Go big or go home!!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Joliet, IL
Location: Joliet, IL
Sportbike: 2012 Ducati Panigale S, 2014 Triumph Scrambler
Years Riding: 147 Years, 4 months, 22 days
How you found us: looking for free porn on the internet
Hey, you know if John Conner can use a 416 its the best!! LMAO.
I personally think the SCAR will be the next widely fielded incremental step. As far as I know the 75th Rangers are the closest "big Army" deployment of the SCAR to date. I'd bet a lot of eyes are on that. FN has far too many ties in the DoD to let HK swoop in for a contract like this. The 416 is a great rifle but it's still a warmed over Stoner design with some weak points of its own. The SCAR is a more comprehensive simple design that's not limited to packaging constraints. Hell, I'd rather see LWRC get a shot over the 416. They at least have a less complex piston design and in the A3 models have an adjustable gas regulator.
Lifted from another forum from a guy who is on the inside of HK:
"Congress is watching this and has, with the media and other help, forced the US Army to conduct a new competition for a new carbine beginning in 2010. Many thanks to OK Sen. Tom Coburn and staff! @ $10M has been approved for the competition. Tests thru 2011 with a decision expected by 2012. The competition is open to various calibers as well.
Problem is the carbine is not the only issue. In the 2006 Army survey of 2607 returning troops the SAW and M9 performed even worse. The M249 has had issues for a long time and contributed to the overrun in the Wanat battle. M9 magazines have caused failures when exposed to sand and grit. We knew already in 1994 from Army tests that the barrel and magazine of the M4 needed to be improved to address these issues and nothing was done about it. NO CHANGES have been made to address these issues yet we continue to issue new multi-year contracts for 1000's more for $100M w/o looking to see what is out there that is better! Our eight most often used small arms are 34 years old on average and outdated compared to newer COTS and threat systems. The OUSD has just completed a top to bottom review of all US DoD small arms and ammo at the request of the past SEC Army Geren and most agree it will likely lead to no positive changes. If you read the book "Misfire" this sad story has been going on for centuries here at the cost of American blood and lives.
The ONLY way to change this is to give the actual end user of the weapon and ammo a say at the decision making table. A User Small Arms and Ammunition Advisory Panel (USAAAP), answerable only to Congress and the SEF DEF, must be formed to direct the acquisition system on all maters of R&D, acquisition and testing. As long as general officers, PM's and PEO's make these decisions we will NEVER have the very best weapons and ammo available to our front line war fighter - never have, never will.
I have and continue to push this idea on Capital Hill, in the Pentagon and elsewhere. LOTS of resistance to change of course and lots of folks claiming they have the best interests of the troops at heart - all BS or they would support this idea. It is in fact this very concept that works so well in select US SOF units, let the end user have a major say in weapon and ammo selection and then their support system makes it happen. Look at the weapons used by these units - most of the aged US standard issue guns are long gone (M9, M4, MK19, M249, etc.) and replaced by better COTS alternatives (Glock, HK416, HK GMG, MK46). That should be the model for the rest of the DoD. In the Big Army it is exactly reverse and you get what some General Officer says "is good enough". How many lives have to be lost or placed at grave risk before we change this?
The current debacle over the Army's ACU uniform is another sad example of waste, fraud and abuse that goes on. $5B of your tax dollars spent on the ACU camo uniform when the troops knew from day one it was a lousy camo pattern inferior to others already available - and no one now remembers why the decision was made to go with the ACU pattern. I can tell you why! GO's and PEO's who know dick about close combat who sit in offices in their fancy positions made the decision - not the actual war fighters, or the war fighters would be wearing Multi-cam now like their most elite SOF brothers!
What can you do? Write your politicians, write SEF DEF Gates, and tell them to support this idea of a USAAAP and send them to me if they need more info. They already know about the concept, they just are not acting on it.
Dr. Robert M. Gates
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon
Washington, DC 20301-1000
And if you have any direct contacts in the news media, at FOX, The Wall Street Journal, etc. send me a PM would you with that info? We need to blow this issue wide open with national converge beyond just Army Times and the AP and get it on Hannity or OReilly. We need to embarrass the DoD to make this change before one more life is lost at the hands of inferior small arms and ammo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Last edited by JPKII; 10-12-2009 at 02:09 PM.