Improved US M24 Sniper Rifle to See Testing in Spring

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by jumpinjarhead, Mar 11, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Sniper Rifle to See Testing in Spring
    March 09, 2010
    Army News Service|by C. Todd Lopez

    Candidates for an improved version of the Army's sniper rifle -- the M-24 -- are expected to go into testing this spring after industry reveals their efforts this month.

    Industry was challenged to improve the M-24 sniper rifle, a weapon that has been in service since the 1980s, to make it more accurate and to make it more adjustable to the Soldier's needs, said Col. Douglas A. Tamilio, project manager, Soldier Weapons.

    "So the Soldier, the sniper, can conform it to his body -- we'll have an adjustable stock, adjustable cheek welds," Tamilio said. "This weapons system has a five-round internal magazine. We're asking industry to do something better -- five-to-ten round external magazines."

    The Army has also asked industry to improve the scope for the M-24, and that means zoom from 3x to 25x magnification, with a reticle that adjusts when the user changes magnification. Also, he said, add Picatinny rails for mounting sensors and optics.

    The M-24 now is chambered for a 7.62mm round with a range to about 800 meters, Tamilio said. But he added that when the Army designed the weapon, it also accommodated a larger round, the .300 Win Mag. He said the improved M-24 will take advantage of that capability in order to realize greater accuracy.

    It's expected the four industry competitors will supply their four improved M-24 candidates by March 11. Those will go into competitive tests in the spring. The Army will down select to a producer in the summer, and start fielding the improved M-24 to Army snipers in the fall.

    Improving the M-24 will involve turning existing weapons over to a contractor and modifying that weapon. It's expected that turnaround time for that process will be 30 days.
  2. No matter how much they fcuk about with it it's a Remington 700. Go and buy a proper sniper rifle. I did. :D
  3. I thought they had the M111 for that ? Well that's what that hard b@st@rd on Future Weapons was wielding the last time I looked on YouTube.......
  4. looks like 7.62 x 51 hasn't got enough punch at long range.
  5. Bone reply but, whats so special about the Picatinnty rail :?
  6. It permits the user to "ally up" his firestick and thus impress his mates back home.


  7. It's more the case that it loses accuracy at longer ranges. At around 1000m it goes transonic, that is drops back through the sound barrier and this transition is generally associated with a major drop off in accuracy.

    338 Lapua Magnum as used in the new British Sniper Rifle stays supersonic a bit further so gives accuracy out to slightly longer ranges.

    Either round will travel up to five miles but it'll be dropping out of the sky with little residual energy at that range.

    Consider that GPMG has sights out to 1800m and the ballistically similar (slightly superior) 303 was expected to be lethal out to 3000 yards and you get an idea of what range the round will kill at, it just isn't accurate enough to hit a figure target/ person.
  8. An possibly bone observation from a total civilian but it seems that the powers that be are constantly changing sniper calibre's to suit whatever theatre of operations are in play or what seems to be the current flavour of the month.

    There seems to be some kind of fascination with the "1,000 metre" shot in sniping, but, the majority of books that I have read seem to talk of shots at much shorter ranges than that.

    Just how common are ranges in excess of 1,000 metres? I can understand that in Afghanistan there may be shots taken well over that range but I also suspect that the average contact takes place well under that where the 7.62 x 51 would appear to be sufficient.

    I am willing to be convinced otherwise though. :)
  9. Couple of points; first is that if a target of opportunity presents itself beyond 1000m what do you do if the weapon you have is marginal at that range? As has been mentioned 7.62 x 51 goes transonic at around 1000m (depending on temp, pressure or alt).

    Second point is that there may be need to destroy or incapacitate material or there may be need for good penetration prior if your tgt is behind cover (think of someone behind a couple of sandbags at 1400m and what a 250 grain .338LM will do to both sandbags and tgt, for example).
  10. Not really. Sniping in the modern sense began in the First World War with 303, this was changed for 7.62 from 1970 and that in turn was superseded by .338LM from 2008.

    303 - 55~ years
    7.62 - 38~ years
    338 LM - ?

    Not exactly constant change.....

    The US experience is similar going from 30-06 to 7.62 and now either 338LM or 300 Win Mag (why? :? )
  11. I would think 338 LM would struggle with that task at that range. What is your experience?
  12. Funny that the US Army M24 and USMC M40 are Rem 700's and they dont seem to kvetch about it's design, just the add ons.
  13. the USMC m40 is rebuilt at there armory by gun nuts I'd imagine theirs probably better on the market in the states than a rehashed m24
  14. There's always better than a Remington 700. Even the accurised ones are nasty. I know. I've got one in the cupboard.
  15. Doing the numbers with my own pet load gives me 1112 fps and 687 foot pounds of energy at that range at sea level. At 3000ft above sea level I get a velocity of approx 1500fps and 1258 foot pounds (guessing the pressure).
    I am going out the back just now to try both. I will put a sandbag(s) out at 1400m and give it a go. I will also hit a sandbag at a range that will give me 1500fps (to compare). No guarantee that I will hit the bags but its a light wind day (less that 10Kt) out there just now so heres hoping.