US cancels Mk. 16 SCAR

[echo1 0]

It's been out a few days now, but given how prolific the SCAR is in Operation Arrowhead, I thought it worthy of mention -

Spec Ops Command Cancels New Rifle

June 25, 2010

Military.com|by Christian Lowe

In a surprising reversal that follows years of effort to design a one-of-a-kind commando rifle, the U.S. military's Special Operations Command has abruptly decided to abandon the new SOCOM Combat Assault rifle – the "SCAR," as the rifle is commonly known – in favor of previously-fielded carbines.

Details provided exclusively to Military.com reveal that SOCOM, the Tampa-based command that oversees the training and equipping of SEALs, Green Berets, Air Force Special Tactics Teams and Marine SOC groups, will stop purchasing the 5.56 mm Mk-16 Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle and might require all units who now have them to turn the new weapons back into the armory.

"The Mk-16 does not provide enough of a performance advantage over the M-4 to justify spending USSOCOM's limited … funds when competing priorities are taken into consideration," officials at USSOCOM said in an email response to questions from Military.com. "Currently, three of USSOCOM's four components receive the 5.56 mm M-4 from their parent service as a service common equipment item." (Naval Special Warfare Command is the only component that does not purchase its weapons with Navy funds.)

SOCOM said it will instead purchase additional Mk-17 variants that use the heavier 7.62 mm round, more Mk-13 Enhanced Grenade Launchers, and a newly-designated Mk-20 Sniper Support Rifle. (Industry observers say the Mk-20 is basically the Mk-17 with longer barrel and other sharpshooter enhancements.)

News of the cancellation of the Mk-16 variant of the SCAR is a major reversal for a command that spent six years and millions of dollars fielding a rifle specifically made for use by special operators. It was the first rifle since the M-16 that was competed, tested, and built from the ground up for the military.

This cancellation will certainly be poorly received by program advocates who touted the weapon's mission flexibility, better gas piston operating system, and performance in dusty environments as clear advantages over the current M-4.

Elaine Golladay, spokeswoman for FNH-USA, the weapon's manufacturer, declined to comment on the cancellation for this report.

Ironically, the company announced May 4 that it had passed the final hurdle from SOCOM's weapons buying office to go into full production and fielding of both the Mk-16 and Mk-17. It is unclear if SOCOM had made the decision to cancel their buy of the Mk-16 when FNH-USA issued that announcement.

Additionally, sources tell Military.com that SOCOM is leaning toward requiring that all Mk-16s currently fielded be returned as retaining limited numbers of them would complicate training and logistics support.

Officials with SOCOM said the services have so far fielded 850 Mk-16s and 750 Mk-17s throughout the SOF community, but did not specify which units got what rifle. As of last count, Military.com reported Army Rangers, most SEAL teams and Naval Special Warfare Combat-Craft Crewmen had received a mix of Mk-16s and 17s.

Original program documents from SOCOM show a requirement of over 120,000 Mk-16s and nearly 40,000 Mk-17s.

It is unclear how many Mk-17 rifles SOCOM will buy. The command budgeted $3 million in fiscal 2011 to purchase SCAR variants and had an additional "unfunded requirement" of $1.6 million for SCAR.

"The Mk-17 fills the existing capability gap for a 7.62 mm rifle," officials said. "USSOCOM is in the process of determining the exact quantities of the Mk-17, Mk-13 and Mk-20 variants that will be purchased."

Link

[roberthammer 582]

And? Maybe army don't want pay much for that , instead they like to use old M4's

[echo1 0]

Yes, that was the point that was being made in that article...

[Big Dawg KS 6]

And remember when the Army picked ACU over MultiCam?

Well guess what, now ACU is being issued with MultiCam pattern.

:d:

[Zipper5 74]

I thought that the Army officially adopted Multicam to replace ACU and is going to phase out ACU over the next few years? :confused:

[Heatseeker 0]

But socom means Chuck Norris, Rambo, etc.

Not the us army, i dont think these will dump the m4 anytime soon...

[BillGordon 10]

I was a little disappointed about everyone being armed with the scar in OA.

[TFatseas 0]

And remember when the Army picked ACU over MultiCam?

Well guess what, now ACU is being issued with MultiCam pattern.

:d:

Not quite...

http://soldiersystems.net/2010/06/30/army-camo-phase-iv/

The Army is seeking a family of three different camo patterns including woodland, desert and, transitional (sometime called universal), and one pattern for personal equipment (such as body armor, ammo pouches and rucksacks) which works with all three (3) uniform camouflage patterns. The idea behind the family of patterns is to give Army leaders and Combatant Commanders options. The document goes on to describe a family of patterns as “A family is considered to be of the same or similar geometry with coordinating color palettes to cross the global operating environments. Global operating environments are defined by a geographic classification system that subdivides the global landmasses into areas with similar environmental characteristics.†So ultimately, they are seeking three and possibly four patterns that share basic composition. Sharing basic geometries can be used for identification purposes as well to streamline with supply chain with common printing screens. One option for the family of patterns is that the transitional or universal pattern will be issued in the clothing bag to all Soldiers and the woodland desert patterns would be special issue to those operating in those environments.

The Sources Sought Notice goes on to describe how the patterns will be evaluated. This methodology can be used in both a photosimulation study as well live field tests.

“The woodland pattern may be evaluated in forest, full ground cover, cropland and jungle terrain at distances between 35 and 400 meters.

The desert pattern may be evaluated in low sandy desert and high rocky desert terrain at distances between 35 and 500 meters.

The transitional pattern may be evaluated in both woodland and desert terrain types at the distances cited above.

All evaluations will be made with a subject mannequin and/or human wearing a uniform in the evaluated pattern and a body armor vest with ammo pouches in the family personal equipment pattern.

The primary method for evaluating uniform and personal equipment pattern effectiveness will be determining the distance at which observers have a 50% probability of detecting the camouflaged test subject; the shorter the distance the more effective the camouflage.

The secondary method for evaluating pattern effectiveness, to be used in instances where all patterns are detected at the same range, will be the relative time to detection; the longer the time to detection the more effective the camouflage.

Near IR performance will also be evaluated at distances from 35 and 200 meters. The patterns will be evaluated for Near IR performance in the same terrain types as for daylight performance.â€

The big issue here is options. The camouflage team which is comprised not only of PEO-Soldier and Natick but also such stake holders as the Maneuver Center of Excellence, Naval Research Labs, USASOC, and the AWG has to brief the Army leadership on their plan of action in July. This plan not only offers choices but also economizes them through a common pattern geometry for uniforms as well as a common OCIE pattern.

COL Cole said that he expected to see a new family of patterns enter service within two years saying “We want to conduct rigorous testing. This is not a fashion contest.†What is clear is that no one wants to rush into a solution but rather, the Army would like to conduct full testing in all terrain environments and all seasons. Additionally, LTC Sloane added, the Army wants to ensure that they conduct a thorough threat analysis placing the correct emphasis on probable areas of operation.

At this point, the Army is trying to ascertain the state of industry to support this requirement and to give everyone a heads up. Offerors have one month to respond and we are looking forward to seeing what industry comes up with once a full blown solicitation is released.

[Zipper5 74]

I was a little disappointed about everyone being armed with the scar in OA.

Well, replace them with M4s or M16s then. Not hard to do. ;)

[SWT_Janowich 10]

No reason to change weapons, the M4 and M16 is great.

[stgn 39]

You guys know theres this thread called military discussion thread in which I posted this news a couple of days ago? And the weapon is actually not canceled they are just not gonna purchase them in large amounts, units that want it can still purchase for that unit.

STGN

[franze 196]

Please use the Military Discussion Thread.

Closing.