H&K gets USMC contract for M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle

[Artful]

http://www.shotbusiness.com/usmc-awards-infantry-automatic-rifle-contract-to-hk-new-products-for-media-day-at-the-range/

Heckler & Koch was awarded a competitive contract to produce the U.S. Marine Corps’ new Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). The formal "Full Rate Production" announcement by the Marines caps a competition that began more than three years ago.


Designated the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle, the lightweight, 11.62 pounds weapon with ancillary equipment, is a variant of the highly successful Heckler & Koch HK416 used by military, law enforcement, and special operations units in the U.S. and throughout the world.


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.


The five-year, indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract calls for possible delivery orders up to $23,600,000 for the production, delivery, and associated support of the Marines’ Infantry Automatic Rifle program.
The Marine Corps approved the full rate production and fielding of the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle during the summer of 2011. There will be one M27 IAR per four-man fire team, with three M27 IARs per squad, 28 per company and more than 4,000 across the entire Marine Corps.


"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," said Marine spokesman Major Joseph Plenzler in a press statement in June.


"The fielding of the IAR will significantly enhance the ability of our infantrymen to gain and maintain fire superiority, reduce their fighting load and provide them a more ergonomic and accurate weapons system that can keep up during the assault."


"Winning the Marine’s IAR competition is another milestone for our HK416," said Wayne Weber, President of Heckler & Koch USA.


"Developed at no cost to the U.S. taxpayer and with U.S. military input in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks on America, the HK416 competed against-and beat many worthy challengers. This contract award is a direct testament to the superior performance of the HK416 and it is an honor for Heckler & Koch to equip the Marines with such a fine rifle."

[Speedo66]

Sadly, it seems like all the US gun manufacturers are owned by conglomerates or private equity firms who suck every penny out of them and then want to close them if they can no longer be tax deductions. No money to R&D results in stagnant product lines.

Ruger copies Kel-Tec, can't remember any recent innovation from Colt or S&W.

First the Army pistol contract to Glock, and now this.

Sad.

[Dan Cash]

Sadly, it seems like all the US gun manufacturers are owned by conglomerates or private equity firms who suck every penny out of them and then want to close them if they can no longer be tax deductions. No money to R&D results in stagnant product lines.

Ruger copies Kel-Tec, can't remember any recent innovation from Colt or S&W.

First the Army pistol contract to Glock, and now this.

Sad.

You are right about the bleeding of various gun companies but if I am not mistaken, SIG got the pistol contract, not Glock.

[Adam Helmer]

Artful,

So what is the cost per firearm? Just before I retired 21 years ago today from a federal law enforcement agency, I was the firearms instructor for all 100 agents in our Division. The HQTS folks bought and issued my division 10 H&K MP-5 9mm sub guns at a cost of $1,200.00 each.

As a historian and gun collector, I saw NO improvement in the MP-5 OVER the $9.00 STEN or $10.00 Grease Gun since I fired both along with the Thompson at the FBI full auto course at Camp Smith, NY.

We lost much when Springfield Armory and Rock Island Arsenal STOPPED making our military arms. The current procurement process is suspect, in my humble opinion.

Adam

[mcdaniel.mac]

Sadly, it seems like all the US gun manufacturers are owned by conglomerates or private equity firms who suck every penny out of them and then want to close them if they can no longer be tax deductions. No money to R&D results in stagnant product lines.

Ruger copies Kel-Tec, can't remember any recent innovation from Colt or S&W.

First the Army pistol contract to Glock, and now this.

Sad.

Have to disagree. Smith's Victory .22 and the M&P 15-22 set the standard for figures, and Ruger's LCR, Gunsite Scout, RPR, and the new MkIV rimfire pistols certainly weren't copied from Keltec. Technology is largely about punctuated equilibrium, periods of sameyness interrupted by a periods of rapid change.

The army also contracted to Sig, not to Glock.


Artful,

So what is the cost per firearm? Just before I retired 21 years ago today from a federal law enforcement agency, I was the firearms instructor for all 100 agents in our Division. The HQTS folks bought and issued my division 10 H&K MP-5 9mm sub guns at a cost of $1,200.00 each.

As a historian and gun collector, I saw NO improvement in the MP-5 OVER the $9.00 STEN or $10.00 Grease Gun since I fired both along with the Thompson at the FBI full auto course at Camp Smith, NY.

We lost much when Springfield Armory and Rock Island Arsenal STOPPED making our military arms. The current procurement process is suspect, in my humble opinion.

Adam

Run an MP5 next to a Sten or M3, not that either costs $10 to make in the 1980s, and you'll know the difference.

Right off, ergonomics and reliability especially over the Sten. The Sten was a garbage rod, or as the Brita called it a spring a pipe and a prayer. Accuracy is poor and reliability suspect. The stock doesn't allow for a cheek weld and reloads are clumsy. The MP5 collapsible stock isn't great, but even that is more stable than the Sten. Dry weight was about 7lb for the Sten as well, and rate of fire about 600rpm.

The M3 is even worse, less accurate than the Thompson and Sten and with an even less capable stock. Truly the Liberator of SMGs. The only upside is that the weight and slow rate of fire make it somewhat controllable.

Meanwhile the MP5 is lighter than either np matter the configuration, has a higher rate of fire (700-900 depending on the variant), could be easily fitted with optics, lights, and laser aiming devices or refitted with the A3 or folding stock to accommodate better shooting, and the roller-delayed blowback produces a more controllable recoil than either the Sten or M3, and arguably moreso than the Thompson or Uzi as well. It also makes for a quieter suppressed gun, especially in the SD variant. That you can't tell a difference between them reflects more on you as an instructor than on the guns themselves.

[Artful]

Artful,

So what is the cost per firearm?

Adam

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/11/18/marine-corps-experimenting-new-service-rifle.html



...
Another variable is cost.
Chief Warrant Officer 5 Christian Wade, the gunner, or infantry weapons officer, for 2nd Marine Division, told Military.com the M27 costs about $3,000 apiece, without the sight. Because the Marine Corps is still grappling with budget cutbacks, he said he was skeptical that the service could find enough in the budget to equip all battalions with the weapons. He said a smaller rollout might be more feasible.
"To give everyone in a Marine rifle squad [the IAR], that might be worth it," he said.
...

[dkf]

This was a pretty poor decision IMO. This new gun isn't going to replace an M249, not even close. They already have plenty of parts and know how with the M4/M16 platform. All they need to do is add a more accurate heavier barrel and decent free float rail on their current M4/M16 platform with the select fire lower. No need to throw a load of money away on an overpriced HK AR variant with proprietary parts.

[Speedo66]

I've fired a Swedish K, crude but reliable, and I'm sure it didn't cost much to make. No tactical Tupperware on it though, so not black and evil.

Sorry about the Glock instead of Sig gaff, but I still don't see enough innovation from American gun manufacturers. For foreign companies to be outfitting American forces is a crime.

[mcdaniel.mac]

I've fired a Swedish K, crude but reliable, and I'm sure it didn't cost much to make. No tactical Tupperware on it though, so not black and evil.

Sorry about the Glock instead of Sig gaff, but I still don't see enough innovation from American gun manufacturers. For foreign companies to be outfitting American forces is a crime.
Sig and Glock are both US made.

Caveat: the pistols they sell in the US, anyway. Smyrna for Glock, somewhere in New Hampshire for Sig. HK has a factory i believe in New Hampshire as well.

[Geezer in NH]

Artful,



We lost much when Springfield Armory and Rock Island Arsenal STOPPED making our military arms. The current procurement process is suspect, in my humble opinion.

Adam

I would blame our gun laws that stifled Americans from developing new designs.

[Ickisrulz]

If these things really are $3K each, it seems too much considering other manufacturers offer piston operated AR15/M16 rifles for less money. Maybe President Trump will negotiate a better deal.

[MUSTANG]

Full auto for suppressive fire as Fire Teams and Squads maneuver under "Covering Fire" is not the same as a LIGHT RIFLE (M-16,M-4, ETC..) trying to accomplish the same function. I favored the M249 SAW as it was capable of utilizing both belted ammunition and 30 round magazines interchangeable with the M-16/M4's. A magazine doing house to house clearing is preferred in a M249 SAW, while a belt feed is preferable in a covering fire mode outside (streets) or fields.

Currently the Corps is focused predominantly on operations in Cities & Built Up areas as a result of the "War on Terror" and the way it has been fought based on influence from a variety of Civilian Driven Policies. I believe the Corps will benefit from the M27 IAR in it's "City" operations, but will be less than thrilled when they are called on for other missions where they are not doing house to house clearing and patrolling. The heavier M249 SAW provides a better platform for other Marine Mission areas and Contingencies. Hopefully the Corps will keep those M249's in storage and available (at least in reduced numbers) in Battalion armories for issue in Missions where they will provide greater advantage.

[mcdaniel.mac]

Full auto for suppressive fire as Fire Teams and Squads maneuver under "Covering Fire" is not the same as a LIGHT RIFLE (M-16,M-4, ETC..) trying to accomplish the same function. I favored the M249 SAW as it was capable of utilizing both belted ammunition and 30 round magazines interchangeable with the M-16/M4's. A magazine doing house to house clearing is preferred in a M249 SAW, while a belt feed is preferable in a covering fire mode outside (streets) or fields.

Currently the Corps is focused predominantly on operations in Cities & Built Up areas as a result of the "War on Terror" and the way it has been fought based on influence from a variety of Civilian Driven Policies. I believe the Corps will benefit from the M27 IAR in it's "City" operations, but will be less than thrilled when they are called on for other missions where they are not doing house to house clearing and patrolling. The heavier M249 SAW provides a better platform for other Marine Mission areas and Contingencies. Hopefully the Corps will keep those M249's in storage and available (at least in reduced numbers) in Battalion armories for issue in Missions where they will provide greater advantage.
I agree, and this is with the caveat that I haven't deployed in 5 years, but I our STOP was to supplement each squad with 1-2 M240s (1 for a standard squad, 2 if you were reinforced) which helps retain the suppressive fire very adequately. I'm not sold on the IAR myself as drum and coffin magazines tend to be a bit awkward, but in the T&E we did find that they were better for quick fire and maneuver, and would actually function using standard magazines. The SAW was always a jamtastic mess with magazines, and most of our gunners just ran a 50rd belt in a cloth sling.

[Love Life]

How old is that press release? We've been fielding the IAR since 2011-ish. As posted above, I believe the M249 to be a better platform for the role the IAR took over. The magazine load out for the IAR is retarded.

[Artful]

how old is that press release? We've been fielding the iar since 2011-ish. As posted above, i believe the m249 to be a better platform for the role the iar took over. The magazine load out for the iar is retarded.

volume 25, number 3 april/may 2017

I would assume it's a new contract for more to add to inventory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M27_Infantry_Automatic_Rifle


The M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR) is a lightweight, magazine-fed 5.56mm weapon used by the United States Marine Corps. It is intended to enhance an automatic rifleman's maneuverability, and it is based on the Heckler & Koch HK416.

The U.S. Marine Corps is planning to purchase 6,500 M27s to replace a portion of the M249 light machine guns currently employed by automatic riflemen within Infantry and Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalions. Approximately 8,000–10,000 M249s will remain in service at the company level to be used at the discretion of company commanders. The United States Army does not plan to purchase the IAR.

Service history
In service 2010–present

In 1999, a Universal Need Statement was issued for an Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR). Around 2000, the 1st Marine Division’s 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines Regiment conducted initial, limited IAR trials which confirmed the desirability of a light automatic rifle. Experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan resulted in formal requests for recommendations.

The Universal Need Statement spent six years going through the procurement process before an official program was begun and a list of required capabilities was created in early 2005.[8]

The Infantry Automatic Rifle program began on 14 July 2005, when the Marine Corps sent Requests For Information to arms manufacturers. Characteristics desired in the weapon included: portability and maneuverability, similarity in appearance to other rifles in the squad, reducing the likelihood that the gunner will receive special attention from the enemy, facilitation of the gunner's participation in counter-insurgency operations and capability of maintaining a high volume of fire.

An initial requirement for a magazine with a minimum capacity of 100 rounds was dropped in favor of the 30-round STANAG magazine because, at the start of testing, available 100-round magazines were unreliable.

Caliber was specified as 5.56×45mm with non-linked ammunition, so as to achieve commonality with existing service rifles.[8][9]

In 2006, contracts were issued to several manufacturers for sample weapons. Fabrique Nationale d'Herstal (submitted an IAR variant of the FN SCAR). Heckler & Koch (submitted a variant of the HK416). Colt Defense submitted two designs. Companies that attempted to compete, but were not accepted as finalists for testing, included Land Warfare Resources Corporation, which submitted the M6A4 IAR,[10][11] Patriot Ordnance Factory,[6] and General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products with the CIS Ultimax 100 MK5 (marketed as the GDATP IAR).[12]

In December 2009, the Heckler & Koch weapon won the competition and entered into a five-month period of final testing.[13][14] In the summer of 2010, it was designated as the M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle,[15] coincidentally sharing a designation with the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, who had been testing automatic rifles since 2001.

[Speedo66]

Sig and Glock are both US made.

Caveat: the pistols they sell in the US, anyway. Smyrna for Glock, somewhere in New Hampshire for Sig. HK has a factory i believe in New Hampshire as well.

Same as the foreign auto makers, they set up a factory here to beat the import tariffs. It's nice to have the jobs here, but the profits leave the country. I guess the gun manufacturers can say they're US made for military contract purposes, but really?

We should be doing better ourselves.