A Kit Up! reader posed a good question on our tip line yesterday, asking which companies and designs were contending for the Army’s Improved Carbine competition.
Soldier Systems Daily got to the issue first the other day, by pointing out a PEO Soldier released graphic describing the “dual path” Soldier Weapons is taking with both improving the current system into an M-4A1 (heavy barrel, ambidextrous controls, full auto) and looking to industry for a new rifle.
Our reader asks a simple question: when will we know the contenders?
According to PEO Soldier, the service plans to issue an RFP and conduct an industry day late this year (December-ish). It’s then that we’ll have a pretty good idea who’s vying for the Army’s small arms dominance. And that coincides well with next year’s SHOT Show in Vegas, where the contenders will be touting their wares to folks like us who can give them some publicity.
The reader also asked about the new ammo technology we wrote about a while back with cased-telescoped and caseless ammo and their associated weapons. Kit Up! asked Col. Doug Tamilio about that program and he basically said the program is in such an early stage, he can’t hold up the carbine improvements to wait for it.
That technology is good. It’s going to provide some capabilities to our Soldiers that we don’t have now. It’s going to lighten the load. But we’re still years out from being able to mass produce that stuff and then get it into our fleet because weapons have to be produced along with it. So what you’ve got is a problem because [the M4] probably couldn’t handle it right now. So I’ve got to design the weapons with that ammo. So, I think when you see new machine guns being developed in the future you’ll see them being developed with that ammo.
He also mentioned the problem of interchangeability of ammo on the battlefield. If he has one weapon with specialized ammo, he’s screwed if it runs out and no one else has a weapon that fires that ammo.
So, December for the improved carbine candidates; a long time before a cased-telescoped or caseless ammo-shooting gun.
Thanks for the tips folks…keep ‘em coming!
{ 36 comments… read them below or add one }
Magpul Masada is the right answer
The M4A1 will work just fine while they improve this new generation of ammunition.
I hope its going to be totaly ambiextrous . The ACR is ok but its got to get rid of some of it's growing pains first and let Bushmaster / Remington pay for that.
I doubt the M-4 is going anywhere. The Army is buying alot of new improved M-4s and is having competitions for new bolt and piston system. I doubt the army will dump[ all of these new guns in a year. This whole new competition is a farse.
Yeah the SOPMOD Block 2 would be a waste if they bought a new carbine. I totally agree with you.
Isn't the current M4 the M4A1? I thought the M4 had burst, the M4A1 had full auto and that its been standard since the 90s.
all that is required initially is to provide new uppers, and then continue by providing the full system as time goes on and it should be: gas-piston, ambidextrious, full auto, free floating barrell (heavy). That is it, do not get fancy and there is no need to find a star wars era solution for the legacy weapon system. The ammo has continued to improve and as long as the weapon is reliable and accurate with the above modifications, it should be able to continue on well into the 21st century.
It lacks terminal stopping power and penetration. heavier ammo taxes it's accuracy and range. It at least needs to go to the new 6.8spc round.
All things considered the Stoner design is long in the tooth. Period! You mean to tell me that Stoner's DI gas system is the pinnacle of weapon technology? Your "you know what". HK 416 would sufice (upper). Colt Defense Multi-Caliber CM901 Modular Carbine would also fit the bill. One weapon system with various caliber options in one all encompassing package. 5.56-7.62 all with a change of bolt/carrier and barrel, all with the same upper and lower. Easy, cheaper and one producer/contract to deal with.
I would love to just get rid of my M16A2 and get an M4 or M16A4!! It's nice being last in the procurement chain as far as the Army goes.
The Navy and Air Force and Cost Guard, said they have no Plans to ditch the M-16A2. I qualified with a A2 rifle also. The Army and Marines will use A2s for a few more years. The Army isn't using the A4 very much and decided to go with a 90% carbine armed army They wont buy any new A4s the Marines are the main user of it. Theirs a chance when the Army adopts large numbers of new improved M-4s that older M-4s will replace some A2s in Army service.
I don't get why, I enjoy my A2 its simpler and lighter than a A4 or M-4 with tons of stuff on it, Of course im not a front line infantry men either, LOL.
What we need is a supper gun that can be fired by a computer.
I assume you meant super, cuz it would be stupid to throw our dinner to Muj.
RE Caseless Ammo:
You mean the same stuff they have been talking about since the 1960s, and have demo'd a few times, but everything they put in simulated testing, totally falls apart – from dirt, dings etc?
I would NOT hold my breath
Wait till SOCOM starts getting the SCAR in larger numbers and switching over to a variant with a multi-caliber reciever. Big Army and the USMC are likely to jump on that bandwagon. Even if they don't want the 7.62 that SOCOM is getting now, they will most likely want that common reciever.
There is NO multicaliber receiver for the FN. FN has not even designed one.
http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-developin…
Yes they said they will look at one but they haven't made one yet and the fact HK and Colt already have ones make me think the military will look else were for a multicaliber weapon.
They hype a multi caliber option but no one has fielded one yet. The ACR mad ethe same claim but it has only been a glorified M4 so far.
You forget the Italian rifle that has begun to supplement the AR-70/90, the ARX-160…..
fuck the army am not going to die fuckin with them
fqcking wit dha army gne gt yo azz shot up
H&K 417. Gas piston operated .308 Win caliber (7.62X51). A real weapon, firing a real round, for real troops. If a troop can't handle the weight & recoil of a .308 Win (7.62X51) then he has no buisness wearing the uniform. The Stoner design was the best for it's time but that time has long since passed. Shoot a "Jacked-Up Haji" with the .556 (.223 Rem) and see how many hits it takes to put 'em down. Shoot the same SOB with the .308 Win (7.62X51) and it's a done deal after 1 hit. WTFO?!!!
I like the fact that transitioning into the 417 would be a cake walk for the grunts who are already familiar with the M4's operation and maintenance procedures.
You do realize Stoners design was the AR-10 in 308 don't you. It was the military that fouled it up and went to the 223 round
How about the cheap keel-tech 7.62 ambidextrous, cartridges drop out front, bull pup, low recoil, cool operating carbine, FOR UNDER ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!
The H&K 416 & 417are the best weapon systems out there. Easy to reconfigure either into something more, or something less, depending on the need. Will fire wet, fouled with dirt in any weather condition And is piston fired. . The drawback is they are a German design, and therefore more expensive( so is a Mercedes Benz} our so called allies hate this part of the concept because they are still hating the Germans. H&K has set up their test site in the US and has many operators wishing this one would get the nod from the procurement folks. The FN Scar wiill most likely win the fight in the end, which is not a bad thing , as this is a very fine system with many adjustable configurations most soldiers can conquer with basic skill training. Also FN has been making many of the factory orders for the pentagon for years in their US factory for years, They make an outstanding rifle.
ai just like to see that the DOD is at least trying to find the best weapons for our troops. I 've only seen the H&K 416, 417 demonstrated on "Future Weapons" which aired on the Military Channel. But in the short segment done on the system, I was truly impressed. I really liked the adaptability, (Mainly the caliber versatility, and barrel length options). But one thing was unclear. In a combat enviroment, when faced with an ammo shortage of NATO 5.56, or 7.62, can this weapon fire Soviet block, or Chinese 7.62 ammo? It's been a long time since I've handled any true tactical arms. But I do recall those Euro 7.62 cartridges as being alot shorter in overall length(round, and casing together) Will the H&K bolt, and carrier accept these cartridges, in a "grab and Go" cenerio? This would be fantastic for our troops, if they could use captured ammo in battle! But overall, I was really impressed with this system. And I wouldn't care what it cost to equip our troops with it. In my opinion, thats money well spent, if it gives the good guys the drop on the bad guys!
One last question. With this weapon system, when switching from 5.56, to 7.62, obviously, the upper reciever, and the barrel must be changed. Does this effect the weapons "zero"?
SOCOM didn't reject the design, they simply chose not to purchase the SCAR-L variant. However, they are still planning on buying the SCAR-H and the marksman variant
H&K 416 in 7.92 x 33 mm
all that is required initially is to provide new uppers, and then continue by providing the full system as time goes on and it should be: gas-piston, ambidextrous, full auto, free floating barrell (heavy). That is it, do not get fancy and there is no need to find a star wars era solution for the legacy weapon system.
SOCOM already paved the way, why not use the SCAR? Why re-invent the wheel and spend more money on another fruitless outcome. The regular combat joe has always benefitted from these outcomes..least we not forget such things like the SOPMOD, MICH helmet, and of course the M4. Just seems to make sense, just need to improve the ammo and also getting troops trained on the SCAR 17 should be easier then training on a whole new weapon system…..seen it before.
I’m old enough to remember when the US changed over to the M-14 , from the M-1, then to the M-16, There were troubles with ALL of them in the beginning, but the grunts worked out the bugs, sent the results back to the weapons people, and we got on with the job of depopulating our enemies. I was a combat corpsman withe the Marines in Viet-Nam and personally saw the use of all three weapons by us, I personally think that if we had adopted the AR-10 we would have been better off!
Why are we trying to “improve” a carbine for use by all grunts anyway? A carbine is for small elite units that don’t have to stick around when the sXXt hits the fan and the grunts with BATTLE RIFLES have come in and save their aXXXs! Give our troops a REAL BATTLE RIFLE, not some lightweight carbine for combat!
How about the RFB? Seems like a fairly solid weapon all around
I just think we should stick to an improved M4 carbine. We’ve been using the M16 family of rifles for decades now, and we know the M4 can be manufactured as an ambidextrous carbine that can be chambered in all kinds of different calibers. If we continue to use this rifle we can still use the spare parts that we had for the old ones, after all, I’d say that most of the parts on the M4 are interchangeable with the M16. It’s cost effective, so why not?