Prediction: all the butthurt about this rifle will be proven pointless because the rapid proliferation of various sorts of autonomous systems, drones,...

Prediction: all the butthurt about this rifle will be proven pointless because the rapid proliferation of various sorts of autonomous systems, drones, UGVs, etc. will make it so that infantry very rarely fire small arms in the future.

You're not going to shoot a gun at a person because some drone in the swarm is going to spot them first and a mortar will be fired at them. Or you'll use your optic to tell your UGV to blast them with a 40mm grenade or HMG.

It'll be like cops. In the movies people will still shoot lots of guns, but not IRL.

Also because armor keeps getting better and lighter so you'll want to use those autonomous 40mm systems instead.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >will make it so that infantry very rarely fire small arms in the future.
    All the more reason to use a lighter more self defense type of rifle like the M4 rather than a full weight battle rifle.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      P90 for defense. Drone swarms for offense.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I think you're on the right track with this. I think total adoption of massive numbers of drones is going to take a decade or two more to fully catch on, for the simple fact that even though the writing is on the wall, the NATO forces aren't ready to accept that drones of all sorts are the future. It's going to take a big US loss or quagmire somewhere to realize the switch needs to happen.
    That said, in regards to OP's picrel, I fully expect the US will get rid of it and retain the m4 with 5.56. It's lighter, can carry more ammo, and as you say, small arms aren't going to matter a whole lot when the drone swarms come. If the average infantryman's main job is to lug around drones to deploy and other tech equipment, he's not going to want a heavy ass XM7 in addition to all the other gear.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I think this is likely right, although another factor would be how quickly integrated fire control systems like SHARP advance. With a smart scope, hitting moving targets far away is much easier, especially if you just hold down the trigger and the gun fires on a calculated hit. So I think the idea at least is that all the situational awareness gained by drones might also increase the likelihood of being able to take advantage of those opportunities. But at the same time, the weight really doesn't seem worth it, even if fire control systems would obviate most of the concerns about having less ammo and more recoil. The only place people would end up using small arms a lot would be urban environments and COIN, and then there you want smaller guns.

      I could see the M4 sticking around for another 50 years since I don't think it'll really be something worth spending money on. If electric guns are ever feasible, then we'll see a change just because they will be way quieter and have much cheaper ammunition and potentially much higher velocity (and velocity you can adjust as needed). But that requires some serious breakthrough in capacitors since getting the energy out quickly is more the limiting factor than batteries.

      I think DARPA had a coil gun mortar than ran off a hybrid Humvee battery, but it was too expensive. And then Japan has 40mm tail guns, but those seem 20+ years from being mature at least.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I fully expect the US will get rid of it
      FY25 budget documents still say they're buying ~111,400 total M7 rifles

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I think you're on the right track with this. I think total adoption of massive numbers of drones is going to take a decade or two more to fully catch on, for the simple fact that even though the writing is on the wall, the NATO forces aren't ready to accept that drones of all sorts are the future. It's going to take a big US loss or quagmire somewhere to realize the switch needs to happen.
        That said, in regards to OP's picrel, I fully expect the US will get rid of it and retain the m4 with 5.56. It's lighter, can carry more ammo, and as you say, small arms aren't going to matter a whole lot when the drone swarms come. If the average infantryman's main job is to lug around drones to deploy and other tech equipment, he's not going to want a heavy ass XM7 in addition to all the other gear.

        43,477 rifles set to be delivered between Feb 2024 and June 2026.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Damn that's like almost 1/35th as many AR-15s are sold in a year

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          What does civilian rifle sales have to do with US Army issued rifles? They're getting 40,000 in the next 2 years, they "only" have around 120,000 "Frontline" units. So this 40,000 bought and paid for already is enough to outfit almost half of the US army's front line "tip of the spear" fighting force. And within another 3 years we'll have procured enough for the rest.

          Yes everyone else will still have M4s, they're not replacing M4's 1 to 1, that has NEVER even been suggested once during the NGSW program, despite all you morons pretending that if it DOESN'T replace the M4 1 to 1 it has somehow "failed" despite it never being intended for that.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's not even going to be used by the spear tip. They'll try it for a couple years, determine it's just a DMR, then go back to the m4 carbine while keeping the XM250. The M7 will, just like the M14, be relegated to the DMR role.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              111,000 DMRs?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                111,000 M14s?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                They only ever modernized like 10-20k M14s

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            111,000 DMRs?

            Damn that's like almost 1/35th as many AR-15s are sold in a year

            They really haven't ordered frick-all rifles because the initial order for the 1903 Springfield, and the Garand, and the M14, and the M16 were all "give us five million fricking rifles right now"

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      By the time they have weaponized drone swarms, there will be laser turrets mounted on IFVs that can take out a drone a mile away in seconds.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Sneet snart, imagine believing drone counters aren't already being developed.
        Stop playing Breakpoint.

        It's much easier to develop counter measures for direct attack drones than against spotters. Spotters can be very small and do their work from quite far away. They can hug the terrain of be fired in from tubes. While I'd agree that the primitive FPV drones being used today will become obsolete, the problem posed by integrated spotter networks will be significantly harder to fully counter.

        When the drone is just delaying targeting data it can stay quite far away. What you have to intercept is the incoming shells, missiles, etc. Will interception for this sort of thing get much better? Sure. But this will just lead to volleys being fired all targeting the AD systems. New munitions will be developed to avoid AD, make it harder to intercept, etc.

        There is no one easy solution to drones. It's still going to be the case that autonomous systems make engaging at longer ranges preferable. Whoever loses their interception umbrella first will get thrown into a rout most likely.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    damn bro you just realized that artillery has accounted for the majority of casualties in combat since the invention of the cannon

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The canon was first used in Europe in the early 1200s and didn't do that much for another 200 years. Then it was largely for fortifications. Just a side point to think about when people say shit like rail guns will never catch on because they don't work well after 40 years of testing.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    as powerful as drones are, infantry are still viable because infantry can fight in buildings/tunnels/caves.
    drones can't do any of those... yet

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >infantry very rarely fire small arms in the future
    So why bother replacing the M4 with a bigger, heavier rifle at all then?

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Would probably be smarter to make a bullpup kit for these. Either way, the extra armor penetration would make UGV's less of a threat to infantry. I also feel like Metal Storm will need to be revisited at some point for dealing with drone swarms in asymmetric fights. Or maybe something like a two-stage aerial claymore mine....

    AND FRICK THIS STUPID CAPTCHA...

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've been skeptical about this since the program started. IMO, it's almost like they want infantrymen to use a battle rifle instead. I get replacing the LMGs but this is weird to me.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The main issues most people have is that it's not .308, it's too heavy but USMC's varmint gun is the same weight unloaded, and that it's an made by israelites which the latter is a perfectly fine issue

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Holy shit, I didn't realize this was true. And people even shill the M27. Holy cope.

      Really does seem like pure sour grapes then. The cartridge is better than .308 is virtually every way.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >all that moronic bullshit.

      >m27 with loaded mag, optic, and suppressor weight: 9.8 pounds
      >xm7 with loaded mag, suppressor, and NO OPTIC weight: 10.07 pounds
      >the xm157 optic is estimated to weigh between 2-3 pounds
      >30 round loaded mags for the m27 weigh less than the loaded 20 rounders of the xm7
      >can carry more mags and ammo for the m27 compared to the xm7

      In conclusion, you're a moronic Black person.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        And that is without accounting for ammunition weight.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >don’t worry about weight goyim
          >it’s only 40% more weight for 33% less ammo
          >trust us we know best

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >other tech makes rifles meaningless
    >let’s spend a bunch of money on a heavier rifle no one will use
    Great fricking plan OP. You convinced me.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >muh drones
    Which are already being countered

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Sneet snart, imagine believing drone counters aren't already being developed.
    Stop playing Breakpoint.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    This will prove extremely useful in the upcoming zerg war

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The war of the future will be fought not with rifles and drones, but with giant avian bowling balls fired from slingshots.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *