• SOCOM cancels MK.16 SCAR
    159 replies, posted
"In an exclusive report for Military.com we reveal that US Spec Ops Command has abandoned the 5.56 version of the SCAR and will use FY 2011 money to buy more 7.62 Mk-17s to fill a “capability gap” for a 7.62 battle rifle." [url]http://kitup.military.com/2010/06/socom-cancels-mk-16-scar.html#ixzz0rtef9uMB[/url] least the ranger still have theirs. was not sure if this was news worthy, oh well.
Wow this changes life as we know it
Oh come on. It's an awesome gun. :saddowns:
Oh shit.. She was so pretty, that SCAR..
Can we stop spending so much money on all this shit that we just cancel anyway?
Good, it was an ugly rifle [editline]07:48PM[/editline] How is this news?
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;22888445]Can we stop spending so much money on all this shit that we just cancel anyway?[/QUOTE] well, the thing is “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,” [editline]12:49AM[/editline] [QUOTE=IliekBoxes;22888458]Good, it was an ugly rifle [editline]07:48PM[/editline] How is this news?[/QUOTE] cause i posted it here,
Aww :(
Make the troops buy their own fucking guns. Wow, I seem to get exponentially increasing amounts of boxes for this. Seems no one else recognizes me for the military genius that I am.
Good, we don't need more pansy .223 rifles. We need more .308s up in the hood.
[QUOTE=whatnow V2;22888472]“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,”[/QUOTE] Then stop spending money on things that our existing equipment does just fine. I have a feeling we could really cut down the budget by getting rid of expensive weapons programs like this. I mean, I could understand developing a sort of 'desert rifle' to be used because our existing rifles were never designed for desert combat and are prone to jamming in the dust, but this just isn't necessary. At least they aren't getting rid of the 7.62 version, so the program wasn't a complete waste.
[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;22888744]Make the troops buy their own fucking guns.[/QUOTE] Oh yes and reduce our standing army size by a half good job. [editline]06:03PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;22888751]Then stop spending money on things that our existing equipment does just fine. I have a feeling we could really cut down the budget by getting rid of expensive weapons programs like this. I mean, I could understand developing a sort of 'desert rifle' to be used because the M4/M16 are prone to jamming in the dust, but this just isn't necessary.[/QUOTE] Actually the M4 platform utilizes the 5.56 in a really bad way.
-snip-
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;22888751]Then stop spending money on things that our existing equipment does just fine. I have a feeling we could really cut down the budget by getting rid of expensive weapons programs like this. I mean, I could understand developing a sort of 'desert rifle' to be used because our existing rifles were never designed for desert combat and are prone to jamming in the dust, but this just isn't necessary.[/QUOTE] The thing is that the M4 does NOT do "just fine". It's not terrible, but it's not what I'd call a "good gun". Lethality issues at range, poor reliability, and some weight problems are all significant. The problem with upgrading is that the Army (and the other branches) demand a significant improvement to justify an upgrade. In one case (the ACR program, I think), they demanded a full DOUBLING of lethality, for the same cost. That just isn't possible with current technology. Really, all we need to do is some upgrades to the M4. Switch to a bullpup layout to lengthen the barrel, tighten up the feed system and gas system to reduce jams, and use a few more composites. Problems solved.
[QUOTE=zombiefreak;22888757]Oh yes and reduce our standing army size by a half good job.[/QUOTE] lol, as if that's a bad thing 700+ military installations in ~135 countries
[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;22888744]Make the troops buy their own fucking guns.[/QUOTE] A military-grade rifle can cost several thousand dollars.
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;22888458]Good, it was an ugly rifle [editline]07:48PM[/editline] How is this news?[/QUOTE] I'd prefer a fuck ugly rifle that works than one that looks pretty but is rubbish.
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;22888458]Good, it was an ugly rifle[/QUOTE] Performance > Looks
[QUOTE=gman003-main;22888942]A military-grade rifle can cost several thousand dollars.[/QUOTE] Fuck rifles, we need our men out there with sawed-offs and mini uzis.
[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;22888988]Fuck rifles, we need our men out there with sawed-offs and mini uzis.[/QUOTE] You have got to be joking... [editline]09:18PM[/editline] [QUOTE=gman003-main;22888928]The thing is that the M4 does NOT do "just fine". It's not terrible, but it's not what I'd call a "good gun". Lethality issues at range, poor reliability, and some weight problems are all significant. The problem with upgrading is that the Army (and the other branches) demand a significant improvement to justify an upgrade. In one case (the ACR program, I think), they demanded a full DOUBLING of lethality, for the same cost. That just isn't possible with current technology. Really, all we need to do is some upgrades to the M4. Switch to a bullpup layout to lengthen the barrel, tighten up the feed system and gas system to reduce jams, and use a few more composites. Problems solved.[/QUOTE] And yet they hold these expensive programs to design new weaponry, get to the end, and decide they don't like any of them and continue using the same tech they've been anyway. It wouldn't bother me as much if these programs actually went somewhere.
HK>FN :colbert:
I think we could better spend our military funds by outfitting tanks with really ghetto hydraulics and neon lights and shit.
useless piece of shit anyway
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;22889057]You have got to be joking...[/QUOTE] That is what you call someone who bases war logic off MW2.
[QUOTE=beanhead;22889103]HK>FN :colbert:[/QUOTE] This, but that FN SCAR was a damn sexy beast...
The SCAR is over rated, just use a M16/M4A1 with 7.62 modification, no need to create an entirely different rifle.
The SCAR.. It looked so beatiful.. :smith:
[QUOTE=beanhead;22889103]HK>FN :colbert:[/QUOTE] The HK G36 is an AR-18 with a bunch of plastic attached to it
[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;22888744]Make the troops buy their own fucking guns.[/QUOTE] I'd bring in my dad's hunting shotgun for deer. A scoped slug gun.
Give them all akimbo gold plated deagles [editline]01:43AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;22888744]Make the troops buy their own fucking guns.[/QUOTE] wat
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.