The future of smallarms?

YUT!

 

What's needed is a select fire bayonet, possibly a pneumatic device that you can set to "Stab", or a three stab burst "Stab, Stab, Stab" or full-auto "Staaaaaaaaaaaaaaaab."

 

That might be something to consider, but the beauty of the bayonet is that there are no moving parts to foul. Simple, beautiful and reliable.

 

Not exactly Smallarms, but a long-running ammunition idea coming to actual deployment. Probably.:

The 40mm Cased Telescoped Armament System (CTAS)
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/cased-telescoped-armament-system/

 

The next generation cartridges are less than a year away from being adopted.
next generation 6.8 ammunition - Google Search

 

So Colt doesn’t supply rifles anymore?

 

I want to say the last batch purchased were 2018 (a lot of them), and "theoretically" they won't be buying any more. Adoption of one of the 3 contenders is set for early 2022, but they haven't said if all soldiers will get the new weapons or how the rollout will go. So who knows if they'll buy another batch of M4's, but probably not.

The Marines no longer use Colt, they're using H&K for individual rifle, squad auto, and designated marksman rifles.

 

wow...end of an era...so Colt is not one of the 3 contenders?

I find it difficult to believe that Colt hasn't come up with a modern design and seems to be left behind...

 

Yes...Of course, the contract was split between Colt & FN.
Colt, FN split $177 million Army M4 contract awards :: Guns.com
FN has steadily eaten away at Colt's government market share, and Colt has just let it happen - with, basically, stagnated development.
Colt's recent bankruptcy did not help matters either.

 

Bankruptcy?? This sounds like the Australian car company "Holden" - The writing was on the wall for at least 20 years and they just continued on with little change to the business plan...government bailouts should have helped and given them a kick in the pants...but did little improve their situation. So, today there is no "Holden" car company and Australia's home grown car that had such a loyal following is no more. Gone.
How can a company with a government contract and many buyers of their hand guns be bankrupt? Without knowing the details, this stinks of considerable mismanagement and perhaps like Holden, probably deserve the end.
Colt is such an old and highly thought of brand, it's sad that its been run into the ground.
I presume that no matter who wins the contract that the weapons will be made locally in the US?

 

I'll believe we'll get a new rifle/cartridge when it happens. So far, nothing new that's come up has been so superior to the AR that it would warrant changing over!

Colt Firearms has been living on its reputation for far too long. The people who own it and run it aren't really into firearms and so are content to let things ride and just rake in what dough they can. They haven't come up with a new design in ages, in fact they mostly sell replicas of their famous old rifles and pistols. Colt is on the same path that Remington took: the path to oblivion.

 

That sounds "exactly" like you are describing the Holden car company...I don't get that level of mismanagement. Its almost …deliberate.
I see your point about the AR still being able to do what most other new designs can do...I would be interested to know therefore why its seen as something that needs replacement. This idea of a new round is big news to me...I've bemoaned the 5.56 for a couple of decades! But have been always shouted down with so called "good" reasons not to use 7.62 - I have said previously the minimum "human" round is the 7.62.
But 6.8? Where does this round come from? Australia only really went 5.56 because the US (and to a lesser extent NATO) went 5.56 and we were told we all should use the same round for compatability reasons...Vietnam is not a bad example where the US could helo drop 7.62 to Australians during a battle for their SLRs & M-60s..."can we have some ammo Yank mate?"
"Sure thing little buddy"...
So I see the compatability argument and think it has its merits...so why is the US now thinking to change the round at all? Unless my argument against 5.56 actually has some merit also?
How many other countries will change theirs?
As Vinnie Barbarino wold say "I'm so confused!"

 

We in Finland had two 'school' shootings and after that you had to have a doctor' s and a police officer meeting to be able to buy a gun that could shoot real bullets. I have a ' Deco ' Schmeisser but it needs no meeting because it cannot shoot. Anyway, we do not buy guns to protect ourselves. We believe in our police force. Some fourty years ago in the countryside they did not even lock doors for the night.

 

Jim Jeffries says that there is only one legitimate reason for owning a gun..."because you like guns". If that's your reason then fair enough...but please spare us the "self protection" BS.



But lets not get off topic Kai.

 

I think he said you are more likely to use the gun on yourself and everybody' s laughing. Weird.

 

Colt just isn't what they used to be. They didn't even submit a rifle.

 

Did you look at the 3 weapons the military is testing? The driving factor is the ammunition, and the new ammunition technology has it all over the 5.56. In the modern age of cheap body armor showing up on pretty much every battlefield, the 5.56 just doesn't have sufficient bullet size to get the job done to the Army's satisfaction; 5.56 has to go.

So the Army recognized they were going to need a bigger bullet, went so far as to put out a solicitation for a new 7.62 NATO "Interim service rifle"...and then canceled it because they realized that wasn't a great idea (and the Next Generation Squad Weapon program was nearing it's conclusion).

"The ICSR program comes after Army Gen. Mark Milley, Army Chief of Staff, admitted to Congress that the Army’s M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round cannot penetrate armor plates that may be used by future enemies."
Army Officially Launches Competition For A New 7.62mm Combat Rifle - Task & Purpose (taskandpurpose.com)


The new 6.8mm cartridges significantly out-perform the 5.56 with tungsten bullets, while being anywhere from 15%-30% lighter in weight. Logistically speaking, you can't ignore that kind of weight savings. That means EVERY shipment of ammo will be 10%-30% more ammunition. With conventional bullets, the new ammo will be cheaper to manufacture, which is something else that's hard to ignore.

So why isn't there an AR chambered for one of the new 6.8mm cartridges? No one submitted one. And the reason for that is, there are better ways to make a rifle 60 years later.

US Army Begins Testing Next Generation Squad Weapon (defenseworld.net)

 

It's going to take the US a good 200 more years to get there. We're VERY slow learners

 

Firearms will continue to get uglier and still uglier.

 

I respectfully disagree...most pointers are a that they will become more ergonomic...projectile weapons need strength and this creates some bulk and weight...most equipment/tools become more streamlined as the add ons eventually become integrated into one design...energy weapons shouldn’t need so much strength and will take a number of shapes...