| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Tech | |
| SCAR Beats the XM-8 | |
| 2004-11-17 | |
| Last year, the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) issued a specification for the SOF (Special Operations Forces) Combat Assault Rifle (SCAR). At the time, the U.S. Army was also developing a new assault rifle, the XM-8, and it was thought that SOCOM might use a version of the XM-8 for its own needs. SCAR, however, is somewhat different from the XM-8. For one thing, SCAR must be able to quickly change barrels and receivers so that it can fire 5.56mm, 7.62mm (large cartridge, like the M-14 and American medium machine-guns) or the short, AK-47 7.62mm rounds. Moreover, SCAR has to be even more rugged and reliable (and expensive to build) than the XM-8. As a result, the XM-8 lost out to a custom weapon from the Belgium firm, FN Herstal. SCAR is actually two different rifles, the "light" version (5.56mm) and the "heavy" (7.62mm). Maximum number of weapons to be ordered will be 155,000 (84,000 standard lights, 28,000 closer-quarter combat versions of the light rifle, 12,000 light sniper types, 15,000 standard heavies, 7,000 heavy close-quarters combat conversions of the heavy rifle and 12,000 heavy sniper rifles.) Meanwhile, the U.S. Army has given all other rifle manufacturers one more chance to submit weapons to compete with the current Heckler & Koch XM-8. This is a sign that official acceptance and mass production is not far away. However, not all of the senior army, or Department of Defense, brass are willing to spend the billions of dollars it will cost to reequip the troops with the XM-8. There should be a decision by next year, however. Meanwhile, SOCOM will have SCAR, even if the army ends up not getting the XM-8.
| |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #6 Mrs. D, no Metal Storm is not even close to being operational anywhere. It requires special ammunition which is not part of the current logistical train. Interesting technology though and it offers mor benefits than just super-high rate of fire. Jonathan, it would be Ronnie Barrett's dream that everyone went over to his 6.8 upper, but I would not hold your breath. |
| Posted by: Remoteman 2004-11-17 8:18:59 PM |
| #5 Okay, so what about the other rumors I've heard, which is that (1)Everybody will go over to the 6.8mm SPC round, (2)M-16s will be retrofitted with Barrett uppers to facilitate this change, and (3)XM-8s will be chambered for 6.8mm SPC from the get-go? This is getting logistically complex, which, as Don noted, can be expensive and potentially dangerous. |
| Posted by: Jonathan 2004-11-17 8:04:16 PM |
| #4 LOL. Only in Formula Uno Mrs. D. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-11-17 5:05:33 PM |
| #3 Is metal storm operational anywhere? |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-11-17 3:51:47 PM |
| #2 Are any of these new weapons using the metal storm technology? I'm not saying they need to fire a million rounds a minute but having no moving parts has to be an advantage when it comes to cleaning the thing. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2004-11-17 3:38:09 PM |
| #1 Just recalls that the Army copy of the German MG didn't pass tests in WWII only to find out later the contractor made some errors in duplication. It would be much later the Army would adopt the M60 MG which is very similar to the German model, vice the Browning models. If the services are once again getting out of the standardization mode for their own 'unique' weapons, like they've done on uniforms, the costs are going to compounded. There has got to be a balance between getting what the servicemembers REALLY needs in their hands and what some think they need driven by trying to get the last 5% capability out of a new system. Perfect is the enemy of just good enough. It also has the consequence of making $500 hammer contracts. |
| Posted by: Don 2004-11-17 3:25:58 PM |