im suprised no guesses
, probly a piston ar type in pic

A new calibre can really cause logistics problems.

I would just give them the @11" Commando AR in 223.

I used one for a work gun for several years and really liked it.

Since the article mentioned increased "thump I wonder if they are looking at a short barreled 450 Bushmaster???, or a 6.8???

Boom,

There a couple contenders as PDW type weapons, the most prominent is FN's 5.7. They use proprietary cartridges that are less effective than 5.56 and that aren't in the supply chain.

I agree that a reliable 10" barreled gas piston weapon that uses AR magazines would be the best choice, but look at all the innovation it would stifle.

My thinking is that the 223 in a short barrel is like skinny tires on a drag car. You cant get the power you are looking for. the need is a fatter bullet. why is the 7.62x39 so popular? because it uses a fatter bullet and it works well for CQC law enforcement type work.

a 35 caliber on a 223 case or spc case or the 39 case is ideal imho.

The 35 can burn more powder in a short barrel.

The 358 Gremlin is the solution.

Look at the 9x39 the Russians use.

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
A new calibre can really cause logistics problems.

I would just give them the @11" Commando AR in 223.

I used one for a work gun for several years and really liked it.

Since the article mentioned increased "thump I wonder if they are looking at a short barreled 450 Bushmaster???, or a 6.8???

6.8spc is in theater. Silver State Armory moved their operation from Nevada to Washington State after they received a very large 6.8sps loaded ammo contract from DOD.

boom stick

I do not know of any American Police Dept. that uses the 7.62x39???

There might be some, but I have never heard of it.

A picture in one of the linked articles looks like a KAC PDW http://www.knightarmco.com/images/pdw1.html which uses a 6x35 (65 gr @ 2425 fps)

Here's the official solicitation.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=op...view=0&cck=1&au=&ck=



Solicitation Number: W52H0908CARBINESV
Notice Type: Sources Sought

Synopsis:
Added: Aug 22, 2008 9:17 am
The Army is in the process of assessing the state of the art in small arms technologies and how these technologies can potentially provide the best weapon system(s) for our Soldiers. To that end, the Program Manager for Soldier Weapons (PM SW) Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07860-5000, on behalf of the Program Executive Office Soldier, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5422, is assessing the enhanced carbine and subcompact small arms technologies as well as production capacity of the US small arms industrial base. This effort may be formally initiated in late 2009 with a competitive solicitation. To facilitate planning for this pending solicitation, the following information is requested:

o Performance Improvement. Request information on potential improvements in individual weapon performance in the areas of accuracy and dispersion out to 600m, reliability and durability in all environments, modularity, and terminal performance on a variety of target mediums. Modularity includes, but is not limited to, compatibility with accessory items such as optical sights, image intensification sights, thermal sights, laser targeting systems, bipods, tactical lights, MILES, bayonets, and accessory type grenade launchers. There is specific interest in improvements to zero retention and zero repeatability. Note: Although this request for information is not limited to 5.56mm NATO systems, it is limited to ammunition that will meet International Convention standards.

o Production capacity estimates. Request information on minimum and maximum monthly production rates for a military carbine and/or subcompact individual weapon, and the lead times to achieve these production rates. This estimate should consider a US based production facility by the third year of deliveries. This capacity should be above and beyond any current production orders or current sales. If new facilities are planned or required, so state.

o Detailed descriptions of proposed weapon systems to include engineering drawings, pictures, brochures, etc. that will convey the principles as well as general and specific capabilities behind the submissions.

o Summarized and detailed test data from any certified test facility that addresses improvements in the areas proposed. Test operating procedures utilized and independent evaluations are also solicited.

o All respondents to this RFI will get an invitation to an Industry Day to be conducted in the fall of 2008. Specific date and time will be announced in the aforementioned invitation.

Interested offerors should submit the information annotated above, in hard copy, by 16 Sep 2008 to: U.S. Army TACOM LCMC, Acquisition Center, AMSTA-LC-WSC-C, Bldg 110, Attn: Bob Egan, Rock Island Arsenal, IL 61299-7630. Electronic submissions may be sent to robert.r.egan@us.army.mil. Submissions shall not exceed 25 pages (8 x 11 inches), not including test data. Font shall be 12 pitch with one inch borders. All information is to be submitted at no cost or obligation to the Government. All information marked {Proprietary to company name} will not be disclosed outside of the Department of Defense. No telephone inquiries will be accepted. The documentation provided will not be returned. This is a sources sought notice only. It is for planning purposes only and should not be construed as a Request for Proposal or a commitment by the United States of America.

Contracting Office Address:
TACOM - Rock Island, ATTN: AMSTA-AQ-AR, Rock Island Arsenal, Rock Island, IL 61299-7630
Place of Performance:
TACOM - Rock Island ATTN: AMSTA-AQ-AR, Rock Island Arsenal Rock Island IL
61299-7630
US
Point of Contact(s):
Teresa Stottlemyre, (309) 782-4626

TACOM - Rock Island

quote:

Originally posted by BISCUT:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
A new calibre can really cause logistics problems.

I would just give them the @11" Commando AR in 223.

I used one for a work gun for several years and really liked it.

Since the article mentioned increased "thump I wonder if they are looking at a short barreled 450 Bushmaster???, or a 6.8???

6.8spc is in theater. Silver State Armory moved their operation from Nevada to Washington State after they received a very large 6.8sps loaded ammo contract from DOD.

Who is using the 6.8 in theater???

Perry

quote:

6.8spc is in theater. Silver State Armory moved their operation from Nevada to Washington State after they received a very large 6.8sps loaded ammo contract from DOD.

Where in Washington State?
I looked on there website, and could not find any reference to an operation in Washington.

I found it on their jobs postings

Packwood WA
Highway 12 west of the summit of White Pass IIRC

OK so it is a necked up 221 fireball? Interesting.

some interesting info

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

Hah...try convincing the logistics bubba's that are high up on the chain that we need another cartridge. You'll have one of the brass slap down the idea in a second.
Yes, the 5.56 sucks. I hate it with a passion. Hell, I hate the M16, we've done so much to adapt it to make it more combat efficient. Yet, the sole problem remains in the damn 5.56. Yes I am a Marine and we've all complained until we're blue in the face about the performance. What do we hear? Make do with it, use what you got and carry on.
The 6.8spc is a good cartridge, however therein lies the problem again of logistics. Changing barrels, swapping everything around to adapt to the new cartridge, than also supplementing the new rifle around our training and actual deployments, than phasing out all the old parts that are unused, plus should it ever get approved, than we'd have to outfit the M249's to use this cartridge as well.
That new rifle is under review, however I would almost bet my reputation on it that it won't get approved, as in many of the rifles being submitted for review. Why? There are several reasons that I could write a book on and still not hit all of them.
We're gonna be sitting pretty with our little M16's and make 'em work, even if we gotta spray down who we're aiming at.