We're the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost. All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT, and KA 2003-2010 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:25:29 Z Movable Type 4.12 en Copyright 2012 http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification Photo by Pvt. Kelly Welch, 1st BCT, 1st Cav. Div. Public Affairs August 19, 2008  Command Sgt. Maj. Dennis Carey, command sergeant major for United States Armed Army Forces Command, tested out the newly designed Lightweight .50 Caliber Machine Gun July 29. Carey and several others from FORSCOM took a look at new weapons designed by Program Executive Office -Soldier. If you need to catch up on the discussion by reading the orginal post - click here. I sent a note to Debi Dawson, at PEO-Soldier, with a link to the post, and she arranged for Major Mike Pottratz to respond for PM Soldier Weapon, the office responsible for weapons development. For me - the money graf, if the weapon holds up in terms of reliability: "What does the XM-312 bring me as a capability? I fired the XM-312 at a National Guard range in Vermont. There were two things that amazed me about the machine gun. First, I picked the whole machine gun, tripod, and T&E up with one hand. The machine gun, at 40 pounds was simply amazing. The XM-312 had such little recoil, I could easily walk my rounds into the targets through the M145 optic. Third, the XM-312 was so stable and such little recoil I could easily and quickly engage targets at 1,600 meters through the optic. Finally.no need for head space and timing.ever." Emphasis mine.  Now I'll have to find a way to talk them into letting me go shoot one.  And have someone else pay the bill to get there. So, here's Major Pottratz- ]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html Thu, 16 Oct 2008 07:36:04 -0600 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79331 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79331 Fri, 17 Oct 2008 21:09:44 -0600
From a Mech Inf point of view, more rpm the better. From a Light Inf point of view, lower rpm better.

MMG and LMG to do the high volume work. Rounds are lighter, easier to carry larger loads of em. HMG for light vehicles, that extra range when required, and hard targets in buildings or bunkers. High volume rpm in a HMG that is humped in means the gun simply runs out of ammo that much faster.

From what the man replied above with, I tend to assume that the M2 it going to stay around anyway. If you've got a truck to carry the ammo, the higher rpm is doable. But if you're carrying it all on your back, lower rpm is good.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79300 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79300 Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:50:33 -0600
And 265 rounds per minute? Hell, a hand cranked 1861 Gatling Gun has a higher rate of fire! Has the Army higher ups forgotten that the purpose of a machine gun is to crank out the maximum amout of rounds in the shortest period of time?  265 RPM might be fine if you want precision shootin but how about in defensive fields of fire? You want mass fire then, not precision.

I'm a former Mech Trooper who used the M-2 a lot and I aint impressed with the XM-312.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79298 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79298 Fri, 17 Oct 2008 12:23:41 -0600
But then what expression will we use for a user induced error?

]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79278 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79278 Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:43:36 -0600
As for the weight/recoil compensation, in a soldier's hands, things tend to break nobody thought in the engineering and scientific testing departments would ever be in danger of breaking.  I remember one guy who broke the drivetrain of a Humvee-an act that was allegedly nearly impossible to achieve, back in the early nineties, and I am forced to recall the AR-15's "Self Cleaning"  feature.  Considering that even in the early nineties we were wrapping our M-16's in pantyhose to keep 'm functioning in the desert...

And then, there's the reliance on optics.  Optics work great if they don't get muddy, or dirty, or stepped on, don't have things dropped on them, don't end up optic-down when the gear lands off the back of a truck/parachute drop/mistreated in the C-130 etc. etc. ad nauseum.

Iron sights can be made "Kinda useful" with a pair of pliers if they get bent, a scope? not so much.  These aren't going to be put in use by college-educated adults who will care for them like the gold they are, they're going to be issued to or used by eighteen year olds with too much adrenaline and testosterone and not enough patience and care.  (this is why Privates and Specialists need NCO leadership).  They're also not going to be present exclusively in locations where spare parts and repair time are in abundance, along with arms rooms and trained armorers.

The question, therefore, remains: How hard is it to keep in a running condition when it isn't going into a nice, clean, arms-room every night for babying?
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79265 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79265 Fri, 17 Oct 2008 05:48:55 -0600
Somewhat off topic, but pertaining to a good friend up at Ethan Allen. Please send my regards to Sgt. Hance, & tell him that I appreciate his good work down at The Putumayo.

Guess that they are already retooling at Saco.

P.S. Has he run over Porky yet?
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79262 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79262 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:01:49 -0600 Re: letting the troops test it: I thought the Army learned THAT lesson 90 years ago when they bought that worthless LMG from the French & issued it in place of the BAR because the brass was afraid of losing JMB's design to the Germans. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79258 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79258 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:44:49 -0600
Yeah, I know. But the weapon in the pic above does not appear to have any iron sight backup for when the optic will fail.

Optics are all well and good for such times as when service and support are co-located with the operational units. But in the Distributed Ops model that the USMC is migrating to, and the logistics limites required by extended field ops, if this system is an optics only sighting platform, then that will become a problem.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79254 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79254 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:30:04 -0600 The sight unit has been in US service since 2003 minimum.

Cheers]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79253 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79253 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:19:39 -0600
Case in point, the recent deployment of 24 MEU. The MEU went into the field and stayed there. No easy access to the armory for quick gear replacement and/or repair.

Iraq and it's FOB structure will not be the only battle ground concept in the near nor distant future. Battalion level units operating for long periods with very limited access to rear area support components will be much the norm for the Marines as issues develop.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79249 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79249 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:41:18 -0600
That gun system dang well better have iron sights to back up those optics when they WILL be broken.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79248 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79248 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:34:02 -0600 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79245 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79245 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:09:11 -0600
I don't think they really care...

Casey - they aren't at that phase of development yet.  Still a ways to go.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79244 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79244 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:04:30 -0600
It's always been my impression that one will never know how useful a weapon is, until you let the grunts beat it up for a year or more in the real world.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79242 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79242 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:59:44 -0600
It's 'armed forces' level counterpart is Joint Forces Command (JFCOM.)
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79238 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79238 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:33:57 -0600 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79236 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79236 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:17:50 -0600
BTW, I'm stealing this post.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79235 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79235 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 11:09:54 -0600
Why did I get that very impression of you when we met at the 2007 Mil-Blog Conference?  *GRIN*

And, to qualify my statement, not every Plt. Sgt. and Plt. Ldr was like that.  Just one pair.  Mostly, I had great NCOs and Officers.  MEN like SSG. Michael Voce, Sgt. Dan Cunningham, Lt. Patrick, and Cpt. Capral.  Men I'd gladly follow into combat today, wheelchair or not.

Paul
aka V5

 ]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79227 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79227 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:05:21 -0600 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79226 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79226 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:04:17 -0600
And they would have garnered a *lot* of weapons cleaning time.

Pissed me off enough, I might well have let troops turn in dirty weapons and had a weekend cleaning party - officers only.

No one is so important that they can't make the time to clean their own personal weapon.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79225 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79225 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:59:33 -0600
I don't know... maybe it's just me, but I think the person that has to clean the weapon after it's fired should be the person who gets to be in the photograph.  Maybe I'm 'still' a tad bit pissed at having a Platoon Sergeant and Platoon Leader that used to fire their pistols and rifles at the range or (worse yet, blanks) during an ARTEP.  Then, as soon as we get downtime, just hand those weapons to the first available private and to be cleaned.

That always stuck in my craw.

Anyway, as a weapon system it looks and sounds pretty good.  

Paul
aka V5]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79224 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2008/10/peosoldier_resp.html#comment-79224 Thu, 16 Oct 2008 08:45:48 -0600