Sig SPEAR (M7 / XM7 NGSW base rifle) practical accuracy to 800y video is available on HWOW now! forgottenweapons.vhx.tv/videos/20240718-sig-spear-11 (free release) You'll have to wait till Thursday to see it on KZitem though. P.S. I realized I called the XM157 the XM158 in the video, sorry... but what do you think about the NGSW project? P.S.S. One other potential instead of just DMROing (destroying essentially) a stock of unused rifles, storing indefinitely, giving them away as Military Aid, or caliber conversion is to "surplus" them to SIG to sell off like the M17 pistols that didn't pass spec... However this may be less likely as it could be politically touchy to "surplus" a magazine-fed modern rifle.
@JonManProductions
Ай бұрын
Aight I made a comment but I guess a really dumb-looking question to some firearms nerds but... Has anyone atm tried seeing how 6.8 handles within the bounds of the AR platform? As in has any asked the caveman form of the question "can we just modify the M4's to fire new bigger boolet?" since it's so modular nowadays I feel like someone has to have thought about it and tried by now...
@jager6863
Ай бұрын
I remember when some army general wanted to switch back to 7.62x51 for all weapons and it died a quiet death, thankfully. The big caliber mafia, regrouped and decided that they needed to justify what they wanted because of body armor and the "need" for long range rifle engagements in order to get their way. SOCOM and the infantry troops in the field never asked for this. In fact, even the Marine Infantry would rather have their M4's back, instead of the heavy and overburdened M27. SOCOM went to the URG-I and I am told the H&K 416's are not as ubiquitous as they once were in Tier 1 units. My prediction is the SIG Spear and the 6.8x51 ammo will very shortly beat the M14's record as the shortest service life of any Army rifle. The new lighter 7.62x51 and 338 Belt feds do have a future, however everyone needs to compete for that contract award. Don't even get me started on that stupid $15,000 do all optic they are bolting on to the M7 and the suppressors (or bright glowing night lights) on every weapon. Perhaps we shouldn't have people who are charge of buying computers and office furniture in charge of weapons trials and procurement???
@hellcy7237
Ай бұрын
With all due respect I think you guys are missing the forest for the trees- As far as I'm concerned the clear intention between the NGSW was for a SAW upgrade and the rifle is the secondary component of that. The XM250 is an upgrade over the M249 in basically every way and the way I see it big army is trying to transition the firepower of the unit away from the individual riflemen and onto the SAW gunner. If you're trying to get a round that can defeat barriers and moderate body armor then you have to go up in caliber to a battle rifle, and the only way to do that while maintaining the same volume of fire as before is to move the firepower away from the rifleman (who cannot keep up the same volume of fire as someone with an intermediate cartridge) and onto the MG. Now is that a necessary change? Debatable- I think a SAW upgrade in 5.56, a new AR upper in 5.56, and MAYBE some development to the 5.56 cartridge but moving to 6.8x51 also fulfills this requirement. Only time will tell if it was a good idea or not however.
@afwaller
Ай бұрын
@@JonManProductionsyou cannot put 308 in an AR-15 without changing the lower. The Ruger SFAR fits it into a similar package but it is proprietary and not compatible. Magazines will not fit in the mag well. You can put 6mm ARC in a 5.56 lower or 300BO.
@Anon-mk4ms
Ай бұрын
I think drones will be more of a problem in the future than any enemy body armour upgrades.
@briantindle7115
Ай бұрын
"I either want less corruption, or I wish to be a part of it."
@damiangrouse4564
Ай бұрын
Believe it or not I came up with the following as the answer to a question: ‘If they’re killing cows anyway, I’m gonna eat steak’.
@davidtbk8789
Ай бұрын
Less of that attitude and more of a justice mindset might be good just now
@MJA5
19 күн бұрын
@@davidtbk8789not to be philosophical, but right as we assess it is right, and truth, by its very nature, is always that. So I agree with you. The reason virtue provides fruit is universal.
@drownthepoor
5 күн бұрын
@@MJA5 I've always agreed with this, but today I'll say that I see a lot of naivete' around truth being universal. You and I see truth as universal, but many people are not mentally capable of facing truth or even understanding it. Our nation and it's system functioned well-enough because of the population being the population it was designed by and for. Today that population is very different, and the goals, morality, and sense of justice of the other populations is not universal. It's a lot to explain, and KZitem often removes me comments when I get into it.
@_Art.Vandelay
Ай бұрын
As something of an importer/exporter myself, I would also love to get your guys’ take on military logistics. The ultimate wunderwaffe was the 40’ shipping container.
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
goddamn aren't you correct on this! I cannot stress how awesome this comment is! (but only log nerds like us understand)
@V3RTIGO222
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviews I feel like this is the same energy as how the 'Jerry can' was the logistics wunderwaffe of WW2...
@oldscratch3535
Ай бұрын
@@V3RTIGO222 Even their ammo cans were better. You could carry 2 in each hand. We still haven't figured that one out.
@patrickwalsh416
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviews conveyer belts, pallets and forklifts are just as deserving of a video as a rifle.
@colbunkmust
Ай бұрын
name checks out...
@mh3225
Ай бұрын
The marine corps back dooring a new service rifle is still one of the funniest things ever. "we need a SAW replacement". *just gives everyone M27s and still retains the saw to be issued at the company commanders discretion.*
@vac1376
Ай бұрын
Company commanders discretion. but there is not 1 infantry unit or weapons platoon that uses a saw. They dont even teach the SAW at IWC, only 240's 50's and mk19s so realistically SAW's are gone in the mc.
@ComfortsSpecter
Ай бұрын
Eghh Sorta
@ComfortsSpecter
Ай бұрын
@@vac1376Sad
@chocolatedude7357
Ай бұрын
@@vac1376 got 12 sitting in the airwing's armory that havent been touched since gwot lol
@Emperor_tomato_ketchup
18 күн бұрын
@vac1376 I believe you but sad to see. I had a saw. Big picture level I have no expertise to argue. Individually the "aw he'll naw" ability of a dedicated weapon can't be replicated. Maybe it is made up for by other means idk
@ftn5546
Ай бұрын
The bigger question is, "what's going on in military contracting?"
@andresmartinezramos7513
Ай бұрын
Business as usual
@matthewconnor5483
Ай бұрын
Corruption 😂
@robertleach5355
Ай бұрын
Hey, did you hear the Navy is fkn up the new Constellation class frigates? Heh heh heh .....
@ChaohsiangChen
Ай бұрын
@robertleach5355 The military procurement wasn't going right since the mid-1990s. Here is a list of major weapon syatem programs that I remeber went wrong: Grizzly CEV Crusader SPA Future Combat System LCS DD(X) F-22 axed after 182 units for no good reason. F-35 KC-46
@Legitpenguins99
Ай бұрын
Sig is giving jobs to the people in charge of procurement. No joke, it happened with the M17. It's mighty suspicious that EVERYTHING is made by Sig
@invertedpolarity6890
Ай бұрын
The bigger-er question is "Does it have enough charging handles?"
@cwolf8841
Ай бұрын
The Soldiers in test units requested adding the M4 style charging handle so Sig gave them what they wanted.
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
Sig shouldve told the soldier to buzz off and get used to the new rifle
@rockineighties
Ай бұрын
@@cwolf8841 A civilian model test of the weapon revealed that the M4-style charge handle gets caught on the stock. The rifle is dominantly intended to use the side charge handle and more issues are evident in how to engage it! Honestly, I fail to see the point of this new system and the round design in question! If I had the power, and I hope the military community would entertain me on the pitch I am going to make. Use an AR-10 as the base, allowing kit swaps of the barrel and receiver and to change between direct-impingement to short stroke gas-piston operation where silencer use is required for a mission, and design the rifle with collective recoil absorbing damper systems. Instead of sticking to the 7.62x51 NATO round, we are going with a modernized Mauser 8mm s.S. Patrone "effect-firing" round with new computerized aerodynamic and weight distributed/balanced design to achieve the ballistic coefficient and desired flat trajectory. The round will utilize a lightweight hybrid-polymer cartridge and the effective propellent chemistry and measurement to enhance the lethality of the already hard-hitting and legendary round. The chamber pressures will certainly not be an issue for this round! This is of course, if I had a say in the Army's project for a new standard of rifle/sniper rifle and light machine gun.
@damiangrouse4564
Ай бұрын
No cup/clipboard holders for seniors NCOs? Ps. Sorry that was my time…Tablets now.
@christopherallmand9407
Ай бұрын
The rear charging handle is rendered useless by the higher spring tension.
@randalljeffs7272
Ай бұрын
Henry saying the quiet stuff out loud
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
Benefits of having a lovely DD214
@Garrick1983
Ай бұрын
Seems a lot of people same the exact same thing, out loud. Spear platform catches a lot of heat.
@andrewshoaf1842
Ай бұрын
I'm messing around with an AR10 in 277 fury. I don't understand the purpose of the xm7 itself.
@perrytilton5221
Ай бұрын
@@andrewshoaf1842 "modularity"
@minhducnguyen9276
Ай бұрын
The part where he talked about additional capabilities is solid. AR development is already peaked, there's little to improve on the assault rifles concept and that's not just with the M16. Even the Chinese decided that all there is to do is copy what they considered the best features of every prolific assault rifle on the market and call it the day. Russia tried to put the counter recoil system but it's not worth the trouble since the 5.45 cartridge is already low on the recoil. So to justify the need for a new rifle you need to make it do something that other rifles cannot.
@_Art.Vandelay
Ай бұрын
Maybe I’m a nerd but I would LOVE more long form content on procurement. It might sound dumb but I think it’s wild how much the process has dictated what everyone uses regardless of if it was the best choice or not.
@BrightEyeSecurity
Ай бұрын
I agree!
@junglesairsoftblog6311
Ай бұрын
Have you discovered Perun's channel? I'd love to see a 9 hole/Perun collaboration
@bigsky2111
Ай бұрын
The M27 IAR was 100% an end run around the Army from the USMC to get what they considered the best infantry weapon to replace the M4A1.
@dariuswilliams7509
Ай бұрын
Exactly and what makes it worse is that the HK 417 already exist as well
@nigerianslumlord
Ай бұрын
Not the best. But the best available on their limited time frame, and budget while meeting very specific requirements. And they ended up with a rifle that really isn't that great as a result.
@KingdomKillaz117
Ай бұрын
@@nigerianslumlord Could've adopted an LMT for a fraction of the cost I'd bet.
@nigerianslumlord
Ай бұрын
@KingdomKillaz117 Possibly. They would have made better rifles for sure. But the USMC wasn't able to push a request for rifles past Congress. The MC wanted new rifles to replace the semi-aged A4s and M4s in inventory. More importantly, abide with the MC's future idea of suppressor usage and infantry theory. They had to sacrifice a true LMG (the 249) to get what they wanted. They justified the HK416 mod as capable of filling in but really it was the proliferation of mmg 240 teams. The 416 (m27) was a shoe horn m4 replacement for combat mos's. It is a very roundabout and political way to get new rifles. But one they did none the less. Tradeoffs be damned. As a result, I don't think LMT could be a contender in that time frame. USMC big brained the shit out of it.
@bigsky2111
Ай бұрын
@@nigerianslumlord MARCORSYSCOM and Gunner Wade were pretty crafty.
@ThrashTillDeth85
Ай бұрын
I just wanted to add that for the logistics side of things it’s not the first time the US strong armed NATO into adopting a round against their will, especially once they had more or less standardized on another cartridge
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
However, as I mentioned in the video, this wasn't a joint service decision... which is certainly not a DOD decision, which holds WAY LESS weight in NATO standardization.
@FortuneZer0
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviews And yet Beretta already has started to also produce the hybrid casings.
@ThrashTillDeth85
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviewsOh I know. That’s why I said it wouldn’t be the first time the US rammed a particular weapon or cartridge through despite NATOs protests. And many of the logistics arguments on it are probably similar to what was said during the adoption of 5.56 and look at where we are now. All of NATO uses 5.56 despite their reservations initially simply because the US wanted it
@ThrashTillDeth85
Ай бұрын
@@FortuneZer0As well as Lake City
@willblack7353
Ай бұрын
Wouldn't this be at least the third time?
@mr.stotruppen8724
Ай бұрын
Someone got mad they were being sprinkled with 7.62 from 900m away by a PKM in the desert and they decided this was the only kind of fight an infantryman ever needs to overcome.
@PavewayJDAM
Ай бұрын
How often are officers in direct combat leadership role? One, two tours, maybe three but generally then they are a on the fob. Add in a timeline for career progression to being in charge - junior officers getting shot at from the hinterland in early to mid 2000s are just now old enough to 'solve' the problems they encountered in combat. 20 years later. America's robust civilian firearm's industry present a LOT of options for COTS solutions for unexpected shortfalls in small arms in future complex. How many units just adopted glocks in GWOT? Millions purchased.
@bcurobinson
Ай бұрын
I’ve been saying this on Reddit. The PKM/ 7.62R has been shot against us for ages, and the best idea was to turn every infantryman into DMR shooter? Really?
@n0tthemessiah
Ай бұрын
Oh fuck, this is the hot take I was looking for!
@Dridgeism
Ай бұрын
Goddamn this made me laugh 😆
@7.62flavorsoffreedom2
Ай бұрын
Being suppressed by a belt fed 900 meters away is a very viable threat in any environment. This is just the advanced version of swapping from the 30 carbine to the m1 garand. Eventually the army will come full circle and adopt another decent intermediate cartridge and phase out the xm7 like they always do
@pnwrob7041
Ай бұрын
Me, a poor, dropping some emotional support in the comment section below*
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
many thanks sir. we are all poor peasants who (unwillingly) support these military boondoggles
@philreynolds7216
Ай бұрын
Henry’s background projects are always interesting. You raise some valid, well-reasoned points. I’m reminded of something Ryan McBeth has said in his videos: The Department of Defense is actually a logistics organization that dabbles in warfare. Our logistic capabilities is what separates us from almost every other military force on the planet, and discounting the logistics of a problem is a recipe for disaster. An old saying I’m reminded of, and I’m sure I’m not quoting it correctly, but the point is still valid: Amateurs discuss strategy. Professionals discuss logistics.
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
Dude Ryan is awesome at what he does, I'm an avid follower to McBeth Programming!
@off6848
Ай бұрын
There's already a name for that. It's called an Expeditionary Force.
@SouthernMagnum
Ай бұрын
I think sig knows people with deep pockets and influence
@marcusfanning7513
Ай бұрын
The rifle was built for the army's specifications, I know general dynamics had the better bid, but ultimately they didn't even bring a machine gun with them. Such a shame.
@chinesesparrows
Ай бұрын
Adversaries include CN which mass produces body armor, AP ammo and scopes/sights, including holosun which many buy here. It's better to be prepared for the worst. They make so much of everything I wouldn't want to just hope for the best with 5.56 carbines
@chinesesparrows
Ай бұрын
@marcusfanning7513 probably some general will have a cushy job at sig
@chinesesparrows
Ай бұрын
There are parallels with the adoption of m14 and then the even heavier and more complex Salvo program. There were better 7.62 designs but the m14 was chosen. The m16 was a air force only rifle until the all powerful McNamara ordered the military branches to all consolidate (rifles, aircraft etc). The sig spear could be the new m14
@jsb9317
Ай бұрын
The sir name of Sig’s president tells you what you need to know about your assertion.
@pablowentscobar
Ай бұрын
I think we've seen before, there's always some high level dipsh*t that in a meetings says "This thing needs to do (Insert stupid unrealistic thing here)!" and the rest scratch their head, look around at each other and go "y-yeah, ok, sure General Dipsh*t, ah, we can do that." and it gets added to the "Requirements".
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
We need it to have anti armor capabilities" "sir we are researching a new GPS nav system." "I said what I said. I am a visionary."
@JerfVR
Ай бұрын
and don't forget general dipsh*t is getting kickbacks on the decision
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
*donations for his think-tank.
@wakes_inc
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviewsjokes have to be half true to be funny. Half. That hypothetical situation hits a little too on the nose to get a laugh.
@aaronclair4489
Ай бұрын
It's fairly obvious to me that this is what happened. You see this all the time: it would actually be nice if you could defeat peer armor at 600 yards, and so when a bigwig gets it in his head that that's a requirement, the program is really imperilled if you can't talk him out of it. You see this all the time. The IFV to replace the Bradley is the XM30. The program before the XM30 was the GCV. The GCV was cancelled because it was heavier and more expensive than an Abrams. Why? "The reason was the vehicle had to have enough armor to protect a squad of nine troops from all battlefield threats (from rocket-propelled grenades to IEDs) as good as or better than other vehicles can protect against specific threats individually." Ok. Somebody important got this added as a requirement and overruled all objections. This is very obviously just a case of "it would be nice if the rifle could do X" transformed into "the troops need this rifle to do X, no matter the cost".
@RakaiVDentist
Ай бұрын
If i had a SIG SPEAR i would name it "William" William SIG SPEAR
@armorers_wrench
Ай бұрын
i don't get it
@jasonspeirs6981
Ай бұрын
@@armorers_wrenchit's a "play" on William Shakespeare
@pablowentscobar
Ай бұрын
@@jasonspeirs6981 It's terrible.
@positiveanion4085
Ай бұрын
The auto captions just give up and say Shakespeare lol
@jasonspeirs6981
Ай бұрын
@@pablowentscobar I didn't say, if it was good or bad pun. That's a matter of opinion.
@pauldees5003
Ай бұрын
Converting that thing to 308 with a simplified optic was the first thing I thought of when it came out. Good job guys!
@Woodland_Warrior
Ай бұрын
Yeah, but at that point just pick something else (from a civilian perspective). The military one is more arguable as touched on in video.
@Klovaneer
Ай бұрын
Reinventing -AR-10- SR-25 at this point.
@TescoVee
Ай бұрын
Having worked on the NGSW program from the industry side, the rumors floating around are the Sig made none of the threshold requirements, the biggest in my mind being the durability/reliability requirement. Having handled the Sig at length I can look at some of their design choices and see why.
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
Once it's in the supply system, you're golden. I'm sure there's a .ppt deck ready for the caliber conversion retrofit project with internal prices already mapped out.
@jimjamauto
Ай бұрын
I thought I heard Ian McCollum say the XM7 was supposed to last a certain amount of full-power rounds and then they will be disposed of
@zombeeofdtx
Ай бұрын
@@jimjamautobarrel life of 10k full power rounds and only had one malfunction during those 10k rounds.
@dariuswilliams7509
Ай бұрын
@@zombeeofdtx The Marines got it right M27 IAR>XM77.
@ThrashTillDeth85
Ай бұрын
@@zombeeofdtxWhich many forget is also about the barrel life of a mk18
@buffhorses3632
Ай бұрын
I’ve been out of the infantry since 07 and the army since 09, so my 2 cents aren’t worth too much. But one thing that seems overlooked is changing caliber changes everything. I hated 556 in Iraq. I don’t think it’s got enough “stopping power”. But….you can carry a whole lot of it. Heavier ammo means you carry less or your dudes suck more. Your suppressive fire has to come more from saws than your riflemen. Like I said, I haven’t been in combat for 17 years lol but I just feel like there aspects that are being overlooked long term. Everybody wants the cool new shit but when you gotta change everything about how you fight, it can turn out to be not that cool.
@celmer6
Ай бұрын
M855 really sucks for Anti-Personnel use. The DOD has been screwing up the AR-15 since the start. The original Colt 601 had 1-14 twist and optimized for 45gr-50gr. Projectiles. The DOD wanted 55gr and the 1-14 twist couldn't stabilize it so 1-12 twist barrel's were adopted to stabilize 55gr M193. I've been doing testing with 45gr-50gr projectiles out of 1-12 twist barrel's for the past 25 years and lighter really is the best way to go. The ballistic performance of a 45gr bullet traveling 3,400fps is absolutely amazing. When you get into 45gr-50gr Ballistic Tips the results get even more dramatic and impressive.
@shane_rm1025
Ай бұрын
Thats why the polymer cartridges would have been the best pick IMO
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
The sig is likely a supplemental rifle for rural and mountain warfare. It probably will not replace 556 in urban suburban combat
@scottzickefoose9829
Ай бұрын
@celmer6 it doesn't help when barrel lengths have been getting shorter, enough so as to affect muzzle velocity.
@-Zevin-
Ай бұрын
@@jason200912 That's what the rifle *should* be, should doesn't mean that's what will happen. They are saying it's for all army infantry, which is monumentally bad idea, but don't put it past the army to make horrible decisions.
@jeffreydrake4876
Ай бұрын
Interesting that Henry’s argument against the 6.8 is the same as General MacArthur’s was against the Garand in .276. We have all this 30-06 why change.
@GeorgiaBoy1961
Ай бұрын
Re: "Interesting that Henry’s argument against the 6.8 is the same as General MacArthur’s was against the Garand in .276. We have all this 30-06 why change." Then Army Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur has taken a lot of heat retroactively for turning down the .276 Pedersen cartridge - but he was correct in his decision then and he is still correct today. Proponents of the 276 seem to proceed from it being some sort of given that the 30-06 was mediocre or even a failure in wartime and military use, when precisely the opposite was the truth. The now-legendary 30-06 has carved its name into the pages of our military history of the First World War, the Second World War, and the Korean conflict, not to mention many smaller ones. Many firearms historians rate the cartridge as the most-influential of the 20th century, not just in military use, but overall. While it is true that the 276 might have offered a few potential improvements to the '06, those gains simply did not amount to enough to justify the switch. And we are not even yet discussing the ways in which the '06 was a better choice. Even if General MacArthur had wanted to make the switch, it would have been a very tough sell on the 'Hill and to Congress during the lean years of the Great Depression. It is difficult for 21st century people to imagine, perhaps, but the between wars army was so strapped for cash that they often held maneuvers during which some soldiers used broomsticks instead of rifles and Model T Fords substituted for tanks, or cavalrymen on horses. The expense of switching from 30-06 to 276 would have eventually involved rebarreling every rifle and medium machine gun in the Army, Navy and Marine Corps, but worse yet, retooling all of the ammunition plants and arsenals making weapons and ammo. To say nothing of having to revamp and redo training, and all of the rest of it. Funding to do that would have had to come out of budgetary allocations made to other important purposes, because the cupboard was bare. Congress wasn't in the mood to allocate more money. In short, MacArthur made the only rational choice he could have, given the economic and other realities of the time. Regarding the 6.8 Fury, do its benefits outweigh the costs associated with adopting it? Does it solve the problems the army wanted solved in the best and most-efficient way possible? I'd argue not, but your mileage may vary....
@vidard9863
Ай бұрын
No, he didn't really address the cartridge itself aside from noting that 7.62 nato already did 80% of what 6.8 does, and isn't sure that the 20% more matters. He just talked about the reality of big army.
@Mrjohnnymoo1
Ай бұрын
And the Garand went down in infamy as the best battle implement of it's time and made major steps to win the war.
@gregewing3916
Ай бұрын
I wonder how much increased performance could have been gotten applying same cartridge tech to the 5.56? Change the shoulder if we don't want to blow up older rifles. Applying the tech something like the 5.6x50mm case with an obviously longer magazine could be interesting
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
@GeorgiaBoy1961 No it didn't require rebarrelling all rifles. It means new rifles and guns would be in the new caliber. And there was no demand to make machine guns in 276 as you said. 276 would only be for the garand as pedersen and John garand had developed. Garand developed it in both 276 and 30-06 because he was aware of the political factions fighting over it. Take a guess what happened when 223 was used in vietnam..Vietnam... did they recharger every single mg and rifle from 7.62 nato to 223? Nope. They built new rifles for the new caliber.
@natem1334
Ай бұрын
In his video about the NGSW, Chris Bartocci at Small Arms Solutions called the program "Section 8 for army procurement". He sees no upside, and he predicted it will be scrapped. He also pointed out the astonishing fact that the Army prices the hybrid high-pressure version of the 277 Fury at over $20 PER CARTRIDGE. He says that alone spells out the cartridge's demise, seeing as how the non-hybrid version has no real advantage over 308.
@11JohnTi
Ай бұрын
The M7 is a step backwards to the m14 where we found that the weight and ammo capacity of 308 or 277 were unsatisfactory when compared to the 556. The amount of you can carry 120 rounds of 556 in 4 magazines or 60 rounds of 308/277 in 3 mags at roughly the same weight. Infantry doctrine and lessons learned in Ukraine show ammo capacity > ammo capability
@nordoceltic7225
10 күн бұрын
The US is stepping up caliber because experience in Iraq showed them that a man can take 3 5.56 to the chest and keep going for up to a full minute, if not 2. Turns out weight matters, and 180-250 pound western and middle eastern men don't just explode like 120 pound Vietnamese men did to the 5.56. Its like trying to shoot a deer with a varmint rifle, you are only gonna kill quickly if you hit a critical organ. So he will die, but he won't fall down disabled before he does damage to friendlies. What are soldiers then gonna do? Use their knives? Now add in plate armor, that ALL universally stops all 5.56mm without question and the army is gonna be facing down dudes who take 3 to the chest and don't even flinch or stop charging. Then we factor in that 5.56 doesn't offer good terminal ballistics past 400 meters. So long range options are utterly off the table. Which also make all those modern optics a waste of time and weight since its limited to "iron sights" ranges. The entire point of spending $$$ to get scopes on every rifle was to extend range for a tactical advantage. They need their cartridges to support that. Dunno if 6.5mm is the answer, but all I know is 5.56 is NOT the answer. More ammo doesn't do piss when not only can it not stop the enemy, the enemy an't even scared of it anymore because the KNOW it can't kill them unless lucky shots are had.
@waltski4375
Ай бұрын
In the "Band of Brothers" miniseries, when Easy Company was moving into the front to counter the 1944 Ardennes Offensive (Battle of the Bulge), the most poignant questions from Easy Company soldiers to those soldiers coming off of the line was "Do you have any ammo? Gimme your ammo."
@hunterjager9538
Ай бұрын
Fun Fact. Only like 10% of that series was historically correct. Also the 101st was only encircled for 6 days. The series makes it look like they were encircled for weeks.
@sebastianprimomija8375
Ай бұрын
@@hunterjager9538How did you come by that statistic?
@Iceman259
Ай бұрын
@@sebastianprimomija8375 rectally
@jansobieski7470
Ай бұрын
@@waltski4375 my dad was one of those troopers, and his squad wasn't just asking for ammo, was also looking for a weapon because he had gotten back to his unit the evening before after being in the hospital since October, being wounded in Holland, he was looking for a weapon, ammo AND field and cold weather gear... 101st was sent to Bastogne with little more than the uniforms they were wearing... no cold weather issues, very few crew-served weapons...
@jansobieski7470
Ай бұрын
@@waltski4375 another fun fact... my dad said that when they asked retreating US troops for weapons, often, they would just throw them down and keep running... talk about making an airborne guy wanna fight...!
@outofrangetv2353
Ай бұрын
Looking at the M7, it doesn’t seem like much of an advantage over an M4. But when you look at the ngsw program as a whole, the m250 is leaps and bounds ahead of the M249 and the M240
@matthewconnor5483
Ай бұрын
The machinegun piece makes more sense then the rifle.
@ajrey8457
Ай бұрын
the M7 is a major upgrade it can easily hit 500 yards compared to an M4 which is 300 yards and thats with a good shooter behind it. I can see the M7 being more of a dmr rifle over the main service weapon which the Army is going for. But then again knowing every soldier is going to have the capability to reach out to 800 yards with the included XM157 aiming system is kind of wild.
@horatiomatthews4257
Ай бұрын
A belt fed without a quick change barrel is kinda silly
@boygonewhoopdataZZ
Ай бұрын
The M7 is a proper battle rifle for occupation and conquering, not policing.
Henry's questions in the last segment remind me of the way the Army stumbled into adopting UCP for its field uniforms. It seemingly came from nowhere, without a clear trail of accountability.
@PentaRaus
Ай бұрын
Fraud, waste, and abuse. We are a banana republic. Except nobody has come to terms with it. Yet.
@stevewilson7819
Ай бұрын
There must always be a way to obscure the trail of accountability. You need to protect senior leadership from being held accountable for incompetence, deriliction of duty, and corruption. And keep the masses placated. Example: 911 Hearings. That was held because they had to. But in the end it was all grand theater. And not one of those that failed in senior leadership really paid a price.
@johnhermann7498
Ай бұрын
Except in the case of ACU/UCP, there is a clear trail of accountability... The biggest hurdle is getting someone high enough in the food chain to say it was a Bad Idea and get the ball rolling.
@petesheppard1709
Ай бұрын
@@johnhermann7498 👍That's what make the issue so frustrating.
@Aztal
Ай бұрын
"I would use a SCAR over this!" Purchase...... justified, Thanks Henry!
@Aztal
Ай бұрын
@@davidjob4909 got mine for 2900 which was acceptable for me
@briansouth9325
Ай бұрын
Did you know that running a suppressor on the scar voids it's warranty?
@Aztal
Ай бұрын
@@briansouth9325 yeah, and I do it anyway
@alexander1902
Ай бұрын
@@Aztaldealing with FN for warranty isn't worth the $3300 I'd pay for a new rifle anyway.
@blackout.ghost718
Ай бұрын
Cope @@davidjob4909
@Rick_Makes
Ай бұрын
I think Henry hit the nail on the head with the calibre conversion point. These will probably end up converted to 7.62 as a DMR to supplement the M110 until the time when the 6.8 cartridge finds its niche.
@tenchraven
Ай бұрын
Assuming it ever does. The grossly accelerated wear and tear on the rifles, which we also see with the 855a1, is going to limit that and yes, there is the underpowered "training load"/civilian 277 Fury but that doesn't do anythign 7.62x51 hasn't for three generations. The juice isn't worth the squeeze on the new round.
@Rick_Makes
Ай бұрын
@@tenchraven it will probably only find a role with 6.8 when a new bullet is developed to combat a new armour or a new threat on the battlefield but like you said currently "the juice isn't worth the squeeze". The XM7 really is a solution looking for a problem.
@blackout.ghost718
Ай бұрын
@@tenchravenpeople said that about the m4 when it replaced the m16 and about the m16 when the m16 replaced the m14, and about the m14 when it replaced the garand...lol etc etx
@Asghaad
Ай бұрын
6.8 is WAY too ahead in every performance metric over 308 for them to convert superior firearms back to inferior legacy cartridge ...
@mrbreck1
Ай бұрын
To me it looks like the best use requires a change in squad level tactics. We may be taking a bigger backward step than even henry realizes. The adoption of body armor and light vehicles coupled with changing terrain projections for future wars necessitated the change of round. We may need to adopt a similar squad set up from ww2. Team one has a weapon in dmr config, 2 in battle rifle, and one perhaps a 5.56 in carbine or machine pistol set up. Team two has a saw, 2 battle rifle, and a carbine with a grenade launcher. Two squads may be needed to handled what one can do in a mout situation but it would give them flexibility those squads currently lack against body armor and targets at range. I think the logistics is a bigger issue than many believe.
@monster61164
Ай бұрын
Good officers talks about tactics, great officers talk about logistics. Keep the m-4 and switch to 77grain bullets. Train soldiers to, when they can take an accurate shot( which is not as often as you think) shoot for the groin area. With 77grain bullets and better optics you can shoot out to 600 meters with an M-4. You can also carry more ammo with the M-4.
@44R0Ndin
Ай бұрын
Why shoot for the groin tho? The thigh with that gigantic femoral artery (and femur) is right there. Can't really fight if you can't walk, or if you're bleeding out from a major artery. That's gonna 100% remove someone from the fight, no 2 ways about it. Plus, Nobody's wearing bulletproof armor on their thighs, not even in the best-armored and best equipped soldiers. Closest you get is an armored bit to protect the groin, the very area you're saying to aim at. The thigh is a hard area to apply good armor to unless you literally make combatants wear a kevlar Kilt (tho to be fair Ireland and Scotland might be interested in that). The idea behind using guns is never to kill people, it's to make them no longer capable of fighting, and "Femur fracture or femoral artery tear" is 100% a combat casualty every time. In fact, if you DO NOT kill them, you occupy more people than if you DO kill them, because if they stay living for a little while people are going to try to administer medical attention, and if they're doing that that's TWO people that can't shoot back at you, whereas if you just killed them, you only took ONE set of crosshairs off your fire team.
@monster61164
Ай бұрын
@@44R0Ndin in combat you first try to eliminate the threat before rendering first aid. Yes sometimes you try to help a wounded soldier but if the threat is still persistent I’ll guarantee you will try to eliminate the threat first. Most soldiers don’t wear nut protectors but if they do then yes shot the legs but remember you can put a tourniquet high up on the leg and possibly still stay in the fight until the threat is eliminated, again possibly not likely but I would say situation dictates what you will try to do. The thing is the groin is a larger target. Also your primary objective in a firefight is to eliminate the threat(kill). Not occupy the enemy with their wounded. Sure it occupies more assets to tend to the wounded and possibly give you more targets but I believe that is secondary. Every time I was in a firefight I shot to kill never to wound the enemy.
@RailRoad188
Ай бұрын
Possibly the issue is the terminology of groin instead of pelvic girdle.
@monster61164
Ай бұрын
@@RailRoad188 yes sir thank you
@kennylamorena6339
Ай бұрын
Ft Campbell 11B NCO here, we tested them. Not a fan of this weapon along with the rest of the team who did for all the statements that were said in this video. 2 steps back for one step forward. This is hindering the Infantry more than benefiting them in my opinion.
@chupacabra304
Ай бұрын
Super curious, in your experienced opinion, What would be the equivalent of something 1 step forward with no steps back, or even 2 steps forward?
@ArchOfficial
Ай бұрын
@@chupacabra304 Nothing. Enlisted personnel don't like new equipment, in any case, ever.
@jmanswat2457
Ай бұрын
I'm just curious what the ACTUAL DREAM SERVICE RIFLE AND CARTRIDGE would be? Like no one is happy with anything it seems. 556 is weak, 308 is bulky and sucky bc, 277 still has to much recoil, the scar has a a stupid charging handle and kills optics, on and on and on. What is the answer please. I want to know what dream gun military guys want.
@pacmanmcgavin7034
3 күн бұрын
Right on, man!
@thebanditman5663
Ай бұрын
I think it will be converted to 7.62x51mm in a lot of cases, as will the XM250. I think it will be a prominent system as a DMR with a longer barrel. I think the winter charging handle is genius, and the AR charging handle will go away in later iterations. (Mittens in -40 suck.) I think suppressors will not be used most of the time. I think the laser rangefinder optic will stay in service as part of the DMR package, and the analog LPVO optic will be standard issue. Garand Thumb's review of it makes it pretty clear just how broken (in gaming terminology) of a system it is. 3 seconds between clicking a button and getting a round out the barrel and onto a target six hundred and some change meters away for the first shot of the day is absurd. If there is a group of people 25 to 50 meters between each other range-wise, (say a V formation or something similar,) all it takes is the first lase on one of them, and everything else is a slight adjustment from the user up or down.
@Live4Gunz
Ай бұрын
A sig mcx in a hybrid 6mm arc would be so much better. It's lighter than the spear with marginally worse range and still having much better performance against armor compared to 5.56.
@Brimwald
Ай бұрын
Or even a 6mm Max
@tedarcher9120
Ай бұрын
Not worse range. 6 arc has exactly the same ballistics as 6.8
@mortcs
Ай бұрын
I would love to see something like a 6mmArc or even 6mmPPC developed with the hybrid bimetalic case that sig developed. I want to see what kind of velocity they can get with the higher pressures this cartridge provides.
@hornmonk3zit
Ай бұрын
What armor? The armor that our near peer adversaries don't even issue or the basic level IV armor from a decade ago that still stops anything shy of a .50BMG? Every modern armor stops .277 and the second something general issue can get through that armor it gets replaced in six months during actual wartime or troops will ditch it like they did with their flak jackets in Vietnam.
@RedXlV
Ай бұрын
@@hornmonk3zit Yeah, this whole idea was "We need something to to penetrate body armor, because suddenly war with a near-peer adversary looks more likely than we used to think. Wait, Russians don't actually wear body armor? I'll pretend I didn't hear that."
@jarvy251
Ай бұрын
What I never understood was the contract being for the package (rifle, MG, cartridge) from a sole source: You're practially guaranteed to get maybe 1/3 thats good, and the rest being a bit rubbish. That's what made NGSW look like an elaborate under-the-table deal rather than a serious upgrade program.
@matthewconnor5483
Ай бұрын
Wink wink, nod nod. That's how the deep state stays entrenched.
@boygonewhoopdataZZ
Ай бұрын
Sig was the only one out of the three participants that can actually do it by themselves without calling for other companies to help.
@Woodland_Warrior
Ай бұрын
@@boygonewhoopdataZZBut the point is, wouldn’t you WANT help? To me, it generally seems to get more quantity out and, on top of that, tends to breed competition (which means innovation).
@bl8danjil
Ай бұрын
Yeah, that was suspect the way the program had all 3 in one.
@jarvy251
Ай бұрын
@@boygonewhoopdataZZ Why would you want them to do it by themselves though? Instead of getting one company that does a mediocre job at different products, why not diversify among companies with appropriate expertise for better results? People start asking question like "Was getting the best equipment not the intent of the contract? Was it all just a charade to funnel money to SIG?" When they were developing the AR15, no one expected Armalite to invent a new round! They did the sensible thing and went to a major ammunition manufacturer with the specs.
@NotHunterCooper
Ай бұрын
The USgov took a gamble that rifles would matter in "next gen warfare". It turns out that small payload drones on the squad level was the horse to bet on.
@positiveanion4085
Ай бұрын
They have more of those than your probably realize. US drone tech is pretty good actually.
@EbonyPhoenix
Ай бұрын
Unlike most militaries, the US army has the budget for all of the above.
@Piggiesgomoomoo
Ай бұрын
@@positiveanion4085Right, so good that we had to ban DJI drones, and can't replace them with anything equivalent made in the US
@MrCashewkitty
Ай бұрын
Well, small arms always matter, just not for the reasons many people think.
@zuccy
Ай бұрын
look up Anduril, the US is absolutely shredding the small payload drone/ew front
@brandonwestfall3241
Ай бұрын
From what I remember hearing about XM157, it sounded like it had more potential than just making range-finding simple. It sounded to me like it had the potential to be used as a sort of infantry level HUD, with datalink. Which could maybe allow for things like "pinging" the location of suspected enemies, increasing the speed and accuracy that an entire unit gets onto target.
@TenaciousTentacruel
Ай бұрын
Seemed like about everybody loved the BAR in WW2. As many as 1/4 of dudes in the Pacific had one by the end of the war. European platoons often carried six BARs instead of the standard three
@andresmartinezramos7513
Ай бұрын
That only tells us that they preferred BARs over M1s. Not if BARs were the optimal choice.
@UMADBRO64
Ай бұрын
Gee, why would guys prefer to have 20 round magazine fed rifles, than 8 round clip fed rifles. Almost as if volume of fire is preferable or something.
@Verdha603
Ай бұрын
That was equal parts the big wigs realizing they were undergunned at the tactical level as it was soldiers loving them. The Marines were smart enough to start the war with a BAR assigned to each fireteam (3 to a squad). The Army started the war with one assigned to a squad. Match that against a squad built around a top fed LMG with 30 round mags, designed for suppressing fire, and at least a dedicated ammo feeder, if not everyone else on the squad contributing mags to feed the LMG, meant we had to throw more BAR’s into each squad to compensate with multiple overlapping fields of fire to overcome the problem.
@TenaciousTentacruel
Ай бұрын
@@UMADBRO64 BARs weigh 20lbs, a Garand weights 10. That's a big reason. It's telling that we didn't see Easy company use the BAR much if at all in the tv show.
@TenaciousTentacruel
Ай бұрын
@@andresmartinezramos7513 I made no claim that the BAR was "optimal", whatever that word means to you. I just mentioned its popularity, soo.. aren't we saying the same thing?
@Brimwald
Ай бұрын
A 6mm Arc with a sized up receiver and barrel extension so they can increase the bolt wall size probably would have been the best choice. Geiselle has 30 rd mags too now. Another option would be the 6mm Max that can increase velocity over 5.56, perform better at range, and only requires a barrel and mag swap.
@Avera9eWh1teShark6
Ай бұрын
On paper, yes, but now you run into the same logistical issues but worse, because then you can't even switch to existing stock for anything. I'm pretty sure this is why the Army said the NGSW explicitly must be chambered in 6.8x51. Both the SIG and Beretta rifles could be chambered in 7.62.
@petesheppard1709
Ай бұрын
There's also the issue of soldiers' load with the larger cartridge; bulk as well as weight.
@Gridlocked
Ай бұрын
Keep in mind that the Army has been rolling out combat helmets and body armor that are lighter in weight than the last. Nothing is happening in isolation.
@cwolf8841
Ай бұрын
Look at the studies re ammo expended vs enemy dead. The Army study re SDM in Iraq was impressive.
@petesheppard1709
Ай бұрын
@@cwolf8841 True, and with lighter ammo the soldier can go longer without resupply. Put another way; 'No one ever complained of too much ammo in a firefight.'
@petesheppard1709
Ай бұрын
@@Gridlocked The newer protective gear isn't much lighter, though, and then there is all the gear, especially electronics and batteries that must be considered.
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
They will probably be drilled to do semi auto only, as they are trained to do now
@ZSC001
Ай бұрын
The cost of the actual armor piercing hotrod 277 ammo is absolutely insane, even for military spending
@jedinutcracker
Ай бұрын
currently yeah but price will go down as more and more of it is made
@JohnBrowningsGhost
Ай бұрын
@jedinutcracker no, it wont, because tungsten isnt more and more available.
@jedinutcracker
Ай бұрын
@@JohnBrowningsGhost tungsten isnt as expensive as you think it is
@tedarcher9120
Ай бұрын
@@JohnBrowningsGhosttungsten bird shot is 10 bucks per round
@BaloneySandwichWithKetchup
Ай бұрын
@@JohnBrowningsGhost but.. it is..
@humanbass
Ай бұрын
What about the 6.5x43 cartridge? Sounds to me a quite reasonable sweet spot. But the US hates sweet spot cartridges. The British 7x43 remembers 😢
@navyman8903
Ай бұрын
Yes, it is stupid. DMR? Sure. Infantry rifle? Hard no.
@zeparagonze6148
Ай бұрын
Naw I think its the way honestly. Handing out a DMR platform to every rifleman to make them be able to engage longer distances. Isnt this literally one of the issues that US troops were facing in afghanistan.
@damncritics
Ай бұрын
@@zeparagonze6148 Yes, so they solve the problem of long range engagements. Now they will have the problem not being able to carry enough ammo to maintain fire superiority for extended periods of time. And that latter problem is significantly more problematic than the former.
@zeparagonze6148
Ай бұрын
@@damncritics If you can hit further shots more accuracly you're gonna be able to use less ammo. I dont think ammo would be a problem. I would assume it would be the same combat load except you just get issued more mags.
@marlowek1936
Ай бұрын
Hy garbage take: they should have gone with a 6mm-6.5mm cartridge in the AR platform and focused on getting that solid. It's got light recoil, plenty of punch, and it's still light so you can have a happy medium on ammo capacity and performance.
@chaoschaoforever
Ай бұрын
@@zeparagonze6148 I honestly don't think so. This seems like a MASSIVE overreaction to what happened in Afghanistan, an environment the AR was not made for. While I think the machine gun might go somewhere and seems like a good idea, I'm not sure about the rifle or the 6.8x51.
@ekajprodnav3843
Ай бұрын
I feel that if this rifle was adopted specifically to replace the armies DMR, there would be a lot less pushback and confusion. Adopting this rifle for the standard infantry rifle makes no sense.
@agskytter8977
Ай бұрын
Why just not use the hybrid cases technology in 7,62NATO and up pressure to app 70000psi. All modern weapons will handle 70000psi with steel bottomed cases. Then you have the 7.62NATO with 90% of 277Fury performance with 200% better barrel life and no logistical problems.
@KevinJohn556
Ай бұрын
I’ve been saying from the beginning this weapon should be DMR only. The XM250 should replace the 240 and 249. The MCX LT chambered in a 6.8spc or 277 Wolverine (because same pills as the 6.8x51) using the hybrid case technology as the standard infantry rifle. If needed we would still have the barrels and conversion kits to swap to the 556 in emergencies or any other caliber that special operations needs using the same rifle. I still would love to see Sig use that new case technology and see how current ammo performs first though although moving to a 277 or 6.8 would be better for the overall system.
@joearledge
Ай бұрын
The modularity of the SIG isn't very different from the AR. You have lowers for 15's and 10's (and technically others) then uppers of your choice... So they didn't wildly improve the modularity
@mrcrecer1312
Ай бұрын
American military leaders have some kind of manic obsession with the constant introduction of rifle cartridges. Instead of the .280 Petersen cartridge they were stuck with the .30-06. When they realized that the intermediate cartridge was the future and the 7.92x33, 7.62x39 and .280 British were created, the USA created the same .30-06 in a shorter cartridge case. And now they are doing the same thing again in the USA. They are making a new M14. But you can make a new armor-piercing cartridge and remain within the framework of an intermediate cartridge for automatic fire, for example, the new 6.02x41 cartridge, which was created in this concept and has increased armor penetration.
@cmdrwilmot2696
Ай бұрын
At least with the .276 Pedersen, the Army not adopting it was the correct choice as WWII happened shortly after.
@mghegotagun
Ай бұрын
Did tungsten tipped 5.56 not cut it somehow?
@userJohnSmith
Ай бұрын
@@mghegotagunDrop off in capability at distance due to accuracy and velocity effects They honestly do have a paint with this cartridge. It's at the upper limit for recoil, we're mostly operating in semiautomatic, and having something that hits a little harder, a little further, with a shorter barrel...
@ChucksSEADnDEAD
Ай бұрын
@@mghegotagun Tungsten is too valuable to make standard issue ammo.
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
@cmdrwilmot2696 I think the caliber debate was in 1930-1935, which is plenty of time for ww2. Italy and Japan screwed up and upgraded their caliber right before ww2 in 1938 and 1940 for Japan. It was unnecessary too as the rifles back then just weren't accurate enough to be used for long range combat, so their small calibers they originally had would have been totally fine.
@68fmj51
Ай бұрын
I’ve got a MCX Spear in .308 and as of right now I hate it. Had it for less than a week and have put only 65 rounds through it. Accuracy is fine, and its shoots 175 grain HPBT just fine, but shooting it suppressed is brutal. Major blowback and it feels like the gun is getting beat to hell. Guess I have to shell out another $1200 or so for a flow through suppressor.
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
that's been our experience, the 308 version recoils like crazy! (not on adverse mode too!)
@positiveanion4085
Ай бұрын
Nuts that a 10+lb rifle would recoil like that. My 10lb M1 is quite soft shooting, no worse than a 12 gauge with birdshot.
@boocomban
Ай бұрын
You have to wait till they come up with M7A1 or M7A2 variants to fix the issue, or wait until FN comes up with a better version of it
@mghegotagun
Ай бұрын
Every day we stray further from Eugene stoner...
@Andrew85or
Ай бұрын
I'd be interested in how the felt recoil is compared to AR10, Galil, FAL and other .308 rifles.
@walker6296
Ай бұрын
There's absolutely no way the XM7 with a 13" barrel and a hot load can penetrate level 4 armor at 600m. It's absurd. Kinda strange that the DOD hasn't released anything about it's armor penetration yet...
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
It can with tungsten I bet.
@ftn5546
Ай бұрын
Henry: "The Lake City plant remains on track to begin interim production at low-scale of the complete 6.8 caliber ammo in the first quarter of calendar year 2024, Adam Hinsdale, the civilian executive assistant at LCAAP, told reporters. Initial production by Winchester at LCAAP will be done in existing facilities. Ground is expected to be broken in 2024 on a new Building 4 at the plant, which will house complete 6.8 caliber production. The new facility is expected to be completed in 2026 and fully commissioned by 2028. In the last six months, the original Building 4, where .30 caliber ammunition was made, has been demolished and the land completely cleared to get ready for the new facility. Denton said the new Building 4 is in the design phase. Come 2028, LCAAP will become the program of record for the 6.8 ammo, ramping to full production as the NGSW is fielded. There are two combat weapons that are part of NGSW, the XM7 Rifle and the XM250 Automatic Rifle, which will replace the current M4 Rifle and M249 Squad Automatic Weapon used by close combat forces, respectively." - Army’s Lake City Plant On Track To Support New Ammo For NGSW Defense Daily 05/19/2023
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
As someone who has yet to see snipers massively field 300 Norma Mag that they were promised with the Mk22 project, and someone who's lived through big army's munition projects... I'll believe it when i see it. (I've prepared quite a few briefings to flag officers and personally briefed the press on these matters myself. I know how it is behind the curtains... and that was with GWOT war-time funding.)
@UMADBRO64
Ай бұрын
I've literally never once seen a Big Army project come in on budget, on time, let alone according to plan. It doesn't happen. Period. End of story. Not once, not ever, not in the history of Civilized Man has this ever once happened. If they say its going to happen, its because they're already expecting and are currently dealing with it to not go according to plan.
@ftn5546
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviewsI hear that. The .300 Norma was supposed to be a good upgrade to the .300 Win Mag, but I've never heard anything about it. I was curious if this one with building four changes was different or not. I'm going to chuckle if the M4 sees another 60 years of service.
@matthewconnor5483
Ай бұрын
Here's my prediction. Rock, paper, logistics. No one else is making 6.8x51. There is no industrial base for the barrels, mags, brass, bullets, etc.... 7.62 on the other hand has massive industry support. Pretty much any ammo producers, mag manufacturers or barrel producers could tool up to make rounds and parts by the millions with the drop of a contract because they have the machines. I still think the modernized m4 is still a better weapon in the vast majority of situations because of the ammo of ammo you can carry and the the ability to quickly lay down accurate fire. Applying the hybrid case tech to 5.56 does open up weight savings and possibilities for pushing a 77+grn round even faster out of a 10.5 or 14.5" barrel.
@COMMANDandConquer199
Ай бұрын
Yeah, that has been my thought since this whole thing started. Why not just apply the hybrid case tech to the 5.56 and replace M4 barrels and receivers if they need to be beefed up?
@Avera9eWh1teShark6
Ай бұрын
The fact that 6.8x51mm is cross compatible with 7.62 magazines means that some of these issues are already dealt with. Also, the fact that the M7 can be barrel swapped to 7.62 is why I think SIG won, on top of the fact that True Velocity didn't have a belt fed option.
@matthewconnor5483
Ай бұрын
@@Avera9eWh1teShark6 I think sig won because they are all up in that Virginia swamp with Boeing, Raytheon and everyone else offering sweet retirement plans for retired officials. Anything technical is just a good cover story for keeping the DOD dollars flowing. And yes I'm super skeptical after having worked on pretty much every side of the system and leaving it to make an honest living.
@matthewconnor5483
Ай бұрын
@@COMMANDandConquer199 we already have a ton of m4/16 along with all the tools and parts in the inventory so an upgrade path makes way more sense. Unless you are trying to but a new house in Alexandria Virginia...
@Avera9eWh1teShark6
Ай бұрын
@@matthewconnor5483 there is nothing to support that. It just sounds like you hate SIG more than anything, to be honest. Textron dropped out on it's own and True Velocity/Beretta didn't have a belt fed option. If you want to be pessimistic, you could say that they won by default, but "muh backroom deals" or "muh gubmint kickbacks" doesn't really hold water.
@gaston9x19mm
Ай бұрын
Your self-made commercials and plugs for Patreon are the best. I know what's coming every time, and it's so well-executed and humorous I have to watch all the way through each time. Love the channel.
@epiccowboymemes2042
Ай бұрын
@21:42 That's kind of a moot point when talking about the M17 contract. SIG did not procure a solution for logistics. SIG did not provide testing data. SIG did not have decades of contracting with the DOD to facilitate a contract. Beretta had all of that and more with the M9A3. The difference being that SIG was already converted into an American corporation and Beretta was Italian and had wronged the Army by not taking their accusations of jeapordized reliability lying down (they sued the Army and won). That's why I also have disdain for the M7 and NGSW programs.
@Gringo111R
Ай бұрын
Would’ve been a great DMR maybe GP rifle for Afghanistan.. it’s only decades late in true government procurement fashion.
@RedXlV
Ай бұрын
But you don't issue the whole squad the DMR.
@Redmanticore
13 күн бұрын
@@RedXlV in afghanistan you would. you would also issue everyman with a personal fpv drone, for everyman to have their personal close air support.
@rozkaz661
Ай бұрын
What i could see the program achieving is getting the machinegun standardized and getting the xm-7 into squads not as a common rifle but a longer range dmr thing that shares the ammo of the mg to help get the squad more reach, kinda like the soviets did with putting both a guy with a pkm and a guy with an svd into most squads while having the rest of the guys using smaller caliber aks.
@Gridlocked
Ай бұрын
I hope your idea of smaller caliber aks isn’t the AKS-74U, Russian Armed Forces absolutely hate that thing.
@vaclavjebavy5118
Ай бұрын
@@Gridlocked The AKS-74U uses the same caliber as the AK-74, and isn't a standard line weapon like the PKM and SVD. It's clear 'smaller caliber AKs' means the AK-74s which have smaller calibers than their MGs and DMRs.
@Gridlocked
Ай бұрын
@@vaclavjebavy5118 You’re right, a smaller caliber would be the standard issued AK-74, but in this particular context about the modern U.S. Army squad weapon configuration, the standard issued weapon in-place of the AK-74 would be the M4A1, which is a carbine and it is too underpowered for duties outside of security and close quarter combat or being used in confined spaces. The M4A1 suffers from a lot of the same ballistic performance issues as the AK/AKS-74U does, those mainly being reduced muzzle velocity and effectiveness at range. Outside of a few security services, many Russian soldiers who’ve had to use the AKS-74U hated it and complained that it was too underpowered. Now, the XM7 is set to replace the M4A1. Which means that the average U.S. Army squad will no longer be burdened with an underpowered carbine for main combat duties and will be deployed with a far better optic than the last, all while still being able to maneuver in confined spaces due the XM7 being even shorter than the standard M4A1.
@vaclavjebavy5118
Ай бұрын
@@Gridlocked I do think you're comparing apples to oranges since an AK-74 carbine might not be the same as an M16 carbine, since both use different ammunition and the AKSU has a significantly shorter barrel than the M4. But at the same time I concur that these higher caliber rifles do bring greater capability, even in closer quarters.
@Gridlocked
Ай бұрын
@@vaclavjebavy5118 I’m glad that we’re in agreement, and I truly believe and what people are failing to understand is that the caliber and rifle in question will only continue to be improved upon and bring great lethality to the U.S. army squad from this point forward.
@mr.x4036
Ай бұрын
The munition logistics is the tip of the iceberg with this rifle. Not only is there a problem with ammo, but there needs to be better ergonomics with the rifle itself. We dont need 3 ways to charge the rifle, and we don’t need to worry about being gentle with the rifle either. The optics will more than likely break AFTER the rifle does. The water and mud tests were a fail. The tolerances inside the rifle cause over loading of the magazine disabling the rifle completely. And, as I mentioned, 6.8x51mm is almost non existant compared to military logisitics. I feel like this is a newer gen NGSW project when the US tried to replace the M16 platform just to find out that making the rifle more accurate was to throw an optic on it.
@andrewgates8158
Ай бұрын
Spuhr furniture
@mr.normalguy69
Ай бұрын
This might sound like a stupid question: But why not go with a new type of armor piercing 7.62x51mm cartridge with a chamber pressure of 80,000psi instead of developing a new 6.8x51mm cartridge (which also has a chamber pressure of 80,000psi)? Even if it's going to be incompatible with most (if not all) weapons chambered in standard 7.62 NATO (which has a chamber pressure of 50,000 psi), all you'd have to do is change the barrel and the receiver to accommodate the chamber pressure of the new 7.62 cartridge rather than develop a whole new family of weapons!
@JimmySailor
Ай бұрын
If a HP cartridge got into the mix with a standard 7.62 it could grenade the rifle. So you’s have to make the cartridge dimensionally different so it won’t chamber in a normal 7.62 weapon. At that point you might as well go for the most advanced bullet shape which is 6.8. The 6.8 cartridge has major advantages over 7.62, it’s a more efficient design. And if it was only used to replace the 7.62 as DMR and MG cartridge I don’t think people would be scratching their heads so much.
@mr.normalguy69
25 күн бұрын
@@JimmySailorGood point. Thanks for the reply.
@PointingLasersAtAircraft
Ай бұрын
The Army should focus on developing body armor that's lighter and doesn't interfere with shouldering a weapon instead.
@mghegotagun
Ай бұрын
Never had the displeasure outside of air force basic, while my personal hesco/RMA lvl3s have been a joy. How bad is it to deal with issue plates?
@dickc.normous6369
Ай бұрын
Absolutely. Also designing full body armor that look badass armor would do wonders for recruitment
@mr.stotruppen8724
Ай бұрын
Honestly dude the issued plates are already much lighter for their protection level than what most of the affordable options on the commercial market are. The real struggle is figuring out soft armor that covers all the junctional areas and soft bits on your sides and armpits without making you heat cat or weighing as much as the rifle plates you're also wearing.
@ftn5546
Ай бұрын
The XM250 is pretty darned amazing. The XM7 is not.
@JohnBrowningsGhost
Ай бұрын
The xm250 would be more amazing with a qd barrel, ive heard foriegn adopters specced their guns with qd barrels so there is hope.
@dickc.normous6369
Ай бұрын
The RM277 is a vastly superior rifle. Almost no recoil and can fire from closed or open bolt. The polymer ammo seems a weird idea though
@epiccowboymemes2042
Ай бұрын
Language...
@brycefelperin
Ай бұрын
@@JohnBrowningsGhost I'd be within five years they'll have an 'A1' revision of the system that will have a QD barrel. Notice the reason they called it an 'automatic rifle' and not a 'machinegun' is because the barrel was not QD.
@norad_clips
Ай бұрын
As a layman, this seems to be the prevailing sentiment with people who know more about the matter than me
@ernstbergerbrent
Ай бұрын
I don't get why the USMC went with all m27 IARs. It's a heavier ar variant that does slightly better with sustained fire. I also hate that the Army's new rifle that has practice ammo and polymer cased combat ammo. This is a logistical nightmare.
@Condor1970
Ай бұрын
I really think they should have continued work on the original 264 USA cartridge the US Army marksmen team was working on. It was an intermediate cartridge using a Carcano casing with a 6.5mm projectile (6.5x48). It has an enormous amount of potential without needing a full sized frame. It was something that would have been in between the AR-15 and AR-10. For civilian use, a lightweight AR-10 build is still the best option today. Generally more accurate than a SCAR, lighter, less expensive, parts available, and just as reliable when maintained, etc.
@nigerianslumlord
Ай бұрын
I'm not sure you can get an AR10 lighter, more accurate, and less expensive than a MK 17 while retaining reliability and not cheaping out on parts. But I also haven't looked into quality builds in the last 2 years.
@Condor1970
Ай бұрын
@@nigerianslumlord ...I've built a couple affordable/quality builds around the $1,000-$1,500 area. The real key parts to ensure accuracy and reliability is obviously the barrel and BCG. A billet receiver set for a little beef, Faxon Gunner barrel (or similar), and melonite BCG is the foundation. Then you can usually cheap out on much of the other furniture by shopping sales. You don't need to spend $250 for a handguard, or $200 for a stock. That's where the price really tends to make them skyrocket. Also, picking up something like a RAVE trigger for around $100 on sale is also a good bet. If you know how to properly build it, you'd be amazed at how you can keep the weight down and still maintain a high level of accuracy for a general battle rifle. The key to reliability of any AR platform is keeping it clean. The melonite BCG really helps in that area, but nothing can replace maintenance.
@mandaloin
Ай бұрын
@@Condor1970 What kind of accuracy are you able to get out of the Faxon barrels and with what ammo? Those kinds of concerns are what's keeping me from buying one.
@Condor1970
Ай бұрын
@mandaloin My 18in does standard ball ammo around 2MOA on a good day, and match ammo will get me around 1MOA at best. It's not a sub MOA target rifle barrel, but a very accurate and lightweight battle rifle barrel. If I was younger and more steady, it may even do better.
@nigerianslumlord
Ай бұрын
@Condor1970 Ah I see. What's the weight without magazine, optic or etc?
@TheSpecialJ11
9 күн бұрын
It's almost like they thought "Hey we need more DMRs to overcome armor at range" but instead of just making more members of a squad deisgnated marksmen and equipping them with existing DMRs and new optics, they created a boondoggle with a new weapons platform and new cartridge.
@MarkFisher_aka_Gatortrapper
Ай бұрын
Only at Minute 13:00 but a few initial comments: 1) if you're going to throw data/info graphics up on the screen (always a good thing IMHO) then leave them up long enough for the viewer to recognize & digest them. 2-3 seconds isn't adequate. Somewhere between 10-20 seconds depending on how "dense"' the material is and how important it is for informing the viewer. 2) acronyms are constantly being invented... So old soldiers like me... 77-81' 82nd ABN & 2nd ID on the DMZ in Korea... will need you to define a current acronym the first time you use it. It's old hat to you... Not necessarily to your audience. Bring them so they stay engaged & don't miss what you're trying to share as they try to figure out what you said 15 seconds ago..
@jonahhekmatyar
Ай бұрын
Plastic ammo is the future. Weapon agnostic, the ammo should have been the first priority, not the weapon. I don't think the current sig offerings will be competitive for the dismounted infantry in 5-10 years if the ammo and weapons are just keep getting heavier
@jonahhekmatyar
Ай бұрын
(also, my take is that sig won't want the army developing a more modular M7 because they're going to want the US using their special 6.8 ammo instead of common stock 7.62 ir 5.56 nato.)
@userJohnSmith
Ай бұрын
Unlikely. Like caseless ammo it's too vulnerable to the elements and not as good at removing heat from the system.
@stefthorman8548
Ай бұрын
@@userJohnSmith those things can be solved, but having lighter ammo, can't be solved with just an redesign
@userJohnSmith
Ай бұрын
@@stefthorman8548 Believe it or not they actually can't. That's just the nature of the materials. With the heat issue, it's kind of one or the other. There might be an aluminum alloy case that could maybe work but heat capacity is at least indirectly tied to mass. This is kind of fundamental physics land. Brass may not be perfect but plastic isn't a solution for a full auto system, and if it isn't a solution for that it's not a solution.
@f.schmid468
3 күн бұрын
Wait till the GI-Robots or just exo-skeletons come into play
@user-zm7yt6bk9v
Ай бұрын
The United States military should have kept the M-4 / M-16 weapons system, but up gunned to caliber 6.5mm Grendel or .224 Valkyrie.
@darthhodges
Ай бұрын
Lake City (where the DoD makes all its own ammo) is building a new building just for 6.8x51. Until that's up and running they are getting the new rifles slowly as Sig is the only source for ammo. Once that is up how long do you think it would take for them to build and and stage all the ammo they will want globally?
@jason200912
Ай бұрын
10 years is a realistic time to setup a new factory
@PrayingPanda
9 күн бұрын
22:53 this is a motto I say when it comes to people buying products. "Refrain from buying 1st generation and first of a generation products." They'll have issues and companies like Sig love using customers as guinea pigs.
@dw5523
Ай бұрын
I'm just a firearms enthusiast, but it seems the NGSW is trying to do the same thing that the M14 was trying to do. I do know that performance always comes at a cost - higher maintenance schedules and increased chances of breakage. I also know that the military isn't, and probably can't, teach the average shooter to effectively use that kind of capability in combat. Don't even get me started on the techno-wizardry that goes into the Vortex scope; it'll take a Marine E1 about .2 seconds to FUBAR that thing into the stone age. The M4 family of weapons just works because we still win fights with fire and maneuver. Locate the enemy, pin them in place, and maneuver to destroy. For more specialized tasks we we have more specialized units with appropriate weapons - GPMG's, precision rifles, mortars, etc. Didn't mean to rant, and I welcome any enlightenment from those who know better.
@ChalkyRN
Ай бұрын
As a Brit, I think the real shame is that they didn’t go with the .277 TVCM polymer-cased cartridge (from the RM-277R). I think this was a cartridge NATO would have been interested in. Much lighter and cheaper than the 6.8 Fury. I can’t see the UK or other NATO countries ever adopting a round so complicated to manufacture and so limited in firing platform.
@duanemckinley9353
Ай бұрын
277 TVCM is somewhat lighter (although both are lighter than 7.62), but the US Army pays $2.08 - $2.15 USD a round for 6.8CC ammo and TVCM charges $3.50 a round for generic 308 ammo. What's more, a traditional ammo factory could relatively easily convert to producing 6.8 CC which is 90% the same from a manufacturing process as traditional ammo but could not switchover to TVCM without completely changing both the facility and most of the technical staff. Ease of manufacture and cost both seem to substantially favor the Fury.
@ChalkyRN
Ай бұрын
@@duanemckinley9353 that’s a really good point but the cost of 277 TVCM would come down considerably in mass production as the raw materials are much cheaper; currently the low production keeps costs high. The steel / copper construction of 6.8 is much more complicated than traditional brass or a polymer mould and cannot be done in legacy manufacturing without considerable modifications. It could have also driven a move over to polymer from brass, saving considerable weight for legacy 7.62 weapons (M240 / UK GPMG). Additionally, as it relied on barrel length rather than super pressure to achieve its results, it would have been easier for NATO countries to swallow and develop weapons for (and no need for a training round to preserve barrel life). I think the real winner was the XM250. In the long run, polymer (and .277) will be seen as a missed opportunity.
@Ratkill9000
Ай бұрын
Tex of the Black Pants legion, currently works for the Military Industrial complex and has brought up weapons procurement. I don't recall him ever bringing up the XM7 or the XM250 in his podcast let alone any of his let's plays. I do know that he has said that generally speaking the M4/M16 platform, like the AK-47 are generally 3-4 MOA rifles, which is standard for rifles for the battlefield. He has brought up on several occasions that yes, Logistics wins wars. Whoever can produce the most of something that is okay and a lot of it, will usually come out on top.
@Hellhound23691
Ай бұрын
Why am I not surprised to find the Aux lurking in this comments section?
@Ratkill9000
Ай бұрын
I haven't visited his Discord channel. But I have caught his podcast on spotify and frequently watch TT Battletech and Ultimate Admiral Dreadnoughts. Just another firearms enthusiast who also likes other things and Tex is entertaining.
@Cloture.q
Ай бұрын
This is 1000% about near-peer conflict. The US is the uncontested global leader in asymmetric warfare. We have a very long way to go in learning conventional war against an enemy who has legitimate individual capabilities such as night vision and armor.
@jasonspeirs6981
Ай бұрын
I think that the "hybrid" cased ammunition, could be a possible solution to increase lethality, from the current 5.56mm cartridge. Higher pressure, heavier bullet, different barrel twist rates(?). Uprating barrels to the higher cartridge pressures, would still leave you able to use the existing 5.56 ammo, that's currently in the logistics supply chain. For me, this would be a far more logical progression, than reinventing everything around a completely new calibre of bullet.
@TheArmourersBench
Ай бұрын
Interesting discussion boys, thank you.
@user-et9mc4tr5n
Ай бұрын
Hey guys, Kevin Owens would be a great guest for you in regard to discussing this. He was part of the weapons procurement in SOCOM. I think I've heard him mention this weapon. His channel is Overmatch consulting.
@henryrodgers1752
Ай бұрын
The Army has again adopted equipment for its’ last War, not the next one.
@boygonewhoopdataZZ
Ай бұрын
The last war was WWII. Everything after had been against Insurgents.
@jic1
Ай бұрын
@@boygonewhoopdataZZ Korea.
@andrewmoore7022
Ай бұрын
@@boygonewhoopdataZZOperation desert Storm.
@CheapSushi
Ай бұрын
I think you're very wrong on that. This is for the next one. Distance + reaction time will matter more than ever. CQB & risking highly valuable and expensive human lives will be the job of drones. Keep the fanatical Chinese at a distance with their heads down while artillery, aircraft and drones do the main work will be key. The Chinese conscripts, let alone their higher tier forces, will make every battle like the WW2 Japanese on Okinawa. Why would we want to play the same game? Plus with more and more focus on swarming & autonomous air and ground drones, you want that distance & time for countering. Throwing bodies at a problem, like in Ukraine's situation, especially door-to-door, trench-to-trench, is not the way to ever think again with our folks.
@Gridlocked
Ай бұрын
The last war was Vietnam, anything after was UN sanctioned police-action.
@thmsmgnm.4513
Ай бұрын
HK 416 frankengun replacing belt fed guns is example of circle back to a stupid idea...for 5th time despite every failure .
@RooftopCiv
Ай бұрын
80% until you go for shorter barrels. Dominates 308 in that arena. With battle moving towards suppressed weapons, and near peer war looming, to me this is a move that doesn’t make sense now… but will over the next decade. There will be greater advances in body armor, exoskeleton tech, battery tech. And maybe this is the wrong cartridge, maybe some form of a larger/over pressured 556 will do the work better, but change isn’t always bad. I would also argue that while super expensive, it’s not a terrible rifle even for civilians. Shoots great, and having the option to swap between 308 and 277 is a nice option to have, if you can handle the cost. That said, any nice set up ain’t cheap.
@JeffNeelzebub
Ай бұрын
Counterpoint, I don't see any reason why a cheapo-depot AR-10 generic rifle, say like an Aero Precision M5, couldn't just be adapted to function with even the higher power 277 Fury loads. You'd need to adjust the gas system perhaps, perhaps a rifle speed or superlative arms gas block would help, but there's no reason to believe that a quality AR-10 bolt and barrel chambered for 277 Fury couldn't handle the pressures with a traditional AR-10 DI system. Again, maybe some adjustment to the gas system may be necessary, maybe an adjustable gas block or a smaller gas port on the barrel, but no reason to believe that there's some magic with the SIG SPEAR that a SIG 716 chambered in 277 Fury couldn't also handle.
@hornmonk3zit
Ай бұрын
I've yet to see why we need a new round in the first place. A .308 with the same weight bullet as the .277 would go the same speed without such a high chamber pressure needing all new case designs and needing more barrel replacements than the belt fed machine guns. You maybe get a better ballistic coefficient with .277 but .308's effective range is already further than anyone is going to shoot, and the M7 isn't even accurate enough to use past 600 yards to begin with. It's a solution in search of a problem and is going to lead to major supply chain issues.
@userJohnSmith
Ай бұрын
It's the bolt lugs and barrel diameter. They require more meat. I have similar issues with a .284 win build that I have to load soft to keep happy.
@JeffNeelzebub
Ай бұрын
@@userJohnSmith the Sig Spear bolt is dimensionally equivalent to your typical AR-10 bolts in terms of the lugs and diameter and what not. Obviously the backend is different due to connection to a piston driven carrier, but the bolt face and lug dimensions are the same.
@JeffNeelzebub
Ай бұрын
@@hornmonk3zit The 277 Fury is pretty much just a hot loaded 6.5 Creedmore. If they made it 6.5 instead of 6.8, I doubt there would be any noticeable difference in performance. The bimetal construction of the casing simply allows the cartridge to be loaded to higher pressures without the primer being blown out, as is common with 6.5 CM PRS match loaded cartridges.
@ThrashTillDeth85
Ай бұрын
Because most AR10s on the market have reliability issues of some kind once you actually run them. Especially once you stack aftermarket parts into em, I sadly know this first hand from building 2 AR10s
@vinceportis-hr1mm
Ай бұрын
Did the army consider how terrible this weapon would be at cqb?many more men died in Iraq as opposed to Afghanistan because of iad's and cqb.
@boygonewhoopdataZZ
Ай бұрын
That was a war on insurgents. A proper war is going to be flat out destruction and occupation. You don't hear Ukrainian insurgency in Russian Controlled Cities do you?
@dickc.normous6369
Ай бұрын
There's a mark 18 version already that's like 7 or 9 inches
@Gridlocked
Ай бұрын
Probably why the rifle is shorter than the standard M4A1.
@shatteredstar2149
Ай бұрын
cqb? You're going to die to the mass of drones and artillery
@andrewcappiello5585
Ай бұрын
As a former enlisted guy who carried a gun professionally (in and out of the U.S. Army) for twenty two years, I have to say something stinks here. Is it A: we need to spend so we can get as much in the budget next year? B: Bob is a good field grade officer, but he needs a successful project manager role and the attendant Legion of Merit award to make general. Whatever else might be going on something stinks.
@bobrowley4346
Ай бұрын
Probably Bob's fault
@masshureando
Ай бұрын
I really enjoyed the discussion. Thank you.
@thomashowardmd247
Ай бұрын
"Be first to be second in line." Great life advice. Early adopters pave the way for the rest of us, but definitely at high cost.
@weiz2420
Ай бұрын
I honestly think this program is more about getting the M250 into the system to replace the saw. I think the M7 will be added to the squad or platoon level as a DMR and not to replace the M4. Ithink the greatest lesson of GWOT was that the military needs a light machine gun since the M60 was replaced. The M240 is too heavy and bulky to make a single machine gunner carry into a fire fight.
@antoniochalking
Ай бұрын
Well then that adds another rounds, why not get the M7 at that point so units can share ammo and not complicate logistics
@weiz2420
Ай бұрын
@@antoniochalking Logistics wouldn't be impacted if the DMR and M250 were both chambered in 7.62x51.
@antoniochalking
Ай бұрын
@@weiz2420 well that’s just going back in time, and also the M7 as a DMR makes no sense when we already have the M110, we are better off adopting the new rifle and round, the idea that it’s “stupid” makes no sense, combat ranges are getting longer and longer and body armor more and more advanced, there is a need for a bigger round, 6.8 is going to be a replacement for 5.56, but we are going to keep M4s around for a while
@weiz2420
Ай бұрын
@@antoniochalking 6.8 isn't going to be a replacement for anything. The army doesn't need a battle rifle. Obviously, you didn't listen to this video. The M4 isn't going to go anywhere, the M110 is going to be replaced, and the M250 will wind up replacing the SAW in infantry squads. The M7 part of this program is a dead end, and the army knows that.
@antoniochalking
Ай бұрын
@@weiz2420 almost like 5.56 doesn’t penetrate modern body armor, we need a bigger round💀
@ronrobertson59
Ай бұрын
This is a mistake to ditch the M-4 and the 5.56X45. The Army has a long history of picking the wrong gun. The 30-40 Kraig over a Mauser the 1903 over the M-1917 the M-14 over the FN FAL in the British intermediate cartridge the M60 over the MG-42/MG-3 the M9 over the Colt 1911 so why not this too.
@positiveanion4085
Ай бұрын
Picking 30-06 over .276 Pederson for the M1 due to supply alone :( .276 is ballistically near identical to .277 fury, just out of a 24” barrel instead of a 16.
@EbonyPhoenix
Ай бұрын
M-4 will still be in use, this is like a decade long process before it is phased out if at all (will still be stockpiled).
@ronrobertson59
Ай бұрын
@@EbonyPhoenix true
@geodkyt
Ай бұрын
Note that we got the M16 into the system the same way - limited (but formal) procurement for a specialty purpose, then rolled into full issue. Or the M4 - designed as a PDW for truck drivers, tankers, etc., and a handy carbine for SOCOM to the stabdard issue rifle. As for ammo clearance. We managed to shift from .30-06 to 6 62x51mm over all in a realtovely short period (at least for the active Army & Marine Corps), and then oivoting a few years later for rifle ammo to the non-NATO 5.56mm. I think the 7.62x51mm is going to have enough uses, (even if Big Army and the Marine Corps goes "all in" on the M7, M250, and 6.8x51mm at the rifle platoon level) to use up our stocks of 7.62x51mm by the time we are ready to field the 6.8x51mm beyond infantry platoons. Im.curious to see if the military leans towards some.of the .338 GPMGs to replace 7.62mm MGs and at least partially displace the M2HB and M2A1. (Honestly, my back of the envelope calcs of space & weight for gun & ammo, and considering the other weapons avaliable, a strong case could be made for replacing both the M240 and M2 on the Abrams and sinilar AFVs with a "pure" battery of .338 GPMGs).
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
Points well taken, but we're taking about very different philosophies: The M16 being adopted during an era of jungle warfare when ammunition count, and mobility was absolutely required. the 7.62x51mm was adopted to usher in a magazine fed weapon when the soviets were moving to an AK system. in this case... the 6.8x51 is adapted for..... ? requirement? for what type of war?
@RailRoad188
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviews Fulda Gap to the Urals 😅
@cokedaz
27 күн бұрын
Totally agree. From day one, I can't see enough of this ammunition being produced and ready in any way by the time its needed. Maybe I am wrong, but the system has far more downsides than it does up sides. It makes more sense to have this capability at least by one on the squad level. But like we see in modern warfare, its scrappy, fast and dirty. A lot of misconception that rounds used vs enemies dead is somehow due to misses or inaccuracy. Supression, blind firing trench corners, a lot of them aren't even aiming at all, and a lot of other reasons make up for it even just losses or destruction of ammunition supplies make up for that stat as well, and having more ammunition in your gun, and on your person, seems to be more useful than more stoppable rounds. A bullet of any size or shape will make someone take cover. Without the new round the rest of the rifle is largely redundant and would take a back seat to a DMR role. The optic and hightech gear may make sense for enemies running around with no armor with AKs and no electronics, but a modern battle it seems to not be something that useful, at least for every soldier anyway, imo.
@orlock20
25 күн бұрын
This ammunition is meant for front line infantry in combat operations against an armored and or distant opponent. I believe something like 100,000 rifles are to be made. The M4 will still be the standard rifle. More rifles will be made when the T-800 comes online.
@OdysseusIthaca
23 сағат бұрын
308 is just too heavy a round for general work, we already went through this with the AR-10. That thing will put a damn dent in your shoulder, it will reduce reliability, etc. This is a mistake.
@diegoflores3408
Ай бұрын
As a MCX owner and someone who has shot the XM it is a abysmal gun that was adopted due to monetary reasons instead of being the most capable
@2IDSGT
Ай бұрын
Army went completely the wrong direction with M7. Ukraine has shown that the fundamentals of fire-superiority haven’t changed. Infantry-on-infantry combat is about volume.
@methodsocratic
Ай бұрын
Agreed. Well, volume (troops & rounds down range), & mobility. M7 is heavier, rounds are heavier = less mobility & less rounds carried (less rounds down range).
@boygonewhoopdataZZ
Ай бұрын
majority of the infantry in that war don't even have magnified optics. Just look at video games no one cares when they're getting shot at but when they're getting hit they start ducking.
@Avera9eWh1teShark6
Ай бұрын
Ukraine is unique due to geopolitical reasons more than the fundamentals not changing (they're actually changing massively with the inclusion of drones)
@joshklaver47
Ай бұрын
On the contrary, while drones and artillery play a huge role, AR-10 variants with suppressors and thermal optics have performed very well.
@ALovelyBunchOfDragonballz
Ай бұрын
As a replacement for the SCAR, the XM7 seems fine, and if thats where it stays its finer. As we are seeing with neer-peer fighting, capacity is king, and this things lacks in that department like all the other large-frame rifles. XM250 is cool though.
@1337goy
Ай бұрын
I know bullets are bullets and fragmentation is largely something for people who are training to discuss. That is precisely why this makes sense. Picking holes with a 22 caliber bullet at even 500 yards is never becoming a universal standard where grunts have even consistent killing potential. They want bigger wound channels with the same flat shooting and a considerable effective range. They dole out quadrails because nobody is training them to shoot without it. I know you think it's shitty to point that out but it shows the lack of disciple related to current standards. Many other western armies have no issues making sure folks can shoot a carbine by starting them with standard clamshell furniture.
@remo_williams
Ай бұрын
It's the new M14 it will be gone in a few years, waste of money.
@positiveanion4085
Ай бұрын
At least the m14 looked nice.
@Rick_Makes
Ай бұрын
That's probably the best comparison. It'll sit around unused until some niche application comes around like with the M14 being used as a DMR in Iraq and Afghanistan.
@user-if4zv5nj5m
Ай бұрын
From an outside perspective, us army is keen on the idea of making everyone a sharpshooter. Every time a war ends, people start to draw experience from the shooting range, where they shoot targets that don't shoot back, and assume that they'll do the same thing on the battlefield. Than the war comes, soliders become disappointed in their weapons, the army adopts rifles that are more suited for volume of fire (m16 vs m14, m4 vs m16), than the war ends and the cycle repeats
@aljole683
Ай бұрын
To the idea of fighting WW2 with the last wars gear…the M1 Garand was the exception to that. And then, logistics before deployment, one could easily argue that the M16 violated that principle, being produced without enough of the proper ammo, and then not being tested properly with the substitute ammo, to the tragic and pointless detriment of a number of Marines, and the reputation of the M16/AR15 family of weapons.
@tedarcher9120
Ай бұрын
Garand was still a ww1 rifle
@CheapSushi
Ай бұрын
I don't think this video and others really acknowledge the new drone warfare paradigm that the war in Ukraine is making more and more obvious; even if the future fight is against the Chinese. Sending bodies into 100m or less zones or CQB combat is a complete waste of a trained expensive human being; it's just so extremely risky, quick to go wrong, with sensory overload where anything could happen; there's a massive loss of real control even with an edge in numbers, etc). So it's just more sensible to send a drone; either aerial based or ground based; there's tons of new tracked & wheeled drones too now. I think the M7 with the new cartridge & optics (the bigger game changer for average soldiers) is what's needed to keep the other side at extended distances, with their heads down, while artillery, aircraft or drones do the main work. You obviously never want to fight the other side on even grounds, a fair fight, or in equal terms. You want to dominate. The majority of their forces will be bogged down at range and won't be able to do much about it and get annihilated; it will save lives on our end. My opinion.
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
we sort of talked about that, I mentioned that in this new era, we're looking at drone warfare... is this really what we need?
@CheapSushi
Ай бұрын
@@9HoleReviews I haven't fought in Ukraine but after seeing tons of videos, I think of it like the Naval approach, the more time and distance you have, the better you can react to it and do something about it. Gives you time to electronically jam, or dazzle, or fry with microwave, or get the short range launcher out, etc. Or get everyone else to pay attention, go for cover, direct fire onto, etc. The flying drones in particular are so fast & maneuverable and there's so many videos showing, they can run laps around people doing everything they can to hit it and they still died so brutally, even jamming it, doesn't stop the inertia of it landing near enough to gimp the person. Now imagine them even further in the future when they're using AI algo's for swarming tactics. Imagine the mass attacks by those Boston Dynamic dog-like robots (whether armed or S-side variants); the Chinese and Russians constantly show off variants with weapons mounted on them. It's going to be like that. So having a few hundred meters more is really important. In the town fights, it's just a massive blood bath in Ukraine. I don't think the U.S. would sacrifice so many bodies for every house like how it is in Ukraine. I don't think in an urban fight, the U.S. will do the same kick in door work through like in Iraq/Afghanistan. I think we'll send in drones to do it and be a lot more cautious with sending people into buildings. I guess my point is that range + reaction time matters a lot with all the drones, so having soldiers with a standard weapon that amplifies that ability I think is for the best. And with that in mind, with a greater focus on more distance & reaction time, you don't have to play the same game the other guys are, who have even more of their bulk forces with weapons that have less consistent range, worse optics, etc. Think about how fanatical a Chinese conscript will be in close combat, let alone their other dedicated higher tier troops. It'll be like the WW2 Japanese on Okinawa in every battle. But at range, there's no way they can out fire our guys. They'll think twice about rushing into situations, or making the advance. Make them waste time, wait it out, try over and over while our forces lock-in and give them a surprise greeting. But you and the people interviewed, who have a lot more experience, understand the dynamics better than I ever could but the drone aspect is just massive in my opinion. Of the interviews of people fighting, especially from the Russian side, the drones are what terrify them the most. So many of them I've seen even commit S-side after they've seen the rest of their squad taken out by drones; they feel utterly hopeless and rather end it quick; some of the operators are incredibly merciless, which of course makes sense but man is it horrible. Imagine these things when they're even more autonomous. I never want that to be the terrifying mindset on our side. In terms of other equipment needed for that environment, from what I read on TWZ, the military is taking it seriously, so developing and putting out equipment for that fight alongside these new rifles.
@Avera9eWh1teShark6
Ай бұрын
@@CheapSushi I've been closely following the Army's big picture modernization effort since 2018, and I have more fingers on my hand than people I've seen display the nuance to understand the big picture of emerging tech in the modern fight, not including myself. You are one of those people.
@Caoimhin777
Ай бұрын
I’d be cool to see a vid where you guys discuss your ideal M4 replacement & the round it should fire.
@J9_j3
Ай бұрын
we are still talking about improved armour penetration (against russians and chinese) but here we see AK-74s in 5.45 and ar-15 in 5.56 carrying brunt of the trench clearing in Ukraine. mind you against russian troops that are all wearing modern armour. and not once i heard from Ukrainian fighters that old soviet 70-80s era 5.45 ammo (Ukraine does not have modern variants of 5.45 AP) that their available ammunition is not sufficient for the job. granted there is a lot of instances of grenades and drones doing the 'clearing' but still there is plenty of very close range engagements with just rifles and no calls for more armour penetration. what do you think of that tendency. is US expecting to fight 'hot war' with russia/china same way they fought war in the Middle East?
@9HoleReviews
Ай бұрын
to answer your question: Yes, but not the entire military, just a small group who is dictating what all Army combat arms soldiers are using. It's very controversial adoption at that. (IMO wrong move)
@Avera9eWh1teShark6
Ай бұрын
the trench situation in ukraine is a one-off due to the fact that Ukraine can't attack Russia directly due to legal restrictions set by NATO as part of their aid agreement, and Russia can't maneuver forces to the flanks due to being blocked by NATO and using Belarus again would draw them into the conflict. There are no restrictions by NATO against them, so it wouldn't be wise.
@RailRoad188
Ай бұрын
@@Avera9eWh1teShark6 So attritional warfare is a thing of the past for the US Military, that's certainly what they want to believe, reminds me of the GWOT mentality.
@SamT-rf1dx
Ай бұрын
My prediction of future: long range stuff will be done with automated systems, drones, artillery etc. and the role of rifles will be reduced to short range, CQB, trench stuff. So, shorty, agile and low recoil (M4 type) weapons will be king for infantry. See Ukraine footage for examples of this.
@n0tthemessiah
Ай бұрын
Allow me to introduce you to an old friend of mine: 7.62x39
@joshklaver47
Ай бұрын
I saw a lot of footage from Ukraine where AR-10 variants with suppressors and thermal optics were used to great effect...
@joearledge
Ай бұрын
At a time when you have the weakest military in history, physically, and in every other sense, you pick a heavier rifle, with heavier ammo, that has more recoil.... Furthermore, you decide to have 2 different GP ammo selections, 1 training and 1 combat, because the PSI on the combat ammo is so high, that it would drastically reduce the life of the rifle, if used regularly.... Not to mention the other issues that come with switching ammo. Preliminary reports have also suggested problems with the rifle such as the ability to accidentally over-insert the mag, putting the rifle out of action till you're able to rip it out, and rumors of other issues.... You also mentioned a goal of punching holes in plates at 600m, the average soldier struggles to hit a 300m full size target, much less a 10" X 12" at 600m with a rifle that recoils more(marksmanship is absolutely one of their weaknesses).... I'm not convinced that this round can punch through level 4+ plates at 600m, that's a pretty tall order in any practical cartridge.... Oh, BTW, it's not a common cartridge, so no mooching of others in a pinch. This rifle MIGHT have potential as a SPR, maybe, if SIG fixes the issues that should have been fixed prior to release(P320 has entered the chat).... If you do want an SPR to punch through plates at 600m, there are better cartridge choices for that job. If you want to punch through armor in CQB, there are absolutely better cartridge and rifle choices.... This is ACU all over again.... Try to do 20 things at once, end up doing none of them, while wasting time, money and resources.... Can we improve on the AR/M16 line??? YES!! But this ain't it, at least not for a GP battle rifle.
@orlock20
Ай бұрын
During peace time, the U.S. army was made up of 20,000 people in the 1800s so it's not the weakest in history. Even in today's military the threat assessments are just horrible. Russia is no longer a conventional threat and Iran plus China would be a cluster F if invaded so there are no plans for that now. Since WW1, 80% of the kills were from some sort of explosive device while bullets make up less than 15%. The modern trooper is going to be peppered by artillery, missiles and drones long before they get into firearm range.
@joearledge
Ай бұрын
@@orlock20 What are you 12?? 20,000 people in the 1800's... the 1800's last for 100 years.... There was a butt load more than 20,000 people in the Army during that time. For God sakes, the War of 1812, The 1st American Civil War and the Spanish American War were all in the 1800's and those are just the 3 major ones. Even if you miraculously find a few years with numbers that low, it was a non-interventionist frontier army for a po-dunk country, that were mostly fighting Indian Wars out west and was not even close to a world super power. I got news for you kid, guys fighting in lines in open fields got ate up by arty, so catching incoming shells isn't a new fad. Furthermore, 20,000 men from the 1800's, given the same tools, could very easily defeat 2,000,000 soy bois from the rainbow coalitions woke army. One day kid, you'll learn it's about quality, not quantity.
@nanzistnt2573
Ай бұрын
@@orlock20Cope, Army has been getting shittier every year for the past many years.
@terminator9099
20 күн бұрын
Many of you missed the whole point of the .277 fury : performances of a 20" barrel with only 16" and bellow. Having decent performances with the CQB configuration. The .277 fury got 3000 joules, extremely close to the 3500 joules of the 7.62x51mm, in a much smaller package. The first ammo that can do it all, while supressed.
@kurtr1090
Ай бұрын
I'm really concerned about the significantly reduced barrel life of the new cartridge. Especially for the machine gun. That would be a logistical nightmare. That's before considering nearly doubling the weight with decreased ammo.
@vikingsoftpaw
Ай бұрын
For some reason the .mil types are fixated on 14" barrels. Take a 277 Fury at 80k psi working pressure, fire it out of a 22"-24" RIFLE barrel and you get level IV body armor destruction.
@griffinfaulkner3514
Ай бұрын
I think that's down to the amount of urban warfare that's been done in recent history. A barrel that long is a pain in the ass to maneuver in close quarters, especially if you have a suppressor hanging off the end. The only way around that is to switch to a bullpup configuration, and there's no way in _hell_ the U.S. military's gonna do that at this point.
@off6848
Ай бұрын
@@griffinfaulkner3514 so basically they want a long range, urban warfare, short barreled, suppressed, armor destructing rifle huh. Sounds like a woman is in charge
@raptorcell6633
Ай бұрын
As US troops learned in Vietnam and Iraq, 20"+ barrels are a major pain in the ass in CQC. A rifle length barrel would be great for the mountains of Afghanistan or the plains of Europe but it's a hindrance in Urban Warfare. I wouldn't be surprised if a rifle length Spear ends up fulfilling a DMR role though.
@TheBennett388
Ай бұрын
That's all well and good for a DMR or LMG, but not as a battle rifle that has to do CQB or quick vehicle dismounts. Not to mention the extra length of a suppressor on it
@southern842
Ай бұрын
General Dynamics was the better option. For me I'd prefer a continuation of the m16/m4 platform. An m16A5 with a free float handguard, folding FSP and an 18in socom taper barrel. An M4a2 sopmod style with a 12.5in socom taper barrel both with an updated mk262 or even something in a 6mil. These would be issued by unit sop just as the m16 and m4 were.
@outofrangetv2353
Ай бұрын
GD might have had a good rifle submission, but their saw submission was abysmal
@southern842
Ай бұрын
@iamtherealrauschguy Similar to that for sure. Add Select fire, hammer forged barrel, bayonet lug and a few extra goodies.
@DocMitchell69
Ай бұрын
I’d just go to a 16 inch Midlength barrel tbh. Might as well shave some weight and length while not completely compromising range/accuracy.
@southern842
Ай бұрын
@@DocMitchell69 Definitely can't go wrong with a good 16in recce running 77gr or something like a 6arc.
@uummmnocoolnames
Ай бұрын
I'm not sure the General Dynamics option was necessarily better; from watching Garand Thumb's video on it, it's advertised party trick of optionally firing from an open bolt struck me as adding a lot of unnecessary complication, in both production and manual of arms, for a standard infantry rifle... _unless_ my suspicions are correct, and it _needs_ the extra cooling or it won't function reliably under sustained fire. Polymer cased ammo will dump heat less efficiently than traditional metal cased ammo; metal conducts heat very well, so a lot of the heat from firing gets absorbed by the metal case, which subsequently then gets ejected from the rifle. With a polymer case, being not nearly as good a conductor, the heat still has to go somewhere - into the chamber and barrel. My suspicion (which is entirely speculation) is that the rifle will heat up enough that polymer cases can start to reach a failure point - not enough to melt out right, or cook off, but just enough to change coefficient of friction or suitably soften to the point that extraction or feeding starts to become a problem. Admittedly, it could be some other mechanical issue or accuracy issue being caused, but for sure that rifle had heat buildup issues that the open bolt mode was meant to address. The end result is a rifle more complex to manufacture, and requiring more training to use effectively. Additionally, there's the big logistic headache of spinning up (and working the bugs out of) mass production lines for an entirely new type of ammo that requires completely different manufacturing technology and expertise not seen before in ammunition production. I don't think the XM7 is particularly impressive either, but I can easily see arguments why it won over just "SIG paid people off" (GD has _way_ deeper pockets than SIG in the first place).
Пікірлер: 2 М.