US Army's Individual Carbine Competition

[Quiet]

Every 10 years or so, the US Military issues forth a competition to determine a possible replacement for a current issue small arms weapon system.

The US Army's Individual Carbine Competition is a competition to determine a possible replacement for the M-4 Carbine weapon system.

If the winner of the competition does not show "measureable improvement" over the M4 Carbine, then the winner will not be adopted to replace the M4 Carbine.


Timeline:
August 2010, a study was created to determine a possible replacement for the M-4 Cabine.
January 2011, a RFP was issued with a reponse deadline set in March 2011.
October 2011, interested vendors submitted their entrys for Phase 1 testing.
May 2012, vendors notified on who will continue on to Phase 2 testing.


Phase 1 competitors:
ADCOR Defense BEAR Elite
Beretta ARX-160
Colt APC
FNH FNAC
H&K HK-416
KAC SR-16
LWRC M-6A4
Remington ACR
Robinson Armament XCR
S&W M&P-15

Phase 2 competitors:
ADCOR Defense BEAR Elite
Colt APC
FNH FNAC
H&K HK-416
Remington ACR

[SapperMapper]

What I want to know is why regular troops don't get tasked with doing some of the testing - not just the Army Marksmanship unit and such.

Put it in the hands of a platoon of picket-pounding engineers, or a mortar section. then have them take it to the field and see what breaks. Sure it's subjective, but you can't tell me you wouldn't gain valuable data.

[Aaryq]

What I want to know is why regular troops don't get tasked with doing some of the testing - not just the Army Marksmanship unit and such.

Put it in the hands of a platoon of picket-pounding engineers, or a mortar section. then have them take it to the field and see what breaks. Sure it's subjective, but you can't tell me you wouldn't gain valuable data.

Good and a bad idea there. The Marines' replacement for the AAV was played with like that. They would give it to the AMTRAK guys, and tell them it's Marine Proof and they needed to prove otherwise. Unfortunately we all saw how much of a money pit that was.
Though I do agree with you that the regular troop needs more input than the oblivious brass and non-deployable units like the marksmanship team but real life consequences in a deployed environment is a bit of a risk. If the rifles fail and people die, their blood is on the hands of the hands of those who equipped them. It's a double edged sword.

[Combat Diver]

One problem with inexpericed troops is that they do not know how to best employ/use weapons systems. Yes, they can pull triggers and break things. Things are broken because lack of understanding/attention to detail. That portion does come into play later on in the fielding/trials.


CD