Or that’s what one blogger on a prominent weapons site said the other day…
Kit Up! friend and gun guru David Crane of Defense Review forwarded along a piece by one of his contributors, Chen Lee, about how this mysterious “common receiver” that FNH is developing for its Mk-17 SCAR-H will save the Mk-16 – sort of.
As the MK16 SCAR-L won the initial contract, the planned evolution of this weapon was for it to employ a multicaliber single receiver, better know as the “common receiver”. This explains the recent decision to run with the Mk-17 and use a 5.56mm adapter kit/conversion kit for it and to produce a common receiver/multicaliber weapons platform.
Sure, the original solicitation called for the development of a common receiver that could be adapted to the rifle so that an operator could fire both 7.62 or 5.56 (or whatever?) ammo the situation called for. But it’s a stretch to say that the development of a common receiver “explains the recent decision to run with the Mk-17 and use a 5.56 adaptor…” What decision to do that?
SOCOM told me on the record that no decision has been made on the still-developmental common receiver, so unless Lee has some inside gouge that he’s not citing, there’s no evidence SOCOM will use the “5.56 adaptor.”
The post also spins the yarn that the Mk-16 was just rolled into the Mk-17 and the common receiver program:
So, when SOCOM decided to move the development funding for the the Mk-16 and Mk-17 and roll it into the Mk17 with a common receiver, it was also part of the cycle of development, but that announcement created the appearance of the MK16 program’s cancellation, and resulting reportage with that interpretation…
Again, “decided”…? On the record, SOCOM told me spending money on the Mk-16 wasn’t worth it since it was only a marginal improvement over the M4 and saw no use in spending SOCOM dollars on a weapon the services buy their snake eaters already. And the meme that that Mk-16 wasn’t “cancelled” and that only hyperbolic “reportage” “interpreted” the fact that the command had decided to stop buying the Mk-16 and have all those in the field returned as a “cancellation” is borderline delusional. Give me a break. It’s CANCELLED! Live with it!
I give great credit to my friend David Crane who put in an editorial note backing me up. This issue is clearly very emotional to FH fans (myself included) because they put so much work and hope into this program only to have the vast bulk of it unceremoniously ripped out from under them.
So I understand there’s some desire to paint lipstick on this pig. And Kit Up! won’t take it personally…
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
FWIW, Chen is pretty connected on the industry side, however at this point on the issue it's SO difficult to discern the wheat from the chaff.
The weapon that never needed to be developed. Just put off-the-shelf piston kits in the existing M-4s.
That is what I've been saying for years wolfgangvonkrieg. It's more cost effective than the SCAR and the HK 416. Besides there are so many different chamberings for the M16/M4 and all you have to do is change the upper insted of taking the whole damn thing apart it's a lot more usere friendly and less likely to break.
Its not just the simple answer of changing the upper receiver and the piston….the lower would require an overhaul as well because the mag well on the M16/M4 is sized for 5.56 not 7.62 which, not to insult anyones intelligence, is a bigger round. However, it would be nice to have a 7.62 variant of the M16/M4. I know I wouldn't mind hauling the extra weight.
I know the magwell can still fit 6.8 mags and I'm pretty sure 6.5 grendal can without changing the lower
Yeah, 6.8 or 6.5 might work but that's not gonna happen….to much logistical trouble and they were talking about switching the M16/M4 over to 7.62
Never happen. Its too simple and practical for government minds. It would not keep hundreds busy investigating, testing, re-investigating, re-testing generating reports etc etc that government weenies all love. Besides it would save too much of the taxpayers money.
Amen Bob!
However there is a small problem with what you are saying…it makes sense! We both know that common sense is not allowed in the halls of the government. Every time a "great" solution has been found to numerous problems the M4 debate being the latest, millions are spent only to discover the solution was in front of their face all along. So here starts another debate. So we convert as part of an update package the existing system to piston/op rod models. Good to go. Now which ones? I bet even money they make this a long complicated problem as well.
Life goes on.
Welp, no surprises here to me. U.S. Mil has been taking small arms manufacturers for a ride for a couple decades now, putting out programs and requests for M16/M4 replacement designs, and, for that matter, M9 replacements. Then they pull the rug out.
It has started to look like a grand version of the practical joke where everyone agrees to jump in a swimming pool at once. The industry can't afford not to jump first every time, lest they miss out on the contract of a lifetime. But, just as in the old gag, they end up getting soaked.
As stated above re: off the shelf parts- The simplicity of the concept dooms it to failure.
In re: 7.62 mags. Make the new lowers able to accept the old M1A mags, and use a removable shim so 7.62 or 5.56 mags can be used. End of problem(?).
Carry 210 rounds of 5.56 around for a few days in the heat, then do the same with 7.62. Let the boots on the ground decide.
I'll hump my 5.56. Had a chance to play with a LMT 14.5", heavy gun.
The entire program was a waste of time and effort on the part of FNH. The military was never going to replace the M4, not even for SOCOM. There are a bevy of AR, 7.62 platforms on the market that SOCOM could adopt. The ability to adapt a rifle from 7.62 to 5.56 and vice versa, is a lot like the McNamara efforts to produce common equipment for all the various services in the early 60's. A lot of time and money wasted for a very few items that already existed comercially. I realize that FNH lives by the GovContract, but that means that they've developed that GovMindset, that states all projects must be "NEW", "BIG" failures.
Maybe if they drop the price and blitz the firearms market, they can recoup some of their losses on developement cost.
After surfing both the FN and SOCOM websites, I find an FN press release that as of AUG 16 2010 SOCOM has approved full production of both the MK16 and MK17.
"McLean, VA, The U.S. Special Operations Command notified FN that the Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR) family of weapons—the MK 16 (5.56mm) and MK 17 (7.62mm) combat assault rifles and MK 13 grenade launcher—was approved for full-rate production. The Full-Rate Production Decision Review by the Milestone Decision Authority occurred on July 30, 2010."
bow bow boq