The M2 and MK-19 are just too good and irreplaceable.

[F-15 Eagle]

The U.S. Army has given up on getting a replacement for the nearly century old M2 .50 caliber (12.7mm) machine-gun. At least not anytime soon. Many of the current ones are wearing out, so the army is replacing over 80 percent of its 36,600 M2 machine-guns in the next five years, with new M2s. Efforts to develop a replacements for the M2 have failed so far.
For example, three years ago, field testing of the XM-312, the chief contender to replace the M-2, began, in the United States and overseas. Then, nothing. That's because the test results were not encouraging, the biggest shortcoming being the low rate of fire (about 260 rounds per minute). This is about half the rate of the M2, and was believed adequate for the 25mm smart shells the XM312 was originally designed for (as the XM307). But for 12.7mm bullets, it didn't impress the troops. There were some reliability problems (the M2 has one jam per 10,000 rounds), which were believed fixable. The rate-of-fire issue, however, has proved to be more difficult. Meanwhile, a new upgrade for the M2 has been fielded, and Ma Deuce still rules the battlefield. The new M2E2 has a quick change barrel, flash hider and lot of small improvements. It is much in demand.
Originally, the M2 replacement was going to be the M-307, which was designed so it could fire either the computer controlled 25mm "smart shell" of the XM-25, or (by changing the barrel and receiver), .50 caliber ammo. But it was felt that a straight replacement for the M-2 was needed quickly. The original plan was for the troops to begin getting the XM312 in 2008, or sooner. Didn't happen.
The M-2, nicknamed "Ma Deuce" by the troops, has been around so long because it was very good at what it did. Accurate, reliable, rugged and easy to use, many of the M-2s currently in use are decades old, and finally wearing out. The army didn't want to build new ones, and wasn't sure it could do without the venerable, and very useful, Ma Deuce. So it tried to develop a new .50 caliber machine-gun (the XM312). The XM312 weighs 36 pounds (compared to 50 for the M-2), even with the addition of the electronic fire control stuff from the XM307.
The fire control system, especially the range finder, makes the XM312 much more accurate with first shot hits. American troops testing the XM312 also reacted favorably to the lighter weight and fire control electronics. But the lower rate-of-fire on the XM-312 was a deal killer to the many troops who had used the M2 in combat recently.
The 25mm "smart shell" of the M307 is still a promising concept, but what the troops really want is a heavy shell that can fire through walls, vehicles and take out enemy troops with one bullet. The 12.7mm bullet does all that. For long range grenades, the troops still prefer the 40mm Mk19. The army has 23,000 of these, and many are old and worn out. Not as bad as the M2 situation, but the army is buying 4,600 new ones over the next few years.
Both the M2 and Mk19 have a max range of 2,000 meters. The Mk19 rate of fire is about 350 rounds a minute, and is usually fired in short (a few rounds) bursts of these 19 ounce grenades (which kill or incapacitate most people with six meters of the explosion). The Mk19 is more complex and expensive ($22,000 each) than the M2 ($14,000 each) and jams more frequently. But it is reliable enough to remain popular and in demand.
The M2 has become even more popular with the addition of night and thermal sights. With these, you can spot enemy troops, over a thousand meters away, at night, as they try to sneak up on you. You can eliminate the threat before they get within rifle or RPG range.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20080915.aspx

[Aussie Digger]

The U.S. Army has given up on getting a replacement for the nearly century old M2 .50 caliber (12.7mm) machine-gun. At least not anytime soon. Many of the current ones are wearing out, so the army is replacing over 80 percent of its 36,600 M2 machine-guns in the next five years, with new M2s. Efforts to develop a replacements for the M2 have failed so far. For example, three years ago, field testing of the XM-312, the chief contender to replace the M-2, began, in the United States and overseas. Then, nothing. That's because the test results were not encouraging, the biggest shortcoming being the low rate of fire (about 260 rounds per minute). This is about half the rate of the M2, and was believed adequate for the 25mm smart shells the XM312 was originally designed for (as the XM307). But for 12.7mm bullets, it didn't impress the troops. There were some reliability problems (the M2 has one jam per 10,000 rounds), which were believed fixable. The rate-of-fire issue, however, has proved to be more difficult. Meanwhile, a new upgrade for the M2 has been fielded, and Ma Deuce still rules the battlefield. The new M2E2 has a quick change barrel, flash hider and lot of small improvements. It is much in demand.
Originally, the M2 replacement was going to be the M-307, which was designed so it could fire either the computer controlled 25mm "smart shell" of the XM-25, or (by changing the barrel and receiver), .50 caliber ammo. But it was felt that a straight replacement for the M-2 was needed quickly. The original plan was for the troops to begin getting the XM312 in 2008, or sooner. Didn't happen.
The M-2, nicknamed "Ma Deuce" by the troops, has been around so long because it was very good at what it did. Accurate, reliable, rugged and easy to use, many of the M-2s currently in use are decades old, and finally wearing out. The army didn't want to build new ones, and wasn't sure it could do without the venerable, and very useful, Ma Deuce. So it tried to develop a new .50 caliber machine-gun (the XM312). The XM312 weighs 36 pounds (compared to 50 for the M-2), even with the addition of the electronic fire control stuff from the XM307.
The fire control system, especially the range finder, makes the XM312 much more accurate with first shot hits. American troops testing the XM312 also reacted favorably to the lighter weight and fire control electronics. But the lower rate-of-fire on the XM-312 was a deal killer to the many troops who had used the M2 in combat recently.
The 25mm "smart shell" of the M307 is still a promising concept, but what the troops really want is a heavy shell that can fire through walls, vehicles and take out enemy troops with one bullet. The 12.7mm bullet does all that. For long range grenades, the troops still prefer the 40mm Mk19. The army has 23,000 of these, and many are old and worn out. Not as bad as the M2 situation, but the army is buying 4,600 new ones over the next few years.
Both the M2 and Mk19 have a max range of 2,000 meters. The Mk19 rate of fire is about 350 rounds a minute, and is usually fired in short (a few rounds) bursts of these 19 ounce grenades (which kill or incapacitate most people with six meters of the explosion). The Mk19 is more complex and expensive ($22,000 each) than the M2 ($14,000 each) and jams more frequently. But it is reliable enough to remain popular and in demand.
The M2 has become even more popular with the addition of night and thermal sights. With these, you can spot enemy troops, over a thousand meters away, at night, as they try to sneak up on you. You can eliminate the threat before they get within rifle or RPG range.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20080915.aspx

The M2 is a fantastic weapon. Update them with FN's "quick change barrel" modification, a decent sighting system, new generation 12.7mm ammunition and they will remain a superior weapon system virtually indefinitely. They are a vehicle, helo or tripod mounted weapon. They don't NEED to be lighter...


The Mk 19? I'm not so sure about. There are PLENTY of modern 40mm AGL's that offer equal or superior reliability. Despite already being in-service with the Australian Army, because of an urgent operational requirement, the Mk 19 wasn't even short-listed for our direct fire weapon system project, designed to acquire (amongst other things) a 40mm automatic grenade launcher for the whole Australian Army.

These were however:

http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl23-e.htm


http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl21-e.htm

[F-15 Eagle]

The M2 is a fantastic weapon. Update them with FN's "quick change barrel" modification, a decent sighting system, new generation 12.7mm ammunition and they will remain a superior weapon system virtually indefinitely. They are a vehicle, helo or tripod mounted weapon. They don't NEED to be lighter...


The Mk 19? I'm not so sure about. There are PLENTY of modern 40mm AGL's that offer equal or superior reliability. Despite already being in-service with the Australian Army, because of an urgent operational requirement, the Mk 19 wasn't even short-listed for our direct fire weapon system project, designed to acquire (amongst other things) a 40mm automatic grenade launcher for the whole Australian Army.

These were however:

http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl23-e.htm


http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl21-e.htm

Although 80 years old it still does the job better then anything else out there.:D

I'm sure there are better 40mm AGL out there as you said but the XM307 with only 25mm is no replacement for the MK-19. The MK-47 and others with the very powerful 40mm grenade are suitable replacements. The 25mm just does not have the power that the 40 mike-mike has.

[kato]

The Navy is largely switching to M3M (GAU-21) in the .50cal department btw.

[F-15 Eagle]

The Navy is largely switching to M3M (GAU-21) in the .50cal department btw.

Wow that monster has a 950-110 round per minute rate of fire. Maybe the Army and USMC should buy some of these?

[Chino]

The M2 belongs in the museum.

The CIS 50 easily leaves the M2 far behind. Lighter, QCB and can feed two different kinds of ammo with the flick of a switch.

We have replaced all M2 with the CIS 50, and Indonesia is in the process of re-equipping with the CIS 50.

Good thing the US hasn't developed a new .5, as this gives the deadbeats, POS sales team at STK a easier hand at selling the CIS 50.

[Aussie Digger]

The Navy is largely switching to M3M (GAU-21) in the .50cal department btw.

Only for the helo ops. Riverine ops and on-board vessels, they still use the M2 from everything I've seen...

[tatra]

ASP-30: Can fit any mount that will take a .50 BHMG, weapon weight is 52kg (114lb). Cyclic rate of the ASP is 400-450rpm. Ammunition is the standard 30 × 113 B ADEN/DEFA/M789 pattern. In US service the most common rounds are the M789 HEDP (HEAT-Frag), M799 HEI and M788 TP. Muzzle velocity is 2,690fps (820m/s).
http://www.geocities.com/strategicmaneuver/sld031.htm

[kato]

Yikes, a Sparky site.

The ASP-30 has so far had zero sales (in 24 years!), short of some single-digit number of prototypes fitted to some M1025. Should be telling.

[F-15 Eagle]

The only thing that can replace the M2 is an upgraded M2. THAT'S IT!

[usgn]

MK 19 is good but there are better 40mm AGL in the market....like the STK 40mm AGL with FCS and air-bursting ammo....:D

[F-15 Eagle]

MK 19 is good but there are better 40mm AGL in the market....like the STK 40mm AGL with FCS and air-bursting ammo....:D

I don't know about the air bursting junk. They usually come only in 25mm making them too weak to replace the 40mm. The MK 47 40mm AGL is a good possible replacement though.

[kato]

Umm, there's plenty of air-bursting projectiles in calibers different from 25mm OCSW... primarily in autocannon calibers of course, but also plenty in 40x53. Offhand, STK, Diehl, Nammo Raufoss and IMI offer such rounds at the moment.

[Chino]

I don't know about the air bursting junk. They usually come only in 25mm making them too weak to replace the 40mm. The MK 47 40mm AGL is a good possible replacement though.

As usual, you don't moderate your language even when talking about something you don't know.

Not everything made outside of the USA is "junk".

STK is probably the biggest exporter of 40mm ammo in the world. We even sell to the UK.

[usgn]

I don't know about the air bursting junk. They usually come only in 25mm making them too weak to replace the 40mm. The MK 47 40mm AGL is a good possible replacement though.

Obviously u don't really know what u r talking about. STK have long came out with HV40mm Air Bursting round and is the first and only in the world with HV40mm ammo with self-destruct fuze....:rolleyes:

[Marc 1]

see: http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/army/Lightweight_50-Caliber_Lethality_at_half_the_weight110016542.php

[F-15 Eagle]

see: http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/army/Lightweight_50-Caliber_Lethality_at_half_the_weight110016542.php

I doubt it will ever enter service, most likely go the same way the XM312 did, especially if its rate of fire if less than half that of the M2.

If it ain't broke, don't replace it.

Meanwhile I found this article you might fine interesting.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20081009.aspx

[Surfinbird]

I doubt it will ever enter service, most likely go the same way the XM312 did, especially if its rate of fire if less than half that of the M2.

Dude, rate of fire is not the issue. The XM307 and its 12.7mm mule the XM312 were designed to have low rates of fire so as to be a very low weight weapon with very low recoil. They have a differential recoil system where the barrel and bolt of the weapon recoil inside the casing. This limits the rate of fire but is well worth it for the other advantages.

Besides like the M2HB and Mk 19 they are only used to fire bursts not continuous fire. In this case the practical use of all of these weapons the difference in ROF is inconsequential. Sustained firing of any of these weapons will burn out the barrel long before you can achieve the listed rounds per minute.

The only reason the US Army is ordering more M2HBs and Mk 19s is because they need new weapons today and new designs like the XM307 are not ready yet.

[kato]

Umm, the XM307 (and XM312) was cancelled last year, that's why they're ordering more M2.
As for short bursts, that's particularly where a higher ROF is somewhat important - not sustained fire, where lower ROFs are perfectly acceptable.

[Surfinbird]

Umm, the XM307 (and XM312) was cancelled last year, that's why they're ordering more M2.

They weren't canceled just zero funded - for now - because the overall budgets were trimmed and they were the guys on the outside who took the blow to protect the guys on the inside.

As for short bursts, that's particularly where a higher ROF is somewhat important - not sustained fire, where lower ROFs are perfectly acceptable.

We are not talking about an air to air gun here. These weapons typically fire 2-3 round bursts. With the M2 that's less than a third of second of firing. The Mk 19 half a second and the XM307 3/4 of a second. If anyone thinks that makes any difference then quite clearly they've never had any practical experience of firing a support weapon in a tactical environment where target acquisition and coordination take up much more time than actually squeezing a trigger.

Then there is the effect of the ammo. For one minute of suppression of a standard target the M2HB needs to fire 350 rounds, the Mk 19 126 rounds and the XM307 27 rounds.

Despite all this the XM307 was never considered a failure because of its 250 rpm rate of fire. This was what it was pitched for, funded for, designed for and achieved. So the whole point is not just wrong in analysis but in fact.

[F-15 Eagle]

They weren't canceled just zero funded - for now - because the overall budgets were trimmed and they were the guys on the outside who took the blow to protect the guys on the inside.



We are not talking about an air to air gun here. These weapons typically fire 2-3 round bursts. With the M2 that's less than a third of second of firing. The Mk 19 half a second and the XM307 3/4 of a second. If anyone thinks that makes any difference then quite clearly they've never had any practical experience of firing a support weapon in a tactical environment where target acquisition and coordination take up much more time than actually squeezing a trigger.

Then there is the effect of the ammo. For one minute of suppression of a standard target the M2HB needs to fire 350 rounds, the Mk 19 126 rounds and the XM307 27 rounds.

Despite all this the XM307 was never considered a failure because of its 250 rpm rate of fire. This was what it was pitched for, funded for, designed for and achieved. So the whole point is not just wrong in analysis but in fact.

Dude seriously its obvious most troops in the Army prefer the higher rate of fire of the M2. A 260 rpm .50 cal just does not cut it in modern warfare, they had their chance with the XM312 and it did not work. They have a second chance with the LW50 and it WILL NOT work.

The Army also likes the 40mm over the 25mm, thats why they are buying the MK-19 and MK-47 over the XM307. If they actually wanted the XM307(XM312) they would have put it in service by now.

If the project was zero funded then that means they are not working on the project which is the same thing as the project being dead.

[F-15 Eagle]

Dude, rate of fire is not the issue. The XM307 and its 12.7mm mule the XM312 were designed to have low rates of fire so as to be a very low weight weapon with very low recoil. They have a differential recoil system where the barrel and bolt of the weapon recoil inside the casing. This limits the rate of fire but is well worth it for the other advantages.



And thats why the Army still prefers the M2 because the rate of fire is an issues whether you like it or not.

Also when is accuracy an issue with the M2? Well its not the M2 is plenty accurate in fact it has been used as a sniper rifle before just to demonstrate its accuracy.

Plus the M2 is far more reliable.

The XM307/312 is a hunk of junk and a waist of military spending IMO and the Army agrees.

[Surfinbird]

Dude seriously its obvious most troops in the Army prefer the higher rate of fire of the M2. A 260 rpm .50 cal just does not cut it in modern warfare, they had their chance with the XM312 and it did not work. They have a second chance with the LW50 and it WILL NOT work.

The Army also likes the 40mm over the 25mm, thats why they are buying the MK-19 and MK-47 over the XM307. If they actually wanted the XM307(XM312) they would have put it in service by now.

If the project was zero funded then that means they are not working on the project which is the same thing as the project being dead.

I'm sorry mate but its not obvious. You've taken an end point and added your own story to how they got there. But its not how it happened!

Plus the XM312 was never seriously considered an operational weapon it was a test bed for the XM307 that you could shoot without needing the developmental 25mm ammo.

Zero funded also does not meant the project is over. Quite clearly GD are still spending their own money on the concept to develop the LW50 and other weapons.

I respect your POV over ROF but I'm afraid it doesn't align to what actually went on in the OCSW project. Cheers!

[F-15 Eagle]

I'm sorry mate but its not obvious. You've taken an end point and added your own story to how they got there. But its not how it happened!

Plus the XM312 was never seriously considered an operational weapon it was a test bed for the XM307 that you could shoot without needing the developmental 25mm ammo.

Zero funded also does not meant the project is over. Quite clearly GD are still spending their own money on the concept to develop the LW50 and other weapons.

I respect your POV over ROF but I'm afraid it doesn't align to what actually went on in the OCSW project. Cheers!

LMAO I'm making up a story? Or is it you trying to prove a point. You see I'm basing my posts off of the facts that I read from news articles ect, but your just posting because you don't agree with me and making up wild ideas just to protect the LW50.

If most of the troops who test fired the XM312 say they prefer the higher rate of fire of the M2 than it is obvious. That is why the XM312 was killed or if you like "zero funded".

Back in 2005 the XM312 was considered as a M2 replacement but the testing did not impresses the ground troops.

The XM312 project is dead and now their moving along with the smiler LW50, so what I meant to say is one project is dead but the other has taken its place. But the LW50 will most likely go the same way the XM312 has. If the Army wanted the LW50 they would have bought the XM312 which is the same thing but with was canned and now GD does not want to give up and they will make money off of this regardless if the army buys this weapon or not....its called corporate greed.