Best Choice for USMC Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR)?

last SG · 2008-01-04T00:35:48+00:00

Never noticed it before but if you watch the Ultimax video again, the weapon has the M16 mag adaptor on. It is chrome in colour so you can't miss it. Only on...

chino65 SG

And we complain about our ex-SAF joining the government... Mr. Green

Shotgun SG

I'm not sure. We're talking about giants such as Colt here. They've got lots of political influence there that VT Systems doesn't. If lobbies such as Colt can thus far prevent a ban on civilian assault rifles, influencing USMC's IAR selection isn't out of its reach as well.

chino65 SG

The USMC tender for IAR was announced more than 1 year ago.

Actually if you read the USMC requirement - especially the part about the 100 round mag and being something " off the shelf " instead of development - it sounded like they are asking for the Ultimax as nothing else fit the bill then.

And the Ultimax Mk4 was ready amd waiting.

But IMO the powers-to-be delayed the process and gave time for Colt to develop the Colt IAR. That's why the whole thing has been dragged for donkey years and until now nothing is concrete.

Fu.cking politics.

davechng SG

YEah! it is all politics and who to grease and who you know
!
I guess we are not marketing the U100 as aggressive!

I wonder if the LWRC rifle has a quickj change barrel ??

DAveC

equlus84 SG

Well, I think the Ultimax will stilll stand a high chance............

Bcos most squad level automatic weapons for fire support, is either a watered-down MG eg. M249 or souped-up heavy barreled rifle eg. L85, Type95 LMG. The thing is Ultimax falls nicely in between these two category. While the souped up rifle can enjoy commonality of parts with the squad, the ROF is low, the barrel cannot be interchanged, like-wise, the water down MG is less controllable, and more heavy. Although the ultimax Mk4 have some short comings, but it offers some desirable features that may help it outshine the other competitiors.

Controllability: The low recoil of the Ultimax is well known. I remembered firing it without much memories of any significant recoil. The clip showing the Ultimax being fired by the chin is the best evidence of this property. Compare to how the well built host in the discovery channel video shake abt everytime he squeeze trigger. This is important as combat terrains are getting more and more urbanise. The M249 may have a front grip, but due to the recoil, the accuracy is sacrified. The may also be no available wall or flatform for you to deploy the bipod of the weapon. Judging from how the host shakes while firing the colt IAR, I wonder how accurate will the firing be.

Reputation: No doubt, colt may have more money for marketing, more lobby power, but the question is prevalent. The marines tested the Ultimax Mk4 and listed it as the most favourable candidate compared to other guns, so this is going to be more favorable to us as we already made a gd impression into their heads. Besides, the marines are frequently deployed over seas for combat missions, so I doubt they are willing to accept a weapon that they do not favor and press it for comabt, as it is a matter of life and death for them, so choosing one that is favored is the most prob option

LazerLordz SG

Time to play more lobbying games by hiring ex Marine Generals to the Board of VT? Laughing

In short, you want the arms deals, you get the right fellows who have the ears of those in the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Pentagon power players.

It's easier to bid for Marine contracts than Army, because the jarheads are less likely to play around with their equipment. However, you must appeal to their patriotic sentiments. Wink

spencer99 SG

I am impressed with the Colt IAR's flexibility to fire from both closed and open bolt...

For a LMG/SAW, to have option for single-shot and to able to fire from closed bolt is not really an advantage... because you will be firing suppressive auto fire at full auto mode, the incremental accuracy of a closed bolt is not really an advantage...

If the Marines are fighting coventional warfare, maybe they would need a "straight" LMG like the Ultimax.

But if you look at the video as well as the current situation they are facing in Iraq... they are looking at a "FIBUA" type of scenario. In this scenario, a "longer" and "heavier" LMG might not be the best fit, they are not going to set it up on a hill as a firebase and then lay down full auto suppressive fire on the opposing hill.

If their need is a weapon that pretty much "look" (training) and "feel" (weight) like a rifle and is "capable" of suppressive full auto fire then the Colt IAR with is a hybrid AR and LMG will be suitable.

The "legendary" low recoil and accurate full-auto fire from a Ultimax is not really that much of an advantage in an urban environement,

my two cents.

touchstone_2000 SG

IMHO we don't stand a chance against the lobbying power of Colt Ind. Otherwise the M4 would have been thrown out long ago.

Now for the SF community the U100 acceptance will be easier due to less public oversight.

kotay SG

Agree. In any case, I've seen my SAW gunners display tremendous accuracy sequentially taking out a row of single targets with double taps ... at 200-300m

If the Marines are fighting coventional warfare, maybe they would need a "straight" LMG like the Ultimax.

But if you look at the video as well as the current situation they are facing in Iraq... they are looking at a "FIBUA" type of scenario. In this scenario, a "longer" and "heavier" LMG might not be the best fit, they are not going to set it up on a hill as a firebase and then lay down full auto suppressive fire on the opposing hill.

If their need is a weapon that pretty much "look" (training) and "feel" (weight) like a rifle and is "capable" of suppressive full auto fire then the Colt IAR with is a hybrid AR and LMG will be suitable.

I don't have figures for the Colt's IAR, in what way do you feel the U-100 to be heavier or longer than the Colt IAR?

Look and feel is something the end-users can get used to once the policy decision has been made. Just like we did with the SAR-21. The proposed designs for US Future infantry weapon systems certainly did not see the need to have any legacy look or feel.

The "legendary" low recoil and accurate full-auto fire from a Ultimax is not really that much of an advantage in an urban environement,

This is the part where I totally disagree.

Fighting in Urban terrain is on where you will frequently be forced to fire from an off-hand postion. It is because of this that a more controllable weapon will prove it's superiority over an auto weapon that isn't as controllable.

Try firing a U-100 round the corner with the butt hanging in the air ... now try that with an M-16. You tell me which will provide more accurate auto fire?

chino65 SG

I agree the ultimax controllability and accuracy will win hands down. But as in my earlier post, I feel the need for a magazine adaptor to take non-modified M16 mags will be a big sore point.

And also, the folks at LWRC are on to some inside info by making their IAR come in a short barrel for urban. And its advantage is great parts and operation similarities with the existing AR used by USMC.

I'm sure the short barrel version of our Ultimax will do very well, too. And the ability to switch easily between a long and short barrel is a GREAT plus that the LWRC IAR doesn't have (I think). But how much will a short barrel on the Ultimax increase the recoil and affect the accuracy?

LazerLordz SG

IIRC, there is a para version of the U100 . Not sure if it is still produced.

Someone actually made a website for the Ultimax vs M249 Minimi comparison. Laughing

http://www.ultimaxsaw.com/Ultimax%20100%20Models.html

And the Ultimax Mk4 (or what its supposed to be, in this image)

Note the common rail system, front grip and a different buttstock and the Tri-Picatinny Rail at the fore (for vertical grip, lights, lasers, etc.)

Fatum SG

the "para" version looks simply like one fitted with a shortened barrel and the butt removed that's all .... Laughing

kotay SG

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. It's a matter of how you spin it ...

It can be viewed as a deficiency in original design necessitating an adaptor. It can also be viewed as a potential failure point.

OTOH, the magazine adaptor can also be viewed as a plus point. Allowing the weapon to accept different magazines without a need to do an A2 version. It allows the weapon an expansion path should bigger/better magazine designs be developed down the road.

But its advantage is great parts and operation similarities with the existing AR used by USMC.

The parts similarity and lack of need for re-tooling is a big plus though.

At the end of day, unfortunately, the politics of procurement will most probably mean that the U100 will not get selected. It will most probably play bridesmaid again ...

kotay SG

Just thought I add ... this is what I wished they had done to the U100;

i) Retain the working mechanism but do a polymer body (ala SAR-21) that'll accept the SAR-21 polymer mag.

ii) Redesign the drum mag to have a removable back cover so that rounds can be reloaded by simply slotting them in. Then load the spring by a hand crank ... QED?

iii) Collapsible stock like the para version of the M239 Minimi.

iv) and for LL ... pic rails at 3, 6, 9 and 12 o'clock. :p

LazerLordz SG

12 o'clock? Shocked Laughing

That's way extra.

kotay SG

what? no 12 o'clock rails? How you gonna mount optics? Smile

chino65 SG

The more I learn about the LWRC IAR the more I like it.

Contrary to what I thought, the LWRC IAR is piston-driven.

So altogether, it has 3 great improvements over the original M4: Piston, open-bolt, and heavier barrel.

But, the more LWRC IAR videos I watch, the more I see how massive the recoil can be on full-auto. Controllability and accuracy on fullauto must not be its strong points.

LWRC should try to reduce its rate of fire on fullauto.
...

So if the USMC is listening, here's my recommendation: Mr. Green

Phase in the LWRC as standard infantry Individual Weapons to gradually replace all M16's and M4's.

For IAR, adopt the Ultimax with the following modifications:

Be able to take M16 magazines as standard. For 100-rounds use C-mags.

Adjustable length AR butt for body armour. Short 16-inch barrel.

Remove current bipod and foregrip and replace with the P-rail version that's a grip/bipod all in one. Retain iron sights but P-rail for optics and other stuff.

Shotgun SG

I don't know if an "improved" m4 is the right description. The IAR essentially a SAW built from an M4. Different role despite similar environment of operation.

I'd like to see the IAR take in Beta-C mags though.

LazerLordz SG

Eh paiseh. Embarassed

chino65 SG

LPPL.

« Previous Page Next Page »