Last week, the US Army officially fielded the M26 Modular Accessory Shotgun System to elements of the 101st Abn Div. This is 2012. I fired it in 2004 when I was still on active duty and it wasn’t exactly brand new when I shot it at APG during a PEO Soldier range day. To put your mind in the right frame of reference, I also fired an XM8 on that day as well as a few other goodies.
(US Army photo by Sgt. Joe Padula, 2nd BCT PAO, 101st ABN Div)
The M26 is a derivative of the C-More Systems Lightweight Shotgun System manufactured by Vertu Corporation.
There are already some out there but I’m not sure why is took so long to pull the trigger this thing. As more and more troops receive it, I fully expect to hear the howls of those who have to carry this thing. It’s a good idea, just poorly executed. Don’t get me wrong, there are a couple of cool things going on here. For example, that big muzzle brake is actually there to aid the shooter in setting his stand off for breaching rounds. Unfortunately, it’s also got a lot of fleas. For one thing, it is magazine fed which will get in the way, so most guys will only load it when it is needed for breaching. Also, it’s a specialty magazine. Supply will become an issue.
(US Army photo by Sgt. Joe Padula, 2nd BCT PAO, 101st ABN Div)
But, the big issue is how it works. There is a collapsible charging handle on the side of the weapon (it can be configured for left or right hand operation) and every time you want to fire it, you have to manually charge it. Sure, it has a standalone stock, but then you get back to the action and magazine issues.
Tags: C-more Systems
Okay – dumb question, but why didn’t they just make a breaching round for the M203 and M320 grenade launchers that are already in use and operationally proven and liked?
40mm HE isn’t a breaching round? Hahaha!
While a 40mm chalk round or some other ablative compound would serve in punching a hole in the door, you usually need more than one go at the door. The time of firing a 203 and the subsequent reloads would be tactically impractical to the needs of a successful breach. This is notwithstanding the issues of collateral on the other side of the door with sending a 40mm through the door/jamb.
There was a breaching round floating around and its terrible, not enough velocity, standoff creates to much guess work with m4 barrel and breaching usually requires two to 8 shots depending latch or hinges. making the m4 as awkward or bulky as a SAW is stupid for all the obvious reasons. Id rather carry a separate shotty or separate grenade launcher respectively. Sighting and reloads are so much faster.
Thanks – I did wonder about the velocity factor…
This is a classic example of a bad idea that isn’t allowed to die on the vine because someone has invested too much time and money in the program and doesn’t want to admit that the program has failed to produce. Instead they force it through, waste more money, put it in the field knowing it’s a dud and then cancel the program after a while of trying to polish a turd.
This thing looks like a ridiculous the, Remington 870 MCS underbarrel is much more suited for the breacher role. Any idea why they chose to field this crap over the Rem? It has a lower profile, easier/ more familiar operating system, can be modified to have a REAL stock… be mounted under M4 barrel, change barrel lengths (that in theory could be useful for other applications), has no magazine issues (wtf does a breacher need a detachable magazine for?).
Wonder how much money was spent developing this abomination? I hope someone got a great OER bullet and a promotion out of it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA
Should fill the voids in the sensitive items connex well during deployments and help to keep the arms room from floating away during training.
I really think this is getting an unfair amount of hate compared to the 870 MCS. Firstly, the M26 is about half the weight of a traditional “Masterkey” type shotgun. Secondly, this has the capacity for a 5 round magazine as opposed to an 870 MCS which only has a 3 round tube (not necessarily enough to reliably breach a door). Thirdly, the 870 MCS mounts directly to the forward handguard which means the full weight and recoil of the shotgun creates yaw on the barrel which won’t be good for it, whereas the rear of the M26 mounts like an M203 to the receiver which is preferable in terms of transferring the recoil through the receiver rather than putting stress on the barrel. As for the magazine being too long and awkward, I can agree with this, but there is also a three round magazine which puts it on par in terms of capacity with the 870 MCS (but with a much faster reload and easier to change ammunition type) and protrudes out about half as far as the 5 round. Also, has anyone here actually tried using a pump action under a rifle, as it is not that easy. This action may seem weird, but is much easier to use.
Nobody uses the Master Key.
2/87 Inf had these in 2004 and they were complete garbage, heavy, fragile, unreliable. We could not wait to get rid of them, we ditched them before our 2006 deployment to Afghanistan and carried Mossberg 500s instead.
this sorta just looks like a saiga12 that has been dumbed down to the point of failure. what happened to the days where having a short barreled shotgun, separate from your primary weapon for breaching?
and this is sort of an old school thought, but in MOUT ops or likewise, why not have a designated shotgunner/breacher with a benelli or remington semi-auto, patrol length shotgun. that seems like it would be a better idea than fielding something thats not “deployment-worthy”.
just my .02cents