The Firearm Blog

The Army Times (via. Murdoc) report that the 75th Rangers are receiving new FN SCAR rifles:

About 600 members of the 75th Ranger Regiment will soon take the Special Operations Combat Assault Rifle into battle.

The 600 SCARs are the first of 1,800 that U.S. Special Operations Command began fielding in early April, SOCom spokeswoman Air Force Maj. Denise Boyd told Army Times.

The first photo I saw of the SCAR in the “wild” was when Defense Tech linked to this Navy photo taken last month showing a SEAL with the SCAR replica (see update below) slung over this shoulder.

090415-N-6403R-006 SEAL BEACH NAVAL WEAPONS STATION, Calif. (April 15, 2009) Special warfare combatant-craft crewmen (SWCC) assigned to Special Boat Team (SBT) 12 conduct an equipment check before getting underway for a training exercise at Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Joshua T. Rodriguez (Released)

UPDATE: Turns out that the above photo shows a replica SCAR. From a Wikipedia discussion:

“I received an email from FN confirming that the image appears to show replica weapons (FN mentioned Independent Studio Services, the same company that the earlier editor did). Actual FN SCAR rifle stocks are solid plastic in “Flat dark earth” color – solidly that color throughout, not a paint or coating over a darker black color. The FN employee has some of the ISS replica weapons and confirmed that they are manufactured in a solid black base material then painted the flat dark earth on top of that. He also confirmed that ISS has made replica SCARs for the SBS teams for training, and that SBS and SEALs routinely do use replica weapons in this manner to avoid training wear and tear on actual rifles.”

Thanks to Anon for the link to the Wikipedia discussion.

DOD Buzz has some thoughts on the weapon platform used by the SEAL Snipers who took out the pirates:

And let’s not get carried away with the sea state, says DT contributor Joe Buff. A multi-thousand ton destroyer is a pretty stable platform in any but the most tumultuous sea states and makes dialing in a shot on an admittedly tossing life raft more doable — a smart platform for the Team to operate from.

Well sure a big ship is a more stable platform, but that does not make it any less of a feat of marksmanship. Missing could have meant the difference between the American captain surviving and being executed by the frightened pirates.

We also have some information — unconfirmed, though we’re working on it — about how the shots were taken and what was used. Our firearms expert Eric Poole who writes for Tactical-Life posits that the snipers were using the MK-11 .308 sniper system manufactured by Knights Armament Co. This weapon is awesome, by the way (I’ve shot it a few times myself) and, if this is indeed what the shooters used, would mark a major, high-profile departure from legacy thinking about sniping which holds bolt-action rifles as the Gold Standard or marksmanship.

I also said that I though the Mk 11 was the likely weapons system.

Bolt actions and semi-auto’s can both be made accurate enough. Bolt actions can be made more accurate cheaper, but semi-autos give a much better rate of fire. The Army is sticking with the M24 Sniper Weapons System, based on the Remington 700 bolt action, for now because of cost.

Poole figures the DevGru frogmen removed the “overpowered” standard-issue Leupold scopes and opted for the Aimpoint CCO augmented by the PVS-14 night vision monocular. Though the SEAL version of the MK-11 Mod 0 is issued with suppressors, it’s unclear whether the operators used them, but I’d bet a million bucks they did.

Good point about scopes. The range was relatively close, so I don’t think the sound suppression of a suppressor would make a huge difference to the situation, but the decrease in recoil would be advantageous when making followup shots at a moving target. I think it is safe to assume these guys know now their weapons performs when suppressed (unlike video games, in real life suppressors make no change to the external ballistics of the projectile, but it does change the weight balance of the firearm)

One other question (among many) remains open…were there three shots or four? Poole reasons, and Allen and I agree, that someone had to shoot through the lifeboat window first, then fire the kill shots. My limited knowledge of ballistics leads me to believe the snipers could not rely on the effectiveness of the one window shot to actually strike the target where it was aimed based in the potential deflection of hitting that probably plastic (glass) window.

There are a lot of things we do not know.

Thanks to Paul for the link.