Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

M24 sniper rifles for Afghanistan

Discussion in 'Rifle Country' started by Slater, Jan 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Slater

    Slater Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,129
    Location:
    Flagstaff AZ
  2. Messenger Guard

    Messenger Guard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2010
    Messages:
    239
    Location:
    Knoxville TN
    Nope, they get bulk discounts and good driver discounts.:D
     
  3. JDMorris

    JDMorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,518
    Location:
    Where the Red Fern grows..
    WAIT.
    The Afghani's are getting M24's?
    That's not cool, good guys or not, they don't need our long range weapons, only to be lost and taken by the insurgents...
    Just my opinion..
     
  4. JHansenAK47

    JHansenAK47 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    603
    Location:
    Alaska
    I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same price.
     
  5. shotgunjoel

    shotgunjoel Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,572
    Location:
    illinois
    If I remember correctly the last order to FNH for M16's had a unit price of around $420. A lot less than what you can find a lower quality AR at the LGS.
     
  6. JHansenAK47

    JHansenAK47 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    603
    Location:
    Alaska
    These rifles aren't M16s mass produced at the lowest possible cost. I don't know how much they are charging for them but I wouldn't assume that they are necessarily cheap.
     
  7. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    12,705
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    The insurgents don't need to steal M-24s to have long-range rifles. Whether it was the M-24 or any of a hundred other commercially available rifles, the Afghanis or their enemies could get a sniping rifle very easily. It isn't the rifle that is dangerous. And it's not like they don't know anything about sniping. They have been using unconventional tactics to drive out invaders for centuries.

    I can't open the pdf, I'm going to suggest that if they are actual M-24s, we are probably rotating out our older rifles to them.

    This is one of those "fear the indian, not the arrow" situations.
     
  8. JDMorris

    JDMorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,518
    Location:
    Where the Red Fern grows..
    The Mosin Nagant, or SVD, don't really count as a sniper rifle to me, But if the insurgents get their hands on M24's, with high quality glass, that has a Mil-Dot reticle, that they might learn to use...
    That makes me feel sick.
    I was watching a program on the Military channel, where a 2 man scout sniper team killed a couple of insurgents that were sitting in a van overlooking a road, when they went to the van after the kills, they recovered a killed snipers' M40, that the insurgents had been using against the Marines.
    We don't need that happening in afghanistan, where the standard soldiers' M16's and M4's aren't going to keep up with the .308 rounds....
    Last thing we need is insurgents using our weapons against us.
     
  9. Jaws

    Jaws Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    271
    This is bloody insane. :fire:

    Talk about stupid military spendings. Why on earth do they need such an expensive rifle paid by us tax payers?
    Some second hand M16s it's ok, but $7000 sniper rifle to some guys that used beat up ak's for all their lives is insane.
    This wars are really making some people filthy rich on tax payer's backs.
    Like is not enough suporting your troops, you have to buy uber cool gadgets for foreign troops, that could use them against you in a few months.:banghead:

    Oh, we can't spend our limited resources to get the SCAR to our special forces. .....but we can buy seven grand a piece coll sniper rifles for foreign troops, that could change their mind tomorow. :banghead:
     
  10. JDMorris

    JDMorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,518
    Location:
    Where the Red Fern grows..
    I though all the M24's were getting the barrel change to .300WM, and that tacticool stock, guess not..
     
  11. Float Pilot

    Float Pilot Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,149
    Location:
    Kachemak Bay Alaska
    As the well trained and armed barbarian hordes plunged through the gates of Rome, one Roman General was heard to remark,
    " Are those not the same auxiliary troops we trained last year?"
     
  12. mljdeckard

    mljdeckard Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    12,705
    Location:
    In a part of Utah that resembles Tattooine.
    I say again,

    If they want long range rifles, it's not like the army is the only place to get them. They can beg, borrow or steal the best rifle in the world, this has never been difficult to get. The reason it hasn't been a concern until now is because they completely understand, having a rifle doesn't make ANYONE a sniper.

    I heard the story about the re-captured M-40 too. There is nothing at all to indicate it ever actually fired against us. And when they got it back, it had different glass on it. Anyone can buy a Remington 700 VS and slap a scope on it. That doesn't mean they have a clue what to do with it other than shoot it like an assault rifle but slower. Calm down, this isn't news.
     
  13. kis2

    kis2 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    925
    mljdeckard is super correct. thank you for posting it.

    now back to the op's question: what's the going rate for these anywhere else?
     
  14. killchain

    killchain Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    780
    Location:
    Washington State
    The SOCOM refused the SCAR after they demanded FN build it just like they wanted.

    Think about it for a second: retraining the entire DoD on a new weapons system, cycling out all of the armories with parts, tools, weapons. Disposal of the old rifles. While fighting two wars? All for the same caliber and a piston? EXPENSIVE. LIKE STUPIDLY EXPENSIVE.

    The last time the military did that, they got a bunch of people killed. Remember when they fielded the M16 in Vietnam?

    I've used both rifles for their intended purpose. I'll take the M4 anyday.
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2011
  15. wannasupra

    wannasupra Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    109
    they just need to upgrade the existing weaponry to a 6.5mm or 6.8mm. the mags would all still work, so would all other parts of the weapons. expanded capability, no retraining of operators.
     
  16. longdayjake

    longdayjake Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,605
    Location:
    Genesee, ID
    Mags, bolts, and barrels wouldn't work. And in some cases the buffers wouldn't either.
     
  17. marksman13

    marksman13 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,426
    Location:
    Mississippi
    The arguments about them having the rifles are ridiculous. As previous posters have stated, they can get the rifles any where.

    My issue is that my tax dollars were used to purchase them. That is what boils my blood. We are past the point of having to supply the Afghan Army.
     
  18. nathan

    nathan Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,067
    If its paid by taxpayers, they dont care less . They stand in the notion that war is expensive and if it needs to be done, it will be done.
     
  19. Slater

    Slater Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,129
    Location:
    Flagstaff AZ
  20. RhinoDefense

    RhinoDefense Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    883
    The 6.8 SPC will never be the MBR cartridge unless NATO adopts it. Period. The two MBR cartridges approved by NATO are the 5.56 and the 7.62. Changing the MBR cartridge during a war is simply ridiculous.

    The problem with today's soldiers not getting enemy kills at distance is not a hardware issue, it's a software issue. The soldiers are getting poor training in marksmanship and the accuracy and skill set of our soldiers is degrading. A different cartridge and weapon system will not solve that problem. The military needs to get serious about killing and training our soldiers to be marksmen.
     
  21. Jaws

    Jaws Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    271
    The point I'm trying to make is that for some reason is not justified to get new modern weapon for US troops yet you buy new modern ridiculously expensive sniper rifles for the Afghan Army.
    The pdf above shows 9 Million dolar contract for 1300 M24's going to the Afghan Army.
    Why not buy some thing like a scoped remington 700's for the Afghan army and use the rest of the money to get something for the US troops instead. Or just don't spend the money.
    I just used the scar example becaus you can buy around 7000 SCAR rifles for your troops on the money you spend on 1000 boutique sniper rifles for ANA.
     
  22. Mainsail

    Mainsail Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,070
    Location:
    Washington
    Am I missing something? I don't see anything in the contract that says this is a foreign military sale (FMS). The customers are the Army and the Air Force and it's administered by DCMA.
     
  23. Slater

    Slater Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,129
    Location:
    Flagstaff AZ
    Mark for:

    Afghan National Army Depot 1
    Attn cstc-a cje log ana
    tel 079-905-9790
    off jalalabad rd nxt to camp dogan
    Kabul Afghanistan
     
  24. txhoghunter

    txhoghunter Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    Messages:
    663
    My guess would be that these are probably not for American snipers overseas but I could be wrong. Last I checked the US military had a contract to upgrade existing M24's to .300 WM and I don't think they would order any more 7.62 rifles from the factory (at least not this many).
     
  25. Slater

    Slater Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    1,129
    Location:
    Flagstaff AZ
    The official Defense.gov announcement:

    Remington Arms Co., Inc., Ilion, N.Y., was awarded on Jan. 5 a $8,914,609 firm-fixed-price contract. The award will provide for 1,212 M24 sniper rifles with bipods to the government of Afghanistan. Work will be performed in Ilion, N.Y., with an estimated completion date of Sept. 30, 2014. One bid was solicited with one bid received. The U.S. Army TACOM LCMC, Rock Island, Ill., is the contracting activity (W56HZV-11-D-0049).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page