Corps to Replace SAW With Automatic Rifle

[Black Knight]

Originally Posted by Tress

TR,

I do not think that he is kidding? I think that he is really serious!



Black Knight,

Go back to BKKMAN's very informative post and reread it. Pay particular attention to the "Maintenance" portion for both the "Sustained and Rapid Rate of Fire" sections and to "Method" under "Cyclic Rate of Fire".

I will even offer you a hint. The M60 does not automatically change its rate of fire. Got it figured out now?

Thomas

T.R. and Thomas,

You are correct, I was serious and now more than a little embarressed. In my ignorance from way back when, I assumed these rates were something the weapon did, not something my trigger finger did.

I do know my way around weapons a little which is why I could never figure out how it was accomplished. Thanks to you guys my question has been finally answered.

Now you know why in 4 years I've only posted 20 times

I swear I'm not a dumbass just a little misguided. I blame the Navy.

Thanks again,
BK

[Richard]

Prior to the M249 making an appearance, we used to use two M14s - one was an M21 for the sniper and the other was an M14A1 (magazine fed w/auto-selector switch and bipod) for use as a SAW type support weapon similar to a BAR. The A1 worked extremely well under all types of conditions and gave us good extended range coverage when needed - weighed about 60% less than the M249.

We also had access to cut-down RPDs in 7.62X39 with 100 round drums - weighed about 50% less than an M249.

And so it goes...

Richard

[EchoSixMike]

Going to something in 7.62x51 would add that caliber to the rifle squad, something the supply type people in the USMC have always been loathe to do. The M249 currently has a bit of a bad rep in the USMC due to a variety of issues, the main ones IMO being: a.) it's old and worn out thus often unreliable and b.) it's heavy, bulky and slows the movement of the automatic rifleman and thus the fire team.

The USMC is eagerly looking forward to the titanium M240 for the company weapons platoon, which are typically attched to the line platoons. Since the parts are already insystem, I doubt the Mk 48 would be considered there.

I personally am a big fan of the M249 and would liked to have seen the USMC simply improve the existing M249 with something like the Mk46 or the Para-SAW thus decreasing the weight while maintaining the ability to have real suppressive fire.

Several of the Marines in my sniper platoon took it upon themselves through personal connections to have their M249's essentially rebuilt by our armorers prior to OIF 2. During the rains and mud of the fall/winter of 04, those SAW's did God's work along MSR Tampa and elsewhere when Fallujah went down. A key issue is that they were dilligently maintained, which is something that seems to be decreasing in frequency, given our society's love for hardware solutions for software issues. S/F(that would be Semper Fidelis)....Ken M

Good to see the thread get bumped.

Still like the M60.

[Kyobanim]

Still like the M60.

Go big or stay home.

[MTN Medic]

Am I missing something? The M249 is nothing like the M-60. I am certain that the Marines will still use the 240G (which is the modern equivalent). The new 240's we are getting are great weapons and my heart feels good when I hear two of them talking laying the proverbial black rain.

I have never been a fan of the SAW. MOO, but the thing was heavy/ weildly for what it brought to the fight.

[EchoSixMike]

The sustained suppression it provides to enable the rest of the team to close with and destroy really isn't "doable" with anything other than another belt fed weapon. Smaller and lighter is generally always nice, hence Para SAW or Mk46 being my pick for replacing worn out M249's. The 249's are worn out, absolutely, but that's not a rational reason to abandon the system, just to buy new stuff.

Sorta like the M1911 to M9 transition based on the 1911's being worn out. S/F....Ken M

[Streck-Fu]

Originally Posted by cback0220

What is wrong with the Mk 48? Fires 7.62 in a friendly operating system that most joes could figure out quickly. Plus it is already being used by units, could have made appropriations easier.

Sorry to bump an old thread but I came across a discussion on the M27 and had this same question.
Why wouldn't the existing Mk 46/48 work? The answer is most likely that the requirement was for accurate fire rather for hits than area suppression fire.
Can they accurately claim there is no need for a squad level belt fed weapon?

[medic&commo]

Given all the current legislation & the manufacturers policies a belt-fed system seems the way to go.
m&c

[Bracholi]

My experience with three different m249s issued while deployed to Iraq (If the number of weapons issued isn't telling enough).

Weapon system 1: Issued day of deployment from Ft. Campbell. Survived the journey to Kuwait. Survived 4 days of acclimatization. On the 5th day survived loading onto bus, along with 2 hour hop to mid-way range (sand dunes). Pronounced dead on range. Reason: parts broke off in trigger assembly, disappeared in sand; Parts utilized SERE training to evade detection including by magnet.

Weapon system 2: Issued upon arrival at FOB. Weapon taken to nearby range for test-fire. Attempted dis-assembly for cleaning. Found bolt was lodged in barrel. Weapon dead-lined.

Weapon system 3: Tied-on parts with 550 cord to ensure they'd stay together. Barrel change modified to include severing cord. Broken sights, negligible issue considering close engagement zone.

Weapon fills one role well. Ability to accept single 5.56 rounds and be hand linked back into a belt. Good capability for if you have the ammunition available and get stuck in an Alamo situation. Aside from that this is a useless ability.

Experience with 240:
One weapon issued before deployment, but staged in company weapons conex for shipping to Iraq. Survived deployment with minimal repairs/downtime.

Lacks shoulder fire capability (at least comfortable and accurate shoulder capability)
Awesome weapon in the right caliber to actually kill something.
As accurate a weapon as you'll ever need to spew lead in 3-5 round bursts.
Fairly susceptible to jamming without proper upkeep/otherwise highly reliable.
Fills multiple roles.


In defense of the 249s I was issued, each was a hand-me-down from recently returned BCTs so they'd taken much abuse and been given little shop time.
If my opinion counts for anything, I believe that the 249 should be continued. Replacing a belt-fed automatic rifle with a weapon that is essentially the same as what the rest of a team is already carrying makes no sense to me at all. If they're going to go this route and phase out the belt-fed, why not just issue more m4/m16s?

[sefryak]

I was disappointed that they didn't decide to adopt the Ultimax 100 Mk.4 . Having used it myself I am a big fan, IMO probably the best shooting weapon I've ever fired. The only issues I had with the Mk.3 variants I had were a lack of rails to mount optics/other accessories, along with the bulky nature of the drums. It also takes a minute to load them.
Has anyone ever seen a breakdown of the testing the Marine Corps did to determine their choice of the M27? I have a suspicion the whole thing was a back door method of acquiring 416s for the force.