Military Approves FN SCAR System for Full-Rate Production

Status
Not open for further replies.

chieftain

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
1,264
Location
The Free State of Arizona
For your consideration:

August 17 : 2010

Military Approves FN SCAR System for Full-Rate Production

McLean, Virginia -- The U.S. Special Operations Command notified FN that the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) family of weapons-the MK 16 (5.56mm) and MK 17 (7.62mm) combat assault rifles and MK 13 grenade launcher-was approved for full-rate production. The Full-Rate Production Decision Review by the Milestone Decision Authority occurred on July 30, 2010.

FN Herstal, a worldwide recognized firearms supplier to generations of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines since 1897, has ramped up production and assembly at its manufacturing facilities to meet the delivery orders placed by USSOCOM.

Following a worldwide solicitation to the firearms industry in 2004, nine vendors submitted a dozen designs for a new modular, multi-caliber weapons system. In November 2004, FNH was awarded the contract by USSOCOM for its SCAR submission after passing the Go/No-Go criteria required by the solicitation and being selected by a source selection board composed of senior operators from every SOF component.

The SCAR weapons system is modular and easily adaptable to future enhancements and calibers. It is built with an eye to careful economic stewardship and the small logistical footprint required of today's highly mobile military. Overall life cycle costs are reduced by features such as a chrome-lined, hammer forged steel barrel with a service life of far more than 15,000+ rounds. Each component of the SCAR weapons system is built for years of dependable service while minimizing maintenance downtime.

The heart of the FN SCAR system consists of two highly adaptable modular rifle platforms and a grenade launcher. Type-designated as the MK 16 and the MK 17, both rifles are available with three different barrel lengths optimized for conducting operations in close-quarters combat, standard infantry and longer-range precision fire roles. All SCAR barrels are tightly attached to a monolithic receiver and can be easily interchanged by the operator in minutes to instantly meet virtually any mission requirement. The MK 13 40mm Enhanced Grenade Launcher Module (EGLM) easily mounts under the barrel of either SCAR platform, providing another useful tool for the warfighter and is easily configured for use as a stand-alone weapon as well. Because of the SCAR system's modular design, ergonomic (100%) and parts commonality (greater than 80%), it represents a significant reduction in training costs and life-cycle support. The weapon system's open architecture supports future enhancements and modifications in operational requirements including ammunition, aiming devices, sighting systems and other mission critical equipment.

The MK 17 (7.62mm) is also the base of the SCAR common receiver currently under final test and evaluation by USSOCOM. The SCAR common receiver can accommodate multi-caliber conversion kits.

The SCAR weapons system is the first new assault rifle procured by the U.S. Military through a full and open competition since the M16 trials held in the mid-1960s. It was tested for reliability, accuracy, safety and ergonomics from August 2005 to September 2008 in a variety of environments including urban, maritime, jungle and winter/mountain operational test scenarios. The SCAR weapons system successfully endured more than two million rounds of ammunition during these trials thereby making it the most heavily tested weapons system in the history of small arms. No other current so-called modular weapons system has endured even a fraction of this degree of strenuous testing, and none are in use by U.S. forces.

FN firearms manufactured in the United States are produced by FN Manufacturing in Columbia, SC. The Herstal Group is represented by FNH USA, FN Manufacturing and Browning within the United States and directly employs more than 1,000 individuals. U.S. operations are located in Virginia, South Carolina, Utah and Missouri. FNH USA is the sales and marketing arm of FN. Its corporate mission is to expand the company's global leadership position in defense, law enforcement and commercial markets by delivering superior products and the finest in training and logistical support. For more information, or to view the entire line of FN products, visit www.fnhusa.com. FNH USA, LLC, P.O. Box 697, McLean, VA 22101 USA.

Media Contact:
Tes Salb (703) 288-3500X125 or [email protected]

Fred
 
I like the SCAR. I have had the pleasure to handle the Mk.17 with GL under it a little, when FN representatives had a presentation here. The whole deal with the GL was lighter than our main .308 cal Swedish HK G3 clone as a blank. Not to say more ergonomic and easier to use (I mean loading, working the charging handle etc. I've also understood that the SOCOM likes the .308Win cal SCAR more, since it's a more bigger improvement than .223 version over the M16/M4. Cannot comment on accuracy or reliability, as I haven't shot one that much. But I am looking forward to the instance when the FN would decide to sell SCARs in Europe too, I'd be happy with the civilian .308 model and 20' barrel, even.
 
That SCAR is nice! but for a range gun and safe queen it's a little to much $$$. I'll stick with the AR platform for now. My preference would be the H&K 417, but again, to much $$ for a range or a 3 gun match rifle.
I'm just wonering why Colt didn't put the gas piston rifle out, they develop it and then put it on the back burner about 3 years ago.
 
Gotta ask, what is full rate production when SOCOM amounts to a few thousand soldiers? It's not like a DOD contract for 400,000 units over 5 years, with follow ups over the next 15.

Don't get too worked up over it. It's FN's announcement, and sounds more like hype and damage repair for SOCOM dropping the MK16, a decision that seems to still stand.

Don't forget, SOCOM's reasoning was 1) the MK16 doesn't do anything remarkably better than the M4, and 2) Whatever DOD issues is what their soldiers bring to shoot. SOCOM bears the expense of retraining. The Army is going through the Improved Carbine trials now, with results later. No since spending money for a potential orphan. SOCOM can wait.
 
The old questions still have to be answered. What does the SCAR do that the AR15/M16/M4 doesn't do?

What makes it that much better a rifle than the current one?

Just my .02,
LeonCarr
 
Last edited:
Fan boys are now stroking their rifles quietly by their self's over the triumphant news.......... J/K :neener:

But on a serious note, its too expensive for what it is in my opinion for the civilian market.

It will defiantly impress a few at a range, but for 2,500 bucks I could buy my weight in Mil Surps and feed them at the same time. :rolleyes:

I might bite at about 1K to 1400, but 2500? No way.


It seems to me not to be the penultimate answer to a question of improving battlefield survivability and firepower superiority. Yes its cool, yes its modular and yes to many it even feels good. But are those factors enough to pry the mean green away from Eugine Stoner's creation? Most likely not any time soon.

The regular army will stick with the M16 family because it works and still fulfills the role for which it was intended.


-Bill
 
For the cost of a civilian-legal SCAR, you could buy a JP-15, easily a much better rifle.

I've handled the SCAR, and, for the price, find it to be unimpressive.
 
The foreend is short so you can interchange a shorter barrel - 10" for the SCAR-L and 13" for the SCAR-H.
 
They may be going into full production, (yeah, ok) but there is no money in the 2011 SOCOM budget to buy them, and the fielding for SF Groups has been postponed indefinitely. So they can make all they want, there is no money for them.
 
Exactly how the M4A1 came into existence.

The SpecOps community received the M4 in drips and drabs. Then suddenly the "BIG ARMY" jumped on board.

Of course in the SpecOps community at least at one time, when they didn't have the money they needed for gear, they would "acquire" it via the intelligence community funding. Unless someone here knows "absolutely for sure". Otherwise it may still work that way.

Unlike others here, I cannot read the future. Just a couple months ago the Anti-SCAR crowd cheered that the SpecOps folks were NOT buying anymore Mk16s, just the Mk17's.

The WAG continue's to prevail.

Go figure.

Fred
 
I do not think the M4 or M-16 will go away anytime soon, however, There was some foresight for an improved weapon system. The SCAR seems to have been the answer SOCOM has found. The price will likely drop down with time just like others but since this seems to be the latest and greatest I wouldn't expect it in the near future.
 
Does the SCAR really weigh less than an equivalent AR? FN lists their SCAR-L standard (13.8" barrel) at 7.24 lbs, while the M4 (14.5" barrel) is listed at 6.5 lbs by the US Army. The KAC RAS only weighs about 2-3oz more than the M4 handguards it replaces. Obviously different barrels, stocks etc. would have an impact but it seems that in an apples to apples comparison the AR would be lighter.
 
.....Posted by Leon Carr "What does the SCAR do that the AR15/M16/M4 doesn't do?".....

Answer: Fire 7.62.

In my opinion as long as we adopt a larger cartridge we will be good. I think they just need to pick up the 6.8 SPC already. It was purpose built to fit all of our M16s and M4s, all we need are new uppers. Heck I'd bet they could get by with just the barrel change and bolt change.

But what I think we REALLY need is this....

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/08/marine_iar_080810w/

....chambered in 6.8
 
Last edited:
F-Body

I am in total agreement with you on the 6.8, but the m27 is nothing new, just a copy of existing technology from Barret and PRI. I can't remember which developed it, but there is an open bolt AR variant that has a unique ability to accept the 249's belt fed capabilities (and existing belts and carriers),but can also take AR mags. Futureweapons did a review on it awhile back and I even saw a couple of them at one of the weapons expos back in 2005. I personally would like to have had one of those guns (in 6.5 or 6.8) with each squad back in 03, 04 or 05 when I was in the sand box.

for the common AR the change to 6.8 is simple and easy change over (like when we switched from the old 1:7 barrels to the 1:8 and 1:9 for the "newer" ammo back in the 90's on the old A1's and A2's (one of my master sergeants back at my first posting was one of the folks that got the $25k innovation and cost savings award for recommending this simple swap of barrels instead of new rifles).

anyway, to convert an AR/M4/M16 to 6.8 you need 3 things : barrel, bolt and mags (the 6.8 mags are stainless steel (to prevent bulging) and have smaller ribs internally and have a different follower. c-products mags which are cheap (and already have an NSN and are on GSA contract for the 5.56 and the 6.8) are good to go and no need to spend 3 to 5 times as much for PRI or barret mags.

I just built a 6.8 AR (search my threads for the specs and pics) as an intermediate between the FAL and Hk91 that I own in 7.62 and my other AR's in 5.56 ..

the 6.8 keeps the weight of a "battle rifle" down to AR specs versus the more heavy 7.62 guns, allows the user to have maintainable and controllable full auto fire (only in a military application) and the 6.8 has the mid range capabilities for lethality and ballistics are a good mix of 5.56 and 7.62 plus the 6.8 gives the shooters that are responsible for CQB the advantage of a round than can shoot thru obstacles (like the 7.62) but limits it's lethality to the surrounding immediate area.

also while the 7.62 is a great long range round the 6.8 loaded with hornady OTM (hollow point boat tail) are doing amazing things on bad guys in the 600yd distances in the real world right now. if the 6.8 would be carried by a majority of the folks in a squad you would open up a whole new ability and limit the need for the SDM's and their m-14's
 
Last edited:
LeonCarr,

Short stroke piston operation is a serious improvement over the Stoner design. Think VC crawling around in mud tunnels, but their SKS doesn't stop. On the other (our) side you had M16s that had some issues with jungle conditions.

I love the SKS for its reliability. It's not accurate or far-reaching, but it is a man-stopper. The idea of putting a short-stroke piston on an accurate, high-quality rifle is an advance for our military.

I will never subscribe to the Stoner idea of routing your gas into your action. I look at that setup and always picture my truck with a hose on it to funnel my exhaust into my air intake. Doesn't take a genius to figure that might gunk something up.

Stoner fans: Please don't run me out of town. I know it's not his fault about the direct-gas thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top