OK, so I see there’s some doubt about my weapons ID skills (Byron.…)…
We also ran a story on this weapon about a year ago.
Allons! so they say…;-)
And oh, yeah, stay tuned to Military.com tomorrow for a story I’ve got posting on the Army’s subcompact weapon search. Here’s a teaser:
Despite initial industry suspicion that the Army would let the effort die a slow death, the service is moving forward with the development of a compact weapon that shoots like a rifle but slings like a sub gun.
According to the Army official in charge of fielding new weapons for the service, the search for a so-called “subcompact individual weapon system” is moving ahead in earnest. In May, the Army sponsored a user evaluation where Soldiers put subcompact weapons through their paces to see if the idea would stick.
And at least for the brass running the show, it did.
“I’m excited about the subcompact,” said Col. Doug Tamilio, the Army program manager for Soldier weapons, during an Oct. 15 interview with Military.com. “There are a lot of Soldiers today who do not need to carry either a carbine or an M-16, but yet a pistol may just not be enough.”
– Christian
I’d be happier to see the M4/M16 family replaced first — this jamming problem and its iterations has been around since Vietnam. It is disgraceful that it still an issue.
Agree on replacing the M4/M16 before we work on a REMF subcarbine. I also question the entire concept of a subcompact rifle. Marines are riflemen first — will they accept a half rifle?
Put 6.5 Grendel into the show and u will see that 8 inch barrel does the job. No question bout that.
The fact that American weapons jam and fail without careful, methodical and constant maintenance is not a defect but a feature. By being unreliable except when constantly maintained a lower tech force cannot use these weapons without the risk of them failing quickly. [/sarcasm]
Good Afternoon Christian,
My very humble apologies Christian for doubting you. You are correct it is one tricked up M-14.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Its a Fulton Armory Mk14 Mod 0 Rifle aka a tricked out M-14
Christian: All soldiers needed firearms training, all need to able
to deal with perimeter assignments.
Equipping them with and office/barracks/ house weapon,useful
only when the enemy is inside the wire or building . Is not prudent
as their lack of training will give them a spray and pray mentality.
Which will end up in a lot of friendly fire.
Should troops need such subcompacts (and yes at times I feel they
are needed. They can be added to the units for particular missions.
Outdoors I don’t think the perimeters should have only the range
subweapons are designed for.
All weapons necessary for a mission should be considered.
Their is no solve all firearm nor munntion.
Training is key. Why are you trying to serve and cannot shoot.
And if you can’t why are we bring you into a combat zone. No
matter what your job is.
A “subcompact individual weapon system”?
And the difference between one of these and a Personal Defence Weapon (such as the FNH P90 or the H&K P7, both of which have been on the market for years) would be.…. ?
Regards & all,
Thomas L. Nielsen
Denmark (presently Luxembourg)
Nielsen, I’m guessing that the difference is that the SCIWS is supposed to use rifle ammo, but of course I’ll have to wait for the full story (darned teasers).
For the more cynical, let’s hope that the soldiers involved in the eval actually got to give the weapons a shot (pun intended) and were consulted before the brass said yes…
“The M-4 is a fantastic little rifle — just too weak. Same rifle with more powerful ammunition would be great.” — Michael Yon on twitter
http://www.lwrci.com/Products/PSD/tabid/87/Default.aspx
Unfortunately that then runs into the ammunition/magazine dilemma…
buy some pdw’s instead of re-inventing the wheel. the us military has a tendency to start from scratch and end up with nothing.
Depends whatcha mean by “PDW,” you mean a shortie submachine gun with specialized pistol rounds or an even-more-cut-down-than-carbine using rifle rounds?
Until they find something better, why not dust off the old M231 Port Firing Weapons that are languishing in warehouses and give those to truck drivers or medics who are only going to use them for suppressive fire while seeking cover anyway? Same ammo/magazines (easier on logistics), parts commonality (easier on maintenance), and already in the inventory (easier on acquisitions).
It’s NOT a long-term solution, but it gets something out the door right now.
Is it just me, or does it seem like there is an intense and misplaced focus on building specialized compact weapons, rather than focusing on improving our main battle rifle? Not that we don’t need compact weapons for some situations, but the emphasis seems heavily skewed toward the “Who can build the smallest/lightest/collapsible stocks/short barrel/etc.” side…?
Possibly stupid question from a civvie who hasn’t fired a weapon since Boy Scouts: the M14-EBR that Sgt. Adkins is toting has a foregrip, but he’s not using it, bracing against the magazine instead. How come?
Not criticizing or anything — I was obviously not there and I don’t know squat about squat (and am happy to admit this up front). Just curious.
“There are a lot of Soldiers today who do not need to carry either a carbine or an M-16, but yet a pistol may just not be enough.”–
MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7 MP7
—And the difference between one of these and a Personal Defence Weapon (such as the FNH P90—
ok.. but since when is P90 a “personal defense weapon”? who pooped this classification out? seriously WTF?!
Little Zachary should learn how to shoulder a rifle rather than just buy things at Wall Mart to attach to his rifle.
But then again, Zachary is just posing isn’t he?
Zacahary is however certainly not very convincing with his combat commando killer pose.
Zachary is a phony wannabe whose father likes to take pictures of him while Zachary pretends to be a hard core Secret US Army Spec Op Commando Unit Killer carrying a bullshit rifle that he put together from pieces he bought from a catalogue.
In case anyone is wondering about the telling points in this picture, one of them is that heroic Zachary is holding the weapon by the magazine.
Only a posing dunce, who has never fired a M-14 would hold one that way.
There are lots of other things in this Zachary picture that smell as well.
Ciao! Zachary
I am really curious who shoulders a rifle that way and who holds onto the magazine for support. That’s not the brightest move.
For those of you out there questioning why the soldier in the pic is bracing the rifle using the magazine, rather than the fore-grip is simple ergonomics and learned lessons in marksmanship.
The soldier is attempting, as best he can in this situation, to create a ‘bone bridge’. If he were to attempt to stabilize the rifle using the fore grip he would soon begin to suffer fatigue and likely his site picture would begin to wander. However, with his left elbow brace on his hip he has much better stability for observing and when it comes to engaging the target he will have as stable a shooting position as he can attain while standing. Some would argue he could shoot ‘off-hand’, that is with his hand on the forearm, but the same issues of arm fatigue would soon come into play. If he took a knee he would brace his elbow on his thigh and move his forward hand to the forearm.
A fore grip is most applicable in a CQB type situation, not a mid to long range shot scenario.
Dear Bob;
If it is better to grip the rifle by the magazine rather than the ” as you call it ” the fore grip why do all rifles have fore grips?
If Zachary is building a bone bridge why doesn’t Zachary have the stock into his shoulder? That would be a very important part of the bone bridge wouldn’t it?
By the way, bone bridges are very important in precision rifle shooting.
Bone bridges are not even thought about in the heat of combat shooting unless you are a sniper.
I doubt that Zachary is a sniper. Otherwise he wouldn’t be holding his phony rifle like a dork on a photo opportunity.
As a further aside, have you ever fired a M-14 while holding onto the magazine rather than the fore stock?
If you have ever done so, you would know what happens to the hand that has hold of the magazine. Fast.
Perhaps that is why, after all, they put fore stocks on rifles.
If you look at the pictures from Camp Perry you won’t see to many shooters holding onto the magazines.
If you look at pictures of US soldiers, German soldiers, or any other countries soldiers combat footage you will be hard pressed to find a photo with the soldier holding on to the magazine.
A few might be holding on to the magazine well, but not the magazine.
Been there and done that Baptist.
Being an M-14 guy myself that has carried one in real world ops, I’d like to put my $.02 in.
Hanging onto the mag is a BAD IDEA. Go ahead and grab that mag and jiggle it around. Feel a little play in the mag? Do you really WANT the round at the top of the mag to be jiggling around under the bolt while it’s under fire?
Hell no you don’t!
Yeah, I’ve seen people do it… I’ve also seen them have failures. Is it common? No. Do I know that the two are linked? No. Are these guys having failures when I’m not? Yes…
I could be way off base, and it couldn’t have anything to do with anything… But when the mechanics point to introducing variables which may add to the failure rate, why tempt fate?
Take my opinion for what you’re paying for it, but I think it’s bad practice.
maybe he’s just looking down the scope =) not shooting someone