Spec Ops Command Cancels New Rifle
 

http://www.military.com/news/article...e.html?wh=news


BMT

The cancellation is for the 5.56 version, the 7.62 version will still be procured and fielded.

Too bad we could not find a reliable gas piston M-16 variant in 7.62 NATO that would meet requirements.

TR

Any comments on the SCAR-H commitment?

We used to use the selective-fire M-14A1 w/bipod - a damn good weapon - any A1s still around?

Richard :munchin

I think that the guys are happy with it because they wanted a new 7.62 rifle.

My personal belief is that having a 5.56 and a 7.62 rifle in the arms room for every SF soldier on an ODA is not a huge cost or issue, given what we ask them to do across a spectrum of environments.

Just another tool in the kitbag.

TR

With the proliferation of 7.62 AR carbines I'm surprised they don't firm up the 7.62 requirement specifying exactly what they want -- but then again the procurement side has to protect their fiefdoms and promotions.

I was under the impression that SF was going over to the HK416 for a variety of reasons. Not having any personal insight into SF, I wouldn't know, but that was the last thing I read concerning the weapons in use. I wish I could find the article again, all came across in reference to SF using them was the wiki article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_HK416


Of course until reading this, I wasn't aware that it was potentially intended to replace the M249 as well... Perhaps what I read previously was refering to SF in general as opposed to specifically Delta Force. Of course, this is also a 5.56.

My readings into the subject of SF and weapons, I was also left with the impression that SF is allowed to choose the weapon they prefer? Is this the case or was that more of the uninformed reporting on something they know nothing about?

More searching and reading, less posting.

TR

We used the 416’s over there, there are issues with compatibility between materials, wear issues, etc.

The Batt boys had the SCAR's while I was over there, what I would say about the SCAR-L being discontinued for use by US forces is; having a foreign built system replacing a major US system (SCAR-L filling the slot of an AR-15 series system) in the inventory does not sit well with congress or their constituents. However, the SCAR-H has no similar US capability currently filling the need.

The key problem with the SCAR acquisition is that the logistics tail would be significant, with no cross compatibility of repair parts and other sustainment items, the SCAR system would still need to go through the full JCIDS development process, entering at Milestone C, and setting up all the other support structures for a major program of record.

I assume that it will end up being a small wartime special purchase, and never become institutionalized into the force.

I think that they should give LWRC a shot....they have 5.56mm and the 7.62mm REPR versions. They're pretty solid firearms from what I hear....the DEA and FBI field them as well...they're supposed to last 20k rounds....

There's two of the best reasons I've heard not to use them......:rolleyes:

TS

Based on?

Hear from who?

This is not the place for opinions.

TR

The early REPR's had problems, there was a mass recall. I'm not sure if every single one was recalled or not, but a lot of them were having function issues. It sounds like they tried to blame the mags, based on what I have seen posted on other forums (I believe quotes from them). This, of course, would be a cop out because they were supposed to be built to use SR-25 spec mags which are already established (they blamed C products for switching mag specs on them). Sounds like they got things ironed out though.

There was a DEA team where I was in Afghanistan working with the ODA team. One of the guys had a REPR and he wasn't happy. He said that it was having feed issues.

I was alos told that when they return CONUS they turn the weapons in and they are then sent in to LWRC. LWRC then inspects and replaces stuff and sends it back. My question is what are they doing? What are they looking for and replacing? Is this info being put out?

It sounds like they are still doing "beta testing".

From what I have seen directly, they needed to alter the magazine catch height and maybe more. From what I have read on the 'nets, they are doing at least this. It would seem, based on other AR type mag catches, that they would have to modify the lower in order to raise the catch height, but I'm not familiar enough to really say. LWRC has a whole forum on their website, I think there's info posted there IIRC, but it used to be really hard to read because of the colors but maybe they changed it.

Would that be 20K rounds with no replacing of parts or 20K with stuff getting replaced? I have seen Colts that have had thousands of rounds through them as well. But, of course parts wear out.

There may be some merit to the whole piston fad, but DI is proven. If you take care of your weapon and keep it lubed it will run.