Thoughts on Virtus & the new service rifle XM5 Spear

[Gixxer]

The US military doesnt care what pissant euro's want. Its the same thing with the implimentation of 7.62x51 and the FAL/m14 tardfight. The US sets the pace since its responsible (by way of spending the most money of defense and military) for fighting for european countries.

As for armor? US civilians are largest user of armor...

Yes, The US carry the bulk of the weight within NATO, but being harmonious with those allies has been the stated intent for the last 70+ years. A contributing factor to the 9mm switch in the 80s was NATO congruency.


And as for armor..... Both China and Russia have been equipping their infantry with armor. Although sporadic reports are showing Russian armor in Ukraine isn't quite what it was advertised to be anyway.

Unless your statement was an inference to potential tyranny, which would not surprise me either.

 

[steviesterno]

I bought a rattler before they were SOCOM adopted, as I was looking for something that fit in a small package but packed a bunch of punch. For my situation, it was the best even considering the price. But for the rifle version? meh. It's cool, but doesn't do anything the AR doesn't do besides fold, which isn't really a huge concern if you're issuing them to a bunch of dudes who aren't trying to hide or anything.

the spear doesn't make a ton of sense to me. I don't see worn armor penetration as a huge deal, because usually if you're shooting with bigger than 556 you're sending more than one round at a time, and armor only covers some of the squishy bits. Seems like maybe it makes sense to have 1/2 guys on the team with one, but then there's the whole logistics thing. Could have probably made a 308 based round go stupid fast or use depleted uranium or otherwise given it more oomph than redesigning the whole shabang.

 

[tomtomgt356]

And something else that seems unwise...... What ever happened to not putting all your eggs in one basket?

SIG has won the pistol, belt-fed (which appears to be a great system and well-suited to a larger cartridge than the 5.56), and service rifle contracts. Didn't they their lesson from Colt?? Not to mention SIG being the developer of the new ammunition design to be used in conjunction with M5.

Sig is a German company... Maybe this is a nazi plot to cripple us before WWIII...

 

[spencer60]

I'd bet that they will force a SIG to accept a second contractor if they really do a whole M4 replacement. Probably to FN at a guess.

 

[Burning Love]

I could be wrong but I think Winchester got the contract to manufacture the new round for sig/gov

 

[Seabass19x]

 

[Xcaliber]

I agree, too heavy

 

[Gixxer]

I could be wrong but I think Winchester got the contract to manufacture the new round for sig/gov

I believe you're right.

And I read that Lake City might also set themselves up to be able to manufacture the cartridges as well.

But as far as I can tell, the patent/design rights belong to SIG, which would allow them to inhibit production if they feel one or more of these manufacturers aren't giving them their due or kissed their feet hard enough. Unless of course they sell the design flat out or sign a contract preventing such a possibility. Who knows....

I like SIG, just seems like the military is pigeon-holing themselves with them.

 

[tstover]

There is usually something pertaining to government obtaining license to bid the awarded products out. I'm sure there's limits to that and it appears the current one contract won't be finished till 2032.

Contracts for April 21, 2022

Today's Defense Department contracts valued at $7.5 million or more are now live on Defense.gov.

www.defense.gov

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15

 

[Gixxer]

There is usually something pertaining to government obtaining license to bid the awarded products out. I'm sure there's limits to that and it appears the current one contract won't be finished till 2032.

Contracts for April 21, 2022

Today's Defense Department contracts valued at $7.5 million or more are now live on Defense.gov.

www.defense.gov

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15

Yeah but we all know the legal gymnastics these companies can do to argue otherwise. The Colt example comes back to mind...