USMC's IAR: Brilliance or sheer stupidity? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

FelixP · 07-10-2009, 11:43 PM

Well, the USMC is apparently planning to transfer to a infantry automatic rifle (sorta like a modern day BAR). It will have a 30rnd clip and is chambered for 5.56 NATO. It can be fired in either semi- or fully-automatic modes, and from both closed and open bolt. What do you think of this?

I think it's a bad idea. The BAR was never that effective of a LMG (a purpose for which it was never designed), largely because of it's small clip. I would imagine that it would lessen the overall effectiveness of the fireteam, especially during an ambush or base defense situation.

However, it is markedly lighter than the M249, and much more accurate. I guess many nations have had success with the RPK (or if you're more historically minded, the Bren[which was well liked]), but I'd be lying if I said I knew anything about it's operational history.

Speak up Tilted Veterans and gun buffs! Let's hear your opinions.

dksuddeth · 07-11-2009, 03:52 AM

the marines seem to be reorganizing and redefining their combat roles to that of riflemen again instead of elite army units. this is a good thing.

Slims · 07-11-2009, 07:02 AM

The M-249 SAW is available in other smaller, lighter versions.

I don't like the magazine-fed idea, I can carry 200 rounds read-to go on a SAW, but it takes a lot of space (and weight) to carry 200 rounds in 30 round magazines. Also, it takes much longer to reload (as you have to do 6 reloads for 210 rounds) vs. one for the belt-fed. I can carry extra saw drums on my person fairly easily, giving me 600 rounds or more of nearly instant firepower, there is just no way to carry that in box magazines in any reasonably accessible fashion. Also, if you get a resupply, etc. the box magazines take a LONG time to reload, and if you lose them you will not be able to run your weapon any more. All you really need for the SAW is the linked ammo.

---------- Post added at 11:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:00 AM ----------

Oh, and the SAW can be carried (and often is) with a 100 round cloth magazine which sits up close and tight to the base of the weapon. It shaves off a lot of weight and bulk while still providing more than 3X the rounds in a regular box magazine.

Plan9 · 07-11-2009, 08:05 AM

This bullshit reeks of another Colt LMG turd.

A 5.56mm rifle that fires in full auto? Why? It's been proven time and time again that unless you speed up the ROF ridiculously and toss in a burst limiter... or reduce it to just-like-semi that full auto is mostly useless on Average Joe weapons. I can't think of anybody that uses the 3 round burst in combat unless they're back-against-the-walls-rushed-by-mobs or they're throwing out marking tracers.

...

In my opinion, infantry primary weapon roles in the US military haven't changed much in the last 40 years.

Submachine guns are in the trash. Pistols are almost non-weapons. Shotguns are like pistols.

Today you've got:

Infantry arm: 5.56mm rifle, M16 / M4 (20" or 14.5" bbl)
"DesMark" arm: 7.62mm rifle, M14 w/ scope (one gun per squad, if you're lucky)
LMG: 5.56mm, M249 (one gun per fire team is normal for combat arms)
GPMG: 7.62mm, M240 (one gun per line squad is normal for combat arms, FSTs have more)

Let's say that the infantry arm (M4) is designed to engage point targets. It's light and compact and good at single shots. It shines in the "every guy can have one" role because it's a great general purpose primary small arm. My 240B gunner had his M4 wrapped up in a breakaway bag and attached to his ruck.

The M249 is a suppressive fire weapon. It's heavier and great for short bursts. It isn't nearly as accurate as the M4 (in my experience) but it gives you massive firepower in a single guy package. I was taught that the M249 is the legs of a fire team, providing suppressive fire for men on the move. If you've got 3 guys with M4s (1 with M203) and 1 guy with a M249, you're toting some serious firepower in a four-man team while still remaining maneuverable (room to trade off, carry special equipment, etc).

...

The real question is: why do the Marines need something that attempts to do both at mediocre levels?

If it's light and accurate, it won't do well at bursts because it's not heavy and has a tiny box mag.

If it's heavy and has a big drum mag, you're not going to want to issue it to every guy in your squad.

They're taking two separate weapon concepts and trying to mate them to create The Ultimate Gun.

Maybe they should just go with the Ares Shrike concept.

Heh.

...

I concur with Slims. The Minimi is more than satisfactory in non-M249 incarnations such as the Mk46 Mod 0.

ATTACHMENT #1: The 100-round soft-side nutsack starter drum is ideal for in-the-weapon carry.

My M249 gunner carried a 100-round in the gun and 3 200-rounds on his kit . (one on each hip, one hanging off assault pack)

Ignore the twist stock on the gun in attachment #1. Those things are total garbage. Go for the M4-style sliding collapsible ones.

Granted, we never got those (1SG spent the money on printer cartridges) so we rocked the fixed stock the whole time in '06.

The 200 round drums are easy to silence with cardboard and give you immense firepower.

Aftermarket companies manufacture 200 round soft-side drums for those who prefer them.

...

Combine the appropriate barrel, optics, stock, and mag config for the mission at hand.

...

Why do we need new shit when the shit we have works with new parts?

Let's refrain from more $800 toilet seats, USMC. C'mon now.

FelixP · 07-11-2009, 09:31 AM

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks this is a bad idea. I should clarify: it won't be issued to everyone, just the team support gunner.

Plan9 · 07-11-2009, 10:19 AM

It looks like tacticool crap to me.

I think the US military should go with the Ultimax, a far superior weapon from every test I've read.

dimbulb · 07-11-2009, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

It looks like tacticool crap to me.

I think the US military should go with the Ultimax, a far superior weapon from every test I've read.

I've used the Ultimax extensively. Mostly with the STANAG 30 round magazines.

The drum magazines can't be hand-loaded, so it proves to be rather inflexible since you can't really share the ammo.

Pretty reliable and light.

The_Dunedan · 07-11-2009, 06:04 PM

Edited: After due consideration, I've decided to consult further with vets on this issue before commenting beyond saying that I like the concept, but I share Cromp's opinion of it's aesthetics.

Kingruv · 07-11-2009, 08:05 PM

Has there been any mention on who will get the contract for this?

KirStang · 07-12-2009, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kingruv

Has there been any mention on who will get the contract for this?

IIRC Colt and FN went on to advanced testing, POF, LWRC and KAC (I think) were all rejected.

MSD · 07-13-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crompsin

It looks like tacticool crap to me.

I heard a rumor from military friends a few months ago (which doesn't mean they're reliable rumors,) that this is going to be joined by the return of 75- or 100-round beta mags. I like the sound of that.

As for the whole IAR thing, I think it's dumb and the army guys think it's dumb, and I don't know any Marines who I'm still in contact with so I can't get their opinions.

Quote:

I think the US military should go with the Ultimax, a far superior weapon from every test I've read.

No. It absolutely must fit on an M16 lower because ... they say so.

Plan9 · 07-13-2009, 06:54 PM

You know why Marines still use the M16A2?

Budget.

/army

...

Also: Fuck the Beta C-mag. Those things are garbage. Military should switch to P-Mags or belt feed.

Also: Fuck H&K / gun laws for preventing a AR / 416 lower match / swap. I was so close to the dream.

Slims · 07-13-2009, 07:44 PM

We had several C-mags sitting around. I managed to break one on the first day I started to use it. Did you know they have feeder rounds shaped like bullets in those things? Apparently they are supposed to stay in the magazine.

C-mags are wholly inadequate for that type of application. They are really heavy, not particularly reliable and most importantly very slow to reload as you have to hand jam the entire mag.

I have seen C-mags used on submachine guns, but it was a special-purpose application for travel in civilian vehicles....and only so the guy riding shotgun could suppress until the 240B was fished out of the trunk.

Plan9 · 07-13-2009, 08:56 PM

Hahaha... yeah, I remember those. Part of the fail of the C-mag design, really... ballsack-lookin' drum that is too complicated for it's own good.

One of my guys brought me the dummy follower rounds outta one while I was playing with the tube of graphite lube. I decided immediately that if a product can't survive 15 minutes with a fresh-from-Benning E3... it has no business in the life-or-death GI Joe arena. I think that's why the 'tards at Bragg were so enamored with those heavy-as-fuck H&K steel mags... you can use them as jack stands to do services on a West Virginia'd 998. They're like side SAPIs.

...

The stupidest thing I've ever seen is a Beta C-mag being used on a SAW with that adapter. That made me giggle.

...

I must admit I'm intrigued by the Ares Shrike concept. A lightweight belt-fed carbine-sized piece would be amazing provided the ROF was relatively tame.

G5_Todd · 07-16-2009, 09:17 PM

the saw is garbage i am not familiar with this new weapon but i'd like to know more...

Plan9 · 07-21-2009, 10:18 PM

I don't love the M249 100%, but it's not a bad gun to have if you're running new parts. The 100-round nutsack and M4-style stock make it quite handy.

Where do you think the M249 is lacking, Todd? Were your gripes addressed in the Mk46 model?

I think, overall, a stock M249 the same as a stock M4 as far as what you need to bolt on it to make it work better.

G5_Todd · 07-28-2009, 10:45 AM

we had the collapsible stocks and short barrels on ours, and used the nutsacks...

i think its odd that you have to take extra measures with this weapon so it doesnt accidentally go off and kill everyone in your gun truck...the only thing that makes this weapon bareable is having those three items with it...

i used to feel bad for the fobbits that had to carry it around without the short barrel and collapsible stock...

Plan9 · 07-28-2009, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G5_Todd

we had the collapsible stocks and short barrels on ours, and used the nutsacks... i think its odd that you have to take extra measures with this weapon so it doesnt accidentally go off and kill everyone in your gun truck...the only thing that makes this weapon bareable is having those three items with it...

Yeah, the twist-collapsible stocks are total garbage. I liked the M4 ones better. I had my guys keep the old clubfoot fixed stocks until the M4-style stocks became available in 2006. The full stock is actually useful for shooting (durable, provides solid cheek weld) and I find it more comfortable to carry than the folding stock given the sling attachment point difference. The pathetic ring placed right in the way of the feed tray cover releases and rear sight... what genius came up with that? Obviously not anybody who has to fight with the gun. The aluminum ring vs. steel hooks thing used to kill me, too.

100 round nutsacks were crucial to carry comfort (at one point each guy had three: one in the gun, two in pouches), as well as silencing the plastic drums with taped cardboard. I can't stand the SAW rattle that people put up with in country. It's like they forgot about E1 shit like noise discipline and jump tests.

I didn't really get the point of the short "para" barrels that everybody was fighting over. It looks cool, but is dangerous when mounted in a turret behind a chicken plate, ya lose the extra couple inches of accuracy (sight radius, rifling) as well as muzzle standoff, and seemed to be more flash messy (moon dust everywhere) for leapfrogging due to the blast it throws. If real life was like the movies, the short barrel would have made more sense.

I fail to see how the SAW is unsafe... or less safe than any other MG (M240B, M60D). With the SAW, you leave the belt tray'd with the bolt forward... safety off... cock and fire when appropriate. It's idiot proof and recommended for 90% of situations in the politically correct GWOT where negligent discharges are feared more than a convoy ambush. None of this half-cock bullshit, don't ride with it loaded inside a vehicle, etc. My guys were never to use their safety on the 249 unless they had actually been firing it or were directed to do so by some idiot fobbit NCO in order to keep the peace. We're not gun shy.

What issues did you have?

G5_Todd · 07-31-2009, 06:30 AM

short barrel was no problem for us we didnt mount anything smaller than the 240...249 was purely for foot patrols because we only had one guy in the squad that would carry a 240 on foot...

raptor9k · 08-06-2009, 06:20 PM

deleted

Plan9 · 08-06-2009, 06:34 PM

Shrike: Yeah, if feel that if you put a heavy buffer in that thing, kept the standard RPM down to like 650-750... you'd have a kickass little SAW carbine. Heavy fluted quick change barrel, belt fed 200 rounder. Need a better stock (Magpul UBR gets me hot) and a nice new EO tech... that'd be suh-weet.

...

I think the USMC would be bettered served by a lightweight 20" 5.56mm DMR with an option to put 2-round bursts out at a ridiculous rate of fire to keep tight patterns. If they want a lighter SAW on their budget? They need to do a product improvement cycle, not get a whole other weapon system.

jnthnlllshprd · 08-26-2009, 10:59 PM

I think this is completely idiotic. Any infantryman knows that the purpose of the SAW is suppressive fire--ie, spraying bullets at the enemy to force them into cover. With 30 rounds in the clip, the tactic is thrown out the window.

07-10-2009, 11:43 PM	#1 (permalink)
FelixP Insane Location: I'm up they see me I'm down.	USMC's IAR: Brilliance or sheer stupidity? Well, the USMC is apparently planning to transfer to a infantry automatic rifle (sorta like a modern day BAR). It will have a 30rnd clip and is chambered for 5.56 NATO. It can be fired in either semi- or fully-automatic modes, and from both closed and open bolt. What do you think of this? I think it's a bad idea. The BAR was never that effective of a LMG (a purpose for which it was never designed), largely because of it's small clip. I would imagine that it would lessen the overall effectiveness of the fireteam, especially during an ambush or base defense situation. However, it is markedly lighter than the M249, and much more accurate. I guess many nations have had success with the RPK (or if you're more historically minded, the Bren[which was well liked]), but I'd be lying if I said I knew anything about it's operational history. Speak up Tilted Veterans and gun buffs! Let's hear your opinions. __________________ Free will lies not in the ability to craft your own fate, but in not knowing what your fate is. --Me "I have just returned from visting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world." --Douglas MacArthur

07-11-2009, 03:52 AM	#2 (permalink)
dksuddeth Junkie Location: bedford, tx	the marines seem to be reorganizing and redefining their combat roles to that of riflemen again instead of elite army units. this is a good thing. __________________ "no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

07-11-2009, 07:02 AM	#3 (permalink)
Slims Eccentric insomniac Location: North Carolina	The M-249 SAW is available in other smaller, lighter versions. I don't like the magazine-fed idea, I can carry 200 rounds read-to go on a SAW, but it takes a lot of space (and weight) to carry 200 rounds in 30 round magazines. Also, it takes much longer to reload (as you have to do 6 reloads for 210 rounds) vs. one for the belt-fed. I can carry extra saw drums on my person fairly easily, giving me 600 rounds or more of nearly instant firepower, there is just no way to carry that in box magazines in any reasonably accessible fashion. Also, if you get a resupply, etc. the box magazines take a LONG time to reload, and if you lose them you will not be able to run your weapon any more. All you really need for the SAW is the linked ammo. ---------- Post added at 11:02 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:00 AM ---------- Oh, and the SAW can be carried (and often is) with a 100 round cloth magazine which sits up close and tight to the base of the weapon. It shaves off a lot of weight and bulk while still providing more than 3X the rounds in a regular box magazine. __________________ "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence

07-11-2009, 08:05 AM	#4 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	This bullshit reeks of another Colt LMG turd. A 5.56mm rifle that fires in full auto? Why? It's been proven time and time again that unless you speed up the ROF ridiculously and toss in a burst limiter... or reduce it to just-like-semi that full auto is mostly useless on Average Joe weapons. I can't think of anybody that uses the 3 round burst in combat unless they're back-against-the-walls-rushed-by-mobs or they're throwing out marking tracers. ... In my opinion, infantry primary weapon roles in the US military haven't changed much in the last 40 years. Submachine guns are in the trash. Pistols are almost non-weapons. Shotguns are like pistols. Today you've got: Infantry arm: 5.56mm rifle, M16 / M4 (20" or 14.5" bbl) "DesMark" arm: 7.62mm rifle, M14 w/ scope (one gun per squad, if you're lucky) LMG: 5.56mm, M249 (one gun per fire team is normal for combat arms) GPMG: 7.62mm, M240 (one gun per line squad is normal for combat arms, FSTs have more) Let's say that the infantry arm (M4) is designed to engage point targets. It's light and compact and good at single shots. It shines in the "every guy can have one" role because it's a great general purpose primary small arm. My 240B gunner had his M4 wrapped up in a breakaway bag and attached to his ruck. The M249 is a suppressive fire weapon. It's heavier and great for short bursts. It isn't nearly as accurate as the M4 (in my experience) but it gives you massive firepower in a single guy package. I was taught that the M249 is the legs of a fire team, providing suppressive fire for men on the move. If you've got 3 guys with M4s (1 with M203) and 1 guy with a M249, you're toting some serious firepower in a four-man team while still remaining maneuverable (room to trade off, carry special equipment, etc). ... The real question is: why do the Marines need something that attempts to do both at mediocre levels? If it's light and accurate, it won't do well at bursts because it's not heavy and has a tiny box mag. If it's heavy and has a big drum mag, you're not going to want to issue it to every guy in your squad. They're taking two separate weapon concepts and trying to mate them to create The Ultimate Gun. Maybe they should just go with the Ares Shrike concept. Heh. ... I concur with Slims. The Minimi is more than satisfactory in non-M249 incarnations such as the Mk46 Mod 0. ATTACHMENT #1: The 100-round soft-side nutsack starter drum is ideal for in-the-weapon carry. My M249 gunner carried a 100-round in the gun and 3 200-rounds on his kit . (one on each hip, one hanging off assault pack) Ignore the twist stock on the gun in attachment #1. Those things are total garbage. Go for the M4-style sliding collapsible ones. Granted, we never got those (1SG spent the money on printer cartridges) so we rocked the fixed stock the whole time in '06. The 200 round drums are easy to silence with cardboard and give you immense firepower. Aftermarket companies manufacture 200 round soft-side drums for those who prefer them. ... Combine the appropriate barrel, optics, stock, and mag config for the mission at hand. ... Why do we need new shit when the shit we have works with new parts? Let's refrain from more $800 toilet seats, USMC. C'mon now. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake." Last edited by Plan9; 04-19-2010 at 12:55 PM..

07-11-2009, 09:31 AM	#5 (permalink)
FelixP Insane Location: I'm up they see me I'm down.	Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks this is a bad idea. I should clarify: it won't be issued to everyone, just the team support gunner. __________________ Free will lies not in the ability to craft your own fate, but in not knowing what your fate is. --Me "I have just returned from visting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world." --Douglas MacArthur

07-11-2009, 10:19 AM	#6 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	It looks like tacticool crap to me. I think the US military should go with the Ultimax, a far superior weapon from every test I've read. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake." Last edited by Plan9; 07-11-2009 at 10:22 AM..

07-11-2009, 06:04 PM	#8 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	Edited: After due consideration, I've decided to consult further with vets on this issue before commenting beyond saying that I like the concept, but I share Cromp's opinion of it's aesthetics. Last edited by The_Dunedan; 07-11-2009 at 06:26 PM..

07-11-2009, 08:05 PM	#9 (permalink)
Kingruv Upright Location: NoVa	Has there been any mention on who will get the contract for this?

07-13-2009, 06:54 PM	#12 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	You know why Marines still use the M16A2? Budget. /army ... Also: Fuck the Beta C-mag. Those things are garbage. Military should switch to P-Mags or belt feed. Also: Fuck H&K / gun laws for preventing a AR / 416 lower match / swap. I was so close to the dream. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake." Last edited by Plan9; 07-13-2009 at 06:57 PM..

07-13-2009, 07:44 PM	#13 (permalink)
Slims Eccentric insomniac Location: North Carolina	We had several C-mags sitting around. I managed to break one on the first day I started to use it. Did you know they have feeder rounds shaped like bullets in those things? Apparently they are supposed to stay in the magazine. C-mags are wholly inadequate for that type of application. They are really heavy, not particularly reliable and most importantly very slow to reload as you have to hand jam the entire mag. I have seen C-mags used on submachine guns, but it was a special-purpose application for travel in civilian vehicles....and only so the guy riding shotgun could suppress until the 240B was fished out of the trunk. __________________ "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill "All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act out their dream with open eyes, to make it possible." Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence

07-13-2009, 08:56 PM	#14 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	Hahaha... yeah, I remember those. Part of the fail of the C-mag design, really... ballsack-lookin' drum that is too complicated for it's own good. One of my guys brought me the dummy follower rounds outta one while I was playing with the tube of graphite lube. I decided immediately that if a product can't survive 15 minutes with a fresh-from-Benning E3... it has no business in the life-or-death GI Joe arena. I think that's why the 'tards at Bragg were so enamored with those heavy-as-fuck H&K steel mags... you can use them as jack stands to do services on a West Virginia'd 998. They're like side SAPIs. ... The stupidest thing I've ever seen is a Beta C-mag being used on a SAW with that adapter. That made me giggle. ... I must admit I'm intrigued by the Ares Shrike concept. A lightweight belt-fed carbine-sized piece would be amazing provided the ROF was relatively tame. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake." Last edited by Plan9; 07-13-2009 at 09:10 PM..

07-16-2009, 09:17 PM	#15 (permalink)
G5_Todd Junkie Location: Reichstag	the saw is garbage i am not familiar with this new weapon but i'd like to know more... __________________ "....and when you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." -General Franks

07-21-2009, 10:18 PM	#16 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	I don't love the M249 100%, but it's not a bad gun to have if you're running new parts. The 100-round nutsack and M4-style stock make it quite handy. Where do you think the M249 is lacking, Todd? Were your gripes addressed in the Mk46 model? I think, overall, a stock M249 the same as a stock M4 as far as what you need to bolt on it to make it work better. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

07-28-2009, 10:45 AM	#17 (permalink)
G5_Todd Junkie Location: Reichstag	we had the collapsible stocks and short barrels on ours, and used the nutsacks... i think its odd that you have to take extra measures with this weapon so it doesnt accidentally go off and kill everyone in your gun truck...the only thing that makes this weapon bareable is having those three items with it... i used to feel bad for the fobbits that had to carry it around without the short barrel and collapsible stock... __________________ "....and when you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." -General Franks Last edited by G5_Todd; 07-28-2009 at 10:48 AM..

07-31-2009, 06:30 AM	#19 (permalink)
G5_Todd Junkie Location: Reichstag	short barrel was no problem for us we didnt mount anything smaller than the 240...249 was purely for foot patrols because we only had one guy in the squad that would carry a 240 on foot... __________________ "....and when you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's dating a pussy." -General Franks

08-06-2009, 06:20 PM	#20 (permalink)
raptor9k Crazy Location: Earth	deleted Last edited by raptor9k; 09-08-2021 at 04:53 AM..

08-06-2009, 06:34 PM	#21 (permalink)
Plan9 I Confess a Shiver	Shrike: Yeah, if feel that if you put a heavy buffer in that thing, kept the standard RPM down to like 650-750... you'd have a kickass little SAW carbine. Heavy fluted quick change barrel, belt fed 200 rounder. Need a better stock (Magpul UBR gets me hot) and a nice new EO tech... that'd be suh-weet. ... I think the USMC would be bettered served by a lightweight 20" 5.56mm DMR with an option to put 2-round bursts out at a ridiculous rate of fire to keep tight patterns. If they want a lighter SAW on their budget? They need to do a product improvement cycle, not get a whole other weapon system. __________________ *Whatever you can carry.* "You should not drink... and bake."

08-26-2009, 10:59 PM	#22 (permalink)
jnthnlllshprd Tilted	I think this is completely idiotic. Any infantryman knows that the purpose of the SAW is suppressive fire--ie, spraying bullets at the enemy to force them into cover. With 30 rounds in the clip, the tactic is thrown out the window.