Joined
·
1,839 Posts
LOL, right?From June 2011:
Marines swap firepower for accuracy with IAR - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times
From Sept. 2011:
http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/145820-usmc-m27-iar-production-order-awarded.html
And mew should recognize this one:
http://www.hkpro.com/forum/hk416-hk417-hq/142472-416-vs-saw-debate.html
Snipershide and Outdoor Hub need to get on the trolly.
The M27 IAR replaces the heavier, M249 SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon) which has been used by the Marines in Infantry Squads since the mid-1980s in the automatic rifle role. Both weapons fire the 5.56 mm NATO cartridge.Exactly. Everyone keeps asking why replace the belt fed weapon? This is NOT replacing the SAW 249. This is just a new addition for a more run and gun style Infantry rifle. Lighter and easier to maneveur.The SAW will remain in use in the Marines and is a great weapon for laying down covering fire.
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.”
It replaces M249 SAW in AR (Automatic Rifle) role, but does not replace it in LMG (Light Machine Gun) role. It is easier to understand in ex-Warsaw Pact countries, because we never used one gun to do all. We had RPK (and versions) in one role and PK (and versions) in second role. Since M60 US wanted to have "do all" weapon that is both AR and LMG. And when something does everything, it does nothing good enough.The M27 IAR replaces the heavier, M249 SAW (Squad Automatic Weapon) which has been used by the Marines in Infantry Squads since the mid-1980s in the automatic rifle role. Both weapons fire the 5.56 mm NATO cartridge.
so its not being replaced? or is it? article seems to say it is...
Well said.It replaces M249 SAW in AR (Automatic Rifle) role, but does not replace it in LMG (Light Machine Gun) role. It is easier to understand in ex-Warsaw Pact countries, because we never used one gun to do all. We had RPK (and versions) in one role and PK (and versions) in second role. Since M60 US wanted to have "do all" weapon that is both AR and LMG. And when something does everything, it does nothing good enough.
FYI the M249SAW didn't replace the M60 in the squad machine gun position, that was the 7.62mm M240b. M249 is the automatic rifle position at the team level. The M249 SAW only replaced the M60 in support units like signal, supply, etc.It replaces M249 SAW in AR (Automatic Rifle) role, but does not replace it in LMG (Light Machine Gun) role. It is easier to understand in ex-Warsaw Pact countries, because we never used one gun to do all. We had RPK (and versions) in one role and PK (and versions) in second role. Since M60 US wanted to have "do all" weapon that is both AR and LMG. And when something does everything, it does nothing good enough.
ETA: Disclaimer: Of course Warsaw Pact doctrine of infantry was different from US / NATO but some similarities in concept of AR and LMG come from common experience for WW2.
I know. M60 was even more "do all" than M249 SAW. It was GPMG in role of MG, LMG and AR. M249 SAW was tasked only with LMG and AR dutiesFYI the M249SAW didn't replace the M60 in the squad machine gun position, that was the 7.62mm M240b. M249 is the automatic rifle position at the team level. The M249 SAW only replaced the M60 in support units like signal, supply, etc.
I couldn't agree more. I actually hated the SAW when they came to my unit. It was big, bulky, and I thought the whole afterthought of a magazine well added to the side of a belt fed gun was ridiculous. It's only real benefit was being belt fed, and the increased rate of fire. I definitely do understand USMC's desire to have something that is more mobile.Personally I think IAR is a great idea, regardless it came from HK or from someone else, as long as properly executed in design and make.
I look forward to hearing about USMCs experiences with this platform. Does anyone know if there has been anything published about any of the testing involved?Marine spokesman Major Joseph Plenzler in a press statement in June said:“After a rigorous testing process, both in garrison and deployed environments, and in-depth consultation with weapons experts through the Corps, the commandant approved the fielding of the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle,”