101st Airborne unit receives the Next Generation Squad Weapon
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 чер 2024
- Troops finally get Next Generation Squad Weapons, while the British Army allows beards and U.S. warship building lags. That and more in this week’s headlines.
''My name is Ian and this is Forgotten Weapons''
😂 I assume that you are from future
So true. Best comment.
Hopefully they won’t need to create a committee on how to mount a scope. The Navy seems to need some help.
That was a photo shop done terribly.
Actually ww 1 was the first time aircraft markings of victories was used French Belgian aces and later German aces kept their tally For example
There are some ignorant people in these comment sections. No one has any clue of what the 6.8 really brings to the table and why it’s so impressive yet they are yapping about how useless it is. It’s not just another .308 sort of round. It’s a round that has better ballistics than a .308 out of a 13 INCH BARREL. That means you have a near sbr length rifle, perfect for room clearing, that can still reach out and touch at .308 distances. The new lmg is even better. The 250 is 15 pounds and still gives you the power of a 240 (that’s 25 lbs). When 5.56 was introduced we didn’t have widespread adoption of magnified optics which meant engagements didn’t require accuracy at long distances. We only needed lmgs with larger calibers to reach out and suppress at longer ranges. Now we do have widespread use of ACOGs, SDOs, and LPVOs which require a larger caliber to reach farther. Yes, it’s 2 pounds heavier than a m4. Yes, you have less ammo. But, this rifle brings so many more upsides than it does downsides and realistically most of your suppression should be coming from the 250s not the riflemen
You just said less ammo...
You get in a firefight and get told you get less ammo...
So then your automatically a better marksman??
PS that rifle malfunctions when you slam the clip in too far...FYI
@@joshs.5623most the rounds i see used are wasted on supposedly; "suppressing fire" or panicked firing.
The amount of times i see joes shooting without a clear sight picture is maddening.
You forgot one thing. It has better ballistics out of a 13 inch barrel than a 308. Out of a 24 inch one.
2# = 2 fully loaded. 556 mags. There is tradeoffs for this solution
Less ammo for sure. The 556 is perfectly adequate for almost all military engagements and you can carry twice as much. And sig makes garbage guns now.
I'm more excited to the new optics than the new rifle and machine gun😂
"Lackluster performance" is pretty misleading. The 5.56 got the job done for me for 15 years. A lot of people have a tendency to look only at ballistics as opposed to all of the other factors that go into a round's overall performance in combat. For example, one needs to figure in weight (for a soldier already carrying 80lbs of kit, every pound makes a difference), as well as magazine capacity (number of reloads needed and magazines needed to reach a full combat load). There are also logistical factors. For example, how feasible is it to replace the rifles of over 400,000 personnel in the military during active operations? How feasible is it to replace the supply chains for ammunition if a new round is fielded? How much complexity does this add to logistics? There are a myriad of other considerations as well that have little to do with ballistics.
Having been in combat arms for ten years and then working as a contractor, I can't think of a round and delivery platform that are flat out better than the M16/M4 on a large scale. Frankly, from what I saw in Ukraine, the Army should be investing much more heavily in modernizing its EW and cyber capabilities, as well as SHORAD capabilities. We also need to be developing mobile command platforms that can replace the massive TOC's that we used in Iraq. Those will be a potentially catastrophic mistake in a conventional war (seeing as they pack a lot of leadership and give off an electronic signature that can be seen from outer space). These are the areas where the Army should be putting massive focus to make ourselves ready for the next big one.
I wish they invested more into the plastic rounds from General Dynamics rifle. All those issues with the weight of the rounds would be gone! Plus, they bring a bunch of other positives like temperature. I think replacing the m4 was going to come at some point. The argument that “it’s not feasible to replace all the Army’s weapons again” is moot because at some a change has to be made. Just because it’s an inconvenience to change the oil in your car doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it. We issued m14s and then immediately decided it was stupid and replaced them all. We phased out the m60 for the 240 pretty quickly. We had to replaced all our tanks with the m1 at some point. You also have to think that now we have only three rounds in active duty for all infantry units. 6.8, .50, and 9mm instead of 5.56, .50, 9mm, and .308. So, in the long run, this makes logistics easier.
@@LaikaTheGReported are saying that the rifle and cartridge is only going to front line troops, the M4 is going to remain for support units like the M1 Carbine, more for personal defense than offense.
it got the job done in some conditions, and not so well in other conditions. with your idea they would still be using Willys jeeps and bolt action rifles.... this is progress and development, if the boys can get better kit they should. Replacing during active operations...... the US is no longer involved in large scale operations. If they lack the ability to plan a deployment of equipment then they aren't very great then....
2nd Batt Rangers agree...
A factor is the length of barrel of the round being fired.
I used the M16A2 for several years in and the barrel length is long enough for the 5.56 to gain the momentum needed to get the job done.
Many of the M4s un the middle east were short barrels which meant the bullets did not gain the FPS and impact of the M16A2.
This has been remedied several years ago with lengthening the barrel of the M4.
Basically the US is adopting the .276 Pedersen...100 years later.
Bout time I say. Just like what Churchill said.
.276 Pedersen had a smaller case diameter and would have made a great parent case for a number of cartridges starting in the 1950s.
@@LRRPFco52 blame NATO existence I guess
@@TheGhostryder88 .276 Pedersen was officially accepted and recommended for adoption by the Fort Benning Infantry Board in 1932. WWII and NATO hadn't even happened yet.
The Marines have the phrase "Every Marine a rifleman." Not to be outdone, the Army has decided on "Every Soldier a designated marksman."
Muscles Are Required Intelligence Not Essential
0:09 Andrea's hot..
Appreciate the subtitles for the Scottish soldier
I am in the UK and even I appreciate them lol
@@bryanbrookes6366 😅🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😂
War is not just about weapons … it is a life and dead situation where ordinary people choose their belief
7.62mm wasn't perfect but it got the job done. (EX L1A1 user) Now I only shoot 9mm and 5.56mm myself because I, getting old and soft. I think the 6.8mm is a good round but incremental gains on the 7.62mm as most won't be shooting the full power version. More like the 277 Fury Elite ball FMJ.
Not in Vietnam..Our trained marksmen got out classed by the crude AK, which led to the problems with the too quickly deployed M16..We left a lot of dead soldiers because of government bureaucracy, before they fixed the M16..Lessons are never learned..
@@hairydogstail Im sure. There is no perfect weapon, for what we were doing in Europe at the time it was fine. Just as the M16 was.
@@emersonmsdThe assault rifle made the heavy battle rifle obsolete..This is not opinion but fact.. Just like breach and repeater type rifles made muzzle rifles obsolete..
@@hairydogstail Looks Like its making a come back.
@@emersonmsdLessons learned in the past are always forgotten in the present.. Read the book Misfire, an excellent biography of the US inability to arm it's soldiers with the best rifles..They call the one shot aim philosophy gravel crawlers mind set..
Andrea, you're giving me the Meg Ryan vibes.
I understand the desire for a new round, Chinese/ Russian body armor or not, however I think the way theyre going about it is wrong. Priority wise, i think they should have focused on perfecting plastic ammo first, then the caliber second. The weight savings alone would be huge, not to mention the reduced recoil to give greater confidence to shooters, reduced muzzle flash, greater heat management, etc.
I do like the new machinegun design, as it makes using a GPMG much easier than other options.
If i could pick and choose, I'd take textrons ammo for the 40% weight savings, true velocity's barrel swap option for the easy logistics, and sig's machine gun for its ease of use. Other than that, lets perfect the m4 first before we get rid of it, alright Army? Outfit every soldier in the 101st with URGI uppers for their m4's and polymer cased telescoped ammo.
Wow. A well rounded and thought out response? Unheard of in this comment section!
I agree. I was hoping general dynamics would’ve won because their rifle was super impressive and the plastic ammo was awesome. Sadly, I think the 250 was too good to pass up
I see the ARMY going back to the 5.56 and 7.62, the logistical support for those weapons systems will be a nightmare lol.
Never happen, not after proven advantages of both calibers after years testing at Aberdeen. DOD is all in.
@@randyboisa6367 Noticed how SOF is not all-in. Adopting an AR-10 carbine for all dudes who go outside the wire is really stupid, and will be rejected ultimately outside of a DM role. The LMG is a different story, although it brings weight penalties for the ammo. M240 conversion to 6.8x51 is a barrel-change.
@@LRRPFco52 In my experience SOCOM guys have liberty to their choice of weapons, most of them were packing HK 416 while we were issued M4, so I can see them getting around that issue in house. I would love to carry the 6.5 in a fireteam instead of 5.56, as far as crew served M40 I would stay with 7.62x51 instead of 6.5. Thats an ex-paratroopers' opinion 1/504th Parachute Infantry Regiment "strike hold!"
@@randyboisa6367 SOCOM used M4A1 SOPMOD Block 1 and Block 2 throughout most of GWOT. JSOC started using Hk416s as soon as they were available since they shoot suppressed almost all the time, and it was made for them.
I was 3/325 AIR, among 7 other units, the best of which was LRSC hands-down.
@@LRRPFco52 I remember while garrisoned at FOB Salerno as task force devil in 06 a MSG and half his team from 75th RRC were all packing HK416, he called our M4's "Kentuckey rifles"
Does the change to the 6.8 X 51 round not cause problems as this will differ from the Nato standard round . Why not go to 7.62 X 51 if you require stopping power
The round itself .277 fury is probably capable of slapping through armor it's not available on civilian markets and probably never will you can get close to it but not the actual round itself that's the difference 7.62 nato cannot accomplish this task
@@kirkmoody6109 I think the issue is the fact that the U.S. is adopting a round that no other NATO country uses and since many NATO countries have recently adopted later generation 5.56mm rifles their unlikely to adopt 6.8mm any time soon.
Hope the quality control on this is better than the troublesome 320.
India ditched the 5.56mm round and has settled on the harder hitting 7.62mm round for regular infantry. The 5.56 however is still used for close quarter weapons, mainly police and security guards, along with 9mm. The new SAW seems to be an in-between solution by committee. It remains to be seen how it works.
This new weapons system is heavy , soldier carry less ammo , who knows if this is the best solution. 5.56 is not that weak, is piece of metal which penetrate human body. Anyhow to defeat Lev4 bodyarmor you need AP round also for 6.8 so whats the difference? Balistic for beyond 500m? Only in Afganisthan was this kind of long distance fights, look on Ukraine where the fights are max on 200m.
@@mrrrxxxxx There are trade offs, you carry less ammo for more accuracy.
@@mrrrxxxxxThe ammo itself wasn’t only designed to defeat body armor, but also other materials.
@@mrrrxxxxxOk, the rifle is heavier. The lmg is actually way lighter. The 250 is 15 pounds whilst the SAW is 18 and the 240 (which has worse ballistics) is 25. Not to mention the 250 is shorter and smaller
The fights are closer ranged in Ukraine because they don’t have optics and use Russian based doctrinal tactics.
The new LMG is probably the best part of the deal. It’s only 15 pounds compared to 18 lbs for a SAW and 25 for a 240. Considering it has better ballistics than both of them that’s pretty damn impressive
Here comes the Fury.
What did he say about the tank?
Can wee see the list of congressional politicians who bought stock in the gun manufacturers?
For real? Is this how the public really thinks politicians make money off this stuff? By investing in publicly traded companies off the back of government information? Information that's been public and debated about for around ten years now?
Too low price for them. Defense contractors aren’t even in the top 20 industries in the US. Small arms are peanuts for Congress. They are more into the energy, insurance, finance, agriculture, big retail, Pharma, and sectors like that. You would have to have a really low self-esteem in Congress to mess around with small arms contracts.
Or DOD don't forget them . Say like an under sec of the army and marines
@@yikemoo Yes they do . Go and look at the pelosies for example . Really have you been paying attention ?
@@LRRPFco52 Add civilian sales . Look at Colt after this decision . Or look at ammo holdings also
One to three years behind schedule is criminal
Is this literally the first time you are hearing the details of military acquisition?
It’s like Christmas
The buggerers love the fabulous drag shows!
How can Challenger 3 offer export opportunities, they are just rebuilt Challenger 2's and there are a limited number of those available especially after giving some of them to Ukraine.
I’m from England and I’m glad there were subtitles for the Challenger tank promo.
This is a hysterical replay of history and a lesson already learned when they moved off the M14 because it was too heavy.
It’s literally not. The m14 was adopted with magnified optics so the power of .308 wasn’t really needed. The m8 and 250 are being adopted alongside a new lpvo and the new xm157
@@LaikaTheG I can see you barely understand what I said.
XM7 is actually much heavier than an M14.
XM7: 9.84lbs with suppressor, no optics, no weapon light no magazine. 14lbs with the XM157 Electro-Optical Aiming System and magazine, Weapon Light, and sling.
M14: 9.2lbs empty, 10.7lbs with loaded magazine of 20rds
@@LRRPFco52 Thank you for that. I can tell it's a pig just by looking at it. The rounds seem very similar in size and weight to a .308 too? I have a .308 semi auto and the 20 round (not 30) mags weigh a ton. It's why the M14 failed in Nam. Too heavy all around, and too long for the brush (much less urban CQB lol). This will be a funny mistake, watch them run right back to the M4. I think .300 black was a good solution to this issue for some troops to carry as it is stellar in short barrels and suppressed. They must be panicking about an open field European battlefield or something.
Interesting to see the xm7 is combat…might be awhile
Scotland’s new tanks were quickly charged with hate speech crimes when their engines started and made noises that seemed to make fun of different cultures.
what?
@@yikemoo I was trying to make a joke about the ridiculous new Scottish hate speech laws.
@@fredericklockard3854 I know, and I'm trying to point out how fucking weird it makes you sound.
Not to sound negative in this, but these weapons are being distributed first to the units that have the most casualties (80% of the most casualties).
Take it as you wish, but it is a necessary measure especially now that we are moving toward near pear than insurgents
sad to see the end of the tour tashe
The 556 was never supposed to be the permanant military ctg, it was a stop gap from day 0 and the military never stopped tinkering with it and trying to replace it.....its not the vererable 45acp or the 9mm it is, was, and always will be "make do" the 6.8 is a real military ctg, purpose built for what it does.
THAT SHIT HEAVY AF
2:24 Maybe you could find an actual historical photo, rather than a plastic scale model?
I mean... Google? C'mon y'all.
That was a great model though. I don’t even notice until you mentioned it, and I’m a fine scale modeler/aviation buff dating back to the 1970s.
@@LRRPFco52 I saw the traces of the mold seam on one prop blade, and what appeared to be rescribed panel lines. It is a nice model though.
Modern warfare for grunts seems to just get heavier, more complex. I'm a minimalist. Learned from enemy in Afghanistan speed, agility are weapons. Simplicity has its beauty also. None are $ makers for military industrial complex.
The 6.8 NGSW cartridge is a bone-headed dead-end for both technical and logistical reasons. How our military's best minds can make such moronic decisions is beyond me. In a few years - after some hard-earned experience in blood and sweat (not the blood and sweat of the minds that made the idiotic decisions, but that of our good young men who suffer their ill-conceived bungling) - we'll go to something like the 6mm ARC or, at most, the .264 LICC that NGSW should have been to being with.
So they went back to the battle rifle and all its draw backs..Nothing changes other than more expensive mistakes...
Never had a problem with the 5.56mm ammo. The old M193 is a very devastating round and still my favorite. The M885 is still deadly because it would fragment beyond 50 meters. The now new 6.8mm is a step backwards because an infantryman would carry less ammo and a heavier rifle like the old M-14. The 5.56mm either in 55 to 62 grain is sufficient because combat will still be within the point blank to the 400 meter range called the Rifleman's Quarter Mile. Not being a Fud but combat is about firepower and not range. The last 100 yards means everything for the Infantryman.
Not that anyone out there cares but Australia allowed beards etc in the RAAF last year (Jan 2023). Army have had it for special forces for years and, well you know them sailors!
The RAF started allowing beards back in 2019, the British Army trying to catch up, as usual.
Ah, That’s Horrible
Sad
Next Gen Weapon - is a woman suffering from PMS and armed with a rolling pin ? Unstoppable !
Most modern women don't even know what a rolling pin is.
Sorry to those that think...getting a simple 6.8 upper for the AR platform is easy. NOT! study the reason why!. Best result??? Buy the cow! (till?).
*Dialect.
So the 6.8 mm is accepted by NATO?
The new standard NATO cartridge?
No. NATO is having a hard time making enough legacy cartridges as it is.
Did you expect anything less from the U.S., they basically forced NATO to adopt 7.62 back in the early fifties then just over 10 years later started the switch to 5.56 even before some NATO countries had gotten around to adopting 7.62.
@@mrjockt US developed the 7.62x51 up into 1955, then worked on adopting the M14 and M60 from the late 1950s through mid 1960s. AR-15 came along and was produced from 1959-forward. USAF ordered their first contract of AR-15s in 1962, followed by Special Forces and then the Army, quickly ditching the M14 by 1967. USMC followed suit almost parallel to the Army.
NATO countries were left having spent their small arms budgets on 7.62 weapons like the FAL, L1A1, and G3 and wouldn't start adopting 5.56 weapons until the 1980s-1990s.
Dear military invest heavily in fpv drones and training. No one needs new rifles or MG. At this point, this is a waste of money.
Could save a lot of money just changing the uppers on current M4’s.
You mean to fire the 6.8x51mm cartridge? That would not work. The new cartridge needs an AR-10 sized magwell and action.
@@fourthhorseman4531 I didn’t realize it was X51. Thought it was the 6.8 SPC. I learned something new today! Thank you
@@dave-d-grunt It's a pretty potent new cartridge. 80,000 psi chamber pressure! Supposedly makes more muzzle energy from a 13" barrel than 7.62x51mm NATO does from a 20" barrel.
@@fourthhorseman4531 I’m going to have to look into it. Sounds lethal.
@@dave-d-grunt This has as much in common with the 6.8 SPC as the 300 Winchester Magnum has with the .30-30 Winchester.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ WE DON'T HAVE FOR WARS WE DON'T WANT...
Another music video.
"Brits were some of the best with the SA80 famous for jamming, we have to have tea making accessories built in because we had to learn to make each shot count so needed a way to pass the time while we waited for more bad guys to show up.
US have all the gear but no idea" - A mate in the SBS 😂
SBS has been using M16s and Colt Commando carbines from Diemaco since the 1960s, not the SA80. Same with SAS. They looked at it when it was developed and said, “No thanks."
@@LRRPFco52 Pity the British Army never got the option to say ''no''.
I dont think we can blame our shipbuilding issues on COVID. I blame the boomers!
Note The Military should have just made M4s and M16 chambered in another caliber for example 6.5 Grendel or 6.8 SPC or many other choices.
Next generation costs to taxpayers for the firearms and ammunition, nothing more.....
The word is schedule…there is no letter K in this word.
If there weren't a "k" sound it would be spelled "shedule". The habit of pronouncing "sch" same as in German (where it works same as "sh" in English) comes from Queen Victoria's - who was half-German - inability to pronounce that word correctly, but nobody dared to correct her, so everybody around her started mispronouncing it it to not upset her. So "sked-youl" is correct, same as you say "skitso-frenee-yah" for "schizophrenia".
@@einundsiebenziger5488 You’re a liar.
Yes, they are heavier.
Facial hair?! We know why
The modern military needs some way to tell the men from the women.
Stupid to adapt the 6.8 with a special case to get the pressures necessary to achieve the fps in the new XM8. They could have gotten more range with going with 6mm ARC or 6.5 Grendel or .22 Grendel used a 90 Grain bullet.
Russia body armor is non existent or not at all. I’m sure China will be cheaply made too. They value life as much as Russia I’m sure:
Test it in Ukraine first.
There’s not a lot of them.
@@Gridlocked Still. Test. You have such opportunity to down to earth battle test. Give it to any American volunteer from Ukrainian foreign legion if you do not have special forces there yet. Test.
Ukriane is homosexual
New rifle looks chubby not sleek.
I have no issue with the round but the rifle is trash. Terrible QC.
Direct fire from handheld rifles and machineguns cause less than 4% of casualties in Ukraine. Meanwhile Artillery causes 80+% and HE from vehicles (Main Battle Tanks and mainly Infantry fighting vehicles) is close to 10%.
98+% of rifle fire misses the target. Regardless of caliber. Have fun carrying even heavier ammunition that will miss its target.
Rifle caliber literally barely matters in a war. And what does the Army do? Cancels the M1299 howitzer (ERCA) and is stuck with the Bradley IFV from the 1970s. But gets pretty new (useless) rifles. Congratulations.
I am going to laugh my ass off when i see an Army squad with these fancy new rifles dismount from a ancient rocked down shitty Bradley IFV. Hilarious. It's just a pet project of some General paid by SIG. This will not improve the capability of a fighting force any bit, probably even harm it because of heavier ammo weight.
I hear you on that. The whole point of 5.56 was to carry more. I'd rather have 30 extra rounds of something smaller than run out of ammo.
As it was the same case for WW2, but that didn’t stop firearms from evolving.
The Bradley is on its way out of service.
the big difference between the US and Ukraine is the US will actually have air supremacy
Ask yourself this. Why is direct fire so ineffective? Could it be that a majority of those poor saps in Ukraine don’t have optics? Probably.
Rifle caliber does matter. Ask anybody from Afghanistan how 5.56 fairs in the mountains at such long ranges. There’s a reason the 240 still exists. .308 is required to engage targets at longer ranges. The Army has done research into Afghanistan and determined that most of their engagements happened at longer ranges. On top of this, magnified optics are becoming more and more prevalent and they need a longer ranged round for the optics to be effective
Lebron James, NBA GOAT
Not even close
very gay
What ever happened to opsec. Yall so desperate to grift a fraction of a penny per view. That you decided to say screw it lets tell the whole world what this unit has. The stupidity of modern america is truly outstanding.
Don’t get the nonsense about allowing beard as a matter of getting on with time and relating better with potential recruits. If a guy tells you he doesn’t want to join up because you don’t allow beard, do you seriously think he’s the right kind of recruit.
Your empire is fallimg down, some new shiny weapons cant do anything about it
Lul see you in 100 years
@@GLoveJF100 years ? Lmao we gonna be fighting with stick and stones by that time
True
Must be pressure from the muslims to grow beards. RIP UK
New 6.8mm is a SELF EVIDENT disaster. 🎉 Barn doors are completely safe. 6ft 200 pound men have problems.
Someone paid someone off. Designated sharp shooters were designed for this.
It just so happens Sig Sauer won both pistol and the rifle contracts. Issues are already appearing on the pistols. Supposedly one of the generals in charge of the rifle programs now works for Sig Sauer
@@Chewee394 "Oh what a surprise". Corruption in a Pentagon procurement program...it could be worse, could be a F35 gun.
@@Chewee394What’s wrong with SiG being the main weapons manufacturer for the Army? Colt has been in that same position for decades, did you cry foul?