MAG58s and MG42s forever?

[shep854 0]

Barrett tries their hand at lightening the M240--without exotics:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/01/26/barrett-m240lw-prototype/

Barrett M240LW Prototype

"Unlike the M240L, which is in service with the Army, it does not use any exotic/expensive materials or manufacturing techniques to decrease weight. They instead decreased weight by trimming off as much metal as possible and decreased manufacturing costs by making the receiver in two pieces and then bolting it together. They managed to trim about 6 pounds off the standard M240B."

[Max H 0]

Barrett tries their hand at lightening the M240--without exotics:

...They instead decreased weight by trimming off as much metal as possible and decreased manufacturing costs by making the receiver in two pieces and then bolting it together...

Didn't the M60 have problems with a weak receiver leading to unreliability? Hopefully they didn't go too far in the quest for light weight.

[thekirk 0]

I may be wrong, but isn't the bone-stock M240 made with a receiver that's already in four pieces, at least? Riveted together? Seems like this would probably serve to both simplify and lighten the weapon at the same time.

[rmgill 0]

Given it was designed before CNC Machining, the updates for assembly along with new metals that aren't exotic might go a long way. IT looks like the sides of the receiver have webs of material machined out like aircraft spars do.

[BansheeOne 0]

The plain HK 417/G 27 is in use by the KSK as a battle rifle where more oomph than provided by 5.56 mm may be needed.

 

And apparently there will be a G 27K (16") for general infantry use now, too.

[Simon Tan 0]

I was at that shoot. The Barrett was correctly timed, which is challenging given the lack of regulator positions compared to an L7. This was because the 240 started in the US as a tank MG and not a GPMG. They compensated for this by having the Enidine hydraulic buffer.

Running overgassed on a lightweight receiver is going to crack it very quickly.

[Arminius 0]

Does anybody know, what mags the H & K G 28 uses?

 

Orig AR 10 / DPMS / SR 25 / OA 10 type?

 

Proprietary?

 

new Armalite AR 10?

 

FAL?

 

M 14???

 

I notice the mag body is slightly curved, which is unusal for 308 20rounders.

 

thx, Hermann

[BansheeOne 0]

Proprietary AFAIK. They started with G 3 mags for the KH 417, but developed their own for the production variant.

[Chris Werb 0]

OK then, where does this currently fit into the Great Scheme of Things?

[Chris Werb 0]

By the way, does anyone have a primary source that states that an 'inch pattern' FN MAG/L7A1 or A2 ever existed? I know the L1A1 was inch pattern but initially (and a lot longer in supporting arms) they were issued in conjunction with L4 series BREN conversions. By the time we adopted the MAG was there a need for this inch pattern nonsense? I have seen L7A2s with RSAF, FN, Manroy Engineering and (thanks to REMOV) H&K markings - it would definitely not make sense for weapons both designated L7A2 to have non interchangeable components.

[Tomas Hoting 0]

OK then, where does this currently fit into the Great Scheme of Things?

 

The French armed forces recently adopted the FN MAG, and (according to an article in the German magazine "Visier") the HK 121 will be adopted by the German Bundeswehr under the designation MG5 (even though an adoption already in 2012 appears unlikely).

[Chris Werb 0]

The French armed forces recently adopted the FN MAG, and (according to an article in the German magazine "Visier") the HK 121 will be adopted by the German Bundeswehr under the designation MG5 (even though an adoption already in 2012 appears unlikely).

 

So the HK221 has still to find a customer?

[Tomas Hoting 0]

So the HK221 has still to find a customer?

 

At least I haven't read of any customers so far. Did the British army show any interest for it?

[TBeyer 0]

A 7.62 version of the Negev, only 8 kg.:

 

http://www.armyrecognition.com/march_2012_new_army_military_defence_industry/israel_weapon_industries_iwi_introduces_new_its_ng7_negev_light_machine_gun_7.62mm_caliber_0503125.html

[X-Files 0]

Seems pretty simple: 900 240 machine guns for $77.4 million. Math was never Battleland’s strong suit, but a quick trip to the calculator says that indicates each gun costs $86,000. Must be those gold-plated barrels (actually, there’s no gold in those barrels, but there is titanium nearby. That makes the 22-pound 240L five pounds lighter than the original 240B). “That price is throwing us for a loop,” an Army contracting whiz said.

But after several calls to Army contracting and public affairs officers, the confusion slowly began to lift. “The announcement amount reflects the maximum amount of money that can be spent, but not the maximum number of guns that can be bought,” the Army contracting expert later explained. “They’ve put in the minimum amount of guns we’re going to be ordering, but the maximum amount of dollars we’re allowed to spend.”

Read more: http://battleland.blogs.time.com/2012/02/06/the-armys-86000-machine-gun/?iid=obnetwork#ixzz1oe9UpDaQ

[rmgill 0]

Seems pretty simple: 900 240 machine guns for $77.4 million. Math was never Battleland’s strong suit, but a quick trip to the calculator says that indicates each gun costs $86,000. Must be those gold-plated barrels (actually, there’s no gold in those barrels, but there is titanium nearby. That makes the 22-pound 240L five pounds lighter than the original 240B). “That price is throwing us for a loop,” an Army contracting whiz said.

But after several calls to Army contracting and public affairs officers, the confusion slowly began to lift. “The announcement amount reflects the maximum amount of money that can be spent, but not the maximum number of guns that can be bought,” the Army contracting expert later explained. “They’ve put in the minimum amount of guns we’re going to be ordering, but the maximum amount of dollars we’re allowed to spend.”

Read more: http://battleland.bl...k#ixzz1oe9UpDaQ

 

 

 

Well, it's not a X:Y equivalence AND we all know that when the military buys a weapons system they're buying a lot of long term parts, repair support and other accessories and training.

[BansheeOne 0]

New picture of HK 121:

 

[Max H 0]

in obligatory Tactical Tan^tm of course

[Tomas Hoting 0]

in obligatory Tactical Tan^tm of course

 

The low IR observable green/brown (RAL8000) color finish (AKA "Afrika-Beige", one of the base colors used by the Afrikakorps) has proven to be quite an effective universal camouflage color. The new G28 DMR also features this color finish, and apparently future acquisitions of standard assault rifles with this finish are under consideration as well.

[BansheeOne 0]

I.e., Tan is the new Black!

[Corinthian 0]

That looks like it came from Sprue Tree A and shot using a camera's macro lens....

[rmgill 0]

in obligatory Tactical Tan^tm of course

 

That's "Coyote^tm".

Edited March 11, 2012 by rmgill

[Simon Tan 0]

No, it's Flat Dark Earth. Duuuuh. Then you have to define whether it is the Magpul tone, the KAC tone etc.

[thekirk 0]

Simon, if you want a really good laugh, go research exactly where the Marines got their color from. If I remember rightly, it's original source was something like a Martha Stewart color for trim that some Marine's wife helped him find. I've read a really humorous write-up about all that surrounded that, somewhere. I wish I could remember where the hell I saw it...

[TonyE 0]

in obligatory Tactical Tan^tm of course

 

The low IR observable green/brown (RAL8000) color finish (AKA "Afrika-Beige", one of the base colors used by the Afrikakorps) has proven to be quite an effective universal camouflage color. The new G28 DMR also features this color finish, and apparently future acquisitions of standard assault rifles with this finish are under consideration as well.

 

Return of the Dunkelgelb?