A Brief History of the NGSW Program

The recently wrapped up NGSW program has been a hot topic across PrepHole and just about every other gun or weapons board or circle in the world.
I think its valuable to sum up a bunch of disparate information from a multitude of sources to supply context and understanding to much of the program for which there is a lot of misinfo or misunderstandings abound. And explain as much as I can to people that haven't followed the program and are confused or annoyed by random names and events being thrown at them and discussed that they don't understand.

The NGSW program of course didn't start out of nowhere, there was a decent amount of build up to it going back well over a decade. And most of its aspects had been played with at one point or another well in advance of the trials and tentative adoption of the XM5/XM250 and the XM157 themselves.
I will try and summarize and draw together these different programs and experiments into a short and semi-cohesive whole.

Note, the following will contain some of my own interpretations and inferences and connections drawn between programs. I have tried to identifiably separate them out from the pure information sections. Take them with a grain of salt where desired. I have tried to make this all as coherent as is possible, but I will clarify where necessary.
Criticize me for mistakes where they are made.

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We begin well in advance of the NGSW program itself. Almost 15 years before it actually.

    To start I think we should go back to the Individual Carbine and SCAR trials, held in the mid 2000s this saw the hammering out of what the 'modern combat rifle' would look like, at least in the US.
    Guns that came out of these trials included the FN SCAR, the Colt SCAR and CM901, the Robinson Arms XCR, the Remington ACR, the HK 416, among others.

    A focus on modularity and the move towards opening up the door to heavier caliber weapons characterized these trials. Specifically, conversions to 7.62NATO and other full power rifle cartridges were a focus.
    The idea of hitting farther, harder, was a common desire as the US moved into full time COIN in Afghanistan and Iraq.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And being ran around the same time, was the LSAT program.
    Ran by Textron via AAI, this saw the reinvention of the Caseless Cartridge and the Cased Telescoped Cartridge, both of which being efforts to reduce ammo and firearm weight and move away from the standard brass cases. The focus on getting a lighter and lighter weight cartridge was already in motion. As were investigations into non-brass cartridges.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You left out the CTSAS program, which was the step between LSAT and NGSW. CTSAS was basically a downselect of the caseless ammo, but otherwise a direct follow-on to the LSAT program.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    After these trials mostly fizzled out in replacing the M4, or slipped into quiet development in the LSAT's case, we have to jump forwards in time a bit here.

    Next on the road was the USMC's Infantry Automatic Rifle trial.
    While overall a smaller trial with influence that could be assessed as either significant or rather small on the NGSW program itself, what really came out of this that matters specifically, was the concept of every soldier having a suppressed firearm. The USMC moved heavily on issuing a suppressor to as many troops as was possible for health and safety reasons, communication reasons, and gaining from the reduction in recoil a suppressor gives.
    The US Army was posed to follow them happily in that way.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The XM5 suppressor is integral to the weapon’s design. It was necessary to address the insanity muzzle flash and recoil of the cartridge. The Army still doesn’t have the same philosophy on suppressors as the Marine Corpse. E.g. I’ve heard no plans to suppress the M240 or M17.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Literally every NGSW weapon was meant to be used with a suppressor full time. The bullpups too, and they have less problems with muzzle flash. Being suppressed full time was a requirement.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Being ran somewhat at the same time as the IAR program, the Enhanced Performance Round (EPR) program also is important here.

    While an effort at least on paper to clear out lead and other toxic metals from standard issue bullets, it also served as means to apply the newest of modern bullet designs in real field conditions.
    Especially being relevant at extreme distances due to the very low velocity requirements for extensive fragmentation, as low as 1700FPS for M80A1 for example (real world upwards of 500-600 yards from muzzle). Making hits at far ranges potentially more viable in at least some circumstances. And potentially allowing for more practical effectiveness at ranges that historically were considered too far.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous
  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And finally while perhaps less directly influential on the NGSW program, the French Felin program also deserves mention here.

    With the integration of an individual level computerized optical sight into the combat squad and it proving itself if clunky and awkward, at least usable in a genuine combat situation.
    Being somewhat off in its timing vs technological development like everything French, the Felin program and the optical sight and squad level computerization included were a definite direct step forwards and showed that the time was ripe for properly computerized optical sights to be developed and slimmed down for practicality.
    It can be called the canary in the coal mine of sorts for this new step forwards.

    I'll give the thread a few minute break now.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The FELIN was directly inspired by the OICW program.
      In fact the OICW program spawned a bunch of programs in a bunch of countries. The Spanish had the Combatiente Futuro program, the Russians trialed similar things in their Ratnik program, and there were others.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        All of them arrived at the same conclusion as OICW that infantry-rugged miniaturization wasn't quite there yet.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good work so far, OP. Interesting connection with FELIN that I'd never considered.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The others are the more interesting .264 USA and .277 USA.
      With a 107gr projectile traveling at 2800-2900FPS from a 16" barrel, the .264 USA matched the 5.56 in velocity for barrel length but with a substantial increase in bullet weight.
      The .277 USA used a 135 gr projectile (soon to be a familiar weight to match a familiar diameter) at 2500FPS, being much closer to the 6.8SPC in format with some specific differences.
      These two cartridges that came out of the Army Marksmanship Unit can be said to be the true start of the road to the 6.8NGSW as it stands. Both being definite moves towards more than intermediate power in the common rifle.

      Thanks for reading.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Now that we have the basics established in terms of tech and gun development in the US and around the world, it seems reasonable to start with the basis for the 6.8x51mm NGSW cartridge itself. A gun’s cartridge can be called its heart to a certain extent. And understanding where the US Army was starting from is pretty important.

    The idea of an in-between that fell in the middle of 5.56NATO and 7.62NATO is very old of course. Dating back to the 70s the 6mm SAW cartridge was one such short lived attempt and plenty more have come from both ends of the spectrum, starting from 5.56NATO and getting bigger, or scaling down 7.62NATO.

    Recently the Army itself again tried two different paths towards this end that especially stand out.
    The first is the well-known 6.8SPC. A less than beloved cartridge, it traded velocity and aerodynamics for bullet weight.
    Firing a bullet as standard a 115gr bullet at 2500-2600FPS from a 16” barrel. Perhaps not being a proper in-between cartridge, it stands more as an example of chasing more power within the intermediate cartridge form factor.
    Its lack of success indicates that it didn't really give the Army or those in it what they wanted.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >very old

      An improved British .280 is exactly what we have ended up with after 80 years of fucking around

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Thought it was closer to 276 Pederson or 7mm-08.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Very 'improved'.
        The only thing really shared is bullet diameter.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The more someone advocates .280 British the less they actually know about it.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It's another "Textron makes the best product but is shelved for garbage" episode

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That could be one interpretation.
      Its impressive in a way how long AAI has been trying for a contract and has failed, often for reasons that weren't entirely its own fault.

      All that shit looks heavy and expensive. Don't really care.

      Those aspects did become larger and larger as the program continued.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Makes exactly what the Air Force requests
        >Has operational units ready to go
        >Air Force cancels the program
        I'm going to call "lobbying" lobby-corruption from now on

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Lobbying is literally just legal bribery.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Lobbying is literally just legal bribery.

          in the US it's 'lobbying', anywhere else on the planet its just called bribery

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          they took this from us

          >no government money used in development
          translation: we built this plane but some congressman doesn't have leverage on us so we will never get a contract

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Murder your local military industrialist

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Now that we have established some build up for our rifle and our cartridge, our stage is set to begin talking about the NGSW program.

    And to start talking about the NGSW program of course we must first talk about 3 things.
    First the remarkably cluttered Powerpoint presentations of a man named Jim Schaltz.
    Second, about the Light Weight Medium Machine Gun program.
    And third, about the Interim Combat Service Rifle program.

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Jim Schaltz's rather notorious presentations didn't so much as drive but instead embody the reaction to the combat experienced in Afghanistan.

    In encountering powerful and lightweight and long ranged ComBloc weapons like the PKM at distances in excess of what standard 5.56NATO loadings were apt to deal with, there were times where the average US infantryman found himself outmatched in terms of ability to trade small arms fire with insurgents. Or so said reports at least.
    Rules of Engagement were generally such that using artillery or other means of attacking targets at those distances was not as common as otherwise. And of course, battle reports are only as trustworthy as those giving them.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >In encountering powerful and lightweight and long ranged ComBloc weapons like the PKM at distances in excess of what standard 5.56NATO loadings were apt to deal with, there were times where the average US infantryman found himself outmatched in terms of ability to trade small arms fire with insurgents.
      Question: Wouldn't in that case the Designated Marksman be the one to take it out?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Thats putting a lot of work on one guy who could be being shot at by multiple enemies, all while his buddies just sitting there throwing rounds downrange that are guaranteed to hit jack shit.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Schaltz's presentations laid out what would be fairly similar to the US's path forwards.

    He pushed for a condensing of ammo types into as few cartridges as possible, 5.56NATO and 7.62NATO being merged into the .264USA or something relatively similar in place of it. And the 7.62NATO and .50BMG being merged in the .338 Norma Magnum.
    Schaltz was a champion of the polymer cased cartridge as well, heavily relying on its existence to build up his ideal plan for the infantry combat rifle and machine gun as a means of tamping down on weight despite his demands for more power.
    Schaltz pushed for the adoption of new computerized optical sights as well, and called for increased development and effort put into creating effective digitally enhanced optical sights to make better use of the long range capabilities of the new cartridges.

    In many ways Schaltz embodied a dual role as both a very conservative figure, but with heavily progressive (in a military tech sense at least) side with an eye on the day after tomorrow.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Are those Asian swordsmen up in the top left corner?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Japanese polymer, folded 1000 times

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Schaltz was also obsessed with the concept of Overmatch, hitting harder, farther than your target, to a very large extent.
    Even at the cost of some weight and recoil gain this was a major interest to him.

    He heavily based his push on the idea of closing the gap between American and ComBloc small arms and then exceeding them at very extended ranges. As well as penetrating armor at far distances, however he focused on last generation LvIII or equivalent armors.

    Schaltz's presentations are often characterized as playing fast and loose with real world data and conditions and exaggerating the effectiveness of the other side's weapons and weapons systems. With NATO cartridges underrated compared to ComBloc cartridges for sometimes indiscernible reasons outside of just fear mongering. As well as him chasing the classic Cult of the Marksman concept.
    He has also been criticized for being too close to HK, and effectively acting as their lobbyist in the military.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >He has also been criticized for being too close to HK, and effectively acting as their lobbyist in the military.
      Of particular note his schizoid-level ramblings on overnmatch just so happened to frequently dovetail into pitches for the floundering HK-417

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The LWMMG program can be called the real modern genesis of what would later become the NGSW trial and adoption.
    What the LWMMG program is, is a somewhat still on-going trial to find a relatively light .338 Norma Magnum MMG to replace both the M2 Browning and the M240 for anti-personnel and anti-armor roles.

    With a focus on finding modern lightweight materials, modern recoil moderation systems, and modern suppressor systems to mitigate noise and flash, as well as the transition to new (potentially polymer) cartridges, much of what the NGSW program would become was started here.
    Additionally, the two competitors for the program would later both be members of the NGSW trial itself sporting firearms mechanically based on their MMG bids.
    Without the LWMMG program it is reasonable to say that the NGSW program would have never existed as it does now.

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All that shit looks heavy and expensive. Don't really care.

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And too finish off this little sction, we should talk about the immediate predecessor to the NGSW program.
    The Interim Combat Service Rifle Program was a short lived and rapidly aborted program with the intention of replacing the M4 with a 7.62NATO chambered rifle as the search for a replacement for both continued.

    In a practical sense it was more of a trial run for the actual replacement program to come later. And mainly served as an indication of what the Army's bare minimum expectations were for the next service rifle.

    It was justified along two different routes at the time.
    First was range of course. Second, was body armor penetration.
    This second reason would be the more interesting of the two reasons and would rapidly become a larger and larger focus of the M4 replacement program as time went on.

    Now for another few minute break.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The XM5 weighs fucking 10#. If I won one I would sell it immediately. I would sooner use grandpa's 270 bolt action. Weapon development gets more and more alienated from reality with every passing year.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The rifle doesn't weigh 10lbs by itself

      80k psi? Does the thing come with extra barrels?

      Thicc profile, lined barrels probably at least last two the army specification. I would doubt the army chose a rifle that didn't meet program specs

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It weighs ten pounds with the suppressor, and you can't use it without the suppressor because at 80k psi you're looking at instant hearing loss through earplugs.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      why did you type an octothorpe and not just lb like a non-retarded person?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Why did you call it an octothorpe instead of a hash mark, braniac?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          why did you type an octothorpe and not just lb like a non-retarded person?

          Why do you both call it wrong things instead of a pound sign like a well-adjusted person

  17. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    80k psi? Does the thing come with extra barrels?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The LMG doesn’t. Army specifically asked for a non quick change barrel

  18. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Now at last, we can talk about the NGSW program.

    First by addressing the NGSAR PON.
    An initial notice given out for the Automatic Rifle portion of the program ahead of the rest of the program to kickstart development and invention ahead of time.
    This was our first glimpse at the standards expected by the program. Weight and size limits as well as ammunition characteristics demanded.

    Including the very confusingly worded ammo weight standard.
    I believe that its best interpreted as saying that the ammo had the reach a 20% weight reduction vs standard brass cased ammo of similar volume - that is to say that '7.62NGSW', should it have the same volume, would have to be 20% lighter than 7.62NATO. And '.50NGSW', should it have the same volume, would have to be 20% lighter than .50BMG. And new NGSW cartridge would have to be 20% lighter than whichever cartridge it was volumetrically meant to match.
    The weight was at least not specifically relative to what was currently in service, only what the cartridge itself was designed to match in internal volume matched in brass.

    Notably this program had some fairly tough accuracy demands.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Don't forget "equal" brass case.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah.
        Its remarkably confusingly worded. Like somewhere between word salad and stroke victim.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I believe that its best interpreted as saying that the ammo had the reach a 20% weight reduction vs standard brass cased ammo of similar volume

      20% lighter case, not 20% lighter cartridge. It is physically impossible for SIG's cartridge to be 20% lighter than M80A1 when M80A1 has a comparable sized case and a lighter projectile.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It could be so.
        Steel is lighter than brass, and the case walls are fairly thinned.
        The projectiles are within a few grains of each other, and the 135gr weight given for the 6.8NGSW bullet could be for the special purpose design of whatever.
        As I do think if we did the math the General Purpose/EPR 6.8 bullet probably couldn't weigh 135gr anyways.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Equal brass case weight, jfc

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        *equal brass case weight volume
        Whatever the fuck that means.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Maybe they are supposed to use aluminum ?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Burn through is the problem there.
            Its not a big issue. Like gatling guns use aluminum cases, but its a potential problem, especially at very high pressure, that the combustion burns through the case and blows up the gun.

  19. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    During this time the main company with a relatively complete firearm for this program was Textron via a derivative of their LSAT, and they essentially served as the posterboy for the project.
    They were working with a 6.5mm Cartridge firing a ~123gr projectile at 3000FPS at this point.

  20. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Later we move onto the NGSW PON proper.
    One important thing to note was that the NGSW program was the proving ground of the US Army’s new procurement system that pushed a combination of getting a lot of soldier feedback from early on, and rapid development time and trial time before adoption.
    Far quicker than most similar trials ran in the past, this program was meant to be demonstrative of that systems efficacy and utility.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      "Hey, let's test out this totally new administrative concept on top of a new technology and see what happens!"

      Good grief, it's LCS all over again.

  21. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The .277" projectile used for all bids was given out by the Army itself and possibly was a derivative of the above .264/.277USA.
    Its characterized by being very long over anything else. Being several millimeters longer than 7.62NATO M80 with a very extended ogive.
    The standard weight for the bullet is likely 135gr. Which while not said publicly by the Army itself, most of the companies in the testing that released ammo details to the public were building their firearms and ammo around ~135gr loadings.

    Potentially and taking a risk of drawing a connection where one shouldn’t, one could assume that it was a combination of the bullet design of the .277 USA with the velocity expectations of the .264 USA.
    Regardless even today we do not well know the upper bound of the velocity expected by the 6.8NGSW. But it is estimated to be between 3000-3200FPS for the full power loadings right now. But it could of course be higher.

    This is a very powerful cartridge for an infantry rifle of course. And as such in many cases required the use of very high operating pressures in the firearms involved, especially when combined with the length limitations of the NGSW PON.
    One thing that is very much spoken of is how not-intermediate the NGSW cartridge requirement was. It is significantly more powerful than 7.62NATO, at least the standard loadings used in testing were so.

  22. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The question comes up as to why in the world would the Army request such a magnum cartridge?
    Especially because all the lead up to its development was set on finding a middle ground between 5.56NATO and 7.62NATO. Not blowing out the entire comparison.

    While performance demands were not shown to the public, statements by the Generals at the head of the project indicated that defeating Lv4 or equivalent body armor at distance was becoming a major focus for the program.
    The Ratnik program by the Russian special forces was especially seen as a threat, as were moves by the Chinese to start the mass issue of Lv4 or equivalent plate armor to its troops. And even in some COIN operations, insurgents were found to be using modern body armor bought cheaply commercially. Making it more and more of a relevant issue.

    Lv4 or equivalent armor is extremely strong and can very well stop most all standard rifle caliber cartridges in military issue. Necessitating, in the Army’s view, finding some kind of cartridge that could potentially deal with it. They were very confident in the ability to achieve this, Chief of Staff Gen. Milley stating -
    >This is a weapon that could defeat any body armor, any planned body armor that we know of in the future
    He spoke at length about some new bullet design developed that gave very enhanced penetration on body armor. Described as specifically a type of construction of any caliber bullet that allowed for enhanced anti-armor capabilities compared to standard bullet designs.

    By this point the level of power that was expected out of the 6.8NGSW cartridge was understood within industry if kept unfortunately vague for anyone outside of it and not included in any public facing documentation.
    Despite these performance requirements the guns were all expected to at least match the M4’s current 5k round barrel life standard.
    Additionally, despite the demands for power, the rifles all had to fall within length limits relatively close to the current M4.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I meant to add to this post, but missed
      >He spoke at length about some new bullet design developed that gave very enhanced penetration on body armor. Described as specifically a type of construction of any caliber bullet that allowed for enhanced anti-armor capabilities compared to standard bullet designs.
      There have been for some time concerns over being able to supply enough tungsten penetrators for small arms in the wake of a conflict with a military power mass issuing body armor.
      The very high velocity requirements linked with the relatively narrowed bullet diameter of the 6.8NGSW cartridge, and the development of the mystery penetrators, could be said to be some effort to get around this theorized tungsten limitation.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      To me, this is the most ridiculous part of the program. Just like almost everything else was sacrificed in the LCS program in search of the mythical 40-50kt sprint speed, everything else was sacrificed in NGSW for the mythical Level IV penetration at >400m. Which--even if they *did* achieve it--meant sacrificing weight and recoil, meaning that heroic measures were necessary to achieve even marginal scores in those areas.

      The answer to body armor is not to use a bigger bullet, but to make copious use of HE, because the body armor only covers center mass. Besides, HE options have been getting better and better the last few decades, with cheap miniaturized guidance packages now available.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Or to just shoot around the plates. No doubt those new optics Israel has been starting to field will help with that

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          There are reasons why you aim for center mass. Aiming outside of center mass has all kinds of issues. Far easier to just dump a few ounces of HE wrapped in pre-formed steel fragments into the target's general vicinity. Save the bullets for suppressing fire and CQB.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        There are reasons why you aim for center mass. Aiming outside of center mass has all kinds of issues. Far easier to just dump a few ounces of HE wrapped in pre-formed steel fragments into the target's general vicinity. Save the bullets for suppressing fire and CQB.

        HE grenades runs into weight issues far faster even.
        40mm LV HE grenades weigh about a half pound (.5lbs).
        The Chinese have pushed grenades the farthest of anyone in terms of weight to performance ratio, and their 35mm HV HE grenades still weigh half a pound.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Oh, certainly, and OICW proved that 20mm just isn't enough HE to do the job (I've heard both yes and no on the XM-25). However, you can still use ordinary bullets to suppress a position (even with body armor, who's going to stand up in the face of suppressing fire?), and you can cut down on the weight of the HE needed by using digital fire control (as with the XM157) and even guidance (e.g., Pike, Switchblade, scaling down PGMM to 60mm or even 40mm, etc.).

          So, for example, when you take fire from that hypothetical Afghan mountaintop that seemed to drive the NGSW requirements, you counter with suppressing fire from your MGs, locate the enemy's position, and then dump a little HE right on top of it. Need more HE? Call in some PGMM or PGK; the latter is supposedly under $10k now, and comes with multiple fuze settings, including airburst.

  23. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Within the NGSW PON, the order of importance for a bid was described as such -
    >4.2 Order of Importance: Factor 1 – NGSW-R is slightly more important than Factor 2 – NGSW-AR which is more important than Factor 3 – Special License Agreements, which is more important than Factor 4 – Price. Factor 1 – NGSW-R Sub-Factors are of equal importance. Factor 2 – NGSW-AR 1 Sub- Factors are of equal importance.
    >The combination of all factors, other than Price, are more important than Price. However, price may become a more significant factor when ratings of acceptable proposals are closely grouped. Offerors will be cautioned, however, that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest priced Offeror or the Offeror with the highest rating.
    Sub factors included:
    >Sub-Factor 1 – User Acceptance Risk. – Sub-Factor 2 – Proposed Threshold Requirements (Tier 1, Tier 2, & Tier 3). – Sub-Factor 3 – Design Maturity. – Sub-Factor 4 – Integrated Master Schedule.
    All firearms were required to be suppressed constantly and had relatively high firerate and durability requirements even with them suppressed.

    Now for another few minute break.

  24. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    actual good thread

  25. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    General dynamics had the better rifle and cartridge. Sig only won the contract through government lobbying, which now places the US in a bad position. Germans do not care about our national security and have no business selling weapons to the US. We are weaker as a nation because of SIG, and their company should face prosecution.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Anon I hate to tell you this but the SIG that sells guns in the US is wholly American based at this point, and the HK rifles that the Marines now use are manufactured here as well, not in Germany.

      >Germans do not care about our national security and have no business selling weapons to the US
      Germany doesn't care about their own national security

  26. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And here we get into the real players as a whole.
    A description of each bid to the best of my ability will be provided for context and for clearing up any misconceptions as to what company/gun was paired with whatever else or what the guns/their ammo actually did.

    Textron pushed forwards a derivative of their LSAT rifle and MG.
    The rifle used a push feed system where every subsequent cartridge would physically push the previous cartridge out of the chamber, and used a cylindrical chamber that was cammed up and down into battery by operating rods attached to a long stroke gas piston and its 'firing pin carrier'.
    There was no bolt locking into the chamber or receiver, instead the chamber rose up and down into a breech area with a hole at the back for the firing pin to come through. The load bearing parts were the chamber and the breech and barrel trunnion.

    The MG used a push feed and a belt feed mechanism and a pivoting cylindrical chamber that was cammed to swing side to side by pegs attached to the gas piston and its 'firing pin carrier'. Similarly, the chamber, breech, and barrel trunnion bore load upon firing. The MG did not have a Quick Change Barrel.

    The barrel was ~13" for the Rifle, and ~16" for the MG.
    Both the Rifle and the MG had a battery powered rail integrated into the top of the firearm, allowing for a centralized battery to power all attachments to the firearm. And allowing data to be sent along the rail if needed.

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Using an in-house developed cased telescoped cartridge, built with assistance by Olin-Winchester, their bullet was set into an open mouthed polymer cylinder. The mouth went all the way to the end of the cartridge creating a full cylindrical profile.
    The base and lower half of the bullet were surrounded by the gun powder, resulting in a significant length decrease and a slight width increase. The polymer stretched upon firing creating a gas seal.

    It contained no extractor groove and was designed with the intention of using a push feed mechanism, the idea being that it would increase extraction reliability.
    The polymer body shielded the chamber from the heat of combustion, resulting in a cooler running rifle and less ammo weight.
    It was built out of two parts, a polymer lower and case wall moulding, and a polymer end cap. Potentially problematically this required a single feed magazine system. It appeared that the primer was set into just the polymer lower.

    Gun design assistance was provided by Heckler and Koch. They paired off with Lewis Machine and Tool to design a custom suppressor for their Rifle and MG.
    Their package weighed under 9lbs with suppressor for the Rifle. And under 12lbs with a suppressor for the MG.

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    General Dynamics entered a derivative of their LWMMG operating system.
    Scaled down to a pair of bullpup magazine fed Rifles, one with a longer barrel and integrated bipod to serve as an automatic rifle.

    It had on the fly capability to swap between open and closed bolt operation. And used a short stroke gas piston operating system with the barrel set in a spring chassis to operate as a recoil buffer at the end of travel. The action beyond that was a multilug rotating bolt. Ejection could be swapped to either side and the gun used a forwards directed ejection system. The Automatic Rifle did not have a Quick Change Barrel.

    They used barrels of 20" and 22" for the Rifle and Automatic Rifle respectively. Both the Rifle and the AR had a battery powered rail integrated into the top of the firearm, allowing for a centralized battery to power all attachments to the firearm should they interface with it. And allowing data to be sent along the rail if needed.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >blender
      i already smell a nothingburger

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There was an official animation put out by TV, but it seemed to be incorrect. With the left hand recoil system not actually functioning or moving within the animation.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It could be so that they moved the barrel recoil spring to the left hand side, and because the barrel isn't seen moving in the animation its simply not used.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/i4PL0Qz.jpg

      Gun design assistance was provided by Beretta.
      Manufacturing was provided by Lonestar Future Weapons.
      They paired off with Delta-P to create a custom suppressor for their Rifle and Automatic Rifle.

      They had paired up with True Velocity, a polymer ammo company, for the ammunition in their bid. The polymer ammo contained a unique blend of additives including tungsten powder. It was built as a 3-part design of a sintered steel baseplate, a polymer case wall, and a polymer neck. The polymer body shielded the chamber from the heat of combustion, resulting in a cooler running firearm and less ammo weight.
      A large selling point of the ammunition was that it kept the same chamber pressure and casehead of 7.62NATO, potentially allowing for simple barrel swap conversions of most of the Army’s .30 caliber stock to the new .277 cal cartridge.

      Their package weighed ~10lbs with suppressor for the Rifle and ~11lbs with the suppressor the Automatic Rifle.

      I wanted THIS one god damn it.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        It seemed like a good gun.
        I think it was a death by 1000 cuts there. Little issues like cost, accuracy, weight, form factor, etc that made SIG more attractive.

  29. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Gun design assistance was provided by Beretta.
    Manufacturing was provided by Lonestar Future Weapons.
    They paired off with Delta-P to create a custom suppressor for their Rifle and Automatic Rifle.

    They had paired up with True Velocity, a polymer ammo company, for the ammunition in their bid. The polymer ammo contained a unique blend of additives including tungsten powder. It was built as a 3-part design of a sintered steel baseplate, a polymer case wall, and a polymer neck. The polymer body shielded the chamber from the heat of combustion, resulting in a cooler running firearm and less ammo weight.
    A large selling point of the ammunition was that it kept the same chamber pressure and casehead of 7.62NATO, potentially allowing for simple barrel swap conversions of most of the Army’s .30 caliber stock to the new .277 cal cartridge.

    Their package weighed ~10lbs with suppressor for the Rifle and ~11lbs with the suppressor the Automatic Rifle.

  30. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    SIG USA entered in a derivative of their SIG MCX carbine and a derivative of the LWMMG bid.

    The rifle is a fairly standard SIG MCX internally, a multilug rotating bolt gas tappet system with a long bolt extension housing an extra-long recoil spring. The receiver is heavily reinforced with steel inserts and rails.

    The MG used a mixture of recoil and gas operation to buffer recoil, fairly similar in base design to the GD bid.
    The gas operated 2 lug rotating bolt running in a 'sub receiver' system attached to the barrel, that the bolt pulls with it when the bolt reaches end of travel. The MG also contained a large spring buffer to help attenuate recoil at the end of travel. The MG did not have a Quick Change Barrel.

    The Rifle used a 13" barrel, and the MG used a 16" barrel.
    Both the Rifle and the MG had a battery powered rail integrated into the top of the firearm, allowing for a centralized battery to power all attachments to the firearm should they interface with it. And allowing data to be sent along the rail if needed

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Sig spear and m250 don't look like they have powered rails to me.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Its simply not installed for that picture.
        The powered rails the NGSW program used are based on the T-Worx "Intelligent Rail".

  31. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Their ammo bid was an in-house solution created by attaching a stamped steel baseplate to a thin-walled brass upper.
    The intention being to avoid the problems of brass welding itself to bolt faces or blowing apart when under very high pressures.
    They developed an in-house suppressor for their Rifle and MG.

    Their package weighed under 10lbs with a suppressor for the Rifle. And under 13lbs with a suppressor for the MG.

    Now for a few minute break.

  32. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    While the above three would be the longest in the running, its useful to discuss those that didn't make it as far, in order to understand why those above bids were chosen and what each represented.

    Desert Tech entered in two versions of their MDRX bullpup rifles.
    The Rifle used a 20" barrel.
    It is unknown what if any recoil mitigation mechanisms they built in to the firearms.
    Both the Rifle and the AR had a battery powered rail integrated into the top and sides of the firearm, allowing for a centralized battery to power all attachments to the firearm should they interface with it. And allowing data to be sent along the rail if needed.

    They paired up with PCP Tactical, a polymer ammo company for the ammunition for the bid.
    PCP Tactical's ammo was a polymer upper with a stamped steel baseplate and lower 1/4th.
    It fired its 136gr cartridge at 3000-3200FPS from a 20" barrel.
    They used an in-house custom suppressor design.

    PR for Desert Tech said the timing of the swap between the NGSAR program timeline and the NGSW follow up's timeline was too short for Desert Tech to adequately test out their firearm and get it running correctly.

  33. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    FN America entered two separate bids, but exact information on them is hard to come by.

    We have since learned that their new FN EVOLYS machine gun was part of one of the bids.
    And the other was likely made up of two versions of their SCAR HAMR rifle.
    Or some of the predecessors to the new FN Mid Range Gas Gun.
    What kind of ammo design they used or its performance is as far as I know also unknown other than it was design in partnership with Federal Ammunition.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >EVOLYS
      I wish we saw more of this

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You're in luck
        https://soldiersystems.net/2022/07/20/on-the-range-with-the-fn-evolys/
        Graves also got to play around with the FN MRGG entry

  34. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    MARS entered in two versions of its Orion system gas assisted long recoil action.

    Similar to the Johnson M1945, it used multilug rotating bolt locking system with a gas port drilled in the barrel to push on a section of the receiver to assist the recoil mechanism in running. Both Rifle and AR in a magazine fed configuration.
    Its Rifle had a 13" barrel and its AR had a 16" barrel.
    As with others it likely used a powered top rail system that allowed data to be sent along. Both the rifle and automatic rifle were magazine fed.

    It had paired with Cobalt Kinetics on ammo design, creating a short magnum cartridge firing a 140gr projectile at 3200FPS.
    The case wasn't brass, but what it was otherwise is unknown. It may have been steel case or an aluminum case.

  35. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    VK Integrated Systems entered the XR-68 pairing, which were essentially two versions of the AR-10, classic Stoner Direct Impingement system and all.
    Both the Rifle and Automatic Rifle were magazine fed.

    It had an interesting lower receiver design where all necessary or potential electronics had cut outs to be routed through, with extra space ostensibly given for future proofing.
    Assumedly the barrel lengths were the 13"/16" seen elsewhere among the standard rifle bids.
    Both the Rifle and the AR had a battery powered rail integrated into the top of the firearm, allowing for a centralized battery to power all attachments to the firearm should they interface with it. And allowing data to be sent along the rail if needed.

    Their 6.8 Sherwood cartridge created with Bachstein Consulting used a standard brass case, its exact ballistics are unknown however it was based on the .284 WIN.
    The gun was designed with the mind to combine it with the VK Systems SmarTak system. Which is a fairly holistic program to network together soldiers and command and supply positional and navigational data amongst other data to those on both ends of the command spectrum. But that was reliant on the US Army being at all interested in said system.

    If there are any other NGSW or NGSAR firearm bids that I missed, I will greatly welcome their recommendation to me.

  36. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As we can see there was certainly a lot of variety tried out by competitors to this program. From the novel, with Textron, to the very conservative, like VK-IS.

    Interestingly we see that a magazine fed option for the NGSW-AR was both common and even the case for the majority of proposed bids.
    Also its interesting to see that while Textron and General Dynamics both drew together large teams of advisors and developers, SIG did everything on their own.

    The earlier mentioned wish for rapid adoption and deployment may be relevant here with regards to SIG’s later success in the program. Being in-house for almost all aspects of the gun design, they didn’t require the complexity of networking several different manufacturers and companies together to fulfill the contract.

  37. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The US has been getting it's ass kicked for 60 years by terrorists blending in with general populations using explosives and close range weaponry. Their solution is to just make bigger and bigger rifles. What a joke. The next batch of farmers defending their country the US invades will shove those things up your ass and execute you with machetes.

  38. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Now we move on to the other half of the program.
    The NGSW-FC competition to equip this new rifle with a new optical sight.
    This ultimately fell between Vortex Optics and L3Harris.

    This in the long term could be called the more important half of the of the program.
    As you could put this optic on any rifle and potentially massively enhance its capability. And that, frankly, computers and computer enhancements to analog tech are advancing much faster than firearm design is.

    The optics were evaluated according to the following
    >The below Evaluation Criteria will be used in the selection of the OTA award. The basis for award of OTA resulting from this PPON will be the result of the evaluation of the Factors specified below.
    >Evaluation Factors: Factor 1 – Technical - Sub-Factor 1 – User Acceptance - Sub-Factor 2 – Proposed Threshold Requirements (Tier 1, Tier 2, & Tier 3) - Sub-Factor 3 – Design Maturity - Sub-Factor 4 – Capability Growth. Factor 2 – Management - Sub-Factor 1 – Integrated Master Plan / Integrated Master Schedule - Sub-Factor 2 – Manufacturing Capability. Factor 3 – Special License Agreement. Factor 4 – Price
    >Order of Importance: Factor 1 – Technical is more important than Factor 2 – Management which is more important than Factor 3 – Special License Agreement, which is more important than Factor 4 – Price. Factor 1 – Technical Sub-Factors 1 – User Acceptance, 2 – Proposed Threshold Requirements, and 3 – Design Maturity are of equal importance with Sub-Factor 4 – Capability Growth being slightly less important. Factor 2 – Management Sub-Factors are of equal importance.”
    >The combination of all factors, other than Price, is significantly more important than Price. However, price may become a more significant factor when ratings of acceptable proposals have similar benefits as compared to shortcomings. Offerors will be cautioned, however, that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest priced Offeror or the Offeror with the highest rating.

  39. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    L3Harris paired up with Leupold for development on their optical sights. Vortex Optics worked on their own.

    These optical sights were built around an LPVO center, with a built in digital display for a 1km laser rangefinder, paired IR and Visible aiming lasers, a digital reticle that moved in accordance to the built-in ballistic computer, and atmospheric sensors.
    They were designed to connect with the powered rail systems included in the rifles above avoiding the need for an on-board battery. And when non-powered still functioned as an etched reticle 1-8x30 LPVO.

    The scopes were controlled by a rail mounted button pad through a wired connection. As well has having control pads on the scope itself for more complex actions.
    They were designed to interface with monocles or other helmet attached eyewear and transmit imagery through them. And have some degree of intersoldier communication capabilities via wireless exchange.

    They had a max weight limit of 3lbs as indicated above.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The L3Harris scope was a 1-6x, not 8x.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        You are correct, thank you for the correction.

        https://i.imgur.com/mjPnzq3.jpg

        L3Harris paired up with Leupold for development on their optical sights. Vortex Optics worked on their own.

        These optical sights were built around an LPVO center, with a built in digital display for a 1km laser rangefinder, paired IR and Visible aiming lasers, a digital reticle that moved in accordance to the built-in ballistic computer, and atmospheric sensors.
        They were designed to connect with the powered rail systems included in the rifles above avoiding the need for an on-board battery. And when non-powered still functioned as an etched reticle 1-8x30 LPVO.

        The scopes were controlled by a rail mounted button pad through a wired connection. As well has having control pads on the scope itself for more complex actions.
        They were designed to interface with monocles or other helmet attached eyewear and transmit imagery through them. And have some degree of intersoldier communication capabilities via wireless exchange.

        They had a max weight limit of 3lbs as indicated above.

        As I have since been corrected -
        While Vortex used a 1-8x LPVO as their center, L3Harris-Leupold used a 1-6x LPVO.
        Otherwise assumedly their exact digital enhancements should be similar as most were project requirements.

  40. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    SIG USA appeared to have tried to develop their own optic, but it did not move on to final testing.
    Photonis as well put in their own bid that didn’t move forward in testing. Likely other companies did as well, but I couldn’t find information about them.

    Unfortunately, where data on the guns can be scarce, data on the sights is even more so. And what is above is pretty much all I can say.
    Individual characteristics of the optical sights relative to each other wasn’t something I could find. It appears that the firearms ate up most of the attention during documentation of the NGSW program.
    If anyone has good sources for all of this, I’ll be very happy to get them.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I have more information to share about the SIG USA optical sight. Here mounted to their LWMMG bid.
      It used a laser range finder and reticle moving system based on their BDX software package.
      Assumedly, here it would physically move the reticle rather than just light up one of the BDC dots as the current BDX does. But perhaps it still did use that system.
      It was non-magnified and instead relied on an external magnifier to function at longer ranges. SIG planned to offer an adjustable magnifier to pair with the optic should it have been adopted apparently.

      Sorry for not having that information before making this thread. I looked around quite a lot for more info on their optical sight and only just found more info on it by accident.

  41. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hopefully WW3 will be mostly urban warfare. Lots of flat, smooth ground for you devoid of obstacles, stairs, and spending most of your time driving.

  42. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The NGSW trials themselves can be a bit confusing to follow. So I will try and clear up any common sources of confusion or misunderstanding.

    Confusion regarding Textron was mainly about when they had left the trials.

    It is still not entirely clear when/why that happened. Anyone sharing information about why with certainty is either an insider to the program or just making something up entirely.
    Whether you think that person is one or the other is up to personal judgement. All stated officially was that it didn’t meet ‘success criteria’ during the initial stages of testing.
    Regardless Textron was revealed to have left the project by a Lewis Machine and Tool representative off hand as a mistake. Leading to a lot of debate until late in the trials and confusion for multiple parties.
    Despite not making any public statements itself Textron would quietly leave the program.

  43. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The swapping of companies in relation to the General Dynamics bid is typically one of the greatest sources of confusion for people talking about the NGSW program.

    As stated initially, the firearm pair were derived from General Dynamics patents on a ‘short recoil impulse averaging system’ first used in the LWMMG.
    General Dynamics as a large contractor with its attention everywhere at once, initially subcontracted production of their Rifle/AR, here forwards referred to as the RM277, for the trials to the Lonestar Future Weapons company.
    A ‘rapid prototyping’ company, they specialized in low volume rapidly shifting manufacture for projects like these. General Dynamics would pass over some degree of patent rights to LFW during the project as LFW took over much of the development necessary in response to Army demands and trials developments. Eventually passing over the entire ownership of the bid to LFW as the trials went on.

    Lonestar Future Weapons then proceeded to be bought up by the True Velocity company. Who before this point were making ammo for the RM277 as stated.
    This then resulted in the RM277 falling entirely under the purview of True Velocity, however, on paper the bid was still under LFW as a subsidiary of True Velocity.
    Throughout this Beretta was retained as an advisor on the project.
    It is still currently unknown why the RM277 lost in the trials, anyone telling you why with certainty is either an insider or making stuff up. Trust them according to your own judgement.

  44. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Now we will address a point of contention on the SIG bid.

    Early on SIG’s bimetallic case used a 3-part design. The steel baseplate. The brass body. And a steel crush washer in the center holding them together. See attached pic.
    Later this design would be condensed down to just the baseplate and the body, the washer being made unnecessary by design changes.
    It is common to see people reference this early design as still being used. And it comes up early in search results when looking up the SIG ammo. However, it has since been replaced with the new design.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Love how those same people will also have a shit fit when you mention this to them

  45. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A final point of contention for the program as a whole, is whether the 6.8NGSW cartridge can even bust a Lv4 plate at the distances expected.
    This has yet to be answered. However, generally with extant bullet designs, short of tungsten penetrators, it appears pretty unlikely given the strength of Lv4 or equivalent armor. And as stated earlier, relying on tungsten penetrators to defeat body armor is potentially less than optimal given supply limitations.
    Performance against armor within shorter distances is also unknown.
    Additionally whether the new bullet design really has all the capabilities stated isn’t clear yet as is even what it actually is in the first place.

    This aspect of the program has the most 'maybes' attached to it. And the lack of hard data makes discussing the capabilities of the XM5/XM250 difficult.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >is whether the 6.8NGSW cartridge can even bust a Lv4 plate at the distances expected.
      Or if it can do it at all, period.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I'd be reasonably sure that it could.
        It a higher sectional density than 30-06M2AP, with more velocity over a smaller surface area.
        The penetrator inside M2AP is a tool steel core. Which is roughly the same as the EPR penetrator.
        I'd expect the GP 6.8NGSW projectiles to penetrate LV4 plates at close range. But farther out, I'd have doubts.
        The Special Purpose bullets, who knows.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          We'll see. Personally I'm incredibly dubious after seeing how skittish they were about even acknowledging whether it could penetrate at all in the hearing. Even if it as at like 25m or something, I'd question the practicality of the entire thing. That's a lot of weight, bang and fire reduction for some benefits at incredibly close range, where you'd want something...honestly the polar opposite of the XM5.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      MAC tested an equivalent weight/velocity FMJ bullet against IV armor and it "almost went through". It is safe to say that a simple tool steel cap will make 6.8mm penetrate IV plates with ease.

  46. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    First the NGSW-FC trial would finish.
    Vortex Optics beat out L3Harris and was adopted tentatively as the XM157.
    As said, info on the optical sights in general is fairly hard to find. So more info on this if you have any is welcome.

  47. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And then the NGSW-R and NGSW-AR trials would finish.
    SIG USA beat out True Velocity and their Rifle and MG were tentatively adopted as the XM5 and XM250.

    In doing so we got more information about the 6.8mm cartridges themselves.
    There would be 3 major versions to pay attention to. The General Purpose cartridge. The Special Purpose cartridge. And the Reduced Range cartridge.
    The exact qualities of each are as of yet unknown. Including bullet design.
    To make educated guesses we can assume that the GP projectile is based on some variation of the EPR base design concept.
    And the SP projectile is probably built around that mystery construction penetrator and is designed to handle the ‘plate busting at range’ aspect of the NGSW program.
    The RR cartridge is more questionable in terms of its actual traits or loading. And whether it is meant just as a training cartridge or as a mission specific cartridge type for closer range fighting.

    A potential funny consequence of the splitting of the NGSW-R/AR program and the NGSW-FC program until late in development is in the addition of the long receiver bridge to the XM250. Which due to the design of the feed system couldn’t mount the very long XM157 optical sight without disturbing use of the feed tray. The bridge of course acts as a pass through for the powered rail system. And it mounts to the feed tray itself.

    True Velocity via LFW would issue a GAO protest for the selection, but would then withdraw it before any investigation was properly put into place.

  48. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    To say why SIG won this program we can examine what it did different than other programs. These statements are all just inferences and should not be treated with more respect than you think they’re due.

    First is that everything was done in-house.
    As stated above, speed of acquisition was the real selling point of the new system the Army adopted here. And a company facilitating that could have been very attractive. Especially in terms of it responding rapidly to requested changes to the firearm during trials or immediately after.

    Second is potentially accuracy.
    The NGSW program had fairly strict accuracy expectations as seen above.
    The RM277 used a moving barrel system that may have negatively contributed to accuracy. As well, the ideal 6.8TV barrel as laid out in the SAAMI application contains a significant amount of freebore ahead of the cartridge. This may have negatively contributed to accuracy in combination with the moving barrel and an unforgiving bullet design. I
    n the same way the Textron gun had a cylinder gap for the bullet to cross over like a revolver would. Except unlike revolvers that fire relatively slow and typically very rounded off bullets, here they were dealing with a very fast and very extended and sharply shaped projectile. This could have led to poor accuracy or throat erosion. Textron never applied for a SAAMI spec for their cartridge, at least to my knowledge.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Third is simply the potential that SIG USA was a firearms company and knew how to make a gun more reliable and more effective for this trial than General Dynamics/True Velocity did or Textron did.
      While the other companies had firearms companies tied on as advisors, that’s quite different than being an actual firearms company yourself.
      SIG’s guns are often maligned for very reasonable and fair reasons involving poor build quality or other flaws as they should at times. However, they do very often put out very successful products that demonstrate a good grasp of high end firearms engineering and manufacture.

      Fourth and final, is that SIG was the most conventional of finalists while being more adventurous than some of the options that didn't get down-selected.
      The Army historically is anything but a risk taking organization for the most part.
      And an ‘good enough’ ammo type that allows Lake City to keep working mostly as it does as a metal stamping and shaping company, rather than needing to be partially converted to a polymer injection molding factory and engineering complex with all the teething issues that will inevitably come with that. Added to a Rifle that is pretty well similar to the AR15 and an MG that may have been the best gun in the entire trial, all together could have simply made SIG the easiest bid for everyone to agree on for its lack of risk.
      While at the same time it was still a fairly significant departure from the current standard or some of the most conservative applicant designs.

      The knowledge that small arms are not necessarily the most important part of modern warfare is very well known in military circles, and doing whatever doesn’t rock the boat too badly in that area could have simply been the easiest choice to make. The potential complexity of developing institutional expertise on polymer injection molding in military ammo manufacture could have been an undesireable negative when speed was considered important.

      I stupidly overlooked this, but SIG may have also had an advantage in Price.
      The True Velocity Company spent a significant amount of capital on their bid and from the start were a far smaller company.
      SIG is known for taking bare minimum margins to win a contract. And TV may have not been able to compete with them in that.

      No comments on the GAO protest being made? I haven't been keeping up with it to know if it got ignored or not, but there did seem to be some good points raised about how SIG won because they provided an MG that was similar to the modern LMG while the characteristics that the Army laid out were much more akin to those the Marines used to justify adopting their fancy new HKs.

      All I could say is that it was withdrawn without comment.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Good analysis If you look at defence procurement across different fields it's often the ability of a company to deliver on the concept proposed "in the present day" rather than necessarily a case of selecting the best specification on paper.

  49. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Third is simply the potential that SIG USA was a firearms company and knew how to make a gun more reliable and more effective for this trial than General Dynamics/True Velocity did or Textron did.
    While the other companies had firearms companies tied on as advisors, that’s quite different than being an actual firearms company yourself.
    SIG’s guns are often maligned for very reasonable and fair reasons involving poor build quality or other flaws as they should at times. However, they do very often put out very successful products that demonstrate a good grasp of high end firearms engineering and manufacture.

    Fourth and final, is that SIG was the most conventional of finalists while being more adventurous than some of the options that didn't get down-selected.
    The Army historically is anything but a risk taking organization for the most part.
    And an ‘good enough’ ammo type that allows Lake City to keep working mostly as it does as a metal stamping and shaping company, rather than needing to be partially converted to a polymer injection molding factory and engineering complex with all the teething issues that will inevitably come with that. Added to a Rifle that is pretty well similar to the AR15 and an MG that may have been the best gun in the entire trial, all together could have simply made SIG the easiest bid for everyone to agree on for its lack of risk.
    While at the same time it was still a fairly significant departure from the current standard or some of the most conservative applicant designs.

    The knowledge that small arms are not necessarily the most important part of modern warfare is very well known in military circles, and doing whatever doesn’t rock the boat too badly in that area could have simply been the easiest choice to make. The potential complexity of developing institutional expertise on polymer injection molding in military ammo manufacture could have been an undesireable negative when speed was considered important.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Your point about polymer cases being an issue from a logistical standpoint makes a lot of sense, im surprised i haven’t heard anyone else bring that up
      Textron had the most innovative design, LFW had the most practical for the design requirements, but sig was definitely the safest option
      I still hope to get my hands on LFW’s bullpup some day but I have a feeling that losing the bid means it’s going to be prohibitively expensive. Hopefully a few civilian weapon manufacturers take some notes from this contract and come up with something truly innovative. I put my full faith into keltec to usher in a new age of polymer cased telescoped lever action revolver rifles

      The ammo thing is kinda like the stories you hear about Kodak inventing the digital camera and then doing nothing with it for decades.
      It sounds ridiculous at first, until you realize what Kodak was as a company. That being a chemical company. Their main area of expertise outside of designing the cameras themselves, was in engineering chemically processed photographic materials and tools.
      They weren't a computer company, they had little expertise in making digital tech beyond the most basic controls. And would have likely had massive trouble in trying to expand into digital storage and computer interfacing with said storage.

      The Army is in that spot.
      Polymer ammo is basically an objective improvement over metallic cased ammo.
      But the expense and complexity of expanding production into polymer molding and treating and everything, is potentially too much to be reasonable in cost for the gain right now. But in the future we'll probably look back on this as a "why the hell did they miss that?!" moment.

  50. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That roughly wraps up my mildly detailed summary of the history of the NGSW program up until today.
    What comes next remains to be seen. What comes of the guns that lost or the companies behind them, also remains to be seen.
    We really can only wait and see whether these guns or optics are successful in service or not.

    I have chosen to leave out most mention of the parallel SOCOM program to find a new 6.5CM rifle for this write up. That was primarily done because I didn’t know how much influence actually was shared back and forth, especially because of the diverging trails for the different projects.
    As well, the CSASS program could have been discussed, but I mostly found its level of linkage to the NGSW program fairly weak.
    I left out mention of the TrackingPoint optical sight systems as well, mainly because I was unsure of the actual influence of them on the NGSW program. And its ultimate function was distant from the NGSW-FC.
    I left out mention of the IVAS too. That program is still in development and how it will integrate into the NGSW program and components is yet unknown.

    If in my attempt to provide accurate information I have said anything incorrect, please do correct me and provide better information.
    Do include some kind of source as well, I myself will provide a source on any specific piece of information that you request if necessary to the best of my ability.
    I have not attempted to say explicitly why one gun or optic beat out the others. That is largely information that we do not have access to, and putting in assumptions for why could lead to misunderstandings spreading.
    If I have blatantly overlooked some piece of information or an event, please tell me.

    Thank you all for reading.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No comments on the GAO protest being made? I haven't been keeping up with it to know if it got ignored or not, but there did seem to be some good points raised about how SIG won because they provided an MG that was similar to the modern LMG while the characteristics that the Army laid out were much more akin to those the Marines used to justify adopting their fancy new HKs.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >SOCOM program to find a new 6.5CM rifle
      Didn't a few other NATO countries move to 6.5CM?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, a number have recently. The Swedes and Finns come to mind.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Thought it was the bongs

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No NATO country has moved to any 6.5 round.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          LMT has been posting photos of the Bongs trialing a 6.5 CM version of the MWS, so hold that thought

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Late night
      >Alert
      >Attack on the base
      >Shit!
      >Dress, get armored and get to the rifle
      >Scope is installing windows updates.
      >mfw

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >yearly congressional budget fight
        >sequestration happens
        >subscription-based ballistic computer turns off
        >tricare shuts down, nobody notices the difference

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You did a fantastic job summarizing all that seems know about the NGSW program, good job.

      Also, checked.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      undoubtedly the best thread on the board right now, hats off anon!

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >bradley wars meme
      thanks for letting me know to discard anything you've said until this point

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        is funni

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The point of the joke is that the meme actually *makes sense* in this case. Back in the LSAT days, it was an open question as to whether the eventual projectile would be under or over 6mm (LSAT tested with both stock 5.56 and 7.62 bullets). It wasn't until the whole "muh penetration" meme took over the NGSW requirements that 80kpsi became a thing.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      This is a response to the image you posted, not necessarily the text from your blog:
      The can and advanced optic are probably the two best points of this rifle. There is no good reason to not use a hearing protection device on a modern weapon, and if it weren't for the NFA stifling sales and development they would probably be a standard part of most civilian weapons by now. There is also no good reason to not have an optical sight on your rifle, and integrating a range finder into that scope is the logical next step. I'm not worried about mud or dust getting on the optic. Raspberry Pis and other small solid state computers have become very powerful while still running on just a few watts, and they can be completely sealed for use in hostile environments.

      My main criticism of the NGSW program is that the program goal was flawed from the beginning. It is easier to circumvent armor with a bomb than to try to punch through it with special ammunition, and it is easier to achieve high accuracy and precision at long range with guided missiles than with a gun. Man portable guided weapons with ranges of 2 to more than 20 kilometers are a reality right now. the focus should have been on evaluating those, developing doctrine that would best exploit their capabilities, and selecting one that is both light enough to be carried and cheap enough that every man in a squad can carry at least one.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        So what? Should we give troops micro missile launchers or something?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          >Should we give troops micro missile launchers or something?

          Yes

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          That's more or less the end goal of the 40mm launched drones and other similar small options that only carry a warhead big enough to deal with AP concerns. If you can replace the weight that's being carried in hand grenades right now with a homing grenade with wings, that's a massive improvement for the lethality of the average soldier for minimal cost. For all my advocating for the NGSW in this thread, I do agree that they might have gone too far in trying to defeat armor at range to the detriment of the weapon's ability to be used close up, but I also don't have trigger time on it, much less with the proper ammo, to be able to state that as more then my mildly educated guess. The way it shoved around Jerry's daughter when it was on full auto, despite her having nearly a 45 degree lean into it, might make it a non ideal choice for the things that are going to actually be the role of the rifle and not the drone in a near future conflict, but I'm also not sure how much they could have walked it down while still being able to defeat armor at more reasonable ranges.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            They should've just focused on getting more range while trying to avoid increasing the weight and recoil too much and left armor penetration for those tiny missiles then.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I agree on that.
        They're really objective improvements over what is in service.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >My main criticism of the NGSW program is that the program goal was flawed from the beginning. It is easier to circumvent armor with a bomb than to try to punch through it with special ammunition, and it is easier to achieve high accuracy and precision at long range with guided missiles than with a gun
        Exactly what came to my mind in

        This begs to question about why you'd bother with big, heavy battle rifles with fewer round counts and higher recoil with long distance in mind if we have suicide drones and precision artillery to handle the threat anyways. Have that shit do its thing, which will be far more effective than any bullet, then move in with the carbines that can actually function effectively close in.

        , if all these precision munitions are going to be available down to the individual soldier, paired with full-sized systems like HIMARS which can shitstomp a tank piddling about, the plugging some lone goon who got cheeky and stuck his head out with a lead pill seems rather superfluous.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        I agree pretty much completely. The LSAT program made tons of sense. Hijacking it and rewriting the requirements to produce a battle rifle made little sense. I'm hoping the optic will be as good as everybody has been speculating, but they're being awfully tight-lipped about it.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      pentagon wars is a shit movie but good meme

  51. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Thank you anon all very interesting. In your opinion who had the best design? I think its a shame textrons cartridge hasn't been chosen, would have been good to see something revolutionary come out of this instead of 'its steel and brass combined!'

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Its hard to say.
      Every bid had its positives and negatives.
      I appreciated the Textron designs myself as being a real innovation on firearms tech.
      Whether it was a true improvement is harder to say.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        so....if SIG can get a 80k psi barrel that doesn't just fucking explode or beocome more blown out and sloppy than my asshole after 1k rounds...

        Why don't we replace every breach/barrel with that?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Here’s a question to your question: Will that ensure the Level 4 armor pen that we were supposed to be chasing this whole time?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Largely because contracts and assembly lines are built and interrupting them to put in new supply or new manufacture is difficult.

          The M27 IAR has a barrel life in excess of 30k rounds in some cases. So why aren't we putting those barrels on the M4 right now?
          Because the contracts written up for M4 production and the production lines current established, are written up and created with the old requirements being used still.
          So the Army would need to make a modification to the specifications and accept the delay in production and increased expense on the M4 in order to take advantage of the current advances in barrel technology.
          Here with the NGSW program, they have a blank slate to start from to facilitate taking advantage of those technological and material advances.

  52. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Your point about polymer cases being an issue from a logistical standpoint makes a lot of sense, im surprised i haven’t heard anyone else bring that up
    Textron had the most innovative design, LFW had the most practical for the design requirements, but sig was definitely the safest option
    I still hope to get my hands on LFW’s bullpup some day but I have a feeling that losing the bid means it’s going to be prohibitively expensive. Hopefully a few civilian weapon manufacturers take some notes from this contract and come up with something truly innovative. I put my full faith into keltec to usher in a new age of polymer cased telescoped lever action revolver rifles

  53. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  54. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It truly is a crime SIG won. Textron has the most interesting ammo and General Dynamics had a great rifle, also the worst MMG but hey. Hell I'd also take GD's ammo over SIGS too.

    Truly insane we went with the most expensive and heaviest round when the goal was the opposite of that.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Some Generals got a giant paycheck from them and a job when they retire I'm sure.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Accuracry.

      With the new aimbot scope, every rifleman is a sniper.

  55. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >another NGSW autist post
    Better than Ukrainian war posts at least

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They won't end until the army starts some other wunderwaffe program.

  56. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    TL:DR
    Sig won, cope, seethe, cry, dilate, etc. bitches, kek!

  57. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're always fighting the last war. The distance in goat fucker countries were just beyond the range of most medium cartridges. The .308 was tried before so no go. Sig sold them on a high pressure meme gun where the barrel gets shot out in a thousand rounds when using the full diesel rounds. The, gays, bitches and trannies who they're currently recruiting will have a great time with the additional recoil. That's probably the ordnance department's passive aggressive pushback.

  58. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I highly disagree with the sig spear design. For one the recipricating dust cover is gone. Two, 6.8 mm is too big of a bullet. Stoner was mostly right about assault rifle design. Yet 5.56 is a little too small. Something in the 5.59 to 6 mm range is required. You make the cartridge as strong and as long as possible while sizing up the direct impingment system widening the internal space and trying to only make the internal parts the right balance of thick and light. The barrel needs to be as short as possible for close encounters.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The marines and army both want to swap over to suppressors enmasse for all infanty weapons. The direct impingement system of the M4 requires more fine tuning to work with suppressors than other systems. The marines solved this by switching to the M27 IAR, which is a gas piston rifle. The army seems to be following suit. None of the final NGSW guns were direct impingement.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >The direct impingement system of the M4 requires more fine tuning to work with suppressors than other systems. The marines solved this by switching to the M27 IAR, which is a gas piston rifle.
        I will never understand this meme that DI guns have more issues running suppressed than pistons, it just doesn't make ANY mechanical sense.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          also, why the fuck does the main battle rifle need to be suppressor friendly anyway?

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            *eeeeeeee*

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Because suppressors make sense overall, it makes it harder to discern where fire is coming from but more importantly it makes it so you don't deafen your troops or disorient them with muzzle blast so they can perform and communicate better.

  59. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the FN Mid Range Gas Gun
    in another world this was the XM5

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Really the MRGG comes off as too much of a jerry-rigged SCAR for me.

  60. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    What a quality thread. Thanks OP, interesting Saturday morning read with abbreviated and concise points. Appreciate it, congrats on being the rare OP that wasn't a gay, but instead an asset.

  61. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Thank you for the thread OP.
    fuck this fucking shit BULLPUP SHOULD HAVE WON REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

  62. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Milley's role in the ICSR[sic]-NGSW transition is underrated IMO. He rode on the close combat squad initiative's political momentum to drag his boomerisms into what was previously a Textron-centric project building 556 and 6.5 CT guns.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I think that the current was only flowing that direction anyhow.
      Textron was working with a pretty hard hitting 6.5mm gun already.

  63. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    If this doesn't reliably penetrate IV plates at 200m this will have been a complete waste of time

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      I agree.
      If all of this comes to naught, it'll be extremely disappointing.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      The super accurate long range fire is the real effect.

      Flat rapid projectile. you can give it a tungsten core later if you need to. Or even some super hardened steel penetrator if tungsten is hard to get.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >The super accurate long range fire is the real effect.
        Cool, 1920s rifle doctrine is back, hurray.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          yep. Hand-sized suicide quadcopters are the new short range slaughter machines.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          We've moved from spamming bombs and artillery shells at a target to get a hit to delivering a single one exactly where we want it via the magic of technology. While I'm not gonna make a statement about whether the smart scope technology is mature enough to be able to do that for the individual rifleman yet, it's pretty clear that we're going to move from spamming bullets at a target to instead delivering a single one exactly into the target as well. The only question is if they've managed to keep the rifle still effective for close range combat for urban situations, which I'm not sure they have with how hard the thing appears to kick but muh 1920s is such a dumb and dishonest argument.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            > to instead delivering a single one exactly into the target as well.
            That's after we introduce the mind control waves that make the enemy expose themselves to get shot and completely negate the need for fire and maneuver, right?

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              Good thing we're getting a more capable LMG to act as a base of fire for the maneuver element to work around. The ability to be all but guaranteed lethal on the first shot when engaging an unaware enemy, something that will happen because of America's rather insane integration of small recon drones and CCC systems is a massive boon to the individual rifleman, especially if it's coming at minimal cost to their ability to engage in a traditional fire and maneuver gunfight. I did agree that the rifle does seem to be difficult to control when being used on full auto compared to the M4, but the ability of smart scopes to allow rifleman to get marksman level shooting without requiring marksman level training and skill is a massive force multiplier and completely unrelated to the ability to have accurate long range fire which is enabled by the NGWS optics package.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I'd lower your expectations.
                The BEF was once the most well trained army in the world. With better marksmanship ability than basically anyone else on the planet outside of circus trick shooters.
                They still got annihilated in the opening days of WW1.
                Because being more accurate on the range doesn't mean that you can express any of that accuracy once you're in actual combat and people are shooting at you. Ultimately for intersoldier combat quantity of fire has a quality all of its own.

                The problem for the LMG is that even assuming a 20% weight decrease from 7.62NATO, you're still losing out on a lot of ammo that you'd otherwise be able to carry for the same overall weight with 5.56NATO.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >even assuming a 20% weight decrease from 7.62NATO
                It's not even close. About 6% lighter if you compare equal projectile weights, about 8% if you compare it to M80.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                And you don't think there might be some parallels between the rise of optics, drones, and other forms of warfighting that weren't around during even Korea and Iraq to an extent and the paradigm shifts that led to the Brits getting slaughtered? We've seen pretty clearly in Ukraine how small recon drones have allowed ambushes on unsuspecting enemy units to become more and more prevalent, even in a frontline situation, and the presence of recon drones and cheap PGMs such as the Excaliber shells, much less fancy things like Brimstone and Hellfire, act as a major disuadant from forming the sort of static positions that prevent an easy ambush, as shown by how effective even laser guided mortar shells have been against Russians. As to combat accuracy, taking as many human elements out of the trigger pulling means that you suddenly have less and less points of failure once the adrenaline hits which dramatically increases the lethality of the individual soldier.

                The ammo problem is unfortunate, but being able to punch through plates necessitates a bigger bullet and heavier load, which is going to cut into your carried ammo. However, that's a reasonable trade off for actually being able to kill what you hit instead of trying to guide your bullets around the armor. Losing carried ammo is made up for by increasing the target size, and also lessens the odds of a mistake being made because you assume a target is down when actually you just hit their plates and they're still in the game.

                methinks you're putting way, way too much emphasis on a smartscope completely altering the way firefights go down. very rarely are you having a clear shot on your enemy, much less one with their guard completely down. this seems even more unlikely if this is for frontline use with a peer or near-peer opponent. if you nail a few at first and then make them get down, you need your MGs to lay down a base of fire so your...riflemen can engage a flank or move in up close to neutralize the enemy with their....13 pound battle rifles. yeah.

                accuracy is, to put it extremely blunt, overrated. fire output, maneuverability are going to be important in the modern battlefield still. sitting back and waiting for your opponent to stick his head out is just doing what the ragheads did in A-stan and inviting the same ordinance drop-induced end they frequently met as well.

                With the average squad carrying a loadout of suicide drones, essentially packing their own PGM air-support in a small manner, you no longer have to rely on closing the distance nearly as hard. If you're able to keep them pinned while a hand grenade with wings is flying to their position, suddenly there is no longer such a need to maneuver to expose the enemy because you're able to provide your own CAS as a solution to them and do it very quickly as well.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >With the average squad carrying a loadout of suicide drones
                cool, when was that officially announced?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Switchblade, those 40mm launched drones, and the others that the Army has been procuring ring any bells? They're pretty clearly moving to mass adoption.

                >you no longer have to rely on closing the distance nearly as hard
                Sure, outdoors, when you know where they are. But in close quarters you still need a PDW. Suicide drones make DMR rifles obsolete, not carbines.

                >close quarters you still need a PDW
                I freely admit that the NGSW might not be the ideal rifle because too many compromises were made in it's close quarter suitability. However, that's a completely different argument from 'muh M14 couldn't reach out to touch people, so we never can'. The technology is pretty clearly approaching, or at, the level where we can force every soldier to be an marksman by taking 90% of the skill out of it and placing it in the hands of a computer, something that wasn't an option back when the M14 failed to deliver.

                >We've seen pretty clearly in Ukraine how small recon drones have allowed ambushes on unsuspecting enemy units to become more and more prevalent, even in a frontline situation
                Yes against forces with little to no ELINT and with certainly no means of countering even basic hobby drones. It's frustrating to see people considering the Ukraine conflict as a shining example of how war will be conducted in the future while failing to take into account the utterly pathetic state of the Russian military from the ground up. They are a stupidly poor example of a modern day military.
                >being able to punch through plates
                Making a lot of assumptions there.

                If I was thinking that Ukraine was an example of how warfare would be conducted in the future, I'd be advocating for a return to trench warfare since that's what the slap fight has devolved into. However, we have seen glimpses of what the big fancy weapons do to grouped targets once they're spotted, and that leads me to think that the future infantryman is going to be much more dispersed to minimize the risk of a surprise HE visit killing the entire squad and also making them harder to detect in the first place. This is enabled by all the fancy CCC systems in development, such as that AR visor the Army is still working on that means that you don't require your fellows to be so close that you can keep a physical eye on them because you've got a blue force marker.

                >Making a lot of assumptions there.
                I can only take the Army's word on it that they're capable of doing so, but it was a requirement of the program and I don't see them lying on something that the GAO would be breathing down their neck over.

                Perhaps.
                I think anti-drone tech is far less developed than many assume, so the close tactical utility of observation drones is still very real.
                However, those are good for finding targets. During engagement the limitations of fighting on Earth are very real still.
                Punching plates will only become more important as time goes on.
                The trouble is doing so at the supposed distances that we're meant to be gaining with these superscopes and drones and the like. That might be a simple limitation of physics right now.

                You have a fair point, but as plates become more and more prevalent, I'd rather kick doors with something that'll put the target down regardless of where I aim, even if it's much less controllable then an M4.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >I can only take the Army's word on it
                oof

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Squad drones are *probably* going to be mass-issued
                >Giving every grunt a DMR is *probably* going to work out fine because scopes have gotten better
                >We're *probably* going to spread out squad deployments beyond reliable LOS from one another and this will *probably* be covered by Future Warrior 2.0
                >The XM5 will *probably* penetrate IV plates
                My man you are cramming a *lot* of assumptions throughout that post there

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >the Army is investing in 40mm suicide drones and other squad level drones because they're going to only issue them to specialists, not see them adopted at the squad level because reasons?
                >XM5's biggest selling point was penetrating plates, and the GAO would have bitchslapped them if they'd picked a round that didn't meet this criteria instead of dismissing the protest

                The other two are certainly my supposition, but you're rather retarded if you don't think those two are mere assumptions.

                >but as plates become more and more prevalent, I'd rather kick doors with something that'll put the target down regardless of where I aim, even if it's much less controllable then an M4.
                that's because you operate on videogame logic, unless you're opponent is armed with something similar to what we're seeing here with the neoM14 then he's going to have a smaller, lighter weapon that's going to be easier to use in the situation and stand more chances of nailing you because he's firing more aimed shots than you are at a faster rate with infinitely more capacity to follow up

                And yet even when doing doorkicking stuff, people who have a choice have moved away from the ultimate conclusion of 'lighter and smaller' in the form of PDWs to SBRs to maximize the chance of low shot stops vs the PDWs which faced complaints about requiring half a mag per target. As better plates become more common, this trend is very likely to continue if SBRs aren't capable of defeating armor where there is a greater push for first shot lethality vs requiring multiple rounds. The NGSW, while being heavier and firing a round with more recoil, is not substantially longer then an M4 being only 2 inches longer with it's suppressor vs an unsupressed M4 with a stock at full extension. It's hardly trying to do CQC with a Mosin or M14, though we'll see how big an issue the recoil becomes.

                I think we're going to find out whether soldiers were missing in combat because they couldn't estimate range and wind correctly while under fire, or if it had as much to do with adrenaline and fear/excitement degrading fine muscle control when lives are at stake. I worry that the latter is being underestimated.

                I also suspect that the rapid delivery of well-aimed/guided HE, whether integral to the squad or delivered by supporting arms is going to be a much bigger deal than having a bigger bullet. I see IVAS--*if* they can get it to meet requirements--as more important than the XM-5 in the long run, because of the possibility that any infantryman could call accurate fires down onto any position he could see (or even just guess at) within at most a few minutes. Of course, that assumes that RoE allows for such a thing, but if you're fighting a largely-conventional war against a modern enemy, the first thing you need to do is to keep the lawyers in their lane.

                Given how much of a boon for accuracy even simple ACOGs were during the invasion of the Middle East, I think that the ability to simply push button, put glowing dot on target, and pull trigger is going to just serve to further increase the average soldier's marksmanship, but I do agree that the proliferation of easy fire support is much more of a game changer. The question is if it becomes trivial to deliver HE to a target, what purpose does an actual rifle hold? I could see a shift to smaller weapons that are solely designed to crack plates at 25 yards while the mid range duties are handled by the squad's LMG pinning while the drones do the killing. Who knows?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >conflating carbines-to-NGSW with PDWs-to-SBRs
                once again, videogame logic. while carbines aren't AS compact or AS controllable to PDWs or, more accurately, SMGs, they are still controllable enough, quick-firing enough, and manuevable enough to perfectly do the job, ON TOP OF being more versatile. the jumps from carbine to NGSW for door-kicking precludes
                >amping up weight
                >extremely amping up recoil and time to put more rounds on a target
                >reducing mag count by 33%
                all in exchange for some more power. this jump/reduction of negatives/positives in the equation simply did not occur in going from SMGs/PDWs to carbines for door-kicking.
                >though we'll see how big an issue the recoil becomes.
                spoiler: it's a big issue in close-quarters.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                And you don't think see any trends you might be able to extrapolate about people who do door kicking accepting those downsides when moving from an MP7 to a SBR 5.56 in exchange for not requiring multiple rounds being put into a target that could be applied in the face of the spread of level 4 plates and even more effective ones in the near future? Clearly at some point it does become not worth it or we'd just issue .338 and call it a day, but there's also just as clearly a lesson that can be learned and applied about moving from the M4 to the XM5 as armor becomes a common threat.

                > unless you start shooting dollar bills with things like tungsten penetrators
                Well that sucks since that's likely what the 6.8 round is going to need to penetrate level 4 plates also, and I'm pretty sure the official quotes for the "AP" version call for shooting Jacksons rather than Washingtons.
                >enabling the individual soldier to be lethal at much greater ranges for the situations where you don't need to drop an explosive on the target.
                In what scenario would you not want to drop explosives if you had the option? It's more effective, can easily get multiple casualties as opposed to one, and can be done without exposing you or your men to fire.

                Fairly certain that those penetators are part of the project's ability to punch through armor after bleeding energy for 200+ yards, while people have shown that even a traditional AP bullet of the same weight and speed as listed for the XM5 can defeat level 4 plates.

                >In what scenario would you not want to drop explosives if you had the option?
                Being able to keep the enemy pinned while the explosives are in transit, engaging targets of opportunity, initiating an ambush with more then just your grenadier's drone, taking advantage of your extended range to engage enemies before they're able to get into effective range themselves which is the whole concept of overmatch that you can read about earlier in the thread.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >while people have shown that even a traditional AP bullet of the same weight and speed as listed for the XM5 can defeat level 4 plates.
                Uhhhh where?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >And you don't think see any trends you might be able to extrapolate about people who do door kicking accepting those downsides when moving from an MP7 to a SBR 5.56 in exchange for not requiring multiple rounds being put into a target
                don't think you're really following, I pointed out how they were willing to make that change because they were still able to largely retain all of those benefits of an SMG/PDW (light weight, compactness, essentially same amount of ammo capacity, low recoil and quick follow-up) with added punch and versatility. your transition calls for more weight, less compactness, less ammo capacity, more recoil, more time for follow-up shots, and much less versatility, in exchange for one boon. it isn't equivalent.
                >Clearly at some point it does become not worth it or we'd just issue .338 and call it a day
                well that's what you're basically calling for, and I personally don't think that's going to go too hot in room-to-room operations.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                drones are *probably* going to be mass-issued
                1-2 per squad

                every grunt a DMR is *probably* going to work out fine because scopes have gotten better
                M5 bro
                also M4A1 with the vortex scope is sweet as hell

                >>We're *probably* going to spread out squad deployments beyond reliable LOS from one another and this will *probably* be covered by Future Warrior 2.0
                EM signature is a huge risk. Squads can already operate and coordinate via radio

                >>The XM5 will *probably* penetrate IV plates
                Black tip 5.56mm already penetrates level IV plates at 300m

                stop being a boomer fudd and pay attention to reality

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Black tip 5.56mm already penetrates level IV plates at 300m
                well the only "black tip" 5.56 is XM777 and that was a failed attempt at making M193 capable of armor piercing with a simple steel penetrator, so I'll let you deduce whether a .55gr projectile going around 2000fps is going to penetrate level IV plates

                if you meant M855A1...also no.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Black tip 5.56mm already penetrates level IV plates at 300m

                ADVAP, which is a 7.62x51 tungsten AP round, cannot do that at 300m.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Black tip 5.56mm already penetrates level IV plates at 300m

                there is literally not enough space in the case to give you the charge you'd need to make 5.56 penetrate IV plates at 300m even if it had a depleted uranium core. why do NGSWfags underestimate armor effectiveness so fucking often?

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                The whole point is zoomers reciting gravelbelly lore about shooting COM as if the GWOT hadn't just proved soldiers love to shoot people in the face, hands, guts and feet instead of acting like mindless bots whose bullets are sucked into a 10x12 hitbox.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >but as plates become more and more prevalent, I'd rather kick doors with something that'll put the target down regardless of where I aim, even if it's much less controllable then an M4.
                that's because you operate on videogame logic, unless you're opponent is armed with something similar to what we're seeing here with the neoM14 then he's going to have a smaller, lighter weapon that's going to be easier to use in the situation and stand more chances of nailing you because he's firing more aimed shots than you are at a faster rate with infinitely more capacity to follow up

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I think we're going to find out whether soldiers were missing in combat because they couldn't estimate range and wind correctly while under fire, or if it had as much to do with adrenaline and fear/excitement degrading fine muscle control when lives are at stake. I worry that the latter is being underestimated.

                I also suspect that the rapid delivery of well-aimed/guided HE, whether integral to the squad or delivered by supporting arms is going to be a much bigger deal than having a bigger bullet. I see IVAS--*if* they can get it to meet requirements--as more important than the XM-5 in the long run, because of the possibility that any infantryman could call accurate fires down onto any position he could see (or even just guess at) within at most a few minutes. Of course, that assumes that RoE allows for such a thing, but if you're fighting a largely-conventional war against a modern enemy, the first thing you need to do is to keep the lawyers in their lane.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                This begs to question about why you'd bother with big, heavy battle rifles with fewer round counts and higher recoil with long distance in mind if we have suicide drones and precision artillery to handle the threat anyways. Have that shit do its thing, which will be far more effective than any bullet, then move in with the carbines that can actually function effectively close in.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                The problem is that unless you're going full PDW, anything that's going to punch through armor is going to end up like a battle rifle with our current position in the ammo vs armor race unless you start shooting dollar bills with things like tungsten penetrators, which even setting aside the economics are a strategic resource. Once you have the battle rifle as the only thing that fits the requirements, slapping a fancy scope package on top is very cost effective in enabling the individual soldier to be lethal at much greater ranges for the situations where you don't need to drop an explosive on the target.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                > unless you start shooting dollar bills with things like tungsten penetrators
                Well that sucks since that's likely what the 6.8 round is going to need to penetrate level 4 plates also, and I'm pretty sure the official quotes for the "AP" version call for shooting Jacksons rather than Washingtons.
                >enabling the individual soldier to be lethal at much greater ranges for the situations where you don't need to drop an explosive on the target.
                In what scenario would you not want to drop explosives if you had the option? It's more effective, can easily get multiple casualties as opposed to one, and can be done without exposing you or your men to fire.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Could use ceramic.
                Or some kind of industrial gem like ruby or diamond.
                All are a lot cheaper than tungsten carbide. And almost as hard or harder.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >you no longer have to rely on closing the distance nearly as hard
                Sure, outdoors, when you know where they are. But in close quarters you still need a PDW. Suicide drones make DMR rifles obsolete, not carbines.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >We've seen pretty clearly in Ukraine how small recon drones have allowed ambushes on unsuspecting enemy units to become more and more prevalent, even in a frontline situation
                Yes against forces with little to no ELINT and with certainly no means of countering even basic hobby drones. It's frustrating to see people considering the Ukraine conflict as a shining example of how war will be conducted in the future while failing to take into account the utterly pathetic state of the Russian military from the ground up. They are a stupidly poor example of a modern day military.
                >being able to punch through plates
                Making a lot of assumptions there.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Perhaps.
                I think anti-drone tech is far less developed than many assume, so the close tactical utility of observation drones is still very real.
                However, those are good for finding targets. During engagement the limitations of fighting on Earth are very real still.
                Punching plates will only become more important as time goes on.
                The trouble is doing so at the supposed distances that we're meant to be gaining with these superscopes and drones and the like. That might be a simple limitation of physics right now.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                methinks you're putting way, way too much emphasis on a smartscope completely altering the way firefights go down. very rarely are you having a clear shot on your enemy, much less one with their guard completely down. this seems even more unlikely if this is for frontline use with a peer or near-peer opponent. if you nail a few at first and then make them get down, you need your MGs to lay down a base of fire so your...riflemen can engage a flank or move in up close to neutralize the enemy with their....13 pound battle rifles. yeah.

                accuracy is, to put it extremely blunt, overrated. fire output, maneuverability are going to be important in the modern battlefield still. sitting back and waiting for your opponent to stick his head out is just doing what the ragheads did in A-stan and inviting the same ordinance drop-induced end they frequently met as well.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous
      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >The super accurate long range fire is the real effect.
        By their own admission, Sig's LMG is at best a 10 MOA gun, assuming all new components.
        No refunds, btw

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Thats better than most LMGs. Especially ones that have a recoil operation component.
          The M249 is about 12MOA for example.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Yea that's the recoiling barrel MOA for the LMG.

          The rifle is sub 1. Gun jesus said he was surprised how accurate it was.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Agreed. The opportunity was there to create a next-gen assault rifle and PDW, and it got wasted on the Every Man a Marksman meme.

  64. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    vortex scopes are excellent

  65. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >Replacing polymer mags with steel on an already overweight pig of a rifle
    lmao

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Probably was too expensive to try and mould those metal feed lips and bracing into the top of every magazine.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        The article said the projectiles were tearing up the polymer mags. Which is something you'd think would have come up in the exhaustive and totally not halfassed testing they did.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      What a meme program.

  66. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    This is how you deal with armor.
    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/04/09/armys-precision-grenadier-program-about-face-its-first-real-test.html

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      This either goes one of two ways.
      You have too little payload and the grenades are mostly useless.
      You have a good payload and they weigh half a pound each.

      Select your fighter.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >You have too little payload and the grenades are mostly useless.
        I see this opinion posted all the time but I've never seen a source backing it up. The only opinions from actual users I've read about come from Rangers and normal infantry. Rangers considered it dead weight since they were primarily doing raids and regular infantry said it helped end firefights much quicker.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Generally 20mm grenades were found to just not be effective.
          The Chinese in their move down the same avenue moved up to 35mm for that reason.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            Do you have any source for that?

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/m1019.htm
              Global Security is a very trustworthy source in my experience.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                That says that the 20mm grenades for the OICW were too weak, which is why the XM-25 uses 25mm grenades.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                That's correct; while OICW was primarily killed over weight issues (upwards of 20lbs w/ 30x5.56+5x20), the lethality of the 20mm warhead was lacking, and that pretty much nailed the XM29's coffin shut. Hence, the XM25, which some units loved and others hated (admittedly, as

                >You have too little payload and the grenades are mostly useless.
                I see this opinion posted all the time but I've never seen a source backing it up. The only opinions from actual users I've read about come from Rangers and normal infantry. Rangers considered it dead weight since they were primarily doing raids and regular infantry said it helped end firefights much quicker.

                pointed out, the most vocal haters, the Rangers, were conducting missions at the time where a grenade launcher wasn't really useful). The XM25 died when the manufacturer failed to provide new rounds on time/budget (the rounds were LRIP, partially hand-made, and there's a story going around that the Germans torpedoed it over asinine Hague claims).

                There's still a need for a squad-level capability for putting fragments into enemy positions. I would argue that it's far more important than having a plate-punching battle rifle. Whether that solution is airburst 40mm with a smart scope (plus Pike for longer ranges), Switchblade or similar micro-drones, a 60mm PGMM, or just using IVAS to automatically complete a 9-line call for fire within seconds and burst-transmit it to a rapid fire control network, that's where the real progress will be made.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >Whether that solution is airburst 40mm with a smart scope (plus Pike for longer ranges), Switchblade or similar micro-drones, a 60mm PGMM, or just using IVAS to automatically complete a 9-line call for fire within seconds and burst-transmit it to a rapid fire control network, that's where the real progress will be made.
                We should do all of that, at the same time. Every grenadier should be equipped with XM-25 with underslung 40mm and a back mounted switchblade launcher.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                You've got to let this go, man. It's not viable.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                Which part?

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        >rangefinder programmable-fuse airburst grenades are mostly useless
        No bro, they're scary as fuck.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          His point is that enough HE to actually do the job reliably gets kinda heavy per round, and you need to carry a fair number as your basic load. And it's a fair point; the whole point behind LSAT was to reduce the weight of the weapon+ammo in order to reduce the soldier's burden and/or allow them to carry other things. And that was just to shave a handful of pounds off the soldier's load. Frag rounds with a useful amount of HE fill eat up a soldier's capacity in a real hurry. Having a smart scope (or even better yet, cheap guidance options) can reduce system weight by reducing the number of rounds needed per target, but even then, it's still an issue. The ability to rapidly call for fire also takes weight off of the soldier, and may be the best overall option (although it doesn't have to be the only one).

  67. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Who has that MSPaint pic of how midwits think body armor functions vs how it actually functions because it seems it needs to be posted in this thread

  68. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    All the people imagining some kind of crazy sci fi optic are gonna be disappointed when they find out it just lights up some holdover marks.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      We've seen the optics in video, they do actively move the reticle around.
      Perhaps optics that just lit up hold over marks like the SIG BDX system were failed out.

  69. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    I hope that GD's protest at the GAO goes somewhere. It's fishy as all hell what SIG and the Army are pulling with 'training ammo'

    >Army requires competitors to have rifles that shoot armor busting 140 grain bullets at 3500 fps
    >GD and Textron make serious tradeoffs in their rifles to meet the project requirements. Textron uses hot ammo and GD opts for a bullpup
    >SIG shoehorns ultra magnum +++++++P ammo into their AR10 to meet it
    >SIG gets selected
    >Army immediately drops the armor-piercing ammo requirement. Now soldiers will be issued underloaded training ammo
    except in the narrow situation where enemies have armor

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      They already retracted both of their protests.
      We don't know why or what the protests even were but Sig can now start up production again.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      They already retracted both of their protests.
      We don't know why or what the protests even were but Sig can now start up production again.

      LOL, SIG WINS AGAIN, BITCHES!

  70. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Does anyone else feel like the military just took the private initiative of Tracking Point and stole the concept after trialing it and rejecting it?
    Is there any sort of info on why TP was rejected?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Probably because it was kind of shit.
      Where the NGSW-FC works by you choosing some point to laser range find, and then adjusts the reticle to make hitting it easier and past that point functioned as a standard optical sight for most purposes. Tracking Point tried to identify specific a specific target that you locked on and then locked the trigger until you lined up the sights over it.

      The problem being that of course computers suck at physically tracking a moving target through brush and detritus and the like as much or more than humans do. And locking someone's trigger until they either disengage or the scope thinks that the target has been sighted over, is an awful idea for anyone other than perhaps Duty Cops.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        TP *did* have a firing mode that didn't engage the trigger brake; it only gave you the adjusted point of aim. I think the big problem (other than Not Invented Here) was the build quality--it wasn't rugged enough--but I don't know any inside information on exactly what went down.

        Do note that a few TP sniper rifles were sent to troops in the field; I don't think we've ever heard what the results were.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        TP *did* have a firing mode that didn't engage the trigger brake; it only gave you the adjusted point of aim. I think the big problem (other than Not Invented Here) was the build quality--it wasn't rugged enough--but I don't know any inside information on exactly what went down.

        Do note that a few TP sniper rifles were sent to troops in the field; I don't think we've ever heard what the results were.

        I'm 100% sure the "don't let me shoot till it'll hit" and the "just tell me where to aim" are on the same system. it's literally 1 button.

        Great for shooting drones in a open sky.

        For a human target in the bush you need thermal and a fuck-off good camera combined to be able to identify the target digitally.

        Although as computers get better, this will only get easier too. This was unthinkably complicated 20 years ago.

        I think the far-future of war is DARPA dog-drones with rifles on their backs.

  71. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    You know it’s bad because armatards and AK fags are keeping pretty quiet about it.
    It’s all day and night about how the M16 is made of plastic, a Barbie gun, malfunctions with the tiniest spec of mud, malfunctions so hard americanski had to pick up glorious kalashnikov in Vietnam, etc. etc.

    The usual detractors aren’t making much noise about this program, so it’s probably seen as a successful step backwards in their eyes.

  72. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    GD was such a better package

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      what fucking gun is that?

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      that wasn't in the submission

      what fucking gun is that?

      KAC lmg

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      If they'd figured out some way to convert it to a bullpup form so they could get the required velocity within length requirements, maybe.
      But that gun didn't exist in the testing world.

Your email address will not be published.