U.S. military has issued a RFI, looking for a 7.62 NATO battle rifle

YeeHaa

YeeHaa

Member
Charter Life Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2016
Messages
6,799
Location
T'ville ~ Trinity
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
The requirements for the platform sound oddly familiar:

• The rifle must be a Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) system readily available for purchase today. Modified or customized systems are not being considered.

• Caliber: 7.62x51mm

• Available barrel lengths, to include 16 and 20 inch barrels, without muzzle device attached.

• Muzzle device capable of or adaptable to auxiliary devices for:
— Compensation of muzzle climb
— Flash suppression
— Sound Suppression

• Fire Control: Safe, Semi-automatic, and fully automatic capable.

• All controls (e.g. selector, charging handle) are ambidextrous and operable by left and right handed users

• Capable of mounting a 1.25 inch wide military sling

• Capable of accepting or mounting the following accessories.
— Forward grip/bi-pod for the weapon
— variable power optic

• Detachable magazine with a minimum capacity of 20 rounds

• Folding or collapsing buttstock adjustable to change the overall length of the weapon

• Foldable backup iron sights calibrated/adjustable to a maximum of 600 meters range

• Weight less than 12lb unloaded and without optic

• Extended Forward Rail


http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...-issues-new-contract-7-62-nato-battle-rifles/
 
The military really wants, from what we civilians can tell, to move towards a 6.5 caliber like .264USA with a metallic rim and polymer case.

Something like the SCAR-H our Colt 901 would allow them to start fielding rifles that are caliber convertible and would be compatible with the new round.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
 
More waste of our tax money....Give the grunts a heavier gun with less ammo, that sounds like a great idea!....
 
Last edited:
YeeHaa said:
• All controls (e.g. selector, charging handle) are ambidextrous and operable by left and right handed users
Click to expand...
Isn't that redundant? o_O
 
What? No grenade launcher attachment?
 
Nah, they want the Ljungman. It's got direct impingement, so troops will be used to it, and it fires the 6.5x55 that we are told they want to go to. What's not to love?

 
Last edited:
I have seen this blow up all over the i-net this past week...Solicitations were due on 06 June, so submission time came and went two months ago.

AND, it is only an RFI (Request For Information)...it is not a proposal and not a request for actual firearms to be purchased. "The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of this RFI or to otherwise pay for the information submitted in response to same."

AND only 10000 rifles...that will equip the Regiment, the 82D BCTs and maybe one other BCT, thats it. The ammo, magazines, personnel kit...not a whisper about these items...the log tail to transition, even just the IBCTs, to a 762 platform is enormous...this is what a budget programmers refer to as a UFR...Unfunded Request. Have you ever seen 762 on stripper clips?

The Army has always been its own worst enemy and I will not be the least bit surprised if we do something this dumb. 762 platforms and similar types have their utility, but not for the masses...IMO. Lets just wait and see what really happens...

These days, I get more agitated about small solicitations like this from DHS that are popping up on a near continuous basis:

"The DHS Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Located at 1300 W. Richey Ave., Artesia, New Mexico 88210 has a requirement for: Brand Name, attached is the Justification and Approval.
Colt 5.56MM Full-Auto 14.5" Barrel with/ Detachable Handle # R0977.
The requirement is for 23 each, 5.56 Full-Auto, Select Fire, 14.5" Barrel M4 Rifle w/ Detachable Carry Handle manufactured with United States Military specifications.
Include shipping cost if applicable.
Required delivery 15 September 2017."
 
The RFP was released...initial request is for seven (7) weapons for T&E with final purchase of up to 50,000 units.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportu...&id=da1ae0e7154e4e8028a4f03243987c72&_cview=1

Again, IMHO...the Army is its own worst enemy and moving to a 762 platform for the masses does not fix the problem. I still see a lot of issues moving forward and surprised that DoD will allow it, especially after the USMC sticking with 556 and moving to the Hk.

Its like our troops and equipment in Europe right now...some troops in ACUs, some in OCPs, some tanks are brown, some are green, some are woodland...the Army cannot decide to put all soldiers in the same uniform or what color its tanks should really be most of the time and now we don't know what rifle to use...lets see, 50000...most (but not all) AC BCTs covered (but not all support troops, so we mix ammo and weapons in the BDE...log nightmare), none of the ARNG BCTs...hell, they have all just now gotten M4s.
 
Spend the money on rifle marksmanship, less time in classrooms on PC/EO lectures. I've learned to shoot a M4 and M16 with irons out past 600m. Give them the optics on the guns that they can see a target that far. Thats why the Army has choosen 300m for training is past that you can not ID a target as a threat with the naked eye. Any advances in 7.62mm to penetrate body armor that they want the rifle for can be also done cheaper with a 5.56mm.

CD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom