• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

USSOCOM ELR-SR

I've always wondered how effective a recoilless rifle-type setup like the Croatian RT-20 would work:

1706544585402.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: babyguppy
Frank Green said:
It’s a fine line… the drawing is the contour of the barrel. If I give out the contour dimensions am I giving out the print information?

Also in some cases does a signed NDA come into play.

I get what your asking but again it’s a fine line for me at times.
Click to expand...
But how do i order one for my clone correct build? :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 
DeathBeforeDismount said:
The wishlist is going to be hard to balance. I mean it's possible but an elr rifle with max weight of 18lbs sans can/mags, be compatable with 300nm kit, have less than 25lbs FR and still have a gun that is durable, reliable and shootable is going to be hard.

Recoil is a function of cartridge and weight. Once you get into the 338+ barrels you are looking at a 1.3+ tennon and with something like a 33xc will need atleast 5 inches of no taper. In order to keep OAL down you are looking at maybe a 26" barrel which means you need more ass and recoil to push those bullets to 2500 SS. The barrel alone is going to weigh almost 10lbs. And you will be replacing them very often.

This reeks of people writing an RFI who don't actually shoot.
Click to expand...
Maybe they're doing something other than conventional.
 
ReturnFire said:
Sounds like SOCOM is looking at a rifle to extend their effective range to 2500 yds. Interesting set of requirements. Makes sense why Barrett just announced the new 416 MRAD.

The ELR-SR shall be a modular, magazine-fed, multi-caliber capable system which will include barrel configurations with required bolts and barrels of each caliber, required magazines of each caliber, stock, receiver, sound suppressor, ballistic computer, operator manual, cleaning kit, tool kit, bipod, and Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) approved locking hard carrying case.

The primary caliber of the system shall be sub-sonic and supersonic capable. If the primary system caliber is not a current DOD-approved munition, system it shall be capable of transitioning to a current .300 Norma Magnum DOD-approved munition with a quick- change kit (T). The quick-change kit shall be able to switch calibers within 5 minutes.

The ELR-SR shall have an overall length of no more than 56 inches, no more than 50 inches, less suppressor and the length of pull set to 14.5 inches.

The ELR-SR shall weigh no more than 22 lbs. with barrel, empty magazine, no more than 18 lbs.

Shall have continuous timed and biased MIL-STD-1913 rails, with numbered slots, at the 12 o’clock position with a minimum length of 24 inches and a 10 (+/- 1) MIL forward-sloping cant from back to front.

Shall provide M-LOK® attachment points at the 3, 6 and 9 o’clock positions with ARCA lock rail with attachment at the 6 o’clock position.

The ELR-SR shall be manual (bolt action gun) in operation.

The ELR-SR, with muzzle device attached, will have a peak free recoil impulse of no more than 25 ft-lbs. The objective is to minimize the effects of recoil on a shooter as much as possible.

The ELR-SR barrel shall be capable of removal and replacement at the operator level Modular changes, including barrel changes, shall be accomplished within 5 minutes and with common tools, in such a way as to meet headspace requirements for each caliber.

The ELR-SR system shall have a single, precision fire, high decibel reduction sound suppressor that will reduce audible signatures for all calibers to no more than 140dB. The sound suppressor should add no more than 8.5 inches in length to the system and should have recoil reducing capabilities. Sound suppressor shall be removable without specialty tools.
Click to expand...
They half to keep spending or loose their budget. what a crock of shit
And why the shitty Barrett platform? just go with the proven AI platform ,spin a 416 barrett barrel and your done.btw while your at it ,have Lapua make the brass, and last but not least,go with a 35 degree shoulder. DONE
 
The proven AI system got its shit pushed in by the mrad in the last go around. Expect that overpriced redcoat shit to go the same way this time too.
 
DeathBeforeDismount said:
Not that one. Sf snipers ran that program and selected the best product. Kevin owens has talked about it in depth.
Click to expand...
Not starting or want to get in a fight but part of it was political I will say from what I all heard.

Also why did one manufacturer get selected when the accuracy test was never performed from what I heard thru back channels? If it was really awarded to them without the accuracy testing being done.... that was/is wrong. I questioned it when I heard it and was told that was fact. Now I will say... I'm not on the inside of this place or that place and could have it wrong.

All the snipers I talked to at the different training areas all seem to like the AI over the other platforms not to mention the accuracy was better is what I was told. Also got to inspect a couple of rifles and barrels that wasn't shooting well and everything was pretty much brand new. Teething troubles? Don't know.

Similar thing happened when PSR2 was going on. Remington and AI tied for the accuracy try outs. Both had our barrels on the guns. One thing that killed AI was they where told they had to have 100% production here in the US with in a 1 year time frame if they were awarded the contract if I recall correctly and there was no way they could do that. So Remmy got it.

Then Remmy found a way to get us off the contract as the barrel supplier. SF knew if they ended up with factory Remmy sticks on the guns they would end up with a turd for a rifle. So the SF guys/operators went kicking and screaming. I know... I was on a conference call in regards to all of this. So big Army didn't cancel the contract but told Remmy that they just were not going to buy any guns. That's what killed PSR2. When I found this out at a meeting at Shot Show.... and when I got back from Shot Show I immediately contacted Remmy about all the open orders we had. Got no reply from anyone... then a few days later a guy calls me (I'm withholding his name) and said they didn't have any orders with us. I asked and who are you? Oh my name is XXXXX and I'm on the board of lawyers with Remmy. I said oh so they got the F'n lawyer calling. I said well I have open orders with PO's and confirmations etc... so I sent him all the info. Calls back a couple of days later and says... yea.... these are open/valid orders. So my next question was.... so how are we going to get paid for all the stuff in process and or done that is sitting here? Took us several months to get the stuff paid for and in the end still ended up short some $ but the bulk of it got paid for.

Big Army asked me to help write the specs' for the barrels for ASR. Which to my knowledge was never done before. This way they are trying to guarantee who ever won ASR and whom ever made the barrels for the guns had to make them to a tighter/written spec vs it just being left open ended and to whatever the contract winner wanted to do. So this in turn basically stopped a manufacturer submitting ringer guns and then after winning the contract go cheap on the barrels to save money. This would also help ensure to some extent the accuracy would be there on the guns.

Some of what you/we hear we all have to take with a grain of salt at times. I know I only got part of the picture. Probably at more at play then what I know but I heard plenty to at least make you raise an eyebrow and go hmmm?
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianf, st1650, kthomas and 13 others
Frank Green said:
Not starting or want to get in a fight but part of it was political I will say from what I all heard.

Also why did one manufacturer get selected when the accuracy test was never performed from what I heard thru back channels? If it was really awarded to them without the accuracy testing being done.... that was/is wrong. I questioned it when I heard it and was told that was fact. Now I will say... I'm not on the inside of this place or that place and could have it wrong.

All the snipers I talked to at the different training areas all seem to like the AI over the other platforms not to mention the accuracy was better is what I was told. Also got to inspect a couple of rifles and barrels that wasn't shooting well and everything was pretty much brand new. Teething troubles? Don't know.

Similar thing happened when PSR2 was going on. Remington and AI tied for the accuracy try outs. Both had our barrels on the guns. One thing that killed AI was they where told they had to have 100% production here in the US with in a 1 year time frame if they were awarded the contract if I recall correctly and there was no way they could do that. So Remmy got it.

Then Remmy found a way to get us off the contract as the barrel supplier. SF knew if they ended up with factory Remmy sticks on the guns they would end up with a turd for a rifle. So the SF guys/operators went kicking and screaming. I know... I was on a conference call in regards to all of this. So big Army didn't cancel the contract but told Remmy that they just were not going to buy any guns. That's what killed PSR2. When I found this out at a meeting at Shot Show.... and when I got back from Shot Show I immediately contacted Remmy about all the open orders we had. Got no reply from anyone... then a few days later a guy calls me (I'm withholding his name) and said they didn't have any orders with us. I asked and who are you? Oh my name is XXXXX and I'm on the board of lawyers with Remmy. I said oh so they got the F'n lawyer calling. I said well I have open orders with PO's and confirmations etc... so I sent him all the info. Calls back a couple of days later and says... yea.... these are open/valid orders. So my next question was.... so how are we going to get paid for all the stuff in process and or done that is sitting here? Took us several months to get the stuff paid for and in the end still ended up short some $ but the bulk of it got paid for.

Big Army asked me to help write the specs' for the barrels for ASR. Which to my knowledge was never done before. This way they are trying to guarantee who ever won ASR and whom ever made the barrels for the guns had to make them to a tighter/written spec vs it just being left open ended and to whatever the contract winner wanted to do. So this in turn basically stopped a manufacturer submitting ringer guns and then after winning the contract go cheap on the barrels to save money. This would also help ensure to some extent the accuracy would be there on the guns.

Some of what you/we hear we all have to take with a grain of salt at times. I know I only got part of the picture. Probably at more at play then what I know but I heard plenty to at least make you raise an eyebrow and go hmmm?
Click to expand...
My only hope in all this is what ever system they pick they have enough sense to use your barrels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas and Frank Green
MikeMiller said:
My only hope in all this is what ever system they pick they have enough sense to use your barrels.
Click to expand...
That would be cool but more importantly whom ever they use for the barrels or if the gun manufacturer makes they're own... that they hold to the spec for instance that was set for ASR that they stick to it and that is checked on once in a while to make sure they are making the barrels to spec.

For ammunition test barrels and or if we would make the barrels for the manufacturer I/we would supply an inspection report for every barrel shipped that list the actually inspected bore and groove size dimensions etc...

This ELR thing.... this is just a preliminary request I guess I would call it but I haven't seen any spec written barrel wise per se because the calibers are not totally set other than one being 30cal. It would be nice to see that who ever wins this if it goes that far that the Army etc... writes in the contract spec's/tolerances the barrels are to be held to so they can to some extent guarantee of some sort that they are getting good barrels.

I know the orders we've already shipped and others that we have on order... we are sending inspection reports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kthomas
Sounds like the first range session with some of the manufacturers was in late March. 375 Enabler with a 410 Berger seems to fit the bill
 
  • Like
Reactions: PappyM3
FatBoy said:
IMO, no. This is such a niche ask I doubt it’ll ever even get tested, almost no chance it gets fielded.
Click to expand...
DoD R&D is filled with niche tools/weapons/capabilities. Yeah, most of it never gets fielded. But the efforts in that R&D push the needle so that a program down the line can build on that research and actually field something.

Bmghunter said:
Why criticize the military for requesting capabilities beyond what is CURRENTLY possible? Won't this make arms makers innovate and come up with something that satisfies this requirement? Won't that be great for the rest of us where we might also get to benefit from it?
Serious question.
Click to expand...

Agreed. If the DoD only ever bought COTS, then we’d stagnate and wouldn’t have the technological military advantage we do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bmghunter
Every one keep spouting xc xc won't happen you would need a cheytac size action to mag feed . If your doing that might as well go cheytac and be better. They will never go 33xc cause it burns up barrels way to fast.
 
From a military sniping perspective, such long-range rifles make no sense.
Firstly, the mass of the weapon and its compactness play a big role on the battlefield.
Secondly, shooting at such distances is very dependent on the stability of the atmosphere. No matter what long-range rifle it is, the target must be identified, and this is already a problem if you do not see the target on the golf course, but in war this happens very rarely, namely almost never.
As a rule, important targets in the conditions of modern technology can be hit by high-precision weapons with a high percentage of damage.
Yes, ELR is cool, but war has its own nuances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Asgard1
UA SOF SNIPE said:
From a military sniping perspective, such long-range rifles make no sense.
Firstly, the mass of the weapon and its compactness play a big role on the battlefield.
Secondly, shooting at such distances is very dependent on the stability of the atmosphere. No matter what long-range rifle it is, the target must be identified, and this is already a problem if you do not see the target on the golf course, but in war this happens very rarely, namely almost never.
As a rule, important targets in the conditions of modern technology can be hit by high-precision weapons with a high percentage of damage.
Yes, ELR is cool, but war has its own nuances.
Click to expand...
What they want is different than way they need . And what thay have had is different then what operators want. And who sets the parameters is not the ones using it.
 
Asgard1 said:
What they want is different than way they need . And what thay have had is different then what operators want. And who sets the parameters is not the ones using it.
Click to expand...
In fact, to guarantee the destruction of an important target at long ultra-long distances, an ATGM with a high-explosive warhead is more suitable.
I’m telling you this as a person who has been practicing military sniping for more than 6 years
 
UA SOF SNIPE said:
From a military sniping perspective, such long-range rifles make no sense.
Firstly, the mass of the weapon and its compactness play a big role on the battlefield.
Secondly, shooting at such distances is very dependent on the stability of the atmosphere. No matter what long-range rifle it is, the target must be identified, and this is already a problem if you do not see the target on the golf course, but in war this happens very rarely, namely almost never.
As a rule, important targets in the conditions of modern technology can be hit by high-precision weapons with a high percentage of damage.
Yes, ELR is cool, but war has its own nuances.
Click to expand...
I spent 6 years of my life in the Middle East and not once did any SOCOM team I was attached to take an ELR shot. Not once was there any HTI missions. If we needed to reach out and touch someone far away it was either CAS, HIMARS, or other artillery. Recon teams who might need precision engagements weapons weren’t really used as recon teams because my intelligence collection teams were doing that plus the drones squadrons. So, someone has money to spend. Denied domains are only where this would make sense and even then there are probably better options.
 
JB.IC said:
I spent 6 years of my life in the Middle East and not once did any SOCOM team I was attached to take an ELR shot. Not once was there any HTI missions. If we needed to reach out and touch someone far away it was either CAS, HIMARS, or other artillery. Recon teams who might need precision engagements weapons weren’t really used as recon teams because my intelligence collection teams were doing that plus the drones squadrons. So, someone has money to spend. Denied domains are only where this would make sense and even then there are probably better options.
Click to expand...
That's right my friend.
Exactly the same thing happened in the Russian-Ukrainian war.
Important targets are met with completely different means of fire destruction.
To eliminate enemy infantry, the 338 LM is quite enough.
The rifle remains of acceptable weight and dimensions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB.IC
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rinky
Accessories Custom barrels
Replies
1
Views
383
Rinky
Rinky
M
HUB to both Tilt Bbl Pistol and Rifle Interface?
Replies
15
Views
258
mebgardner
M
mxjoe35
Firearms 6ARC - Precision Rifle Series Match Winner!
Replies
0
Views
257
mxjoe35
mxjoe35
G
Beretta BRX1
Replies
7
Views
588
IDbound
I
softcock
coyote / re barrel /.223
Replies
7
Views
522
camotoe
camotoe
Top Bottom
Back