Are you ready for the Army to replace the M4 with the NGSW (6.8mm)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C-grunt said:
I think the Sig has the best chance of winning the rifle program. The General Dynamics model is a bullpup which I dont see happening. The Textron has a weird forward ejection system that I think is going to become troublesome in testing when the rifles are on the ground, on some support, or fired from an awkward position. The Sig is basically an AR10 (I know the operating system is a lot different) which will have the handling characteristics of a standard rifle Soldiers are used to.
Click to expand...
For a bunch of technical and probably more important political reasons I think you are right about Sig. The engineer in me thinks General Dynamics is a lot more interesting (that does not mean better, just more interestng). I got to play with all three briefly at AUSA in 2019 and the GD weapon was very interesting internally. I never did get a straight answer on if I was shooting in full auto and switched to semi-auto would the bolt auto close or would I have to release the bolt manually. It appeared it would be auto but hard to test on a disabled display gun and the guy I was talking to was not an engineer.

I think Sig would be better off using GD's True Velocity ammo though. The polymer case is poised (after many failures) to make it finally (I think/hope). I think the True Velocity ammo in the Sig gun would have the best chance of winning.

As for the Textron and the case telescoping ammo. Its an interesting concept but when the rubber meets the roads all the problems of extraction/ejection is solves with case telescoping cases seems offset by other issue of chamber seals and or chamber motion to allow for this push the case forward out of the chamber extraction. Continuously revolving chambers seems the best use of case telescoping ammunition but so far its not been terrible compatible with other constraints of small arms.
 
Last edited:
mcb said:
For a bunch of technical and probably more important political reasons I think you are right about Sig. The engineer in me thinks General Dynamics is a lot more interesting (that does not mean better, just more interestng). I got to play with all three briefly at AUSA in 2019 and the GD weapon was very interesting internally. I never did get a straight answer on if I was shooting in full auto and switched to semi-auto would the bolt auto close or would I have to release the bolt manually. It appeared it would be auto but hard to test on a disabled display gun and the guy I was talking to was not an engineer.

I think Sig would be better off using GD ammo though. The polymer case is poised (after many failures) to make it finally (I think/hope). I think the True Velocity ammo in the Sig gun would have the best chance of winning.

As for the Textron and the case telescoping ammo. Its an interesting concept but when the rubber meets the roads all the problems of extraction/ejection is solves with case telescoping cases seems offset by other issue of chamber seals and or chamber motion to allow for this push the case forward out of the chamber extraction. Continuously revolving chambers seems the best use of case telescoping ammunition but so far its not been terrible compatible with other constraints of small arms.
Click to expand...

No need to leave brass on the battlefield. Polymer works fine. True Velocity has a good design.
 
N9NWO said:
No need to leave brass on the battlefield. Polymer works fine. True Velocity has a good design.
Click to expand...

Why is it better to leave polymer cases on the battlefield as apposed to brass? (unless you're the guy that owns the company making polymer cases, then hell yeah, leave em by the dump truck load!) ;)
 
Nature Boy said:
Why is it better to leave polymer cases on the battlefield as apposed to brass? (unless you're the guy that owns the company making polymer cases, then hell yeah, leave em by the dump truck load!) ;)
Click to expand...

In theory the true velocity cases left on the battle field will have less value to the enemy being harder if not impossible to reload and as a raw material far less recyclable for most enemy forces, than brass is.

It reality its more about reducing the weight the soldier has to carry in the field. The polymer case will let the soldiers carry less weight, or more likely, more ammo for the same weight.
 
Nature Boy said:
Why is it better to leave polymer cases on the battlefield as apposed to brass? (unless you're the guy that owns the company making polymer cases, then hell yeah, leave em by the dump truck load!) ;)
Click to expand...
Brass can be reused. Or used to do something else. Polymer is worthless.

Plus the weight factor for the troops
 
N9NWO said:
most likely the support units will have M4s then a PDW based on the M4 in 7.62x35 with a 9" barrel and folding stock. The support units do not need to be able to hit out to 1000 meters. 300m is enough and the 7.62x35 will do that as well be suppressed or replace pistols.
Click to expand...
Never going to happen. The military is not going to replace pistols with short rifles and they definitely aren’t going to replace one rifle cartridge with two new cartridges.
 
marksman13 said:
Never going to happen. The military is not going to replace pistols with short rifles and they definitely aren’t going to replace one rifle cartridge with two new cartridges.
Click to expand...

Never say NEVER

They are merging four weapon systems into two and two calibers into one. Plus there is discussion about having a replacement for the M240 that chambers the 8.59x63 (.338NM) and then phasing out the M2 and .50 cal

Pistols really have no place on the battlefield. A PDW does
 
N9NWO said:
Never say NEVER

They are merging four weapon systems into two and two calibers into one. Plus there is discussion about having a replacement for the M240 that chambers the 8.59x63 (.338NM) and then phasing out the M2 and .50 cal

Pistols really have no place on the battlefield. A PDW does
Click to expand...
I’ll respectfully disagree with your opinion of pistols on the battlefield. A Beretta M9 saved my life when my selector switch broke off my M4. Any troop whom would be issued a PDW could be issued an M4 which is already in inventory. A short barreled rifle in a new chambering is not going to happen just so that cooks and admin personnel can look cool on the FOB.
 
I get that designing the gun around the cartridge is the best route if your changing both. But we have all seen first hand how that can turn out.

Seems to me an easy way to effectively increase range while keeping weght down for both platforms is to move to a 224 Valkyrie. Small increase in cartridge weight and it can easily be converted in an M4/M-16 for example.

And why a 6.8mm anything? Seems a bit of added weight to be lugging around heavy ammo. I thought a 6.5mm ballistic equivalent to the Grendel might be on the upper realm of cartridge weight yet a good performer ballistically.
 
.455_Hunter said:
Do you have a DD214?

I have to ask, because I do, carried a pistol, and am in complete disagreement with that sentiment.
Click to expand...
It's amazing the opinions of those without one about what a soldier needs or doesn't. When you are fighting for your life it's not a video game. There's no reset or do over. Lucky for them that they don't know what they don't know.
Just the same we all enjoy talking about it. The study of war is man's nature No harm in speculating,
 
Last edited:
marksman13 said:
I’ll respectfully disagree with your opinion of pistols on the battlefield. A Beretta M9 saved my life when my selector switch broke off my M4. Any troop whom would be issued a PDW could be issued an M4 which is already in inventory. A short barreled rifle in a new chambering is not going to happen just so that cooks and admin personnel can look cool on the FOB.
Click to expand...
We were using 11" M4s in Afghanistan so we could fire out of vehicles. A normal M4 was too big. And the muzzle flash from 5.56 was huge compared to a PDW with 9" barrel firing 7.62x35
 
Wreck-n-Crew said:
I get that designing the gun around the cartridge is the best route if your changing both. But we have all seen first hand how that can turn out.

Seems to me an easy way to effectively increase range while keeping weght down for both platforms is to move to a 224 Valkyrie. Small increase in cartridge weight and it can easily be converted in an M4/M-16 for example.

And why a 6.8mm anything? Seems a bit of added weight to be lugging around heavy ammo. I thought a 6.5mm ballistic equivalent to the Grendel might be on the upper realm of cartridge weight yet a good performer ballistically.
Click to expand...
from what I read the 6.8 was more effective against mud brick houses. And the bullet that the Army approved has a BC more like the 6.5
 
N9NWO said:
We were using 11" M4s in Afghanistan so we could fire out of vehicles. A normal M4 was too big. And the muzzle flash from 5.56 was huge compared to a PDW with 9" barrel firing 7.62x35
Click to expand...

I agree that a PDW could have good applications, but it doesn't replace the pistol.
 
A pistol is better than a sharp stick or a rock, but that’s not the subject of the post (not trying to be a thread nanny here)

If the DoD comes up with something better than what’s issued I can only hope that they’ve done the testing to prove it.
 
N9NWO said:
Did four combat tours. The last was in 2007 right before I turned 60
Click to expand...

Thanks for your service.

And given your experience, do you really believe what’s written in the Army Times? I know we never did
 
.455_Hunter said:
Interesting. I guess people have different experiences with regards to pistols in the service.
Click to expand...

A pistol is extra weight. instead of a pistol use the weight for water or more ammo.

And for many support troops the pistol was their only weapon. Or a short barreled M4. Thus the need for a PDW
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Colt's M4 contract expired. Army acquires rights to M4.
2 3
Replies
63
Views
5K
Daniel Watters
D
E
  • Locked
Defense Tech: Army (might) Abandon "Leap" for M4 Replacement
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
4K
Bart Noir
B
Back
Top