Kevin Mackie
The Army wants an upgrade from the M16.
Several companies have key products that may result in a contract.
May be too early to make any bets, but watch for developments.
An initiative to find a better rifle and/or accompanying munitions has been resurrected by the US Army. There was a battery of tests conducted from 2011 to 2013 to find an improved weapon system whose performance out-scaled the M16/M4 but the initiative was abandoned because none of the tested replacement rifles/ammunition showed significant enough of an improvement above that current platform. Another study was started in 2014 and will wrap up in the next couple months that researched further the direction the army should go with their small arms capabilities. Today I will discuss what implications this renewed hunt may have for publicly traded firearm-defense-munitions companies that could be contracted to research, develop, design, and manufacture the new weapon/ammunition, or which companies might be contracted because they already manufacture what the military is looking for. Any contract would potentially be worth hundreds of millions of dollars and could send the lucky stock soaring. Timelines stated by army personnel site 2020 as the hopeful date to have a working prototype.
First, a brief backdrop of why the army is looking for something new is important to provide context. The M16 platform has been used pervasively by the US Army since it's introduction in 1964 where it saw heavy use in Vietnam. It has gone through several adaptations and improvements since that time and now the M4 is the most commonly used weapon for soldiers. In engagements with the enemy the M4 is being outperformed mostly due to poorer range. Our army is being outreached by our adversaries weapons. While the M4 using 5.56mm NATO ammunition has an effective point range of about 500 meters, the PK machine gun with a 7.62X54R cartridge used pervasively by the Taliban and ISIS has a range of 800-1000 meters. Imagine being in a street fight with a guy who has longer arms. Other problems with the M4 and the 5.56 round include ineffectiveness due to enemies improved body armor and too frequent malfunctions (especially in dusty/dirty environments). So leaders are looking at different options to better equip our infantry, something that will shoot reliably, going farther and hitting harder. They need a round that can outperform the 5.56mm without giving up magazine capacity or adding too much weight. Something in the 6.5-7mm range is what the army is looking for.
No comments:
Post a Comment