SOCOM Cancels SCAR Project

[GUNS-R-US]

SOCOM Cancels SCAR Project
 
Military.com is reporting that the United States Military's Special Operations Command has "abruptly" decided to cancel the Mk-16 (5.56mm) variant of the SOCOM Combat Assault Rifle - the SCAR. The heavier Mk-17 (7.62mm) version will, however, remain in the current arms inventory.

According to the Military.com report, SOCOM officials say the SCAR rifle in 5.56mm does not "provide enough of a performance advantage over the M-4 to justify spending USSOCOM's limited...funds when competing priorities are taken into consideration."

Instead of the SOCOM rifle, there will be additional Mk-17 variants using the 7.62mm NATO round (.308), enhanced grenade launchers, and new Mk-20 Sniper Support Rifles purchased.

Wow.

The decision puts the brakes on a six-year project to develop a new rifle that was designed from the ground-up for the military. It will undoubtedly set off another raging debate between decision-makers and the people inside the program who felt the SCAR in 5.56mm offered more flexibility, a better operating system (piston) and better performance in "dusty environments"- like the desert and mountain theaters where troops are currently deployed.

Just over a month ago, FNH, the builder of the SCAR rifle, announced they had cleared the final requirement hurdles and were going into production on both systems. Those rifles were scheduled to be issued in a Mk 16 CQC (Close Quarters Combat), Mk16S (standard), and Mk16LB (long barrel) configuration.

Instead, orders have been issued from SOCOM to turn in the approximately 850 Mk-16s currently deployed to Army Rangers, SEAL units and Naval Special Warfare Combat-Craft crewmen.

I think FNH is going to take a bit of a financial hit on this one! OUCH!!

[ericire12]

Well, actually they will be using the money to buy SCAR MK-17s in 7.62x51mm NATO

[billt]

All of this sounds to me like they are sick of the 5.56 in general, more so than any particular gun it's chambered in. .22's have no place attacking in open country except on a dog town.   Bill T.

[GUNS-R-US]

Well, actually they will be using the money to buy SCAR MK-17s in 7.62x51mm NATO

That's true, but they're going to be buying the MK17, accessories, and the new MK-20 but how many of these do you think there going to buy compared to how many of the 5.56 MK16's they were going to buy. I'm just guessing but I'd think more than 80% of the spec ops folks were going to be carrying the MK-16's. The way I read it they are still going to be carrying the M-4, not the MK-17.

According to the Military.com report, SOCOM officials say the SCAR rifle in 5.56mm does not "provide enough of a performance advantage over the M-4 to justify spending USSOCOM's limited...funds when competing priorities are taken into consideration."

So they'll buy a hand full of the others compared to the thousands of MK-16! That will equal a hugh profit loss to FNH. Their best hope is to wrangle the M-4 contract from colt. But I don't think the R&D cost their going to lose can't really be recovered!

[fightingquaker13]

All of this sounds to me like they are sick of the 5.56 in general, more so than any particular gun it's chambered in. .22's have no place attacking in open country except on a dog town.   Bill T.

Yup. The only real advantages are the light weight of the ammo (meaning you can carry more) and the low recoil which makes auto fire easier to control. Beyond that....? I think my AR is fine for civilian or police social work. If I were going into battle, I'd like to see .308 on the label. Hell, if its not enough gun to take deer hunting, its not enough gun to take to war.
Just my .02.
FQ13

[Sponsor]

[ericire12]

Yup. The only real advantages are the light weight of the ammo (meaning you can carry more) and the low recoil which makes auto fire easier to control. Beyond that....? I think my AR is fine for civilian or police social work. If I were going into battle, I'd like to see .308 on the label. Hell, if its not enough gun to take deer hunting, its not enough gun to take to war.
Just my .02.
FQ13

Many a great deer has been taken with a .223 - Hell, my uncle has started deer hunting with .22 mag to make it more interesting.

The problem is that on the battle field its a leetle difficult to always have to make a neck shot. 

[bulldog75]

Bring enough gun to the fight. Yea you can carry 210 rounds to the fight but if you have to shoot someone 10 times to put them down that just negated the perk of carrying that round. One shot from a .308 and they stop comming.

[fightingquaker13]

Bring enough gun to the fight. Yea you can carry 210 rounds to the fight but if you have to shoot someone 10 times to put them down that just negated the perk of carrying that round. One shot from a .308 and they stop comming.

Point. The M4 on three round burst mode turns a 30 round mag into a 10 round clip (used deliberately as its only two more than a garand). A twenty rounder from an M-14 will let you address more targets (maybe).
FQ13

[GUNS-R-US]

Point. The M4 on three round burst mode turns a 30 round mag into a 10 round clip (used deliberately as its only two more than a garand). A twenty rounder from an M-14 will let you address more targets (maybe).
FQ13

Very few people use the full auto or burst selectors in the military, and only a few folks in civilian life even have the option to use it. So that point I think is mute! I also think hitting the target is far more important than what caliber you shoot it with!! For as much as I love the M-1 and M14's given a choice as to which weapon I when to war with, I'd rather have a M-4 with 30 rounds of hollow point ammo the Marines are using!

[twyacht]

Too bad the 6.5 and/or 6.8 aren't anything more than a "closet round". That platform I think would be a good balance, between the two for a mass produced combat rifle.

Somehow the 5.56, has an entrenched mindset, and the .308, has been around a long time. Perhaps, in time there can be balancing point, to give the soldiers what they want, and the feasibility to mass produce it.