Jump to content
AIR-DEFENSE.NET

Ici on cause fusil


Berkut
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/03/hk-wins-usmc-iar-competition-big-news/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheFirearmBlog+%28The+Firearm+Blog%29

After a year of speculation and commentary from pundits, myself included, the Marine Times reports that the H&K has won the competition and that their entry will enter production next year ...

The Marine Corps has selected the infantry automatic rifle made by Heckler & Koch as the weapon that will replace the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon in infantry fire teams, a senior service official told Marine Corps Times on Wednesday.

The H&K IAR “was truly the best in the class on multiple levels and will finally allow the billet of automatic rifleman to be performed as intended without the disruption of the squad integrity that the M249 created,” Chief Warrant Officer 5 Jeffrey Eby, the Corps’ senior gunner, said in an e-mail.

Despite what is said in the above quotation, I do not think that the SAW is being replaced outright. The Marine Times has at times reported that the SAW would be replaced with the IAR, and at other times reported that it would augment the IAR, not replace it ...

The plan is to buy 4,100 IARs and reduce the number of SAWs in the Corps from 10,000 to 8,000, Cantwell said.

“We are still going to maintain SAWs in the company,” he said. “Only 2,000 SAWs will be replaced. The reminder will be kept as an organizational weapon for when commanders need them.”

The H&K entry was a modified version of their HK416 piston-operated AR-15 rifle. Unlike the Colt and FN entries, it is said to fire only from a closed bolt. Given the lack of an open-bolt fire mode I had presumed it was the least likely choice for an automatic rifle.

Presumably it is fitted with a heavy barrel, like H&K's previous, and commercially unsuccessful, attempt at the automatic rifle: the MG36. The Marine Corps has been reporting the weight of the 16.5" barreled H&K IAR as being 7.9 lbs. This is not possible as a standard 16.5" barreled Hk416 weights in at 7.84 lbs. I also think that the photo of the H&K IAR shown by the Military Times is that of a standard HK416.

HK416 standard rifle (not IAR)

I have contacted H&K to see if they are willing to publicly acknowledge if they have won. If they do, I will endeavor to get the specs of the new weapon.

UPDATE: I have written a follow up blog post here.

Many thanks to Mark and Matt for sending me the news.

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/12/05/update-on-the-iar-competition/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheFirearmBlog+%28The+Firearm+Blog%29

A couple of days ago I blogged about H&K winning the USMC's IAR competition. There has been much confusion regarding the IAR competition since then.

Dan Lamothe, who broke the news, updated his The Marine Times article and added that it now appears that the H&K IAR has not officially won but is the frontrunner ...

With several months of testing ahead, the decision isn’t considered final, but it makes the H&K model the clear front-runner in the competition.

...

The Corps will now put H&K IAR through five months of testing beginning in January and taking place in locations ranging from Panama to the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center and Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center in California, Eby said. The Corps has ordered 24 H&K IARs for testing, said Capt. Geraldine Care

Rob Curtis who blogs at GearScout (also part of the Military Times) wrote that the DoD appear to done a downselect, rather than awarding H&K an outright win ...

From what we understand, this is actually a downselect to just one system as opposed to a contract win

Dan send me an email regarding my previous comments on the supposed weight of the H&K IAR, which is almost identical to the standard HK416 carbine. He sent me the spec document which H&K provided him with. It does indeed list the weight as just 7.9 lbs!

Daniel E. Watters wrote that he suspects that the Marine command may have been framing the IAR as a partial M249 replacement but in reality they may have just wanted a piston operated full-auto carbine. By procuring what is sold as a new class of weapon they could sidestep the inter-service politics and bureaucracy ...

The weird thing is that the HK416 IAR is roughly the same weight as the M16A4, if not lighter when the latter is fitted with the M5 ARS. I'm certain that someone in Congress will ultimately ask what the HK416 can do that their issue M16A4 retrofitted with full-auto trigger groups can't.

Like others have mentioned, I can't help but wonder if the USMC didn't game the IAR requirements so that a basic carbine could win instead of a HBAR. The idea would be to gradually increase the number of IAR issued so that they could later justify standardizing on it to replace not just the infantry squad's M249, but their M16A4 and M4 as well. By framing it as a service-specific supplement to their M249, they skirted the need to argue with the other service branches over a set of joint requirements.

As for winning the contract, everyone needs to remember that Colt, FN, and HK were already awarded Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contracts for their IAR last year. An IDIQ contract guarantees the awardee that they will have a specific minimum of items ordered, with the possibility of additional orders up to a specific maximum. There is no guarantee that more than the stated minimum will ever be ordered. I've long suspected that contracting officers have been purposefully making multiple awards of IDIQ contracts prior to a final downselect in order to head off potential award protests by the disgruntled losers. It is my understanding that by accepting their IDIQ award, the contractor only has grounds to protest if the guaranteed minimum has not ordered before the end of the contract. They cannot protest that they did not receive additional orders in excess of the guaranteed minimum.

Make of all this information as you will. All I know is that DoD procurement was never designed to be understood by a mere mortal such as myself!

IAR ne serait qu'un plan pour éviter le lobby COLTien :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dans l'achat d'une arme réglementaire ou semi réglementaire le temps où seule les qualitès technique de l'engin primait sont révolu depuis ma première 22.

Un exemple simple le vrai vainqueur du marché des PA de la gendarmerie n'était pas italien mais germano-suisse dommage les italiens nous achetaient des hopitaux de campagne une de nos bests de l'époque et deviniez qui gagnee le concour sur un prix qui oubliait tous les accessoires ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mais quand même, la plupart des problèmes du M4 pourraient être résolus avec ces variantes à piston. A propos de M4, je me demandais si les dérivés du M4 (Bushmaster, Smith & Wesson M&P,...) étaient différents où si ce sont des copies conformes au plan mécanique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mais quand même, la plupart des problèmes du M4 pourraient être résolus avec ces variantes à piston. A propos de M4, je me demandais si les dérivés du M4 (Bushmaster, Smith & Wesson M&P,...) étaient différents où si ce sont des copies conformes au plan mécanique.

Il y a aux USA un standard : l'AR15 .... le design est tombé dans le domaine public, et donc pour que toutes ces "petites" entreprises qui "customisent" du M16/M4 soient sûres de pouvoir survir, il est impératif qu'elles suivent strictement les standards.

Clairon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok ! C'était pour savoir si elles étaient sujettes aux mêmes problèmes et exigences que les Colt M4 de l'armée américaine. Vu que c'est les mêmes armes, c'est oui.

Attention, "les standards AR15" ce sont plus des normes en terme de dimensions, de mesure, de pas de vis, que de qualité ou de résistance, c'est une forme de standardisation, comme ta feuille de papier A4 qui sera reconnue par n'importe quelle imprimante pour les dimensions, ce qui ne veut pas dire que la qualité ou la couleur du papier soient un standard.

Clairon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Merci !

C'est facile à nettoyer ces armes ?

Un des grands reproches fait à l'AR15 classique, est sa grande propension a s'encrasser, en effet le principe de base est que les gaz repoussent la culasse directement, amenant ainsi des déchets de poudre et de tir, encrassant et "assechant" assez vite l'arme.

C'est pour cela que HK et quelques autres suiveurs ont tellement révolutionné le monde de l'AR15 en proposant un "upper" travaillant par piston, evitant ainsi tout contact entre les gaz et la culasse, simplifiant fortement les opérations de nettoyage.

Clairon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pour avoir eu à une époque une AR15 Colt en 222Rem Mag législation française oblige Bof oui elle s'encrasse mais pas tant que cela Sauf à tirer en rafalle (normalement pas prèvu) et un bon paquet de cartouches.

Attention en plus d'un munitionaire à l'autre vous pouvez avoir des surprises Je ma souviens d'un lot de 22 que m'avait passé un ami militaire à croire qu'elle étaient chargèes à la poudre noire .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pour avoir eu à une époque une AR15 Colt en 222Rem Mag législation française oblige Bof oui elle s'encrasse mais pas tant que cela Sauf à tirer en rafalle (normalement pas prèvu) et un bon paquet de cartouches.

Attention en plus d'un munitionaire à l'autre vous pouvez avoir des surprises Je ma souviens d'un lot de 22 que m'avait passé un ami militaire à croire qu'elle étaient chargèes à la poudre noire .

En plus des probleme d'encrassement de l'emprunt de gaz, le gros souci des AR15 est thermique ... renvoyer les gaz jusqu'a la culasse forcément ca chauffe plus que s'il restent dans le canon et l'évent d'un systeme a piston. La chaleur supérieure doit pas arranger la lubrification, en plus de limiter plus rapidement la cadence de tir.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

c'est quand même dur de rester sérieux avec ce genre de commentaire vous savez :lol:  Franchement c'est pas sympa.

Plus sérieusement, si on fait toujours de la poudre noire, mais on ne s'en sert pas pour autre chose que certaines armes de collection et reproductions. Sinon Kiriyama tu voulais pas plutôt écrire Barrett à la place de Varrett?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'est pas énorme 4500$ pour un fusil de précision de ce calibre. L'UR de PGM c'est 2800 NU, la version PGM 338 c'est 4000 et des poussières et toujours aussi peu habillé.

Les fusils TELD ça douille un max, mais quand tu vois la mécanique de précision que c'est, tu comprends pourquoi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Le Barrett c'est aussi à poil les 4.500$. Maintenant j'ai aussi lu que la munition de .338 était plutôt chère.

Tout est relatif:

Tu dépense des milliers d'euros pour la formation d'un soldat, tu l'entraine, l'équipe et pan, une cartouche à 5 roro pièce te fout tout ça en l'air.

Maintenant si c'est pour "se faire mousser" (n'est-ce pas camarade commissaire berkut) sur un stand de tir, ça fait cher le bestiau..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Member Statistics

    5,957
    Total Members
    1,749
    Most Online
    Lexpat
    Newest Member
    Lexpat
    Joined
  • Forum Statistics

    21.5k
    Total Topics
    1.7m
    Total Posts
  • Blog Statistics

    4
    Total Blogs
    3
    Total Entries
×
×
  • Create New...