NGSW Rifle (M4 Replacement) and Machine Gun

Preliminary assessment of the NGSW system by the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation 2024 report issued January, not favorable.

• The 6.8mm GP ammunitionprovides increased lethalityover the M855A1 (i.e., the GPammunition for the legacyM4A1 weapon) against the tested targets,
• Soldiers assessed the usabilityof the XM157 as below average/failing, and
• The XM7 with mounted XM157demonstrated a low probabilityof completing one 72-hourwartime mission without incurring a critical failure.

 
Might be an opportune time to gracefully terminate the program.

The XM250 in 7.62 looks like the best thing to emerge from this whole escapade. Perhaps renegotiate the contract value to that weapon?
 
Kiltonge said:
Might be an opportune time to gracefully terminate the program.

The XM250 in 7.62 looks like the best thing to emerge from this whole escapade.
Click to expand...

Seems like the main failure point is the scope. Not surprising given how sophisticated it is.
 
johnpjones1775 said:
I know this post is years old at this point, but putting a can on a carbine remains shorter than putting a can on a full length rifle…that’s the point.
Click to expand...
I know such a carbine length is desirable, I'm just saying I think such requirements were unrealistic considering the lofty ballistic performance desired from NGSW. It has technically been achieved, but resulted in questionable compromises as did many NGSW requirements. A lot like the way the Army wanted the M14 to do everything but replacing carbines and submachine guns with a full rifle-caliber service is impossible while keeping the characteristics desired out of the latter two weapons.

Kiltonge said:
Might be an opportune time to gracefully terminate the program.

The XM250 in 7.62 looks like the best thing to emerge from this whole escapade. Perhaps renegotiate the contract value to that weapon?
Click to expand...
I think some things could be salvaged from the whole effort. Perhaps the XM7 could be re-tuned into a squad-level DMR while the XM250 with some modifications like a quick-change barrel could be adopted. I like what I heard about that steel alloy case Federal is promoting so maybe the high performance 6.8x51mm could still be feasible as an eventual replacement for 7.62x51mm.

If the scope doesn't work well enough, then the whole basis of this idea that NGSW will allow the average infantryman to be outranging the opposition and taking them out before they're within effective range falls apart.
 
And this is about what I expected.

NGSW was M14 all over again. It'll probably stay as the DMR, but I see the majority of troops continuing to carry M4s or even full length M16s. You'd have one XM7 per squad, maybe two, a pair of M250s instead of the SAWs, a pair of M4/M320s, and three or four plain M4s (Squad Leader, two team leaders, and maybe one dude who is the Antitank gunner).

Unless of course the Army pulls head out of ass and enlarges the infantry squad to 15.
 
My guess is that that most of the people who are involved in this project have no understanding whatsoever of the various projects that came before them stretching back as far as the late 1940's.
History may not always repeat it self but it often rhymes.
Btw way Canadian Army currently has a research project developing a truly fugly bullpup some of it's developers honestly think it has chance of being turned into a service rifle.
Anyone who has ever been an end-user...not so much.
Turns out that when asked about the Ross Rifle they hadn't heard of it......
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom