Comments for Ah, to be a Combatant Commander...

Ah, to be a Combatant Commander...

2004-12-29T16:55:32Z

...with your own R&D and Acquisition funds. Special Operations Command didn't like the XM8 rifle, nor did they like the time development was taking.

So they took their money and got one built to their specs, by Fabrique Nationale, vice Heckler and Koch's product.

The SCAR, the SOF Capable Assault Rifle.

Hmmmm. Pointedly different approaches here in procurement. The M4 and M16A2 don't meet SOCOM's needs, they want something NOW. So they go get it. Evolutionary, not revolutionary, and get it pretty quickly.

The Acquisition Corps (and the Army leadership) go for revolutionary, a leap ahead, with the XM8. Which guarantees long lead time, in addition to the pathologies inherent in a politically-managed acquisition process (much of which SOCOM gets to skirt).

Only the US has the money to operate this way...

On a related note, however, it would appear that the M1014 Joint Service Combat Shotgun is performing well in Iraq.

Speaking of the US - is it me, or are all the new small arms in the US arsenal being designed by Europeans? Beretta (the M92 pistol), Benelli (the M1014), FN (the M240 and M249 and now the SCAR), Heckler and Koch (the XM8). Is the US firearms industry so moribund that we can't compete? Am I missing something because I'm so much more focused on the old stuff vice the new?

Comment from Ironbear on 2004-12-31

2005-01-01T02:35:42Z

I've wondered about this, John... quite a change from the days when Springfield, Winchester, and Remington made the bulk of our ordnance, eh? Not that I have anything against HK. I've spent too much time around G3's and PSG-1's to have anything but affection for the H&K. Given an option, I'd pick an Hk-33 or an Hk-53 over any M16 variant, any day... and that's just in the poodleshooter guns. There's no comparison between the G3/Hk-91 and the AR-15 - the Hk-91 wins hands down for me.

Comment from Larry on 2004-12-30

2004-12-31T03:53:48Z

The Coast Guard got new shotguns last year (basically 870's) and just announced a new pistol contract to go away from the (mm Berettas to a Sig Saur P229 in 40 cal from what I understand.

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2004-12-30

2004-12-30T18:49:18Z

Yep. then I'll be able to say "those Enfield were right afterall". Plus, when someone uses the word 'new', I like to see something a little 'different'. Cheers JMH

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2004-12-30

2004-12-30T16:59:42Z

Ah, the Castle's resident curmudgeon is back, in fine form! Little prickly today, John. But you aren't fooling me - you aren't as enamored of the caliber as you are of watching the bureaucratic train-wreck of introducing a caliber change to NATO!

Comment from J.M. Heinrichs on 2004-12-30

2004-12-30T16:57:06Z

Both rifles have similar characteristics: gas piston, rotating bolt, barrel swapping, calibre swapping. Major difference is the SCAR is about 1 KG heavier, and appears to show more 'user-mods' than the XM8, yet. I'll wait till either shows up in 6.5-6.8mm before getting excited Cheers JMH

Comment from SayUncle on 2004-12-30

2004-12-30T14:39:20Z

XM8 has field changeable barrels (9.5" to 20"). Each gun can, by changing barrels and stocks, be converted from PDW to SAW or any variant in between. Essentially, a troop carrying a couple extra parts could perform near any function. Also, it's gas system is kick ass. It uses a gas rod (not tube) so nothing gets gunked up. The result is that it only really needs to be cleaned once the barrel is filthy (about 10,000 rounds). Troops could carry multiple barrels and never really be forced to clean their weapons.

Comment from cw4billt on 2004-12-29

2004-12-30T03:16:21Z

A six-barrelled 240,000+ rpm weapon--I just had a vision of a 10-ton truck following each squad member, the bed packed solid with ammo-tubes and spare batteries...

Comment from SangerM on 2004-12-29

2004-12-30T02:35:23Z

I don't know much about the XM8, but for a truly revolutionary weapon system and technology, take a look at the Metal Storm products at: www.metalstorm.com/04_the_technology.html Imagine a "six barrel 9mm system with an electronically variable firing rate as high as 240,000 rpm." They even have videos. -SangerM

Comment from big al on 2004-12-29

2004-12-29T22:29:01Z

Just wondering,the new XM8,is it really much of a difference from the M-16 family? It looks a little flashier but it uses the same ammo I take it,and are the specs much different?.......I didn't mean it to sound like it was just an evolution of the M-16,I was just wondering if all the foo-faraw is worth it? Is the rifle itself going to be any better? Harder hitting? Easier to field strip and keep clean? Or was it just that the M-16 family is getting long in the tooth? and somebody wants something more "sexy" and photogenic?

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2004-12-29

2004-12-29T21:52:07Z

Oh, I know about building 'em here in the US, I was more concerned about where the design expertise is. Of course, our record with native designers (i.e., trashing their work, like Stoner) isn't all that good either...

Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2004-12-29

2004-12-29T21:17:24Z

Colt is pretty much the only U.S. parent company making small arms for the U.S. military-and IIRC, the bulk of their non-military sales go to law enforcement. It seems to me that Colt is becoming something of a one-trick pony (excuse the pun) selling M-4s and not much else. However, with the exception of H&K, I think the European companies making weapons for the DoD are doing so here in the states. FNMI's plant is in Columbia, SC (which makes the M240, M249, and M-16, along with other mil/LEO type weapons), and I believe Beretta runs a factory in North Carolina (originally set up for an M-16 contract. Not sure on Benelli. And I've heard tell that H&K is looking to build a plant in Columbus, GA. I also remember hearing that the Marine spec-ops types had bought a small amount of 1911s from Kimber. But for the most part, U.S. gun makers concentrate on the civilian market.

Comment from SangerM on 2004-12-29

2004-12-29T18:40:45Z

An interesting but unhappy side-effect of the recent change making SOCOM a Combatant (supported) Command as well as a supporting Command is that it now has to conform more with standard DoD acquisition (and accounting) practices. Suffice to say this has caused concern and some unhappiness. The jury is still out on whether or not this change will have lasting deleterious effects, but things are not all contentment and light at the home of "fast & furious." -SangerM

Comment from SayUncle on 2004-12-29

2004-12-29T18:16:39Z

I think the American firearms industry has learned that it needs to cater to civilians and not military (unlike europeans whose contracts are mostly military). Just ask Colt. If the army goes to the XM8 (a done deal, according to Mail Call), Colt will be in big trouble since they pretty much told the civilian market to piss off.