Check out the TB2K CHATROOM, open 24/7               Configuring Your Preferences for OPTIMAL Viewing
  To access our Email server, CLICK HERE

  If you are unfamiliar with the Guidelines for Posting on TB2K please read them.      ** LINKS PAGE **



*** Help Support TB2K ***
via mail, at TB2K Fund, P.O. Box 24, Coupland, TX, 78615
or


WAR Army Starts Testing Next Generation Squad Weapons In 27-Month Test
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    16,932

    Army Starts Testing Next Generation Squad Weapons In 27-Month Test

    So your carefully-procured body armor is about to be worth just a little less in about two years. Thankfully, our odds of actually having to go up against these guns held by domestic soldiery are pretty slim. Or at least, that's what a lot of people think.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...-27-month-test

    Army Starts Testing Next Generation Squad Weapons In 27-Month Test

    by Tyler Durden
    Sun, 09/08/2019 - 16:25

    The U.S. Army is getting much closer to deploying the next generation weapon that could soon replace the M4 carbine and M249 light machine gun sometime in the early 2020s.

    On Aug. 29, the Army announced it selected three defense companies to deliver prototype weapons for the Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) program.

    The new weapons must be lighter and able to penetrate the world's most advanced body armor from at least 600 meters away, defense insiders say.

    "This is a weapon that could defeat any body armor, any planned body armor that we know of in the future," former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley has said.

    "This is a weapon that can go out at ranges that are unknown today. There is a target acquisition system built into this thing that is unlike anything that exists today. This is a very sophisticated weapon."

    The announcement was originally posted on the Federal Business Opportunities website on Aug. 29. The notice said the Army selected AAI Corporation Textron Systems, General Dynamics Ordnance, and Sig Sauer as the three finalists for the NGSW program, reported Defense Blog.


    Parthu Potluri
    @Parthu_Potluri
    For those that missed the reveal months ago, here's AAI's (@Textron subsidiary) prototypes for the #USArmy's NGSW program. The first pic is the offer for the NGSW-R segment (M4 rifle replacement), the 2nd pic shows the two NGSW-AR prototypes (M249 SAW replacement), both in 6.8mm.

    View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
    30
    11:00 AM - Jun 18, 2019
    Twitter Ads info and privacy
    See Parthu Potluri's other Tweets

    The request asks AAI/Textron, G.D., and Sig Sauer each to supply 53 rifles, 43 automatic rifles and 850,000 rounds of ammunition for the 27-month test. The Army is expected to wrap up the test in 1H22 when it's expected to announce the winning design. By 2H22, the Army could start fielding the new weapons to combat units.

    NGSW weapons won't initially replace all M4 carbine and M249 light machine guns but will be given to infantry and special operation forces first.

    The 27-month test will include "soldier touchpoint" tests that evaluate "mobility and maneuverability on Army relevant obstacles, and user acceptance scenario testing," the Army says.

    The Army is expected to test each weapon's round for ballistic effectiveness under simulated combat conditions. There's a chance in the latter parts of the test, the weapons could be tested in a war zone.

    "These evaluations may be conducted with multiple squads," the Army added.

    The NGSW program has been centered around a weapon that can support a new 6.8mm bullet.



    AAI/Textron is seen as the leader in the NGSW since it has spent more than a decade developing its 6.8mm cased-telescoped round.



    "We have assembled a team that understands and can deliver on the rigorous requirements for this U.S. Army program with mature and capable technology, reliable program execution and dedicated user support," says Wayne Prender, Textron Systems' Senior Vice President, Applied Technologies and Advanced Programs.

    "Together, we are honored to support America's soldiers with the next-generation capabilities they need in their most dangerous missions."



    The Pentagon's current shift from urban warfare in Iraq and Syria to the mountains and open terrain of Afghanistan have been the driving force behind modernizing standard issue weapons for infantry units. While standard rifles are well-suited for close combat in cities like Mosul and Raqqa, it lacks the range to kill adversaries in open stretches.

    AAI/Textron will likely secure the contract for NGSW by 1H22. The contract could be as large as 250,000 weapons and 150 million rounds for the first order.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,879
    See my threads in the Firearms, Hunting and Fieldcraft section....Short answer is they're playing with the projectile design more than anything else to approach the terminal performance they're looking for, elsewhys ballistically this new cartridge has an awful lot in common with the .276 Pedersen round of 1925-1932 as well as the .270 Winchester. Physics doesn't change....ETA, also note the language used by the PAO, "could" is liberally used...
    Last edited by Housecarl; 09-09-2019 at 10:35 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    16,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Housecarl View Post
    See my threads in the Firearms, Hunting and Fieldcraft section....Short answer is they're playing with the projectile design more than anything else to approach the terminal performance they're looking for, elsewhys ballistically this new cartridge has an awful lot in common with the .276 Pedersen round of 1925-1932 as well as the .270 Winchester. Physics doesn't change....ETA, also note the language used by the PAO, "could" is liberally used...
    All good points. Especially if you try to beat FUTURE body armor. Who knows what will be developed down the line?

  4. #4
    First of all...LOL! Probably hundreds of millions to be spent coming up with answers they already know, to be followed by no action taken. The military’s small arms selection process is almost always a clusterflub. Lots of history on this. Why should it be different this time around?

  5. #5
    Firearms technology has pretty much reached its technological zenith. There's just not much more you can do with kinetic projectiles propelled by gunpowder. To draw an analogy with steam engines, steam's zenith was reached with the adoption of turbines over reciprocating (piston operated) engines. The firearms equivalent was the adoption of smokeless powder over black powder.

    Since that time, improvements have been small and incremental, but even here not all new innovations are necessarily better. Take for example the ongoing, constant (and mostly futile) debates between Glock owners and 1911 pistol owners. This pits a relatively new and high-tech design against a one hundred-year old+ design. Who's right? Does it matter? Both platforms are perfectly capable designs and the differences over a century have clearly not convinced all pistol owners. On the other hand, you never hear of debates between proponents of muzzle-loading, smoothbore, black powder pistols versus 1911s or Glocks. Even if the Army decided to go back to using Garands - a 1930s design, prominent in WWII - no one could honestly say that the Army was horribly under-armed.

    The basic M16 platform, after initial teething problems were sorted out, was developed into a fine weapon with over fifty years of tiny, incremental improvements. Similarly, the Eastern Bloc's AK-47 - variants of which are still in worldwide service - were developed to a high degree of effectiveness and reliability. What will a new rifle bring to the table that previous ones didn't?

    The US military is always seeking bigger budgets and new weapons programs are just one way to dip into the public till. I smell an expensive boondoogle ahead.

    Best regards
    Doc

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc1 View Post
    Firearms technology has pretty much reached its technological zenith. There's just not much more you can do with kinetic projectiles propelled by gunpowder...
    I totally agree, doc.

    I read an article once that said, we’ve reach as far as we can go with firearms - Until they start going “Zap” instead of “bang”!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    location, location...
    Posts
    6,396
    JMHO, but Milley appears to be living in a fantasy land. The proposed operating pressures for this sooper-dooper armor penetrator are just shy of twice that of 5.56 NATO. The concussion, recoil, and abbreviated barrel life, are gonna be serious hindrances for any kind of useful operational employment. Touching-off a round of this stuff is going to be louder and brighter than a 7" AR pistol... The mind reels.

    I can almost see a valid argument for adopting a cartridge like 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC, but asking for more than that just seems pointless; especially since our military doctrine is focused on fixing troops with light weapons, and eliminating them with crew-served stuff.

    In the end, how about just using all of that R&D money for marksmanship training with the current rifle/cartridge combo??? We're still interested in having our soldiers actually make hits, right?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    SE Okieland
    Posts
    6,598
    .


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Texican View Post
    .


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/Xt...B4XNEWPZFU.jpg


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/3K...A5FK53ONG4.jpg


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/iS...EDR7TZUIAA.jpg


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/gA...HXLSRCTXH4.jpg


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/Y7...7OOFEK7XZY.jpg


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/HM...HSLTVQVQ3Y.jpg

    ------

    For links see article source.....
    Posted for fair use.....
    https://www.militarytimes.com/off-du..._source=clavis

    New research shows the Army could soon develop a rifle with hyper-velocity rounds
    The failed XM29 OICW, once a contender for the US Army's M16A2 replacement program (Photo US Army)

    The Army has been on the hunt for a new rifle for nearly 30 years to replace the rifles it currently fields in its infantry units.

    Once upon a time, the service seemed to be close to adopting a new weapon, though the projects ultimately went nowhere.

    But perhaps soldiers should be glad that the Army didn’t go with the infamous Heckler & Koch G11 or the futuristic XM29 OICW, or the ill-fated XM8 assault rifle.

    Instead of a very conventional rifle firing the 5.56 NATO round, the Army is now rapidly progressing towards developing and field-testing a new weapon that can double the muzzle speeds of a bullet.

    The primary advantages to this new (and no-so-new) technology are insane armor-penetration capabilities at close ranges, and next-level accuracy at longer ranges.

    The Army’s SAW and M4 replacements will both fire this more accurate and deadly round

    The new round will put soldier ranges out to 600 meters, twice as far as the effective range of the M4.
    By: Todd South

    Army Research Laboratory scientists and engineers boast an even greater feat -- instead of needing a massive weapon with external power sources, a la rail guns, this new rifle doesn’t require a barrel longer than 10 inches (for reference, an M4A1 carbine is typically outfitted with a 14.5 inch barrel).

    All that’s needed to send bullets hurtling out at incredible speeds is a new propellant and a special receiver.


    https://www.armytimes.com/resizer/7D...GOYDEE3FP4.png

    A diagram of the tapered-bore gun's new bolt assembly which maximizes chamber combustion pressure to allow for greater muzzle velocities (Photo Army Research Laboratory)

    The idea for the new receiver and its internal assembly dates back to the 1930s where the German military developed “tapered-bore” (popularly referred to as “squeeze-bore” at the time) anti-tank guns that shot medium-caliber rounds.

    This concept was revived and improved by the ARL by revamping the chamber of the gun to withstand higher pressures, while ensuring that the bullet casing can still be cycled out and a new round cycled in.

    Because of the greater pressure coupled with the round’s already potent propellant, the bullet can achieve stunning muzzle velocities. In testing, the Army’s prototype, equipped with a 24 inch barrel, could produce muzzle velocities in excess of 4,600 to 5,750 feet per second.

    According to the ARL, the ultimate goal for the new tapered-bore design is to downsize it to the point where it can be fielded on fully-automatic rifle-caliber guns the size of personal defense weapons which can be used in close quarters battle in addition to ranged combat.

    Additionally, the ARL hopes that their 10 inch barrel version will be used with remotely-operated vehicles and drones, which minimize risk and boost survivability for soldiers in combat zones.

    There’s no target date on when the technology will reach full maturity, but given the progress the ARL has already made with regards to refining the tapered-bore gun, it shouldn’t be much longer until the Army has prototypes in hand of what could be its next-generation rifle.
    About
    this
    Author
    About Ian D'Costa

    Ian D’Costa is a correspondent with Gear Scout whose work has been featured with We Are The Mighty, The Aviationist, and Business Insider. An avid outdoorsman, Ian is also a guns and gear enthusiast.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    16,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Texican View Post
    .




  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,879

    https://uklandpower.files.wordpress....ammo.jpg?w=616
    From left to right: M855A1 (5.56 x 45); 264 USA with MAC polymer/ steel case (6.5 x 47); 277 USA (6.8 x 47); 6.5 mm Creedmoor (6.5 x 49); M80 with PCP polymer/aluminium case (7.62 x 51) .300 Winchester Magnum (7.62 x 67B); 7.62 CTSAS (52 mm case)



    https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...34123202_n.jpg
    Ammunition from the author’s collection. Atop the circa 1929 .276 caliber box are from left to right: .30-06 Springfield M2 Ball, .276 Pedersen PD-42, 7.62x39mm M67, 7.62x51mm NATO DM111, 5.56x45mm M193, and a pulled .276 Pedersen PD-42 bullet, weighing 127 grains. The .276 Pedersen was the would-be replacement of the .30-06, but was aborted officially by declaration of the Army Chief of Staff in 1932. The .30-06 would later be replaced by the 7.62 NATO in 1957, which besides an overall length difference of half an inch was not a meaningful improvement. As a US rifle caliber, the 7.62 NATO was short-lived; it would be replaced in that role beginning in 1963 by the 5.56mm cartridge, and the 7.62mm M14 rifle would be finally relegated to secondary duty in 1970. After World War II, it became obvious that full power rifle cartridges were much more than what was needed, and the intermediate round – here represented by the 7.62×39 and 5.56×45 – became state of the art.
    Last edited by Housecarl; 09-09-2019 at 10:24 PM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    SE Okieland
    Posts
    6,598
    Thanks guys for the info and pics....

    Texican....

  13. #13
    Mark D posted:

    " In the end, how about just using all of that R&D money for marksmanship training with the current rifle/cartridge combo??? We're still interested in having our soldiers actually make hits, right?"

    Couldn't agree more.

    Best
    Doc

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc1 View Post
    Mark D posted:

    " In the end, how about just using all of that R&D money for marksmanship training with the current rifle/cartridge combo??? We're still interested in having our soldiers actually make hits, right?"

    Couldn't agree more.

    Best
    Doc

    For links and images see article source.....
    Posted for fair use.....
    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/y...ing-standards/

    Irons

    Night fire, chem attack shooting, no more ‘alibis': What you need to know about new Army shooting standards

    By: Todd South  
    August 23

    Spc. Thomas Lamb, public affairs specialist with the 100th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment, waits to engage targets on the M249 range at Camp Swift near Bastrop, Texas. (Spc. Jason Archer/Army)
    Soldiers with C Troop, 2nd Squadron, 15th Cavalry Regiment, one-station unit training for cavalry scouts with the Maneuver Center of Excellence, zero their M4 carbines at Soto Range on Fort Benning, Ga., Aug. 21. (Markeith Horace/Army)
    Soldiers with C Troop, 2nd Squadron, 15th Cavalry Regiment, one-station unit training for cavalry scouts with the Maneuver Center of Excellence, zero their M4 carbines at Soto Range on Fort Benning, Ga., Aug. 21. (Markeith Horace/Army)

    Shooters from Army cooks to snipers will see sweeping changes to their marksmanship training, whether they’re toting the newest handgun, carbine, rifle, sniper rifle or machine gun.

    With the recent release of the 800-page, one-stop-shop training manual, “TC 3-20.40, Training and Qualification-Individual Weapons,” marksmanship experts are overhauling a shooting training system that dates to the service of many young soldiers’ grandfathers, as it was developed in 1956.

    The “combat-oriented” changes, according to a recent Army release, are aimed to improve marksmanship for both combat and non-combat arms soldiers across the ranks.
    More than a rifle: How a new 6.8mm round, advanced optics will make soldiers, Marines a lot deadlier
    More than a rifle: How a new 6.8mm round, advanced optics will make soldiers, Marines a lot deadlier

    Top leaders want this weapon in troops' hands soon.
    By: Todd South

    Soldiers have a year from October to learn and practice these new drills for a new qualification, which will begin in October 2020.

    Two big changes – qualifying at night and under simulated chemical attack. And while shooters have long used barricades and shot from standing positions, now they’ll be graded on those portions as well to qualify.
    Sign up for GearScout Weekly
    Get your fill of tactical coolness with guns, gear, bullets and moto content each week.

    That will include loading and reloading weapons as they would in combat.

    “You will work your transitions, from a standing against the barrier, you’ll work the kneeling to the prone, the prone to the kneeling,” Command Sgt. Maj. Robert K. Fortenberry, head of the Infantry School’s marksmanship revamp project, said in the release.

    Along the way, coaches will assess the soldier on their transitions, such as pulling from their kit and using magazines.

    “Before, commanders, leaders, didn’t have to necessarily focus on that," said Fortenberry. "It now forces everybody to practice on it.”

    “It’s exactly what we would do in a combat environment, and I think it’s just going to build a much better shooter,” he said.

    Over a two-year period, 200 marksmanship experts contributed to the project, led by the Maneuver Center of Excellence’s Directorate of Training and Doctrine.

    “We’re calling it ‘new’ but it’s truly not new,” said Fortenberry. “It’s a revamp definitely, an overhaul, of what we were already all doing.”
    Pfc. Ayanna Clay, a paralegal with the 71st Theater Information Operations Group, engages targets from the kneeling position at the qualification range. (Spc. Jason Archer/Army)
    Pfc. Ayanna Clay, a paralegal with the 71st Theater Information Operations Group, engages targets from the kneeling position at the qualification range. (Spc. Jason Archer/Army)

    The command sergeant major noted that the new approach is not just for a qualification on the wall, “They are proficient. They're capable,” he said.

    The changes are to modernize and improve, not totally replace past practices.

    “It’s not to say that what we were doing in the past was wrong,” Fortenberry said. “We killed a lot of bad guys in Iraq and Afghanistan and all over the world with our current level of marksmanship training. So it's not that the old way of firing didn't teach you how to shoot.”

    But lessons learned from those campaigns has added to what Army leaders want their soldiers to know.

    “There was an opportunity to create a fundamental change in regards to marksmanship that more closely aligns with what was done and learned over the past 19 years of combat, making it to where it fits the entire Army as a collective, and makes a more proficient marksman,” he said.

    This is all coming as the Army fielded its first new service-wide sidearm in 2017, the Modular Handgun System, continues upgrades to its light and medium machine guns and develops the Next Generation Squad Weapon program that is expected to deliver an advanced carbine and light machine gun to replace the Squad Automatic Weapon.

    That NGSW program seeks a futuristic fire control that incorporates day/night vision, range finding, ballistics computers and augmented reality compatibility.

    It also will replace the central caliber that has been in service for a century, the .30 caliber family, with a 6.8mm caliber cartridge. And that cartridge could see major changes to polymer or cased-telescoped or other variants, replacing the ubiquitous brass casings.

    Training goes out to soldiers

    Infantry School marksmanship team members are traveling across the Army to better explain the changes to training and qualification with senior leaders of divisions, brigades and soldiers in what are known as Leadership Professional Development sessions, according to the release.

    For instance, hitting the target, while crucial, is only one part of the skill set. Shooters must also be well-trained on other tasks they face while using their weapon in combat.

    Better thinker, better shooter could summarize some of the shifts that soldiers will see.

    The new manual lays out drills and tests to check if soldiers can rapidly load and reload as they would need to while under fire.
    Sgt. John Sis, an infantryman assigned to 4th Battalion, 70th Armor Regiment, 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division. fires a Beretta M9 pistol at a target at Fort Bliss, Texas. (Spc. Matthew J. Marcellus/Army)
    Sgt. John Sis, an infantryman assigned to 4th Battalion, 70th Armor Regiment, 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division. fires a Beretta M9 pistol at a target at Fort Bliss, Texas. (Spc. Matthew J. Marcellus/Army)

    They’ll need to show the ability to work the bolt of their weapon, switch firing positions quickly — standing, kneeling, lying prone, firing from behind a barrier, all while using critical thinking to make battlefield snap judgments on which targets to shoot at and in what order.

    Oh, and still hit the target after all of that.

    Those combined sets make for a proficient shooter.

    “You're employing your weapon system in a more tactical environment or scenario, versus the more traditional way of doing it,” said Fortenberry. “And by doing so, it creates additional rigor, using all of the elements of critical thinking, sound judgment, adapting to change, all of those non-tangible attributes.

    Which, he said, makes for a “clear progression” that makes shooter a lot more capable with their weapon and the “nuances” of marksmanship.
    Soldiers with C Troop, 2nd Squadron, 15th Cavalry Regiment, a one station unit training for cavalry scouts with the Maneuver Center of Excellence, zero their M4 carbines at Soto Range on Fort Benning, Ga., Aug. 21. (Markeith Horace/Army)
    Soldiers with C Troop, 2nd Squadron, 15th Cavalry Regiment, a one station unit training for cavalry scouts with the Maneuver Center of Excellence, zero their M4 carbines at Soto Range on Fort Benning, Ga., Aug. 21. (Markeith Horace/Army)

    Previous testing had soldiers lay out magazines stacked in front of them. The test focused on aim but not the rest of the movements that led to the shot.

    During the “course of fire” testing, soldiers will have to fire at multiple targets, pull magazines from combat gear.

    "Four targets at a time will present themselves in this new course of fire,” said Fortenberry. “There is a quad series that comes up. How do I engage that? No longer is it stacks of 20 magazines here, stacks of 20 over here. Now you have tens.”

    No more pre-staged magazines.

    Oh, and the soldier is moving as they go.

    “You now have to shoot from a barrier, from a concealed position. You transition from the prone to the kneeling and the kneeling to the prone,” Fortenberry said. “The clock doesn’t stop. So, you have to know — Boom! Got that exposure. Okay. I should be transitioning to the kneeling position now. Transition. There it is! — Boom! And then you’re engaging as you go.”

    No more alibis

    Before, soldiers could call for a kind of time out for a malfunctioning weapon — no more.

    “Alibis are gone," said Fortenberry. “’Hey, Sarge! Got an alibi on lane three! Weapons malfunction!' There's no alibis anymore. You have to fix the malfunction,” just as a soldier would have to in combat, he said.

    Leaders can still authorize an alibi on a case-by-case basis.

    Another add-on includes the mandated use of indoor, electronic ranges as soldiers prep for their qualification.

    The simulator stations will be required shooting for every soldier as they move through the firing progression.

    Before it was available and up to the unit leaders to use. No more, now it’s mandatory, according to the release.

    The new manual also consolidates a lot of spread-out marksmanship training and doctrine, officials said.

    The “Dot-40” puts that in one package.

    “The Dot-40 was designed simply because we had multiple manuals and multiple best practices," said Fortenberry. "And we were just grabbing whatever was on the shelf. We had nothing that spoke to individual marksmanship other than a very broad series of best practices, manuals. It hadn't been evolved over time.”

    The senior enlisted leader noted that the new manual provides a “common ground” for marksmanship and effectively employing the range of small arms.

    “Every commander and leader out there wants a Soldier to be trained and proficient in warrior tasks and drills, marksmanship being one of those — be able to place effective fires on the enemy,” Fortenberry said. “So the intent has never changed. This just grabs all the tools and gives them a blueprint to achieve that end state.”

    About
    this
    Author
    About Todd South

    Todd South is a Marine veteran of the Iraq War. He has written about crime, courts, government and military issues for multiple publications since 2004. In 2014, he was named a Pulitzer finalist for local reporting on a project he co-wrote about witness problems in gang criminal cases. Todd covers ground combat for Military Times.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,879
    For links and images see article source.....
    Posted for fair use.....
    https://www.shootingillustrated.com/...pons-contract/

    SIG Sauer Selected for Army Next Generation Squad Weapons Contract

    by Guy J. Sagi - Tuesday, September 10, 2019

    SIG Sauer was awarded a contract by the U.S. Army in the down-select process for the branch’s Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW). The award encompasses the complete SIG Sauer system, consisting of 6.8 mm hybrid ammunition, a lightweight machine gun, rifle and suppressors. The company will provide single-source manufacturing for ammunition, weapons, and suppressors allowing for less risk and increased capability for the U.S. Army.

    “The U.S. Army is leading the world in the first significant upgrade to small arms in decades to meet the growing demands of soldiers on the battlefield,” said Ron Cohen, president and CEO of SIG Sauer. “We are honored to have been selected for the Next Generation Squad Weapons program bringing increased lethality to the warfighter over the legacy weapons. At the core of our submission is our newly developed, high-pressure, 6.8 mm hybrid ammunition that is utilized in both weapons, and is a significant leap forward in ammunition innovation, design and manufacturing.”

    The SIG Sauer 6.8 mm hybrid ammunition is designed for increased penetration at greater distances. Cohen continued, “Using patent-pending technology the SIG Sauer Ammunition division has engineered a completely new cartridge resulting in a more compact round, with increased velocity and accuracy, while delivering a substantial reduction in the weight of the ammunition.”

    The primary objectives set forth by the U.S. Army for the NGSW-AR was a weapon with the firepower and range of a machine gun, coupled with the precision and ergonomics of a rifle. The company’s submission is an ultra-light, medium-caliber machine gun with AR ergonomics chambered in 6.8 mm hybrid ammunition. Features include quick-detach magazines, side-opening feed tray, increased available 1913 rail space for night vision and enablers, folding buttstock and suppressor.

    Additionally, the Prototype Project Opportunity Notice (PPON) requirements were inclusive of an NGSW-Rifle. The SIG Sauer NGSW-Rifle submission, also chambered in the 6.8 mm hybrid, is lightweight and features a free-floating reinforced M-Lok handguard, side-charging handle, full ambidextrous controls, folding buttstock and suppressor.

    “Both weapons are designed with features that will increase the capabilities of the soldier,” Cohen said. “The final component of the SIG Sauer Next Generation Weapons System is our suppressor, which through exhaustively researched design enhancements, reduces harmful backflow and signature.”

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Blacknarwhal View Post
    snip

    The U.S. Army is getting much closer to deploying the next generation weapon that could soon replace the M4 carbine and M249 light machine gun sometime in the early 2020s.

    On Aug. 29, the Army announced it selected three defense companies to deliver prototype weapons for the Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) program.

    The new weapons must be lighter and able to penetrate the world's most advanced body armor from at least 600 meters away, defense insiders say.

    "This is a weapon that could defeat any body armor, any planned body armor that we know of in the future," former Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley has said.

    "This is a weapon that can go out at ranges that are unknown today. There is a target acquisition system built into this thing that is unlike anything that exists today. This is a very sophisticated weapon."
    Sounds like AR15s and AK47s are are merely antiquated curious from a past era and should no longer be considered weapons of war. The dems need to make sure such old has-been guns can be direct shipped to any Americans holding a C&R license.
    Matthew 13:49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

  17. #17
    I would think optics, with the technology possible, would be a better investment. Range finding, instantly transfers to the scope in relation to the target with some of the other unique techs, like firing upon aquisition with a safety involved to prevent any unintended consequences.

    As stated earlier, rounds on target are key.

  18. #18
    http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pu...l_FINAL_ph.pdf

    Not ready for prime time or just not ready for the public.
    Matthew 13:49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    95,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Ractivist View Post
    I would think optics, with the technology possible, would be a better investment. Range finding, instantly transfers to the scope in relation to the target with some of the other unique techs, like firing upon aquisition with a safety involved to prevent any unintended consequences.

    As stated earlier, rounds on target are key.
    What was determined in all of the studies after the last couple of wars still holds true. Small arms employment against an armed enemy mostly occurs within 300 meters, and most of that even closer than that while under fire or under its threat. Opponents appear in fleeting moments and the best way to ensure a hit upon them in such circumstances is volume of rounds and giving the weapon operator an optic to be able to see the target better (which produces a psychological obstacle to "get over"). That inturn forced a balancing act between number of rounds and size and weight of rounds that are "effective", particularly when it is understood that most rounds would be expended in suppressing movement. That balancing act gets further tweeked when the conflict changes from peer force vs peer force to insurgencies, as well as adding urban or mountainous terrain and changes in rules of engagement which places limits upon employing fire and movement/hammer and anvil upon US and allied forces, but generally not upon the opponents. Afghanistan being the extreme where the Taliban et al can employ further stand off using "full powered" 7.62x54R chambered weapons, often with optics, to open ambushes from cover and concealment from 300 meters and further out, often from elevated positions, then fade away before effective counter fires can be employed or authorized.
    Last edited by Housecarl; 09-11-2019 at 03:03 PM. Reason: Fixed autocorrect

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


NOTICE: Timebomb2000 is an Internet forum for discussion of world events and personal disaster preparation. Membership is by request only. The opinions posted do not necessarily represent those of TB2K Incorporated (the owner of this website), the staff or site host. Responsibility for the content of all posts rests solely with the Member making them. Neither TB2K Inc, the Staff nor the site host shall be liable for any content.

All original member content posted on this forum becomes the property of TB2K Inc. for archival and display purposes on the Timebomb2000 website venue. Said content may be removed or edited at staff discretion. The original authors retain all rights to their material outside of the Timebomb2000.com website venue. Publication of any original material from Timebomb2000.com on other websites or venues without permission from TB2K Inc. or the original author is expressly forbidden.



"Timebomb2000", "TB2K" and "Watching the World Tick Away" are Service Mark℠ TB2K, Inc. All Rights Reserved.