuming that no other higher than 30rd capacity ammo supply is available, they have not yet figured out, remembered, or possibly just haven't accepted yet, is that what makes the M249 desireable is that (as i understand the doctrine) it lays down Lots-o-lead in a effort to keep the enemy behind cover or at least limited in movement, while the riflemen work forward to do thier jobs.
the IAR when fed from 30rd mags is NOT an "Automatic Rifle" it's a beefed up M16 and still an "Assault Rifle", there is a difference and it is an important one.

 

[mastiffhound]

Maybe instead of Beta mags, they will let you use surefire 60 round or 100 round mags? Hopefully they would be compatible with the IAR.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

It will be interesting to see what the service life of the M27 looks like if it gets the same loving care and maintenance that the M249 receives.

 

[Jay the Plinker]

Why not put a 100 round double drum on it

 

[Detritus]

Why not put a 100 round double drum on it

Heavy, cumbersome, some reports of being noisy (rattle), suspect reliability under field conditions... these are the common complaints about Beta and similar double and single drum mag systems.

for use by the standard Infantry troop Beta mags and similar have been a Non Starter for long time. they look cool and might have a limited use in very limited conditions, but they're not "Marine (or soldier) proof"


The Surefire mags are currently looking to be the best bet going for a possible, viable ammo supply for the M-27. but only time will tell

 

[fatcat4620]

Does anyone know how long it takes to reload a M249?

 

[Collector0311]

Anywhere between 5-10 seconds depending on where you store you extra ammo and whether or not you're doing a barrel change too.
And as far as the role of the automatic gunner, his job is to establish a solid base of fire suppression on the enemy to keep their heads down, thereby allowing the rest of the team to bound forward and cover the movement of the automatic gunner. There are generally 3 SAWs per squad (one per team of four, then being 3 teams in a squad)

 

[Sam1911]

And as far as the role of the automatic gunner, his job is to establish a solid base of fire suppression on the enemy to keep their heads down, thereby allowing the rest of the team to bound forward and cover the movement of the automatic gunner. There are generally 3 SAWs per squad (one per team of four, then being 3 teams in a squad)

Yes, that's as I understood it to be. But does this role change as the SAW gets traded for the new Ultra-LMG? Or is the 0311 being told to do the same thing with less ammo and less rifle?

Or will there be more M-27s issued per squad or per team so that more than one man per team can share the role?

I've not read or heard many accounts where the 249 gunner was complaining that he just had waaaay too much ammo (except perhaps when carrying it -- ).

And I'm a little perplexed by the requirement for higher accuracy. Accuracy of fire isn't really a necessity for suppression duties, so it doesn't help the gunner's primary role. It could let him act more effectively as a standard rifleman, of course (simply ditching the bulk and weight of the 249 could help with that), but is advancing the importance of his secondary role important enough to give up the capacity and ROF of the 249?

 

[C-grunt]

As a former SAW gunner I am excited for the adoption of the IAR. Like was stated above it should be used like the BAR. From what I have heard it isnt replacing the SAW but more supplementing it. It gives the fire team an automatic weapon that can easily keep up with the team.

 

[C-grunt]

Wanted to add... The SAWs were the to be a more squad or platoon level weapon where it can be used as a LMG that it was built to be instead of being used as an Automatic Rifle like its been stuck into before.

 

[Detritus]

The SAWs were the to be a more squad or platoon level weapon where it can be used as a LMG that it was built to be instead of being used as an Automatic Rifle like its been stuck into before.

It's good to know that that is the Intent here. what will be telling is whether (or more acurately when) the changes in tactics, ie how the "IAR man" is used/deployed, will sink in in such as way that the IAR is not used where the sustained ROF of a SAW is more warranted.

And I still maintain that a larger than 30rd mag is a must have for a weapon like this. Using the BAR as an example, it carried two and a half to four times the "on board" ammo compared to the rifles issued to the rest of the squad, 20rds Vs 5 or 8rds. Unless the guy with the IAR has a longer wait between mag changes, he's no better off and it would seem of no higher utility to the unit than his brother riflemen armed with M16s.

 

[HorseSoldier]

The goal of this weapons system is to allow automatic rifle fire from a fire-team or larger sized element, while reducing the systems weight, and the ammo load out of the automatic gunner. It does this. But in my mind, without the option of hundreds of rounds of suppression, the ability of fire and maneuver is greatly hindered. The "accuracy by volume" mantra of machine gunners is wholly accurate here. Because their targets are not only the soft bodies of the enemy, but striking fear into any enemy that dares to think of maneuvering on you. A greasy, smoking, rattling machine gun, spewing bullets all over the enemy has a certain omnipresence, this is what allows us to move forward and destroy.

This is my issue/question with the IAR as well (admittedly from a position of zero hands on experience with it). I just don't see the IAR as particularly effective as a base of fire weapon/suppressive weapon to allow maneuver by other guys/teams, even if the weapon allows the guy carrying it to maneuver way, way, way better than a guy carrying a SAW (and ammo, and spare barrel and that worthless MGO the Army issues for it, etc). As stated, part of effective fire and maneuver is making the other guy feel like he just stuck a random appendage into a hornets nest and scare the hell out of him -- and being able to do that is important, even in today's very restrictive engagement environments.

 

[7.62x51NATO]

Was anything ever done with the .338 Norma Magnum Machine Gun from General Dynamics?

 

[68wj]

Thanks for the report thus far. I will keep my opinions on tactics away from the discussion since this was never my specialty, and even if it were, times are always changing. Enjoy your time in the Stumps.

Has anyone attempted a range qual with one?

 

[Sam1911]

Was anything ever done with the .338 Norma Magnum Machine Gun from General Dynamics?

Seems like a question for another thread. .338 Norma Mag, and a slightly modified M-16 really don't occupy the same niche!

 

[HorseSoldier]

Wanted to add... The SAWs were the to be a more squad or platoon level weapon where it can be used as a LMG that it was built to be instead of being used as an Automatic Rifle like its been stuck into before.

The "SAW is an individual weapon" idea the army is so wedded to always struck me as just dumb. I've been in/around units where that meant the SAW gunner had to lug his almost 20 pounds of weapon + optic (that piece of junk MGO, no less), spare barrel(s), tripod and 600 or more rounds of ammo. And then leadership getting all bent out of shape when the guys schlepping all this stuff have trouble keeping up with riflemen armed with M4s. A lot of team/squad leaders and platoon sergeants seem to have some sort of inherent blind spot about the concept of distributing that load among multiple guys "because the SAW is an individual weapon." (Maybe other guys with more infantry-intensive career paths have seen that handled better -- SAW isn't heavily represented in cavalry units.)

 

[Jay the Plinker]

But isn't the m27/416 3x more reliable in the future carbine testing program

 

[C-grunt]

The "SAW is an individual weapon" idea the army is so wedded to always struck me as just dumb. I've been in/around units where that meant the SAW gunner had to lug his almost 20 pounds of weapon + optic (that piece of junk MGO, no less), spare barrel(s), tripod and 600 or more rounds of ammo. And then leadership getting all bent out of shape when the guys schlepping all this stuff have trouble keeping up with riflemen armed with M4s. A lot of team/squad leaders and platoon sergeants seem to have some sort of inherent blind spot about the concept of distributing that load among multiple guys "because the SAW is an individual weapon." (Maybe other guys with more infantry-intensive career paths have seen that handled better -- SAW isn't heavily represented in cavalry units.)

When I was a SAW gunner during the invasion of Iraq in 2003 our gunners didnt carry the extra barrel and tripod. Standard load for most guys was around 600 rounds. I was placed in a "weapons squad" which consisted of three M240s, two SAWs, two M203s, a Javelin and a M24. As part of that squad I carried 900 rounds. We also didnt use the MGO and left them in the Brads.

I think that a platoon that is configured with a weapons squad would do well with the IAR. Let the SAWs and M240s lay down some good auto suppresive fire while the manuever element flanks. Then when the manuever element gets to close and the suppressive fire has to shift or lift, the IAR guy in the manuever element can still lay down a decent base of fire if its needed. Load him up with some Surefire 60 rounders.

 

[TrickyDick]

I loved my M249 SAW, her name was Athena, Goddess of War....

 

[TrickyDick]

I never used my tripod, and just slung my spare barrel over my shoulder, or stuffed with my rucksack. As far as Ammo,3-4 200 rd drums was normal, except i had to rig an "Ammo carrier" from 550 cord before we got the new LBV's made to carry drums.

 

[paintballdude902]

im still not sure i see the point. i see this as just a better m16 but it seems like they will still be using 30rders. so the ability to sustain a high rate of fire wont be there any better than m16 with f/a and a heavy barrel



this being said my experience is limited as im a flyer and my experience is limited to an m4 and weapons 25mm and larger