My notes (with my comments) on this development in the Colt Canada presentation at RCMI: The rifle is still based on the Stoner design (aka the M16 and AR-15), and it’s chambered for the 5.56x45mm NATO caliber. It features fully ambidextrous weapon controls, just like the latest versions of the Canadian C7 and C8. The weapon will be 1/2 pound lighter than a Colt M4 with a comparable optic, thermal and laser mounted. The current metallic cartridge small arms ammunition is at the developmental apex. Colt Canada is not looking at moving away from the 5.56x45mm NATO. Integrated sound suppressor. Keeping the direct-impingement action makes a lot of sense. As the suppressor is designed as part of the weapon from the start, there will be no point-of-impact shift issue to deal with. Monolithic upper receiver with modular accessory interface. It looks like the Magpul M-Lok system. Btw, Colt Canada developed their monolithic upper design way before Vltor and LMT did theirs. New collapsible stock. Finally! Colt Canada is moving away from the original Colt Fiberlite CAR stock design. Built-in modular power & data rail system. Optic and accessories mounted on it not only get power from the rail, but it also allow data communication between the devices. This could be a simple activation button, to feeding images from a thermal imager. The power & data interface is the dual small round contacts between the Pictinny rail slots. Central power pack at the rear of the weapon. From the look of it, it’s mounted under the buffer tube. The location is probably for counter-balancing the weight of the suppressor mounted at the front of the weapon. The digital optic sight. It’s probably a fixed 4x prism sight with digital display overlay inside showing range/ballistic data (for the rifle and the under-barrel grenade launcher), and allows image feed from thermal imaging device. In addition, the sight has an etched reticle and it will work as a simple traditional 4x rifle sight without power or if the electronics die. It’s interesting to see who is the actual manufacturer of this sight. It is likely either ELCAN or Trijicon. Wireless networking built-in, wired data connection, navigation and inertial sensors. Well, I’m not so sure about having all of those mounted onto a rifle is a good idea. All of those features are part of the Canadian Forces/Colt Canada’s SWORD System. [video=youtube;bHcy7b-JWyI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHcy7b-JWyI[/video] http://www.alloutdoorstech.com/phot...eveloping-a-new-combat-rifle-us-marine-corps/ Interesting development in the AR series. Im wondering how the integral suppressor will work long term. The optics are fascinating, going to have to read up on it. I wonder how far off this is from limited use? The tragic thing is with Obama in the White House, its more likely our allies will have to use force. The worlds bad guys are emboldened by a weak POTUS.
Hey US Conservative. Don't have time to watch the entire video right now, will later on. Did Colt Canuck say why they are sticking with the 5.56X45 varmint cartridge and not adopting a new cartridge like maybe the Grendel 6.5X39 ? A few years ago I thought that the U.S. military was going to dump varmint 5.56 and move up to something larger that could actually reach out and touch a bad guy at 500 meters and kill him with one shot ?
Sticking with 5.56 is just stupid in this day and age with body armor being readily available to pretty much any organization with a bit of cash. Dump it and move on already.
More effective target identification is probably ruling this, and weapon employment options means if the troop cannot get that target id effectively at range, then you don't need the precision reach. Especially in urban environments where every local mug has the same equipment no matter which side they are on. So then when a threat becomes hostile the suppression fire becomes less about precision and more about recce by fire so other weapon systems can locate engaged hostiles. So personal weapons can be shorter ranged, which is where the idea to put in dedicated sharpshooters within maneuver elements probably bubbled up from. Its meant to be heading to a more ISR directed shaped effect game rather then a soldier to soldier shooting competition game. I guess they want to protect the troops lives more, and hope to have a better umbrella of fire support for those maneuver elements, whether it be supporting elements, indirect fires or direct fires of various lethality and precision to suit the environment and threat better. Anyhow, can I have one?
And that kind of myopic thinking is what ends up biting the military in the ass down the road. If nothing else we learned in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere that soldiers will have to engage targets at all sorts of different ranges and you can't rely on a sniper being in the area all the time and even if he is that assumes that the sniper is in a position to take a shot. Are they going to put snipers on every convoy that drives around and gets ambushed? We have won most of the gun battles precisely because US soldiers are trained to take accurate shots and not just spray and pray like many untrained militants do. At some point though, just as with body armor getting more and more common the jihadists will figure out that they should also be carefully placing their shots instead of just throwing bullets all over. Stop trying to overly rely on specific elements in ground combat.......it NEVER ends up working according to plan. Maximize each soldiers killing capabilities so that when that situation does occur......and it will....they will still have the upper hand.
Yea but its that kind of myopic thinking which is ignoring change. Nothing ever works to plan. The more they rely on technology, the more they will have to rely on it.
Its not a question of technology or ignoring it. They just want to continue relying on 5.56 even though there are superior munitions out there. There is literally no reason why they couldn't switch to superior ammo other than they are following the old axiom about generals fighting the last war. The only people ignoring technology and change are the ones NOT trying to switch from 5.56.
Depends on the tech, and patrol order weights. If other systems can operate at those ranges better for surveillance, targeting and prosecution then I think transformation is meant to be more about avoiding using troops to place themselves in harms way to acquire that, and also operate personal weapons onto that threat as required. The information flow should speed up and the extent of information available increase which means decision making and accountability is going to be more complex and stringent. I understand troops want better effect, and for a rifleman that means a larger round among other things... but for the above stated reasons this might not be the best course of action all things considered.
Real men shoot 7.62x39mm. Seriously, the trend in milspec guns is high velocity rather than hitting power. Good at close to medium ranges, seriously limited at longer ones. The 5.56 ammo is easier to lug around, too. The Canuck Colt gun is clearly designed for urban warfare, house-to-house clearing grunt work - A Canadian speciality.
What about the weight of heavier cartridges though? I've always heard that that the immense 200 round magazines of the SAW, along with their ability to lay down such huge and sustained fields of fire, would be impossible with 7.62 mm cartridges
5.56 is standard throughout NATO. If we keep any sort of ammo standardization, that means all of NATO would have to agree to it, and then every NATO ally would have to change out their main battle rifle. I just don't see that as likely as long as we belong to NATO.
Weight would be a critical factor for a light automatic weapon. So would range. Assuming you are comparing intermediate rounds (7.62x39 vs 5.56 NATO) in a light weapon, the 5.56 wins in trajectory, weight, and velocity (which is a factor in a general purpose round especially in penetration capability). Accuracy is generally better too. The 7.62x39 would penetrate better. The differences would mostly be greater with a full power 30 caliber round like the 7.62x51 NATO. How this new Canadian carbine works out will be interesting to see. For the role of a general issue carbine, the M4 its based on has been proven. The suppressor will increase back pressure and fouling, but perhaps being an integral design its effects can be minimized. Or perhaps it runs into issues with more frequent jamming. As for the tech gizmo's, I have no idea how they will work out, but it might impact future US weapons designs.
The US is pretty much NATO if we do something they will follow. You don't have to switch everyone over immediately either. It's not like everyone uses just 5.56 ammo there are different ammos already out there. The 5.56 would just be slowly phased out over time.
I personally hate the 556. Every time I engage a target I feel like I'm holding a squirt gun that came from a cereal box.
The the SR-25 and M-14 became real useful. In towns in Iraq, we wanted to shoot back at the guy with a dragonov, or pop the guy with an RPG. If we had a rooftop.. great. In both Iraq + Afghanistan the classic guy with a gillie suit ain't as useful if there's not much vegetation. In Iraq the bad guy can be using a car or wall as cover. You want a bullet to bust through. In Afghanistan.. the terrain could mean the hostiles were 400-600 m off. We wanted semi Auto that can do that range. We needed a Marksman at squad lever.. since MANY battles were a couple dozen guys against a couple dozen.
Well.. the point was to have a LOAD troops could tote for hours or days,in harsh climate and terrain. In some circumstances a 30.06 Garand may top an AK or M-16. However....it's HEAVY. The M-14 has 7.62 and can do a scope better than the Garand. I ALSO would like a gun with good punch and range. gives a choice .....rather pick them off from a distance than do a close in cluster-fck
Not to mention most of our firefights now are from a long distance. They fire from 300+ meters out so we mix them up with civilians when we get close. But they always forget that we'll just call in the A10
