MURFREESBORO, TN – The U.S. Army has announced that the MARS Inc, Barrett team has been selected as the winner of the xTech Soldier Lethality competition. In six months, this team of agile businesses were able to design, build, test, and demonstrate the effectiveness of a new 30mm grenade rifle system in support of the Army’s Precision Grenadier System (PGS) requirement. PGS is a soldier portable, shoulder fired, semi-automatic, magazine fed, integrated armament system (weapon, ammunition, fire control) that enables rapid, precision engagements to destroy personnel targets in defilade and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) targets at close range. Both companies are proud to have the opportunity to provide this unique capability to the U.S. and allied war fighters.
MARS Inc. and Barrett’s PGS submission for U.S. Army’s xTech.
“For decades, Barrett has changed the battlefield with revolutionary systems like the shoulder fired semi-automatic .50 caliber Model 82 and its modern variants, as well as the MRAD MK 22 — the world’s most accurate multi-caliber sniper rifle,” said Bryan James, Barrett CEO. “These weapon systems are now supporting the U.S. and more than 80 allied nations around the world. With our focus now on the U.S. Army’s PGS initiative, we are committed to delivering another game changing advantage: a system with Programmable Air Bursting counter defilade and Counter-UAS capabilities designed to keep our troops safe and ensure mission success.”
The xTech program was an incredible demonstration of the strength and capabilities of the Barrett team to collaborate with like minded companies to achieve what many thought unachievable in the given time frame. As part of that journey, Barrett worked closely with small business innovator MARS Inc to bring their technology to life, AMTEC Corp to develop an entirely new family of 30mm shoulder fired munitions, and Precision Targeting to provide a fire control system customized for the AMTEC ammunition. This new ammunition family will have the full spectrum of capabilities required to achieve the US Army’s mission to provide over match on the modern battlefield. This includes, Programmable Air Bursting High Explosive (HE), Proximity Fuzed and Point Detonating HE, as well as a Close Quarter Battle Round.
“This award highlights not only our technical capabilities, but the power of partnership, agility, and a shared mission,” said Ryan Krantz, Barrett Vice President of Business Development & Sales. “We’re proud to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the U.S. Army to deliver the next leap forward in soldier lethality.”
Barrett and MARS Inc. put their xTech Precision Grenadier System prototype to the test in a live fire event.
SSD,
I know that the X Tech Lethality Demo and PGS are linked, but what is the path forward?
What are the next concrete steps for PGS, and Barrett’s system as a whole?
My 5 cents worth, based on open-source information. My understanding of the process is as follows:
The PGS project, up until now, has been “only” a technology demonstration, which means that the winning Barrett/MARS PGS is not the final product. As such, the Barrett/MARS design will now be evaluated, to assess if it is reasonable to expect that the US Army’s needs can be achieved with current technology.
If the answer to that question is “yes”, the US Army will issue a tender for an actual PGS prototype. The requirements in the tender will be based on the evaluation of the technology demonstrator, but the tender will not be limited to those who took part in the technology demonstration process. In other words, anyone who wants can submit a bid.
Following bid evaluation and downselect, the US Army will buy a small quantity (15 ea. has been mentioned) of the winning prototype design, and subject these to testing and refinement over a period of 3-4 years.
If it turns out that the prototypes do what the Army wants them to, within reasonable cost and complexity limits, a contract will then be awarded for the finaL production PGS. This is estimated to take place in the 2029-2030 timeframe.
That is, as I understand it, the plan at this point in time. But, given the history of projects like this, we’ll have to see what actually happens.
Might happen, might not. There seems to be a love hate relationship with this capability within the Army. It’s an odd situation. The Northrop Grumman system was the government baseline so I’m not sure where that now stands due to this. Also, the PGS requirements process marches on.
The NG/Colt system sure looks to be a tad better from an ergonomics perspective.
I’d love to know which factors put Barrett ahead of FN for XTech.
That’s roughly the process that I was familiar with as well, and that’s what gives me concern…
4-6 years for development (refinement really) of a GL like this is insane.
We’ve been through the XM-25. It’s got to be lethal, ergonomic, and give a squad more than it takes.
Maybe they’ve fixed the lethality issue with “newer” 25MM or the 30MM munitions, but bulk and ergonomics still remain an issue for all possible/expected entrants…including the Barrett system.
To be honest, I really don’t think they’ve settled on whether any of these would outweigh the loss of a rifleman. That, to me, is the hang up. It was the “nagging question” with the XM25, and it remains for PGS.
Hopefully we see urgent progress with answering that question so they can get to work. A half decade to field a capability that is needed NOW is entirely unsatisfactory.
Cool weapon. That said, the XM25 Punisher worked, could have also engaged UAS systems, yet was canceled as it took a rifleman out of the fight for anything other than standoff engagements or covering fire. Will this just be a specialty weapon? They really need to look at something like the XM29 again, even if the weight means the operator can only carry a few standard rifle magazines to complement the grenade launcher, and it’s only the “grenadiers” in the platoon that are issued it. Such a weapon would not take a rifleman out of the fight for room clearing etc yet still have this modern grenade launcher capability.
It’s an interesting question, because everyone (I think) acknowledges the capability these systems bring, but no one can agree of if those outweigh the loss of a traditional shooter.
The idea of combining the weapons is space efficient, but causes both systems to suffer ergonomically.
The idea of loosing the traditional shooter is unsat.
The grenadier can’t carry an M4 and a PGS, as they can with an M320.
Perhaps the solution is to rethink how we equip the grenadier.
A PGS + carbine (M4, XM7, etc) isn’t workable, but what about an actual PDW?
It’s entirely feasible that a grenadier could carry his launcher, plus a subcompact PDW like an MP7 for limited use in CQB/self defense.
It raises issues with ammo comparability within a squad, but those same problems would exist if the grenadier carried a PGS alone, so it may be worth exploring.