- Thread starter DavidK
- Start date
I hear they pretty much get what they want, when they want it irrespective of the bureaucracy! Guess I can understand that to a certain extent. The boarder decisions and mandates coming out of the Army are the target of my commentary. Sorry to the OP. did not mean to hijack this thread. This shit just infuriates me.
Official solicitation. https://www.govcb.com/government-bids/ADVANCED-SNIPER-RIFLE-ASR-NBD00159636886191378.htm
Black Hills Ammunition is working closely with the government to lend "surrogate cartridges" to companies interested in developing an ASR contender. The rounds are not a spot-on representation of the final government approved ammo, instead serving as a starting point for gun makers to craft their ASR platforms.
OP - Black Hills might know.
OP - Black Hills might know.
Last edited:
I'm curious what the rational is for the 300NM? Commonality if that aforementioned machine gun is pressed into wide service?
it would seem to me, having been out now 20 years, that 7.62 NATO is here to stay for the foreseeable future. 338LM and 300NM kind of occupy the same space, so why the 300NM requirement unless there is a shift coming right around the corner that few are privey to?
Also, 1.5 MOA requirement may be there so that they aren't ditching a barrel every 800 rounds.(depending on what distance this 1.5 MOA is required at) If they press a 300NM hard over the course of a week they could kill a barrel. I seriously doubt they are going to chrome line the barrels on a sniper rifle, so 800-1000 rounds is gonna be it before you get wild ass flyers at 1000m.
There is a history for the 1.5 MOA accuracy requirement though. They did the same thing with the development of the Mk248 mod1, though it and the old mod0 ammo shoot half MOA in my "cloned" but non-issue mk13 rifles.
This contract is kind if confusing to me, unless the fix is in and they amended it over and over to cull it down so only one vendor could possibly meet the parameters?
it would seem to me, having been out now 20 years, that 7.62 NATO is here to stay for the foreseeable future. 338LM and 300NM kind of occupy the same space, so why the 300NM requirement unless there is a shift coming right around the corner that few are privey to?
Also, 1.5 MOA requirement may be there so that they aren't ditching a barrel every 800 rounds.(depending on what distance this 1.5 MOA is required at) If they press a 300NM hard over the course of a week they could kill a barrel. I seriously doubt they are going to chrome line the barrels on a sniper rifle, so 800-1000 rounds is gonna be it before you get wild ass flyers at 1000m.
There is a history for the 1.5 MOA accuracy requirement though. They did the same thing with the development of the Mk248 mod1, though it and the old mod0 ammo shoot half MOA in my "cloned" but non-issue mk13 rifles.
This contract is kind if confusing to me, unless the fix is in and they amended it over and over to cull it down so only one vendor could possibly meet the parameters?
Reubenski just came in here like a god damn boss and lawyered everyone and their mammies..
For real, the most effective use of the multi-quote feature I think I've ever seen.
And who the hell are you Reubenski? A boot-licking Govt bureaucrat who sees nothing and does nothing? Unless you have done or been through any of the following, go back under your rock:
Developed military technology without ANY Govt funding or involvement.
Had the US Army halt the approval of your patents "in the interest of national security".
Had the US Army do said above without ever testing your product?
Had the US Army essentially put you out of business with commercialization and customer PO's in hand?
Lived through 3 years (and counting!) of legal and process wrangling just to get an appeal decision from the patent office?
I'm just getting warmed up if you want to continue to associate with a lynch mob coward.
I agree. Scopes don't go down, M24's shoot like they just came out of the factory freshly tuned...
I was a little shocked at a discussion a few weeks ago when guys coming back from "that place I hear about in the news" talking about how the scopes don't take long to turn to shit...even the good ones... and rifles don't hold accuracy all that long when shot a lot. I'm not saying it's a total failure, but the contract support wasn't there.
And Reubinski, If you want to quote me, don't take me out of context. And then you might want to wake the fuck up and see, that a .338 Lapua/any fucking magnum in a machine gun is going to wear barrels out a helluva lot faster than a 7.62. At this point you remind me of that dumbass lieutenant that told me back in Ranger School that "the personal weapon as we know it, will be gone in five years". Well, that didn't happen. And in spite of the Army's best intentions, stuff getting fielded isn't always ready for the real deal.
If nobody gives a shit about barrels, than why would getting good barrels with suppressors installed on the existing guns be a big deal? Serious question. Seems like it would save a boatload of money.
Thank you reubenski.
Based on your first paragraph though, people involved directly or indirectly think things are pretty fucked up. It’s not a stretch that we here, seeing what appears to be an obvious train wreck, would speculate on the causes and the fixes. I only mention this because nobody was beating on anyone else until you kicked the door down. Just sayin....
First you call me a part of lynch mob and now this? "AZgeek thinks the Army and SOCOM is out there buttraping babies;" Just to make sure I'm not out-of-line, I'm looking for the Hide memo that made you arbiter of hate speech. Are you former Obama administration or part of academia?
Fair enough. I did the same thing for a different reason. We movin on as Hide brothers?
Which one of the Canadian ones were you thinking of?
For us are you thinking of something in the .300 Norma / .338 type range as being a good idea, or are you thinking something in the .416 or similar range?
Hi,
@reubenski
The guys handling the ASR are different from the ones that were handling the integral suppressed upper for the SOCOM lowers right?
That RFI and eventual tender solicitation is the PERFECT example of criteria being revised as the testing progresses because the "desired" manufacturer continually lagged behind some of the others.
Those requirements were revised so much that Gemtech (of course pre-S&W) pulled their entry and owner of Gemtech got in touch with his political connections due to how things were being handled.
Sincerely,
Theis
When I was in Tampa working in the office for a DoD contractor that picked me up after I 'retired' from contracting abroad, we used to refer to random/bad/obviously enticed decisions made by SOCOM/CENTCOM as 'someone went for a ride in the spaceship'.
It happened frequently enough to where there was an actual saying, that people knew what it meant.
If you've never been to Tampa, CENTCOM/SOCOM are in McDill AFB. A few miles up the road, are the world famous Mons Venus and 2001 Odyssey strip clubs which are almost across the street from each other. The Mons Venus actually looks like an old Taco Bell that they took the windows out of, yet the 2001 has a space travel theme to it; with a giant Roswell looking UFO on top of the building. The giant UFO is the VIP lounge.
So you don't need too much imagination to figure out what going for a ride in the spaceship means. And with billion dollar Prime contractors in town (i.e. SAIC; who I used to work on contracts for) as well as some other vultures like SRA, it gets ugly/spendy/downright obvious pretty fucking quick which results in a ton of wasted money, last minute contract MODs and overnight 180 degree change of courses.
I think the biggest spaceship ride result I've personally watched was while on a contract to do site security/convoy work in Afghanistan with engineering contractors that did voice/data and were tasked to start the initial setup and installation of servers, secured comms, etc for a new site. After getting conex trailers full of server equipment, it was sent down to them that it was decided they weren't going to be utilizing whatever setup had been planned on for X amount of time, that the contract specifically was based on and why they were all there. Nope. It was just decided that they now needed X brand of servers and equipment because reasons.
What happened to the conex boxes full of the servers that were deemed no longer needed that were just sitting around in their boxes, shrink wrapped together on pallets? We were told to demo them; guy I asked that was a SME for the project told me it was over $16M in just servers.
I mean shit, you think SIG is winning all the contrats on shit lately because their submissions are actually better? H&K G28 anyone?
Last edited:
To back up a bit, what exactly is the PSR failing at right now? I (and many others) were so interested in the PSR selection, and gasped a bit when Remington was selected. I remember when you said several years ago they won it on merit, still, it’s Remington...
What is Uncle Sugar’s recourse against Remington, or are they just goin to chalk it up as a loss? If I was the guy behind the curtain pulling the levers for the federal govt, I’d want to massacre Remington so badly that the masses would not dare speak its name.
I’m sure whatever comes of the ASR selection will be fruitful for us consumers, like the PSR selection was before it. I’ll start saving my money for the AI submission now.
Hi,
Gotcha.
The PSR project had same type of "revision" issues even way back in the second series of accuracy test in 2010. After the manufacturers supplied their firing fixtures for that series of accuracy tests the "requirements" were revised once again. Because a non Remington manufacturer supplied a firing fixture that was leaps ahead of all the others and it was deemed "unfair"...even though as part of the PSR tender; the manufacturers were required to supply their own firing fixtures.
Sincerely,
Theis
I went in '82, Graduated in '83. FWIW, the screen name sandwarrior actually has nothing to do with the military.
I understand the bureaucracy gets really stupid at times. But, when I hear somebody's gotta put a magnum in a machinegun, I get livid. It's stupid. It's not so much the cost of barrels, it's the downtime changing them in the middle of a fight. And for what? So, you can spray a mountain top a mile away? For that we could just run a new LR bullet in the ones we've got. No point in reaching mountaintop to mountaintop with machinegun inaccuracy. With a sniper rifle? Absolutely! High volume sniper rifle, yes. Something like a Barrett M107 but in .338.15-20 rd. mag.
At least this 338 machine gun didn't cost the taxpayers. General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems used internal R&D Dollars. GD identified a capability gap between the M240 and M2 machine guns. They set about to create a machine gun which would offer similar handling characteristics as the M240, yet rival the reach of the venerable M2. Combining the .338 Norma Magnum cartridge and their “Short Recoil Impulse Averaging” recoil mitigation system, the LWMMG can engage targets out to 1700m (some GD literature offers 1900m) with a 300gr Sierra HPBT, FMJ, or AP projectile. That round offers 5 times the energy of a 7.62 projectile at 1000m.
if you mean by a deal the army couldnt refuse? Parts, bullets, and weapons....... pistols need to go bang and for the money the 320 did
Because guys that make movies like them and if they like them then we all have to use it.
Because I AM DYING to know about all these hot spots with 1200yd engagements...... People are in love with the Hindu Kush FFS, the 308 worked for all these years then we went into AF and we all needed to make 2 mile shots. Given we use missiles instead of a 338/300/6.5/308/50 anyways, and sniper teams are used for observation more than "white feather and the general"
The problem with these team guys and operators running things is when did they do it and what fight are they doing it for? Because SF has a priority mission and sniping isnt it.
When was the last time they were on a team in a sniper engagement? was it 02-03 when they were Jr? what are the tgts they are hitting with these 2 mile shots? Some dude standing around with a PKM and a wad of kat in his jaw?
Fallajuah was a long time ago and the AARs I think had almost all the sniper engagements of under 500 yards. I am just blown away with the need for these new rifle needs... we need a 500m one a 800m one a 1200m one 1 1500m one and a 1500+ one.... WHY! you are wasting loads of $$ for what? A cool toy that you might need in the event of a war in a new Afghanistan with its terrain?
Last edited:
When they standardize the 2000 yard capable rifle and round our next fight will be in forest/jungle where 200 yards of clear terrain would be max.
didnt say that. Just said you have guys that are demanding new gear based off a place that is really one of a kind and I have been all over it and think its a beautiful place. When i get to the place I can make equip decision... i have probably been removed from the weapons system or team for a long time.
I am saying this we need 6.5 .308 .300 .338 lapua and .50... no you don't to add to that the accuracy 2.5 really? Whats 2.5 at 3500????? Where are these scalpels needed?
Get a very accurate ASR but you dont need 4 barrel choices. Going to AF? nope ok take the 6.5 or .308 then. I go to SOFIC then realize why we need this crap... cuz its cool. Why does 7th have half polaris Rzrs and half Teryx? WHY! for the end of year sale? Point is you can throw... we have operators, didnt know that many CAG guys were that close to me, but lets thing about what you really need. if you are 1200+ away does the extra pounds of a 338 matter? I mean how many have "randomly" glassed someone at 1200+ if they dont see you at 1200 and they wont they arent gonna se eyou at 800-1000 either. I just can't get my head around the need for a rifle that will be rarely used unless we push NE and E from Kabul.
you mean like the entire planet besides AF that we would ever find ourselves in a fight? Been to PACOM/OUTHCOM/AFRICOM/EUCOM much??? we need to ask them to build an OP for us to snipe at so we can use these cool 2000+ rifles.
not even gonna go there on the politcal front.... but in 1979-80 we landed helos and had dudes in (EDIT:there was a ton of in and out mission prep) and out of that place and the only reason they knew is cuz we crashed them. We did have the time to take pics. So I dont think they are gonna fight us in the hills and empty lands.... They will stick to the COGs as the leadership is pretty hands on.
There is no perfect answer.
But in a capitalist society we are spoiled for solutions no matter the issue.
We should be thankful for our top of the food chain first world problems.
Other countries without the freedom of ours (ie a Second Amendment) wouldnt even have the ability to effectively discuss the matter across such a wide audience.
Sure Brits, Aussies and a few others have knowledge but the audience is limited and to some extent privlidged.
Here "any man" has an opinion and probably some field experience whether it be in the service or killing hogs.
Instead of choosing the "perfect" sniper rifle perfect the logistics chain so if someone needs a 6.5 one day he can choose Shotgun the next.
Fucking Bernie sanders is the only American I know that advocates for three choices and three choices only.
Edit/Add - and this is only an issue where we are fighting "boutique" wars. Go some place where the threat is existential we must use what ever we can produce the "mostest" of to get there the "firstest" with.
But in a capitalist society we are spoiled for solutions no matter the issue.
We should be thankful for our top of the food chain first world problems.
Other countries without the freedom of ours (ie a Second Amendment) wouldnt even have the ability to effectively discuss the matter across such a wide audience.
Sure Brits, Aussies and a few others have knowledge but the audience is limited and to some extent privlidged.
Here "any man" has an opinion and probably some field experience whether it be in the service or killing hogs.
Instead of choosing the "perfect" sniper rifle perfect the logistics chain so if someone needs a 6.5 one day he can choose Shotgun the next.
Fucking Bernie sanders is the only American I know that advocates for three choices and three choices only.
Edit/Add - and this is only an issue where we are fighting "boutique" wars. Go some place where the threat is existential we must use what ever we can produce the "mostest" of to get there the "firstest" with.
Last edited:
In SOCOM picking a rifle thing... my pushback is because we are buying things that would have been NICE, if we knew AF was kicking off, as the stuff we want is really only useful there. We didnt have many if any engagements that can be traced back to needing round we didnt have. Would a 6.5 be nicer? would a 300N be nice? yes do we have capable alternatives? yes will we NEED this NEW round in other places or would the old one have worked? Thats the question. People want to shut down the gov, fire all gov employees, let CIA officers die, and then there is this where we are blowing money on a new round because we can.
Agreed.
Is there any doubt right now that on the three (possibly 4) active fronts I can think of the equipment and training of our guys doesnt out strip the enemy by far?
I understand the issue of a guy on a hill top slinging rounds from his PKM at a platoon of guys with M4s but that is when we have to have the political will to call in air or arty.
Placing all this emphasis on the perfect one rifle accepts the fucked up ROE imposed by Obama.
We need our enemies to complain such as the Germans did "We take a pot shot with our limited rifle ammo and the Americans respond with a Divisional Artillery barage. They dont know how to fight fair!"
I dont want our military to go to war with the best rifle when a fast moving plane or artillery on target can be used.
Last edited:
You and i both know we have a plan for every country on the planet. even our allies.
LOL that is your BS name dropping crap. Worked up??? really thats the best you can come up with? Try addressing my comment about the war zone we are gonna use SOCOMs new rifle in.... I do just adore your lesson on how we use diplomats... you know the ones everyone here wants to dump.
Never said we dont need a sniper capability, thats all you can focus on. Something I never said. I wasn't aware our nation had any threats. Now that I know it can be solved by a sniper I can rest easy. Little did I know the SOCOM ASR will fix all of our problems LOL!!!! you are emotionally attached to a BS procurement!!
You need to get out of the tactical level and start thinking big picture. We arent shooting folks from 1500 yards that we really really really need to kill, We are using 114s.
Want a new toy? just say it no need to BS justify it. right SOCOM isnt going to say, we are buying a new rifle cuz we like to shoot .300N. Because everyone knows the cash cow that follows when SOCOM buys a new rifle. But come on.... every time i turn around we have a new rifle competition and it seems they never look at whats out there before they make requirements. 2.5 MOA...... really? How many of these civilians would ever buy a 2.5 MOA rifle????
The Mattis Doctrine
except its been practice since before Mattis made his kill everyone he meets comment if for nothing more than a mental excercise.
its been around since forever. Mattis just said it more eloquently.
To add some humor or just a fast moving missile that I decide where it hits you. I dont think either of us are saying scrap all rifles, no we need new and advanced gear. But looking at their specs there is nothing advanced about the new ASR, its just that a New Rifle.
Here is some sacrilege sure to cause some howling...
I think the USMC going to 300WM across the board is a mistake. Maybe not as big a mistake as changing from a belt fed in the AR spot on a fire team but a mistake none the less.
Sure have it available when needed but not "everywhere" and "only".
I think the M40 series in general is a musket. How is the 300WM going to improve on that?
I like the idea of the XM3 concept as long as you can fully capture that 1000 yard zone.
I think the 300WM will limit availability of capability and training time to some extent.
Id rather see more of "good enough" and better "ability to be used effectively" than "perfect" but "only available to a few".
Oh isnt it sweet to be an arm chair tactician?
I think the USMC going to 300WM across the board is a mistake. Maybe not as big a mistake as changing from a belt fed in the AR spot on a fire team but a mistake none the less.
Sure have it available when needed but not "everywhere" and "only".
I think the M40 series in general is a musket. How is the 300WM going to improve on that?
I like the idea of the XM3 concept as long as you can fully capture that 1000 yard zone.
I think the 300WM will limit availability of capability and training time to some extent.
Id rather see more of "good enough" and better "ability to be used effectively" than "perfect" but "only available to a few".
Oh isnt it sweet to be an arm chair tactician?
Last edited:
Last post for a bit but the last USMC Snipers I talked to said they dont get the need to change rifles as they are training to emphasize more SCOUT less sniper. I mean obviously you need to shoot but thats from the mouth fo a dude that came through a different class of mine and deployed.
