How’s that crew served M249 doing?
Well, how’s that crew served SAW going Mr. Machunegun?Yep they spent the bucks , cool. Still the system is flawed, The light machine gun will not replace the M240. It will remain 7.62x51 meaning we are adding a new cartridge into the supply chain. The XM250 is going to standardize with a 50 round soft magazine. Surely there will be 100 round bags. The M249 stand bag load is 200 rounds. At any rate read it and consider. I notice they will start issuing this fall. That will tell the tale.
https://www.guns.com/news/2022/05/17/more-on-the-armys-new-xm5-xm250-next-gen-weapons
https://www.military.com/equipment/m240b-machine-gun
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-S...unces-2-new-rifles-for-close-combat-soldiers/
In this thread junior I have made no reference to the 249 being crew served. The 240 was crew served. How about addressing the far fewer rounds a squad will be able to put out with these weapons? Or adding a new round to the supply chain? I am not saying that there is no room for improvement as far as the 5.56 is concerned but it appears we are destined to relearn why the 308 was discarded. Beyond that a good question is how long will a suppressor last under the storm of muzzle pressure and powder fouling 80K PSI will cause before needing service? Will the weapon function properly without the suppressor? Will the muzzle blast be so bad it distracts other squad members? I note that uppers will be available in 7.62 and 6.5 Creedmoor. Do you actually think Nato will embrace this new expensive to produce round? Many questions and you seem to not want to engage them.How’s that crew served M249 doing?
IMHO, NATO will do what it has always done—hem and haw and b*tch and moan, then end up adopting whatever Uncle Sam has chosen.Do you actually think Nato will embrace this new expensive to produce round?
Only if we pay for it as usual.IMHO, NATO will do what it has always done—hem and haw and b*tch and moan, then end up adopting whatever Uncle Sam has chosen.
In this thread junior I have made no reference to the 249 being crew served. The 240 was crew served. How about addressing the far fewer rounds a squad will be able to put out with these weapons? Or adding a new round to the supply chain? I am not saying that there is no room for improvement as far as the 5.56 is concerned but it appears we are destined to relearn why the 308 was discarded. Beyond that a good question is how long will a suppressor last under the storm of muzzle pressure and powder fouling 80K PSI will cause before needing service? Will the weapon function properly without the suppressor? Will the muzzle blast be so bad it distracts other squad members? I note that uppers will be available in 7.62 and 6.5 Creedmoor. Do you actually think Nato will embrace this new expensive to produce round? Many questions and you seem to not want to engage them.
I have no idea why you are acting like a jerk. Comparing the new weapons to older versions is how you decide if the new are actually better designs. The new cartridge is closer in size to the 7.62 than the 5.56 so it is normal to compare the two. The new weapons also have lesser round capacities and if you had any ability for reading comprehension as I provided an excellent link for said comparison.Talking out your neck. You changed from SAW and M60 to 240 now? lol And please lemme know how much time you got on an MG, juniorDB. And how much time you got in Acquisitions? Oh, and how much time you got doing Ray Epps sh*t? lol
Enter your email address to join: