Marines are going to replace the SAW

[seeker_two]

Sounds like they're going to adopt one of these in .223.... 



http://world.guns.ru/machine/bar1918.jpg

[Cutter68CB]

     If the primary concern is mostly to reduce wieght than why not test the Ares Defence Systems http://www.aresdefensesales.com/ (Strike 5.56)? It's a belt feed upper that will fit on any M4 and can still use 30 rd. mags, Beta-mags or the same 200 rd. SAW belts. It also has a quick change barrell system in 10",16" and 20". They may have already tested this and found it not to be up to par, but I would hate to think they didn't and our guys end up with a product that really don't fit their needs.
 

[tombogan03884]

I don't think it will happen, I don't see Congress coming up with funds.
Promised or not. (F 35, new Helo's for Marine 1 )

[schizuki]

This is insane. A mag-fed automatic rifle without a quick-change barrel is not a replacement for a SAW. How many times does the US military need to learn this lesson?

It's lighter to carry than the SAW. Great. But at some point you stop carrying and start shooting. A lot.

And the accuracy question? One of the few criticisms of the Bren gun of WWII was that it was TOO accurate:

"Initial versions of the weapon were sometimes considered too accurate because the cone or pattern of fire was extremely concentrated, resulting in multiple hits on one or two enemies, with other enemy soldiers going untouched. Soldiers often expressed a preference for worn-out barrels in order to spread the cone of fire among several targets. Later versions of the Bren addressed this issue by providing a wider cone of fire."

A machinegun needs to be a bit less accurate to create a larger "beaten zone" of suppressive fire. High volume of fire is more important than pinpoint accuracy - an open bolt design is your friend. 

[tombogan03884]

This is insane. A mag-fed automatic rifle without a quick-change barrel is not a replacement for a SAW. How many times does the US military need to learn this lesson?

It's lighter to carry than the SAW. Great. But at some point you stop carrying and start shooting. A lot.

And the accuracy question? One of the few criticisms of the Bren gun of WWII was that it was TOO accurate:

"Initial versions of the weapon were sometimes considered too accurate because the cone or pattern of fire was extremely concentrated, resulting in multiple hits on one or two enemies, with other enemy soldiers going untouched. Soldiers often expressed a preference for worn-out barrels in order to spread the cone of fire among several targets. Later versions of the Bren addressed this issue by providing a wider cone of fire."

A machinegun needs to be a bit less accurate to create a larger "beaten zone" of suppressive fire. High volume of fire is more important than pinpoint accuracy - an open bolt design is your friend.  

Spoken like an older Machine gunner.  

In WWII and Korea machine guns were used to fire indirect harassing fire.
During WWI "raids" were conducted on German rear areas by massing large numbers of guns and firing indirect fire into a grid square, just like an artillery fire mission.
They don't actually teach the machine gun any more, and few Officers or Troops truly understand the weapon they have in hand.

[Sponsor]

[Combat Diver]

Bad idea to make a dedicated Automatic Rife with a closed bolt.  Get into a fire fight and you have a gun that is unsafe as it will cook off the round in the chamber.  Only takes 6 mags on a M4A1 to get a cook off used in a suppressive fire mode.  I know because I've done it.

CD

[twyacht]

Bad idea to make a dedicated Automatic Rife with a closed bolt.  Get into a fire fight and you have a gun that is unsafe as it will cook off the round in the chamber.  Only takes 6 mags on a M4A1 to get a cook off used in a suppressive fire mode.  I know because I've done it.

CD

Thanks you for the "reality" CD, I hope more "decision makers" actually LISTEN to those that do what you do, and provide the optimum platform.

P.S. What are you thoughts on the FN FAL? In general civilian usage?

Thanks again.

[Combat Diver]

Love the FAL, have owned a FN49 in 7x57 and two FALs in the past.  I used to hunt with my FNs during the 90s.  My longest deer harvest was with a 18" SAR48 Bush Rifle wearing a 2.5x scope at 300m.  Have found FALs buried in Kuwait between the wars and got them up and running.  Have toted several battlefield pickups in Iraq during the years also (however never did use them in anger).  I prefer a M14/M1A for long range (past 500m) work do to the better sights however as a general purpose, running around, balanced rifle that will function in all weather thats the FAL.  Did get to handle an orginal H&R T48 (US test rifle against the M14 during development) in my units arms room in Germany in 88'.

CD