PDA

View Full Version : Does the Army want SMGs???



EDELWEISS
05-12-2018, 07:01 AM
OMG.... I saw this and just smiled :haha::haha::haha:

BACK TO SUBGUNS? US Army Releases RFI for Sub Compact Weapons
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/05/09/us-army-releases-rfi-for-sub-compact-weapons/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=2018-05-13&utm_campaign=Weekly+Newsletter


The US Army’s PEO Soldier – Project Manager Soldier Weapons has issued an Request for Information (RFI) to obtain industry feedback on possible submissions to Sub Compact Weapons (SCW) evaluations. The specification details offered by the Project Manager Soldier Weapons (PMSW) are scant and extremely broad. Describing potential SCWs as being select fire weapons, chambered in 9x19mm and having MIL-STD 1913 rail (Picatinny Rail) space.
The RFI, published 2 May, makes no mention of physical dimensions such as size or weight and instead seeks to cast as wide a net as possible for potential submissions. It does, however, call for suppressors, spares and slings for the weapon (not holsters). Potential future SCW submissions will have to chamber ‘9×19 mm military grade’ ammunition – meaning both M882 ball and the new XM1153 Special Purpose 9mm Round from Winchester.

Interestingly, ambidextrous controls are not an initial requirement and there is no mention of a folding stock. The 9x19mm requirement is likely to avoid the addition of a new ammunition type into the logistics chain, however, 9mm is unable to defeat even light body armour. The move leaves behind the former interest in small-calibre, high-velocity rounds, capable of defeating some body armour, such as FN’s 5.7×28mm and HK’s 4.6×30mm popular in the late 90s and 2000s.

barnetmill
05-12-2018, 07:51 AM
OMG.... I saw this and just smiled :haha::haha::haha:

BACK TO SUBGUNS? US Army Releases RFI for Sub Compact Weapons
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/05/09/us-army-releases-rfi-for-sub-compact-weapons/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=2018-05-13&utm_campaign=Weekly+Newsletter


The US Army’s PEO Soldier – Project Manager Soldier Weapons has issued an Request for Information (RFI) to obtain industry feedback on possible submissions to Sub Compact Weapons (SCW) evaluations. The specification details offered by the Project Manager Soldier Weapons (PMSW) are scant and extremely broad. Describing potential SCWs as being select fire weapons, chambered in 9x19mm and having MIL-STD 1913 rail (Picatinny Rail) space.
The RFI, published 2 May, makes no mention of physical dimensions such as size or weight and instead seeks to cast as wide a net as possible for potential submissions. It does, however, call for suppressors, spares and slings for the weapon (not holsters). Potential future SCW submissions will have to chamber ‘9×19 mm military grade’ ammunition – meaning both M882 ball and the new XM1153 Special Purpose 9mm Round from Winchester.

Interestingly, ambidextrous controls are not an initial requirement and there is no mention of a folding stock. The 9x19mm requirement is likely to avoid the addition of a new ammunition type into the logistics chain, however, 9mm is unable to defeat even light body armour. The move leaves behind the former interest in small-calibre, high-velocity rounds, capable of defeating some body armour, such as FN’s 5.7×28mm and HK’s 4.6×30mm popular in the late 90s and 2000s.
If they want to defeat light body armor they might take a hard look at the 7.62x25 with improved projectiles. It is a battle tested round that has been extensively used in many theaters of war.
If the must stay with the 9x19 parabellum, then they should look into high velocity sabot loads for the 9mm firing a tungsten core.

Gabriel Suarez
05-12-2018, 08:14 AM
Or they could teach guys to shoot people in the face...just saying.

Popshot
05-12-2018, 09:03 AM
A new smg - cool!

Will the winner be truly new, like a Sig MPX? Or, a "renewed" legacy Colt or MP5 system?

Don't get too excited, though. Many, many years and truckloads of money will be exhausted to get to the end result.

callmebubba
05-12-2018, 09:07 AM
We all know there’s room in any multi-faceted force for an SMG. Probably just trying to replace the few, old, complex MP5’s that are still around. I assume this will be a small contract if/ when it drops. A stocked chassis for the 320 or a complete gun that uses the same mags would make sense but that’s unlikely.
If AP is a major concern they just need to get some short uppers for existing M4 lowers and some of those 4” super rugged suppressors to take the edge off indoors.

Of course none of this will happen. Just throwing out some thoughts on the matter. I was in from 08 to 15 and saw exactly 6 MP5’s. Three in the arms room at the cool guy firebase we were on in Astan and 3 on a generals PSD at the same location.

EDELWEISS
05-12-2018, 09:38 AM
IF it is serious, I do find it interesting that they want to stay with standard 9mm over the PDW rounds (FN 5.7 etc). Staying with 9mm makes sense, especially as the specialty PDW rounds were designed to defeat SOFT body armor and since the world has pretty much moved past soft armor to plates, theres no reason to stick with "boutique" rounds, when plate armor is the new standard. As Gabe says, maybe they should just train for head shots....


and yeah I'm am excited about any official interest in SMGs....

Bold
05-12-2018, 11:48 AM
Reads like they are just testing the waters to see what is out there at this point - this is nowhere near the "we need an X to do Y and Z." you'd expect if they were already getting serious about actually buying new SMGs.
Will be interesting to see where this is going; SMGs seem to be very much a niche weapon today.

EDELWEISS
05-12-2018, 12:38 PM
Reads like they are just testing the waters to see what is out there at this point - this is nowhere near the "we need an X to do Y and Z." you'd expect if they were already getting serious about actually buying new SMGs.
Will be interesting to see where this is going; SMGs seem to be very much a niche weapon today.

Agreed; but it does sound like they are definitely interested in some version of a SMG, maybe Gabe should suggest a Glock PDW?

jaowens
05-12-2018, 02:34 PM
Agreed; but it does sound like they are definitely interested in some version of a SMG, maybe Gabe should suggest a Glock PDW?

While I love the Glock PDW, it is NOT a substitute for a dedicated SMG. It is more of a needs must in order to skirt the NFA. Now it is a great weapons system, I am absolutely not knocking it, a go to war SMG it is not however.

Ryan Taylor
05-12-2018, 03:58 PM
I have been drawing up a plan to make a sort of piston/blowback hybrid that can fire extremely over pressure 9mm (think open class guns) all the way down to 147 grain subs with 100% reliability.

I am on my phone so dont have drawing but try to imagine this and if it already exists (probably doesnt work) let me know:

Gas port drilled immediately in front of chamber ala hk p7. A piston is pushed back towards the carrier, pushing down a locking mechanism, locking the bolt. Once pressure drops, a spring pushes the pistol bacl forward, raising the locking mechanism and freeing the bolt. Bolt is now essentialy pure blowback operation.

The idea is, with low pressure ammo, the piston is never pushed back locking the bolt, allowing the gun to cyce normally. High pressure ammo is locked until chamber pressure drops and action can 'unlock' via the piston spring.

Im gonna build this first on an ar, with proprietary upper, and if that doesnt work, it will look like a mac10 until i give up or it works.

H60DoorGunner
05-12-2018, 04:49 PM
Or they could teach guys to shoot people in the face...just saying.

I doubt that will happen. Most units in the Army devote an incredibly insufficient amount of time to pistol marksmanship and tactics. Which always surprised me, being that many who get issued a pistol, will probably only have a pistol if they need it.

Currently, the standard is "hit the silhouette anywhere 30 times from 25 yds". Lots of guys still can't manage that, so I doubt they'll raise the bar.


Reads like they are just testing the waters to see what is out there at this point - this is nowhere near the "we need an X to do Y and Z." you'd expect if they were already getting serious about actually buying new SMGs.
Will be interesting to see where this is going; SMGs seem to be very much a niche weapon today.

A pistol is a niche weapon too in a large mechanized army. I doubt they'd give everyone a sub gun, but a tank or air crew would certainly benefit from the use of them.

callmebubba
05-12-2018, 05:21 PM
Currently, the standard is "hit the silhouette anywhere 30 times from 25 yds". Lots of guys still can't manage that, so I doubt they'll raise the bar. The one time I qualified with a pistol the staff E7 next to me told me 3 times “Slow down and qualify.” As I dumped mags as fast as I could. He shot 0/30 first attempt.



A pistol is a niche weapon too in a large mechanized army. I doubt they'd give everyone a sub gun, but a tank or air crew would certainly benefit from the use of them. I was issued a pistol for 3 months in 7 years. Issued to a position, not a need. The officers NEED a pistol and an ACOG. The guys who actually get in gunfights can fight over what’s left after that.

Bold

Mike OTDP
05-12-2018, 05:55 PM
The Army small arms procurement office seems to do this sort of thing regularly - go out and do a Request for Information, then cancel the whole affair after getting some guns to play with.

I suspect it's a combination of make-work for the office team, and keeping abreast of market developments.

C.J. Singleton
05-17-2018, 07:34 AM
Couple of soldiers I shoot uspsa with were telling me about some field surgeons that are connected to the special forces they were at JRTC for a rotation. They said these people were armed with UMPs

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Bold
05-17-2018, 08:12 AM
A pistol is a niche weapon too in a large mechanized army. I doubt they'd give everyone a sub gun, but a tank or air crew would certainly benefit from the use of them.

Of course the SMG will not be for everyone - I was more thinking in the (rather common) direction of: why would you want a pistol caliber SMG for these uses when short assault rifles or dedicated PDWs will do a much better job?
There was a dedicated and quite successful PDW back in WW2 (!) and now "we" are thinking about a pistol caliber SMG again? That is either for a very special and limited application or (much more likely) we are going in big, slow circles once more.

Huntindoc
05-21-2018, 09:28 AM
Meh.

It would be exciting if us peasants were able to purchase the original model. A semi-auto version is not the same to me. A glock PDW is lighter, likely smaller and more accurate not to mention significantly cheaper.

Randy Harris
05-21-2018, 10:12 AM
If they want to defeat light body armor they might take a hard look at the 7.62x25 with improved projectiles. It is a battle tested round that has been extensively used in many theaters of war.
If the must stay with the 9x19 parabellum, then they should look into high velocity sabot loads for the 9mm firing a tungsten core.

BOFORS makes a 9mm AP round that we do not use for Clinton administration fear of it falling into civilian hands....

Chainsaw76
06-26-2018, 04:50 PM
An M4 with 10" bbl and a 1 in 7 twist firing 75 gr. Projos would do the trick as would the same gun in 7.62x25 at a lot less money and time spent. Of course that doesn't leave a lot of wiggle room for bribes and kickbacks though.

jim

Bold
06-27-2018, 03:43 AM
If you want the gun to be as compact as possible an M4 is not a good solution.
But neither are most of the guns they are looking at... :facepalm:

Gabriel Suarez
06-28-2018, 07:34 AM
There are advantages to an SMG sized weapon that fires 9mm over a larger weapon that fires 5.56. Just as there are advantages over a handgun. The SMG is not a main battlefield weapon, but in its niche it will perform better than a rifle.

Greg Nichols
06-28-2018, 07:44 AM
There are advantages to an SMG sized weapon that fires 9mm over a larger weapon that fires 5.56. Just as there are advantages over a handgun. The SMG is not a main battlefield weapon, but in its niche it will perform better than a rifle.

Concur, in many situations (read: confined spaces), I can make a compact 5.56 work but it involves a lot of experience and techniques that aren't required with an SMG style/sized platform. Additionally in those spaces while a PDW will work in some situations I may desire a platform that is a little more substantial even if in the same caliber. Not to mention the varying benefits of different cartridges/calibers depending on the environment.

Chainsaw76
06-28-2018, 11:49 AM
I think armor crews would prefer a sub gun also due to their enclosed environment and other obvious factors. No larger than the M3a1 preferably smaller, firing something like the Bofors or Bofers + ammo would be nice. I feel the MAC 9/10 is a bit too small for all but the best and cyclic rate is far too high for most. 450 rpm or slower is about right, and even that is too high for second and third echelon soldiers to use efficiently.

While I detest them in theory and practice, a three round burst control trigger would be needed for rear echelon unmotivated/poorly trained users. Motivated front line troops with proper training should not need such an impediment. Suarez training could have practically any soldier efficiently employing a weapon of this type, but we all know that is unlikely to happen.

jim

Bold
06-28-2018, 01:25 PM
I don't think these SMGs are going to be for rear echelon troops.
From what I've read it's going to be a small number for rather well trained users in specialized applications.

Greg Nichols
06-28-2018, 01:45 PM
I don't think these SMGs are going to be for rear echelon troops.
From what I've read it's going to be a small number for rather well trained users in specialized applications.

It's possible that those in the rear may see a wider distribution as well due to their function not requiring a carbine but still, in the case of emergency, need an easily portable system that allows them to perform their function while easily carrying it with them. The nature of being in the rear where they are a passive support to active security personnel and a limited need for ballistic range could lead to the assignment of a smaller weapon system.

Bold
06-28-2018, 02:24 PM
I'm not saying it wouldn't make sense - just that the $ number floating around (ca. 450 K) suggests a rather small batch of guns, nowhere near enough to arm significant numbers of REMFs.


Issuing PDWs in large quantities for actual PDW purposes instead of being a small, lightweight assaulter's weapon or a highly concealable gun for the cool HSLD dudes...now that would be a big step (forward/backward/sideways? ;) ).

Greg Nichols
06-28-2018, 02:29 PM
I'm not saying it wouldn't make sense - just that the $ number floating around (ca. 450 K) suggests a rather small batch of guns, nowhere near enough to arm significant numbers of REMFs.


Issuing PDWs in large quantities for actual PDW purposes instead of being a small, lightweight assaulter's weapon or a highly concealable gun for the cool HSLD dudes...now that would be a big step (forward/backward/sideways? ;) ).

ya it's difficult to interject logic into a bureaucratic process.

Bold
06-29-2018, 03:54 AM
One more thought:
We've seen PDWs in rear echelon troops make the jump to crack frontline troops because the latter saw a use for them (best example: the M1 Carbine in WW2).

We've also seen planned PDWs not get to the rear echelon guys in the first place (because of money constraints etc.) and only be bought in rather small numbers for specialised units - as happened with the P90 and the MP7.


When PDWs are now explicitly procured for those specialised units/applications, I don't see a big chance for a trickle down-effect to the REMFs.
They don't have a lobby like the cool guys do and as there is an awful lot of them, anything you plan to buy for them means a lot of money - as opposed to the small crack units who get a lot of their stuff mainly because the procurement numbers mean it's all small change in the big picture.

coastalcop
06-29-2018, 07:15 AM
ya it's difficult to interject logic into a bureaucratic process.

Logic...... rarely the engine that propels bureaucracy. ;)

EDELWEISS
06-30-2018, 08:21 AM
There are advantages to an SMG sized weapon that fires 9mm over a larger weapon that fires 5.56. Just as there are advantages over a handgun. The SMG is not a main battlefield weapon, but in its niche it will perform better than a rifle.

EXACTLY Hahahaha I seem to remember this same argument about 10 years ago.