PICATINNY ARSENAL, NJ – Project Manager Soldier Lethality (PM SL) announced today the official Type Classification – Standard (TC-STD) of the U.S. Army’s M7 Rifle and M250 Automatic Rifle, signifying a major program milestone.
Following a full and open competition, including technical testing and Soldier touch points, a 10-year production contract was awarded to SIG SAUER in April 2022 to produce the M7 Rifle and M250 Automatic Rifle.
The M7 Rifle and M250 Automatic Rifle are currently being fielded across the Close Combat Force (CCB) to replace the M4A1 Carbine and M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) respectively. The Type Classification confirms the system meets the Army’s stringent standards for operational performance, safety, and sustainment.
“This milestone reflects our commitment to delivering cutting-edge capabilities that give our Soldiers the tactical advantage and lethality required on the battlefield,” said Col. Jason Bohannon, Project Manager Soldier Lethality. “We remain focused on equipping our force with the most reliable and effective tools to ensure mission success.”
PM SL continues to lead the way in modernizing the Army’s combat effectiveness and lethality through innovative, Soldier-focused solutions.
– PEO Soldier
Did it really meet the requirements or was it rubber stamped like the pistols
Has anybody O-8 or higher gotten a job with Sig in the last 5 years? The answer to that will answer your question.
Retired GOs have indeed joined SIG. However, none of them were on the SIG board before either MHS or NGSW were selected. What’s more, none of them served in acquisition.
So what are you attempting to imply with your statement?
I was standing on an Army base with people that are involved with this stuff. They literally told me one of the Generals selected Sig then retired and joined their board. Also, one of the senior enlisted guys who was against it spoke out and was ignored. He retired shortly after and works in the gun industry at one of Sigs competitors. Due to the nature of the event on Ft. Moore no names will be used.
The problem with what you posted is that you’ve accused a company and individuals of malfeasance without leaving the reader with the ability to properly weigh your allegations. By not using names, you have swept quite a couple of individuals who are highly respected into your logic trap. That is completely unfair to anyone who might be innocent while you’ve used your broad brush. Even worse, you have attempted to make this allegation anonymously but shellacked it with claims that you overheard it at Fort Benning, leading people who don’t know what I’m about to explain, that you’ve got some kind of inside knowledge and should be believed.
The biggest problem with your allegation is that there are currently only two retired General Officers on the SIG board:
GEN Austin Scott Miller retired in Oct 2021 and joined the board on Oct 2022.
LTG E John Deetrick retired in May 2023 and joined the board in Oct 2023.
The US Army awarded SIG a contract for Modular Handgun System in January, 2017, and for Next Generation Squad Weapons in April, 2022. Neither of those Retired GO board members’ appointments coincide with the contract awards. Furthermore, none of those men served in Acquisition or Contracting positions at any point in their careers let alone during the periods of the MHS or NGSW program source selections.
So who precisely are you accusing of violating federal law?
“I was standing on an Army base with people that are involved with this stuff. They literally told me one of the Generals selected Sig then retired and joined their board.”
Yeah I call bullshit.
In my experience, the only General who fits that description would be the Brigadier General of Program Executive Office Soldier. Since the NGSW was started in 2017, there have been four officers in that position. None of them are on Sig’s Board of Directors. Try again.
“Also, one of the senior enlisted guys who was against it spoke out and was ignored. He retired shortly after and works in the gun industry at one of Sigs competitors.”
So a senior enlisted spoke out against the Sig NGSW, and is now working for a competitor of Sig… How is that NOT a conflict of interest? Or do those only apply to officers?
“I was standing on an Army base… Due to the nature of the event on Ft. Moore no names will be used.”
If you were really trying to ‘protect the innocent’ why’d you name drop Fort Moore? FYI: It’s back to Fort Benning, in case you hadn’t heard. There haven’t been that many events at Fort Benning with the NGSW, so that narrows it down more than you realize apparently.
You drop just enough information in your post to make some people believe you are in the loop on things, when the reality is you are in the dark, just like the rest of us.
Even if you did attend this alleged event at Fort Benning, I bet the people you talked with said nothing like you believe they did. You just heard what you wanted to hear.
Army guy: “A general retired, yes.”
You: “HE’S ON THE BOARD OF SIG!”
Confirmation bias is a thing.
Of course it passed all relevant tests, just because you all want to hate doesn’t make your claims any more valid
Is that sling part of the M7 package?
The M7 delivers the desired terminal ballistics. I’m excited to see it in Army wide competitive marksmanship events.
The toxic & truly effeminate gossip (including that Captain) surrounding the M7 is shameful.
The Army published REQUIREMENTS. The M7 met them.
Agreed. The problem most who object to these weapons have is, they don’t
understand this.
When the Army requests a new piece of equipment like a rifle, they generate a list of requirements that the submission must meet. An example of a requirement from the NGSW would be that it must be chambered in 6.8x51mm. You can include things like threshhold/objective performance requirements as well. An example of this would something like “the rifle must maintain a dispersion of: (t) 4 Minutes of Angle(MOA) (o) 2 MOA.” (Note: I am not claiming these as performance specifications for the M7, these are EXAMPLE numbers).
Based off the requirements submitted to DoD, we got the NGSW.
The other layer of acquisition most seem to forget/not realize is that the DoD buys nothing. They go to congress to ask for funds to procure something based off these requirements. As such Congrees can include laws that the DoD is MANDATED to follow when procuring material solutions.
As for the gossip, it’s been going on since 2017. People have been predicting the M7/M250’s demise for years now. When that Army Times article came out in 2023, the confirmation bias was strong. “See I told you they would cancel it!” was the order of the day, even though that guy’s article was more shoddily written and had more confirmation bias in it than CPT Trent’s “Thesis”.
The only people whose opinions matter when it comes to these weapons is the Soldiers who will have to carry them. Everyone else(including members of the DD214 club) take a back seat to that.