logo
Army infantry officer calls new XM7 ‘unfit for use as a modern service rifle'

Army infantry officer calls new XM7 ‘unfit for use as a modern service rifle'

Yahoo12-05-2025
An Army infantry officer has made a series of criticisms of the Army's Next Generation Squad Weapon rifle, which is meant to replace the M4A1 carbine.
The Army introduced the XM7 rifle and XM250 light machine gun — both of which chamber a 6.8mm round — partly due to concerns that modern body armor could stop the 5.56mm rounds fired by the M4A1 and M249. The bigger round is also meant to give the XM7 an increased range based on lessons from Afghanistan.
But Army Capt. Braden Trent presented his research into the XM7 at the Modern Day Marine exhibition in Washington, D.C. — research he claims shows that the rifle is inferior to the M4A1.
As part of his research, Trent said he visited the 1st Brigade Combat Team 'Bastogne,' 101st Airborne Division, which was the first active-duty Army unit to receive the XM7. Trent said he interviewed more than 150 soldiers and disassembled 23 XM7 rifles.
His 52-page report on the subject, which included testing with experts, ballistic research, and input from soldiers, concluded that the XM7 is 'unfit for use as a modern service rifle,' Trent said on April 29 during his presentation at Modern Day Marine.
Trent said his research has shown that soldiers equipped with the XM7 in a live-fire exercise quickly run out of ammunition because its magazine only holds 20 rounds. He also said that gouges and scratches can form in the barrel after firing more than 2,000 rounds, the rifle's weight makes it hard for soldiers to maneuver.
Trent also said that soldiers told him that nearly all of their engagements in a military exercise were taking place within 300 meters, negating the XM7's advantage at longer ranges, he said.
'The XM7 is a tactically outdated service rifle that would be better classified as a designated marksman rifle, if that,' Trent said during his presentation. 'This rifle is a mechanically unsound design that will not hold up to sustained combat on a peer-on-peer conflict.'
However, a representative of Sig Sauer, which the Army selected in 2022 to build the Next Generation Squad Weapon rifle and machine gun, disputed Trent's findings.
'We have a very large staff of individuals that work daily on that rifle to ensure that every aspect of its performance is scrutinized, every aspect of its safety is criticized,' said Jason St. John, the senior director of strategic products for Sig Sauer. 'We are highly confident that we have provided the U.S. Army soldier with a very robust weapon system that is not only safe, but it performs at the highest levels.'
St. John said he did not want to issue a point-by-point rebuttal for all of Trent's conclusions 'because most of them are patently false.'
David H. Patterson, Jr., a spokesman for Program Executive Office Soldier, also said that the Next Generation Squad Weapon is well suited for close combat. Specifically, the weapon 'provides greater effects within 300 meters,' he said.
'As the secretary of the Army and chief of staff highlighted in their Army Transformation Initiative memo to the force, 'Yesterday's weapons will not win tomorrow's wars,'' Patterson wrote in an email on Monday to Task & Purpose. 'The Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) program provides unmatched lethality to our Close Combat Force (CCF). The Army is committed to accepting soldier feedback and enhancing weapons for optimal use.'
Trent is currently a student at the Marine Corps' Expeditionary Warfare School and was presenting his personal views on the subject, and his research for the school's fellowship program is not sponsored or endorsed by the Army, Marine Corps, or Defense Department, according to his research paper, which was obtained by Task & Purpose.
In a statement provided by a Marine Corps spokesman, Trent said he was selected by the Expeditionary Warfare School to conduct a fellowship project on small arms lethality that focused on the XM7.
'The project began as a fact-finding effort to evaluate how the XM7 enhances soldier lethality,' Trent said in the statement. 'The goal was to provide unclassified, accessible information to soldiers and leaders to support informed decision-making at the tactical, operational, and strategic levels when employing the new system to maximize lethality.'
Trent is scheduled to graduate from the Expeditionary Warfare School on Thursday as a Distinguished Graduate, and he is also the recipient of the Yeosock Memorial Award for the best sister service writing project at Marine Corps University, according to the Marine Corps.
The Modern Day Marine exhibition encourages collaboration and the sharing of ideas, especially among noncommissioned officers and company grade officers who use some weapons and systems showcased at the exhibition, said Marine Corps spokesman Lt. Col. Nick Mannweiler.
'While it remains solely his personal opinion, Capt. Trent's presentation exemplifies the type of dialogue and feedback we wanted with student presentations,' Mannweiler wrote in an email to Task & Purpose. 'This is what the profession of arms looks like.'
In his research project, Trent wrote that his paper is 'in no way intended to disparage the United States Army, acquisitions personnel, or private contractors/manufacturers.'
Trent also wrote that the Army can still 'rectify the decision to adopt the XM7,' adding that soldiers deserve to go into battle knowing they have been given the best weapons available.
'They deserve to be given a weapon that is safe and efficient to operate,' Trent wrote. 'They deserve a rifle capable of providing the fire superiority they need to close with and destroy the enemy. The men and women of the infantry have always fought at the fullest extent of their capabilities, willing to achieve victory at the price of 'the last full measure of devotion.' The Army must continue to provide them with weapons capable of matching that devotion.'
The most serious problem Trent said he noticed was that some XM7 rifles developed a scratch or gouge in their barrel after firing more than 2,000 rounds, Trent said.
'This can lead to all kinds of problems with accuracy and safety, and I recommend a full investigation by those who are more qualified — engineers with bore scopes, etc, that I did not have available with me during my time at 1st Brigade,' Trent said.
In his project paper, Trent wrote, 'Surface damage to the rifling was visible to the eye at the same location on rifles that had exceeded the 2,000 round count.'
But St. John said Trent's findings on gouges and scratches in the XM7's rifle barrel were based on a superficial examination of the weapon.
'Capt. Trent looked down a barrel naked eye, didn't use a boroscope, didn't use any gauging to determine if there was any sort of erosive nature to that weapon system, is indistinct in his ability to say what he witnessed other than he believes by naked eye looking down a barrel with natural light that he witnessed some issues,' St. John said.
According to St. John, the XM7 can fire more than 10,000 rounds before the barrel fails — twice the program's requirement.
Patterson, the Army spokesperson, said the service fired more than 20,000 rounds per barrel while testing the XM7 and found that the rifle's performance and accuracy were not affected.
Another issue raised by Trent is the 20-round capacity of the XM7's magazine, compared with the M4A1, which has a 30-round magazine.
If soldiers armed with both weapons are expected to carry seven magazines into battle as part of their universal basic load, or UBL, soldiers with M4A1 carbines would carry 210 rounds while soldiers armed with the XM7 would have 140 rounds, Trent said at Modern Day Marine.
'Now again, a 70-round difference may not seem significant, but to the soldier in the fight, it absolutely is a difference, not to mention that every magazine added to the XM7 — each 20-round loaded magazine — adds another 1.25 pounds to the soldier's load, meaning that if troops equipped with the XM7 tried to match their old UBLs, they're going to have even more weight being carried,' Trent said.
Indeed, during a company live-fire exercise that he observed, a platoon of soldiers armed with XM7s tasked with suppressing an objective while other soldiers could maneuver, burned through their ammunition quickly, Trent said.
'Within 10 minutes, the platoon I observed was almost completely out of ammunition after starting the engagement,' Trent said. 'And by 15 minutes, their ability to produce effective suppression had become almost zero. This is after having taken spare magazines for the XM7 from radio operators, medics, platoon leadership, etc.'
When asked about the exercise in which soldiers ran out of ammunition, St. John said Sig Sauer has no opinion about how the Army uses the XM7.
'That's way outside of our realm,' St. John said. 'How the Army trains, how the Army utilizes it, what the Army's tactics, techniques, and procedures are, that's way beyond Sig Sauer's opinion level. We're in the delivering firearms business.'
Patterson said the Army has conducted several different exercises that looked at how much ammunition soldiers armed with the XM7 use.
'Following the completion of the exercises, there was enough ammunition remaining to conduct a follow-on action,' Patterson said.
Patterson also said there is no doctrine dictating a 'Universal Combat Load.'
The Army's Training Publication for infantry platoons and squads says that a platoon's basic load depends on the mission and may be determined by the unit's leader or standard operating procedure.
'The unit basic load includes supplies kept by the platoon for use in combat,' the publication says. 'The quantity of most unit basic load supply items depends on how many days in combat the platoon might have to sustain itself without resupply. For Class V ammunition, the higher commander or [standard operating procedure] specifies the platoon's basic load.'
UPDATE 1: 05/06/2025; this story was updated with information from the Army about exercises involving how much ammunition soldiers armed with the XM7 used and who determines how much ammunition platoons carry as part of their unit's basic load.
UPDATE 2: 05/06/2025; this story was updated with a statement from Army Capt. Braden Trent provided by a Marine Corps spokesman.
Commandant says Marines should have a say in whether they change duty stations
Space Force Special Operations Command is on its way
Army reverses course on banning fun and games for soldiers in Kuwait
A meal card foul-up at Fort Johnson underscores a bigger Army problem
Sailor wins $7,500 settlement after his car was towed and auctioned off while deployed
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

A pilot made sharp turn to avoid a B-52 bomber over North Dakota
A pilot made sharp turn to avoid a B-52 bomber over North Dakota

Boston Globe

time7 days ago

  • Boston Globe

A pilot made sharp turn to avoid a B-52 bomber over North Dakota

Advertisement An Air Force spokesperson confirmed Monday that a B-52 bomber assigned to nearby Minot Air Force Base conducted a flyover Friday of the North Dakota State Fair, which is held in Minot. The Air Force is 'looking into' the incident, the spokesman said. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The North Dakota incident comes nearly six months after a midair collision between an Army helicopter and a jetliner over Washington, D.C., that killed all 67 people aboard the two aircraft. That collision and subsequent close calls with Army helicopters over the nation's capital put the spotlight on the interaction between military and civilian flights. Officials have focused on improving communications between the two and making sure that air traffic controllers know where military aircraft are at all times because the Army helicopters around Washington were flying with a key locating device turned off. Advertisement SkyWest, a regional carrier for Delta and other large airlines, said the Friday flight had departed from the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and landed safely in Minot after performing a 'go-around' maneuver when another aircraft became visible in the SkyWest plane's flight path. Minot is 100 miles (160 kilometers) north of Bismarck, North Dakota's capital city, and about 50 miles (80 kilometers) from the Canadian border. Minot Air Force Base is about 10 miles (16 kilometers) north of Minot, North Dakota's fourth-largest city. The base is home to 26 B-52 bombers, intercontinental ballistic missile operations, and more than 5,400 military personnel. In the video, the pilot noted that Minot's small airport does not operate radar and directs flights visually. When the airport tower instructed the SkyWest flight to make a right turn upon approach, the pilot said he looked in that direction and saw the bomber in his flight path. He informed the tower and made a hard turn to avoid the bomber, he said. 'I don't know how fast they were going, but they were a lot faster than us,' the pilot said of the bomber. Passengers can be heard applauding as the pilot wrapped up his explanation. The Federal Aviation Administration issued a statement Monday morning simply saying it's investigating the incident. By midafternoon, it had issued a second statement to note that air traffic services were provided by a private company that services the Minot air traffic control tower. 'These controllers are not FAA employees,' the agency said. Some small airports like Minot's don't have their radar systems on site. The vast majority of the nation's airports don't even have towers. But regional FAA radar facilities do oversee traffic all across the country and help direct planes in and out of airports like Minot. The Minot airport typically handles between 18 and 24 flights a day. Advertisement The pilot's frustration is evident in the video. 'The Air Force base does have radar, and nobody said, 'Hey, there's a B-52 in the pattern,'' the pilot told passengers. SkyWest said it is also investigating.

I gave up my US passport and changed my name — all for my love of basketball and Korea
I gave up my US passport and changed my name — all for my love of basketball and Korea

Business Insider

time20-07-2025

  • Business Insider

I gave up my US passport and changed my name — all for my love of basketball and Korea

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Lee Seung-jun, a 47-year-old retired professional basketball player who represented South Korea internationally. His words have been edited for length and clarity. A mix of my American dad's height and my Korean mom's identity took me places — literally. I was born in the US and grew up as Eric Lee Sandrin, but after moving to Korea and giving up my US passport, I became Lee Seung-jun. I went on to play professional basketball and on the Korean national team. Both sides of my family shaped me in different ways. Settling down in Seattle My dad is 6-foot-7 and played basketball through college, then later for the Army team. He met my mom while stationed in Korea. After completing his service, they moved to Washington state to settle down. My dad loved the mountains, and my mom liked being closer to Korea. My younger brother and I were raised in the suburbs of Seattle, although we often spent summers in Korea. Over the years, we started bringing other members of the family to the US, my grandmother, uncles, and aunts. Little by little, almost all of them ended up moving to the Seattle area, opening up small businesses like grocery stores and karaoke bars, similar to other Korean immigrants in the area. In between cultures At school, we were usually the only Asian kids in class. At home, everyone looked like us. It created a constant push-pull: Korean at home, American outside. At school, kids would say, "Are you guys Chinese?" And we'd say, "No, it's a different country." And they would say, "Oh, Japanese?" When we visited my dad's family in Michigan, our cousins didn't know what we were; they hadn't seen people like us in the Midwest. My mom worried about prejudice, so we didn't grow up speaking Korean. She wanted us to be American first, even as she struggled to learn English herself. Court vs. classroom I started shooting hoops when I was around six. In our early teens, we'd just head to the park and play. It wasn't until high school, when coaches started sending letters and offering scholarships, that I thought, "Wow, I might actually get to play basketball in school." I ended up enrolling at the University of Portland, and later, after a knee injury, transferring to Seattle Pacific University — I played for both of the schools' teams. After graduating, I got a teaching certificate and lined up a job teaching at a high school. Change of plans Then I chose basketball instead. My mom thought I was throwing it all away. My brother was planning to be a lawyer, and she had dreams of bragging about us to her coffee group. But by then, basketball had become my life, my brother's too. When I didn't make it to the NBA, I started building an international career, including a brief stint with the Harlem Globetrotters. I was still chasing the NBA dream when a Korean agent suggested I try out for teams in Korea. I suggested that my brother go first. He loved it and told me, "You have to come." So I did. To play for the South Korean team, I had to give up my US citizenship. My dad, a military vet, wasn't happy. He reminded me that family members had died fighting for the US. He thought it was rash. But after we talked it through, he understood. For me, it was about finding a better opportunity, just like his grandparents had done when they came from Italy. Restarting in Korea When I arrived in Seoul, I had just turned 30. At first, Korea felt familiar. The faces and food reminded me of my mom. But once I got deeper into the culture, I realized how different I was. I didn't speak the language and hadn't done military service. Basketball practice in Korea felt like military training. We practiced four times a day: 6 a.m., 10 a.m., 4 p.m., and 8 p.m. That's also when I started realizing just how many unspoken rules there are in the Korean language and culture. I remember one of my first practices, I walked in, sat down, and started lacing up my shoes. I was sitting in the head coach's chair, but I had no idea that was a big faux pas. So I was sitting there when the coach walked in. I went, "Oh, what's up?" I didn't even greet him properly. I didn't know any of this stuff. The whole team was like: "How can he be so rude? How does he not know this?" That moment really pushed me to start learning the unspoken rules and study the language. I eventually changed my name to Seung-jun, a name crafted with my mom's help. It means "beautiful victory," and links to my brother's name Dong‑jun — he grew up as Daniel. When I was growing up in the States, my grandma used to talk to us for hours, but we could hardly understand her. After learning to speak Korean, it was like meeting my grandma for the first time. I could actually talk to her and understand what she was saying. Off the court, still in the game In 2017, I retired, although I knew I wanted to stay in Korea. It felt like home. The healthcare system is amazing. My wife, who's half-Korean, half-Romanian, is also a basketball player and is still playing. A year after retiring from basketball, before my brother eventually got a green card and moved back to the States, we started Prism Hoops Academy. The youth sports company is focused on making sports fun for kids. In Korea, education is intense and regimented. Our goal was to create a space where kids could just play. I'm now running the school with Im Won‑jun, another Korean American who, funnily enough, also grew up in Seattle. We offer basketball, soccer, and chess. It's not about drills or perfection; our goal is just helping kids build positive memories. Coaching young kids has become a real passion of mine, and my plan is to go back to school for a higher degree in education or administration. So it looks like my mom will get her teacher after all.

The Army has realized that horses are no longer good for ‘warfighting'
The Army has realized that horses are no longer good for ‘warfighting'

Yahoo

time18-07-2025

  • Yahoo

The Army has realized that horses are no longer good for ‘warfighting'

Goodbye horses, the Army's over you. The Army is drastically scaling back its Military Working Equid program, the Army term for the service's contingent of horses, donkeys and mules. With a few exceptions for ceremonial horse teams, the equine operations will wind down over the next year at five Army bases, with animals being donated or transferred to private owners, the Army announced last week. Why the drawdown? According to the Army, it's 'to align more resources with warfighting capability and readiness.' 'This initiative will save the Army $2 million annually and will allow the funds and soldiers dedicated to [Military Working Equid] programs to be redirected to readiness and warfighting priorities,' according to the Army's release. The 'warfighting priorities' were not specified. The Department of Defense currently owns 236 horses, mules and donkeys, which are housed and cared for on Army bases, Army spokesperson Lt. Col. Ruth Castro told Task & Purpose on Monday. The one-year reduction will see the closure of MWE programs at bases in California, Arizona, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas: Fort Irwin, Fort Huachuca, Fort Riley, Fort Sill and Fort Hood. The Army will keep horse teams at two locations, including the 3rd Infantry Regiment, or 'the Old Guard,' at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia, which restarted its caisson services in June after a two-year pause following the death of two horses. That effort saw the Army invest more than $18 million in new real estate and equipment for the horses. Though the age of the war horse is long gone, horses have not been totally absent from combat use in the modern Army. Army Special Forces soldiers famously used horses with the Northern Alliance during the initial invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 — those horses were provided by Afghan partners. The last time the Army staged an outright cavalry charge was 83 years ago during World War II. The 26th Cavalry Regiment in the Philippines, made up of American and Filipino fighters, resisted Japanese forces with horseback tactics. On Jan. 16, 1942, Lt. Edward Ramsey led a mounted force into the village of Morong. When the cavalry encountered a larger Japanese infantry force, Ramsey ordered them forward, even yelling 'charge!' The horse-based assault was so sudden and shocking it pushed the Japanese forces back. According to the Army, equine veterinarian experts will oversee the drawdown of the MWE animals. They will be donated or adopted by outside parties. The latest on Task & Purpose Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps learns an old lesson: Don't mess with Audie Murphy A breakdown of safety procedures 'directly contributed' to an 82nd Airborne paratrooper's death WWII Marine Raider who fought at Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal wants cards for 100th birthday Navy identifies special warfare sailor killed while parachuting Pentagon appears to pause renaming of Navy ships Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store