The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Tactical Rifle & Carbine => Topic started by: GUNS-R-US on June 28, 2010, 11:49:24 AM
-
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!!
-
Well, actually they will be using the money to buy SCAR MK-17s in 7.62x51mm NATO
-
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.
-
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!
-
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
-
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. :P
-
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.
-
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
-
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!
-
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.
-
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.
If the Military would witch to the 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel I would love it. I think there good capable man stoppers. That provide a good balance between weight, power, capacity, and recoil.
Ya know I think the AR-10 is a good battle rifle, but for the recoil and capacity issue. The weight is only a bit more than the M-16.
-
Dagg-nabb-it. And here I just bought one.
Oh, well. Maybe it will end up being a decent rifle and might supplant a couple of my ARs. Or maybe I will find it isn't all that the hype says and I'll trade it for my latest whim...
-
Dagg-nabb-it. And here I just bought one.
Oh, well. Maybe it will end up being a decent rifle and might supplant a couple of my ARs. Or maybe I will find it isn't all that the hype says and I'll trade it for my latest whim...
Your investment has been protected. The price will not fall soon since there will be no military contract to offset the cost of R&D and tooling should production continue.
Should production stop, you have a rare collector's item.
-
Dagg-nabb-it. And here I just bought one.
Oh, well. Maybe it will end up being a decent rifle and might supplant a couple of my ARs. Or maybe I will find it isn't all that the hype says and I'll trade it for my latest whim...
Your investment has been protected. The price will not fall soon since there will be no military contract to offset the cost of R&D and tooling should production continue.
Should production stop, you have a rare collector's item.
+1 to what Solus said!
-
Wouldn't FN just refurbish the850 rifles, switch out the selector switch and sell them commercially? I mean, that's what I would do.
-
Wouldn't FN just refurbish the850 rifles, switch out the selector switch and sell them commercially? I mean, that's what I would do.
Exactly what I was thinking. Couldn't the bolt group and selector assembly be swapped out and repacked as a civilian variant? There is a quick way to recoup some capitol. The wait now for these is enough to prevent it from making a successful run in the civilian gun shops and the suppliers are jacking the price up accordingly. Get more of these units in the supply chain and the price will normalize and the sales will take off. It's a popular platform with the gas piston and offers a level of coolness that attracts buyers who already own AR platform guns. I would buy one without a doubt if they were a little more available and not being price hiked buy the distributors. Plus if they were to make these a special run, being that they were from the SOCOM contract, they would fly out the door.
-
Wouldn't FN just refurbish the850 rifles, switch out the selector switch and sell them commercially? I mean, that's what I would do.
They might recoup some of their money that way, but their still used "surplus arms". How much can they charge for them? new ones cost $2400-$3000 big money in my case. Now if they price them "used" @ say $1200-$1500 I might bite.
-
I doubt it cost anywhere near $2000 to build each rifle, even if you account for refitting it to civilian legal. So, looking at it from a retailer's view, why couldn't they sell them as "factory reconditioned" unit, slap a $2000 price tag on it and make back some of the lost R&D money? I know it's not quite THAT simple but close enough. I bet the production cost per unit is around $600-$800 per SCAR so even at a reduced $1800-$2000 they would stand to get back quite a decent chunk of change and I could actually afford one or maybe 2...
-
I doubt it cost anywhere near $2000 to build each rifle, even if you account for refitting it to civilian legal. So, looking at it from a retailer's view, why couldn't they sell them as "factory reconditioned" unit, slap a $2000 price tag on it and make back some of the lost R&D money? I know it's not quite THAT simple but close enough. I bet the production cost per unit is around $600-$800 per SCAR so even at a reduced $1800-$2000 they would stand to get back quite a decent chunk of change and I could actually afford one or maybe 2...
There's still police and foriegn sales to go for. You won't get the retro fitted civvie legal versions until Paraguay has told them no. :-\
FQ13
-
If FNH needs somewhere to dump those automatic rifles, I know a guy who knows a guy who could help them with that. ;)
-
They could always bury dem in my backyard next to da may-o-naese jar wit my life savin's of $29.95 in it. He yuk
-
They could always bury dem in my backyard next to da may-o-naese jar wit my life savin's of $29.95 in it. He yuk
;D
Next to the AK and Moisin,....cause they will always just work..... 8)
P.S. Gots to hav my 5th o' Old Crow,.... ;)
-
Looks like it got uncanceled?
http://www.thetacticalwire.com/story/222618
-
Looks like it got uncanceled?
http://www.thetacticalwire.com/story/222618
Solus you beat me to it.
I still don't think SOCOM is going to be buying to many MK16 variants.
Home : Subscription : Archives : Contact
August 17 : 2010
Military Approves FN SCAR System for Full-Rate Production
McLean, Virginia -- The U.S. Special Operations Command notified FN that the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) family of weapons-the MK 16 (5.56mm) and MK 17 (7.62mm) combat assault rifles and MK 13 grenade launcher-was approved for full-rate production. The Full-Rate Production Decision Review by the Milestone Decision Authority occurred on July 30, 2010.
FN Herstal, a worldwide recognized firearms supplier to generations of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines since 1897, has ramped up production and assembly at its manufacturing facilities to meet the delivery orders placed by USSOCOM.
Following a worldwide solicitation to the firearms industry in 2004, nine vendors submitted a dozen designs for a new modular, multi-caliber weapons system. In November 2004, FNH was awarded the contract by USSOCOM for its SCAR submission after passing the Go/No-Go criteria required by the solicitation and being selected by a source selection board composed of senior operators from every SOF component.
The SCAR weapons system is modular and easily adaptable to future enhancements and calibers. It is built with an eye to careful economic stewardship and the small logistical footprint required of today's highly mobile military. Overall life cycle costs are reduced by features such as a chrome-lined, hammer forged steel barrel with a service life of far more than 15,000+ rounds. Each component of the SCAR weapons system is built for years of dependable service while minimizing maintenance downtime.
The heart of the FN SCAR system consists of two highly adaptable modular rifle platforms and a grenade launcher. Type-designated as the MK 16 and the MK 17, both rifles are available with three different barrel lengths optimized for conducting operations in close-quarters combat, standard infantry and longer-range precision fire roles. All SCAR barrels are tightly attached to a monolithic receiver and can be easily interchanged by the operator in minutes to instantly meet virtually any mission requirement. The MK 13 40mm Enhanced Grenade Launcher Module (EGLM) easily mounts under the barrel of either SCAR platform, providing another useful tool for the warfighter and is easily configured for use as a stand-alone weapon as well. Because of the SCAR system's modular design, ergonomic (100%) and parts commonality (greater than 80%), it represents a significant reduction in training costs and life-cycle support. The weapon system's open architecture supports future enhancements and modifications in operational requirements including ammunition, aiming devices, sighting systems and other mission critical equipment.
The MK 17 (7.62mm) is also the base of the SCAR common receiver currently under final test and evaluation by USSOCOM. The SCAR common receiver can accommodate multi-caliber conversion kits.
The SCAR weapons system is the first new assault rifle procured by the U.S. Military through a full and open competition since the M16 trials held in the mid-1960s. It was tested for reliability, accuracy, safety and ergonomics from August 2005 to September 2008 in a variety of environments including urban, maritime, jungle and winter/mountain operational test scenarios. The SCAR weapons system successfully endured more than two million rounds of ammunition during these trials thereby making it the most heavily tested weapons system in the history of small arms. No other current so-called modular weapons system has endured even a fraction of this degree of strenuous testing, and none are in use by U.S. forces.
FN firearms manufactured in the United States are produced by FN Manufacturing in Columbia, SC. The Herstal Group is represented by FNH USA, FN Manufacturing and Browning within the United States and directly employs more than 1,000 individuals. U.S. operations are located in Virginia, South Carolina, Utah and Missouri. FNH USA is the sales and marketing arm of FN. Its corporate mission is to expand the company's global leadership position in defense, law enforcement and commercial markets by delivering superior products and the finest in training and logistical support. For more information, or to view the entire line of FN products, visit www.fnhusa.com. FNH USA, LLC, P.O. Box 697, McLean, VA 22101 USA.
Media Contact:
Tes Salb (703) 288-3500X125 or tess@fnhusa.com
Elaine Hadden Golladay (864) 640-7159 or dagtactical@bellsouth.net
© Copyright 2008-2010 The Tactical Wire. All Rights Reserved.
-
I still don't think SOCOM is going to be buying to many MK16 variants.
I agree...production release and actual orders are 2 different things
-
Looks like it got uncanceled?
http://www.thetacticalwire.com/story/222618
Looks like they finally accepted the obvious;
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/08/20/fn-finally-admits-that-ussocom-is-not-buying-the-scar-mk-16/
-
Is it safe to say it's the round not the gun?
-
Is it safe to say it's the round not the gun?
Don't know if I would go that far. ??? I think the blog writer really hit the nail on the head in CJ's post, this decision is purely monetary! :P In the original article I posted it said "the Mk16 didn't provide enough of an advantage over the current M4" to purchase them. Not that they didn't want to buy them. If someone dropped a nuke on the SOCOM armory I think they would be buying a lot of them!
-
Yup, I'd say GUNS R US got it right. From what I hear, the Mk16 did provide an advantage...just not enough to justify the expense. The Mk17 however, is a fairly sizable upgrade to their aging M14 fleet (as much as I like my M1A, it is getting a bit long in the tooth).
-
i agree the round just dont cut it no more unless your shooting chucks and yotes. Now the 6.5 or 6.8 would be perfect. Some swat teams have switched to it. Flat shooting fast round and great all around caliber. My boy has a 6.5 bolt gun on vermiter.com and he loves it for deer and bear.
-
i agree the round just dont cut it no more unless your shooting chucks and yotes. Now the 6.5 or 6.8 would be perfect. Some swat teams have switched to it. Flat shooting fast round and great all around caliber. My boy has a 6.5 bolt gun on vermiter.com and he loves it for deer and bear.
Ya know, I think the 6.5 or 6.8 are good rounds, but I think it would take a forced move by someone in a power position to ever get the military to switch from the 5.56 to one of the other cartridges. It's kinda like when the military or more specifically the Army and Marine Corps, it took the Sec Def to basically force them to buy it. Their just to heavily invested in the 5.56. As I recall the Army at least didn't want to switch from the M-14. I think the Navy didn't switch the majority of their forces back then or even now many ship board security teams use the M-14. Personally, I like the 5.56. Kinda like the 9mm, it depends on the type of bullet used whether it's going to be good for defensive or offensive operations. My primary SHTF weapon is a 5.56, not the 7.62 or 6.8 Just my opinion. Not that I don't want a 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel as my service weapon if we did switch.
-
Ya know, I think the 6.5 or 6.8 are good rounds, but I think it would take a forced move by someone in a power position to ever get the military to switch from the 5.56 to one of the other cartridges. It's kinda like when the military or more specifically the Army and Marine Corps, it took the Sec Def to basically force them to buy it. Their just to heavily invested in the 5.56. As I recall the Army at least didn't want to switch from the M-14. I think the Navy didn't switch the majority of their forces back then or even now many ship board security teams use the M-14. Personally, I like the 5.56. Kinda like the 9mm, it depends on the type of bullet used whether it's going to be good for defensive or offensive operations. My primary SHTF weapon is a 5.56, not the 7.62 or 6.8 Just my opinion. Not that I don't want a 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel as my service weapon if we did switch.
Military has been restricted to 'ball' rounds by the Geneva Convention?
-
Military has been restricted to 'ball' rounds by the Geneva Convention?
That's only true when fighting another uniformed enemy. We're not required by law of the Hague convention of 1899 (not the Geneva Convention) to use FMJ's when fighting irregular forces or insurgencies. The Marines started using the MK318 Mod 0 - SOST's earlier this year, to good effect I under stand. Eventually these rounds should make it to the surplus markets, when they do I think I'll rotate my ammo stock though.
Here's a link to the story http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/ (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/)
-
That's only true when fighting another uniformed enemy. We're not required by law of the Hague convention of 1899 (not the Geneva Convention) to use FMJ's when fighting irregular forces or insurgencies. The Marines started using the MK318 Mod 0 - SOST's earlier this year, to good effect I under stand. Eventually these rounds should make it to the surplus markets, when they do I think I'll rotate my ammo stock though.
Here's a link to the story http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/ (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/)
Thanks for the info ..and lesson.
take care
-
Military has been restricted to 'ball' rounds by the Geneva Convention?
I was thinking the same thing. I've always wondered because when used with a better expanding bullet, the 5.56 CAN BE a very potent round. The problem I see (especially at close range) is the 5.56 FMJ tends to go straight through and not cause a lot of damage.
-
I love my 5.56 also.
-
That's only true when fighting another uniformed enemy. We're not required by law of the Hague convention of 1899 (not the Geneva Convention) to use FMJ's when fighting irregular forces or insurgencies. The Marines started using the MK318 Mod 0 - SOST's earlier this year, to good effect I under stand. Eventually these rounds should make it to the surplus markets, when they do I think I'll rotate my ammo stock though.
Here's a link to the story http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/ (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/)
Does make for unusual ROE, however.
If they all have the same color clothes on, load ball, otherwise use the good stuff.
-
Here's a link to the story http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/ (http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/02/17/usmc-adopt-new-5-56mm-mk318-mod-0-ammunition/)
Interesting....looks like it would tumble more effectively in a body than the current FMJ rounds....kinda like the 5.45x39 "poison bullet" rounds the Russians used in Afghanistan.
Personally, I'm glad that the MIL is investing in the SCAR-Heavy. The M-4's make great submachine guns...but lousy battle rifles. Time to look for something with more punch....