End of the M2 50cal?

[[R-CON]nedlands1]

The revolutionary technology behind the air-burst munition [of the XM307] involves integration of the fuse and fuse setter into the weapon’s fire control system. In a process that includes three microbursts of information, the fire control system lazes the target and determines the range. That information is transferred to the round through galvanic hard points as it is loaded into the chamber. The fuse reads the data, verifies it and retransmits it as a safety check. Multiple layers of coding and verification ensure accurate range data and protects against premature detonation of the round in or near the weapon.

I'd say that an airburst capability is fairly redundant considering that .50 cal rounds can pass through most sorts of cover. What cover can't be penetrated by one round should be able to be penetrated by concentrated fire.

Table 1-5 lists the maximum penetration in inches for an armor-piercing cartridge fired from the 45-inch barrel (muzzle velocity, 2,935 feet per second), which in some cases may enhance the leader's selection of targets to engage.


Table 1-6 lists the maximum penetration in inches for a ball cartridge fired from the 45-inch barrel (muzzle velocity, 2,935 feet per second):

(Source: FM 23-65 Chptr 1 Introduction)

[gx]

Originally Posted by Liquid_Cow

M-60 23.1 lbs
M-60E3 18.75 lbs (this one I know from personal experience)
M-240G 25.9 lbs
M-249 15.2 lbs (Ditto)
M-2HB 84.1 lbs plus another 44lbs for the tripod.

XM-307 50lbs uses M-3 tripod (same as 50cal)

While that difference makes it light enough to pack on your back (its less than a full ALICE pack would weigh)(I know, I'm showing my age with the ALICE comment), its not a light weight gun.

Sure, we used to practice dismounting a M2 as well, but in reality if you can't shoot it from the Jeep it probably ain't worth shooting at. Dismounting was highly discouraged cause if you had to bug out in a hurry you might have to leave the gun behind, and the last thing we want is a M-2 shooting at us now don't we. There are all sorts of things we used to practice cause it was in the books, but just were not realistic in a battle zone.

Bottom line, it ain't broke...

ok, im sure you have had alot more time with the .50 than i have, so i'll just take you word on it.

and ps, you never listed the m240b, as thats what we tend to use now when its not vehicle mounted.

[[R-MOD]Bob_Marley]

Originally Posted by gx

ok, im sure you have had alot more time with the .50 than i have, so i'll just take you word on it.

and ps, you never listed the m240b, as thats what we tend to use now when its not vehicle mounted.

Thats probably because Liquid is/was a marine, and they use the M240G, not the M240B

[Lieutenant-FPS-Bob]

Originally Posted by gx

well looks at the m-16, there is only so much up-grading you can do before you either A) would have spent less money with a new weapon in the first place, or you just end up accidentally make a new one with all the up-grades.

Not really, H&K piston kit, problem solved.

Or you could also get the Barrett upper receivers, either way it's cheaper than buy some new H&K 416 carbines that are shaped like M4's with some upgrades.

Upgrading is cheaper than buying new, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[gx]

Originally Posted by Lieutenant-FPS-Bob

Not really, H&K piston kit, problem solved.

Or you could also get the Barrett upper receivers, either way it's cheaper than buy some new H&K 416 carbines that are shaped like M4's with some upgrades.

Upgrading is cheaper than buying new, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Is it ok with army reg to get a non-colt produced upper receiver? Or are you just saying it is something the army could do as an alternative?

[WNxKenwayy]

Originally Posted by gx

Is it ok with army reg to get a non-colt produced upper receiver? Or are you just saying it is something the army could do as an alternative?

No its not. SOCOM can, but the AWG was buying off the shelf HK's as I recall and got banned from doing so.

[Liquid_Cow]

I'm pretty sure that while I was in we were buying FN M-16's, that colt had actually loss the contract for a while, so there is precident.

Yeah, I just looked it up, FN has been making the M-16 since 1988, though Colt still produces the M-4.

[gx]

well, army uses the m-4, at least the infantry does, but speaking of heavy weapons, we ever going to get ride of that over weight beast m240b?

[Lieutenant-FPS-Bob]

Originally Posted by gx

Is it ok with army reg to get a non-colt produced upper receiver? Or are you just saying it is something the army could do as an alternative?

Just speaking in general, looking at all the options, not for individual units.

BTW, I'm not trying to argue everything you say, you do raise some very good points.

I've just always heard that the M2 is an excellent weapon and it is very tried and true.