PDA

View Full Version : US Army Awards M4/M4A1 Carbine Contract to Remington



BrendenF11
04-25-2012, 10:32 PM
Love it!

http://soldiersystems.net/tag/remington/

US Army Awards M4/M4A1 Carbine Contract to Remington
Saturday, April 21st, 2012

Way back in June of last year the US Army issued a pre-solicitation for the purchase of an additional 70,000-100,000 M4A1 carbines. The idea was that it was going to be a free-for-all and anybody, including incumbent Colt Defense could bid. The actual solicitation hit the street in August. Now, there’s an award, but it was issued at 6:20 PM and the announcement was under the innocuous title of, “GUNS, THROUGH 30MM” which is the Federal Supply Class (10) they weapons are categorized under. Too late for the daily DoD Contract award announcements. Odd? Absolutely, considering the size and commodity involved.

Here’s the content of the award notice -

Notice Type:
Award Notice
Contract Award Date:
April 20, 2012
Contract Award Number:
W56HZV12D00560001
Contract Award Dollar Amount:
$16,163,252.07
Contract Line Item Number:
0004AB
Contractor Awardee:
REMINGTON ARMS COMPANY, LLC,14 HOEFLER AVE,ILION,NY,13357-1816
Synopsis:
Added: Apr 20, 2012 6:20 pm
No Description Provided
Contracting Office Address:
U.S. ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND, WARREN, MICHIGAN 48397-5000

There’s another award (W56HZV12D0056) to Remington Arms Company for a “Max Potential Contract Value $180,000,000.00″ for the generic “GUNS, THROUGH 30MM” issued about an hour before the award mentioned above. Remember, that $180 Million is a contract ceiling and allows the Government to purchase their full requirement over multiple years without competing multiple contracts.

Notice the contract numbers. The base contract is W56HZV12D0056. The additional 0001 would denote an initial order meaning there will be more to come.

These carbines will be produced in accordance with the Colt Technical Data Package. This isn’t the first time something like this has happened. In the mid-80s FN began producing the M16A2. However, access to the Colt TDP will certainly give Remington a leg up. Hopefully, these Remington guns will be better than the early FN M16s which were of low quality.


Follow up from Remington,


Remington Speaks Out on US Army M4 Carbine Award
Tuesday, April 24th, 2012

Remington issued this statement earlier today regarding their recent award for 24,000 M4A1 carbines by the US Army.

4/24/2012 MADISON, NC – Remington Arms Company, LLC (“Remington”), a member of the Freedom Group family of companies, is pleased to announce the award of an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract for the procurement of a maximum of 120,000 M4/M4A1 carbines by the US Army Contracting Command in Warren, Michigan, on Friday, April 20, 2012.

“It is a great honor to be awarded this contract from the United States Army,” said John Day, Vice President, Remington Defense Division, former Marine, and Iraq War Veteran. “Our workforce is extremely proud to be adding this combat-proven carbine to the Remington Defense family alongside our combat-proven sniper rifles, suppressors and shotguns. We will produce these carbines with the same diligence, attention to detail, and quality that snipers and shooters worldwide expect from Remington.”

The M4 and M4A1 carbines are the US Army’s primary individual combat weapons and will be produced by Remington to the US Army’s M4 technical data package. The Army has initially ordered 24,000 M4A1 carbines from Remington; deliveries will start in September, 2013.

“The innovation, quality and reliability of Remington rifles have made our company a leader in defense markets around the world,” said General Michael W. Hagee (USMC, Ret.), a Remington Arms board member and former Commandant of the Marine Corps.

“The chance to expand our strong military and defense presence producing M4s for the U.S. Army is a great opportunity,” added General George Joulwan (US Army, Ret.), also a Remington board member and former Supreme Allied Commander of Europe and head of NATO Forces. “We are proud and honored to serve those who serve all of us.”

Remington, in operation since 1816, is one of the oldest continuously operating manufacturers in the country. The M4 and M4A1 carbines will be produced at Remington’s core rifle manufacturing facility in Ilion, New York.

George Kollitides, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Freedom Group and Remington Arms, noted, “Over the past four years, we have made a substantial investment in Remington’s ability to compete in the government small arms space by modernizing our production facilities, focusing our research and development on end-user requirements, and ensuring consistent and repeatable quality in a high volume, high mix manufacturing environment. We see this award as proof that an American manufacturing company can still expand its product offerings and compete in this modern age to provide best in class weaponry to our troops defending freedom around the globe.”

KGCNC
04-25-2012, 10:44 PM
Cool. Now chamber them in 6.8 then we will be talking.

BrendenF11
04-25-2012, 11:06 PM
I do agree with that, I wish they would maintain the same platform but make it interchangeable like and ACR. Swap out a barrel and bolt, good to go. I like the 6.8, but until they come up with a decent replacement as a combat arm, the M4 will do. 2 in the chest one in the head usually does the trick.

KGCNC
04-26-2012, 08:57 PM
http://ammo.ar15.com/project/Misc_Documents/Roberts_2008NDIA.pdf This is a good read.

BrendenF11
04-26-2012, 09:24 PM
Very good read, thanks for the link. I could understand the military sticking with the M4/M4A1 platform simply for cost reasons. However, I never could understand how the military opted for a 5.56 LMG with the M249. A LMG attached to a squad with the ballistics of the 6.8mm would make so much more sense, better ballistics, lighter ammo load than a M240, and instead of having two LMG platforms you could have one that provides both roles. That reduces costs, gives the soldiers a better weapon, and maintains enough fire power at the squad level. Then again these are just my opinions after having carried a M249 for a solid year.

serpa6
04-26-2012, 10:08 PM
On future weapon's HK came out with an M4 version chambered in 7.62 does anyone know what happen to that development?? The barrel stood cool even on automatic had speed loading or quick change mags and i think an interchangeable barrel for sniping
PS I could be wrong on the ammo but I think that was it

KGCNC
04-26-2012, 10:19 PM
hk 416 or 417. 416 is m4 based and in 5.56. 417 is 7.62 based and looks m4ish.

KGCNC
04-26-2012, 10:20 PM
http://www.hk-usa.com/military_products/hk417_general.asp This it or?

BrendenF11
04-26-2012, 10:23 PM
Serpa, I am pretty sure that would have been the HK416 which is also chambered in 5.56. I think they put out a version HK 417 which is chambered in 7.62. It is far more reliable, but from what I remember it was thrown out of the competition for the new service rifle. Pretty sure because of the influence of lobbying on behalf of US congressmen, with the likes of Colt and Remington running around.

I do know, atleast from what I have read, the HK416 is certainly in use the SOF theater for the US military, and I have read numerous articles that the HK416 is the weapon that brought Bin Laden down.

serpa6
04-26-2012, 10:57 PM
Serpa, I am pretty sure that would have been the HK416 which is also chambered in 5.56. I think they put out a version HK 417 which is chambered in 7.62. It is far more reliable, but from what I remember it was thrown out of the competition for the new service rifle. Pretty sure because of the influence of lobbying on behalf of US congressmen, with the likes of Colt and Remington running around.

I do know, atleast from what I have read, the HK416 is certainly in use the SOF theater for the US military, and I have read numerous articles that the HK416 is the weapon that brought Bin Laden down.
thanks for letting me know I wondered what had happened to the weapon it seemed like the prefect weapon our boys needed reliable heavier round for penetration on hard targets Might be the cost thanks for the research on it

serpa6
05-04-2012, 11:28 PM
http://www.hk-usa.com/military_products/hk417_general.asp This it or?

Yes sir that be the one the shorter barrel be for CC and the longer for sniping thanks for that link

thomasjkelley
05-16-2012, 02:44 AM
Very good read, thanks for the link. I could understand the military sticking with the M4/M4A1 platform simply for cost reasons. However, I never could understand how the military opted for a 5.56 LMG with the M249. A LMG attached to a squad with the ballistics of the 6.8mm would make so much more sense, better ballistics, lighter ammo load than a M240, and instead of having two LMG platforms you could have one that provides both roles. That reduces costs, gives the soldiers a better weapon, and maintains enough fire power at the squad level. Then again these are just my opinions after having carried a M249 for a solid year.
Then your opinion should carry more weight than all the experts, engineers, & Generals combined. I understand you're a humble man, like most soldiers, but the people in charge of placing weapons in the hands of our troops, would do well to put more consideration into the end user's opinion, than all the data their tests tell them.

BrendenF11
05-16-2012, 06:45 AM
An engineer also expects 100 lbs of crap to fit in a 5lb space. Don't forget that most times than not, projects and new additions to this military arsenal are not put into effect unless they have congressional approval. That congressional approval is typically secured through lobiests and "contributions" to influential members of congress. Much like the military now not allowing the use of PMAG's or any other magazine other than the ones allowed through the militaries purchasing program. Even though PMAGs and various other polymer magazines have NSN's for ordering, I can't say for sure but I am assuming that the owners of the steel regular M4/M16 mags threw a bit of a tiff about it when units started ordering just PMAGs.