OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Scopes > Tactical Scopes
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - U.S. Army’s M110 Sniper System's New Scope
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

U.S. Army’s M110 Sniper System's New Scope

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 8024
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chris Farris Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: U.S. Army’s M110 Sniper System's New Scope
    Posted: April/28/2020 at 10:35

LEUPOLD OPTICS ANNOUNCES THE MARK 5HD 3.6-18×44 RIFLE SCOPE CHOSEN FOR ARMY M110 RIFLE

Leupold Optics has recently announced they have been awarded a contract to supply the U.S. Army M110 rifle with the Leupold Mark 5hd 3.6-18×44 rifle scope.

Leupold Optics states “Leupold & Stevens, Inc., provider of the world’s most rugged, lightweight, and clear riflescopes and reflex sights, is pleased to announce that its award-winning Mark 5HD riflescope has been selected for use with the United States Army’s M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper System. Like all of Leupold’s riflescopes, the Mark 5HD is designed, machined, and assembled in the company’s Beaverton, Ore. factory.

The Mark 5HD that’s being built for the M110 will come in a proprietary flat dark earth coating and utilize the Army’s patented Mil-Grid Reticle. It will include a Leupold Mark IMS mount. The 3.6-18 is the second Mark 5HD model to be selected for use by the U.S. Army this year. The 5-25×56, featuring the same FDE coating and reticle, was selected by the Army Precision Sniper Rifle Program last month.

“The men and women of the U.S. armed forces require and deserve the very best, and when it comes to riflescopes, that’s the Mark 5HD,” said Bruce Pettet, President and Chief Executive Officer for Leupold & Stevens, Inc. “Our optics face strenuous durability testing, and fully meet the extremely high performance standards that the military demands.”

The Mark 5HD has been crafted to redefine accuracy, precision, and optical performance for long-range shooters. Three models – a 7-35×56, 5-25×56, and 3.6-18×44 – are available in both milliradian and MOA configurations. Pick one up and you’ll feel the difference: it’s up to 20 ounces lighter than other scopes in its class. Get behind one and you’ll see the difference, from its superior edge-to-edge clarity to its extreme low-light performance. With three revolutions of elevation adjustment, the Mark 5HD was made to max out the performance of the latest long-range rifles and ammunition.

“The Mark 5 was designed in partnership with elite shooters to create a product that has the quality and features required to get rounds on target faster,” said Sam Horstman, Director of Military Sales for Leupold & Stevens, Inc. “The end result is precisely the caliber of riflescope we’d want our troops to have in the field.”

Leupold proudly provides its optics to the United States military, law enforcement, and government agencies across the country, and to the armed forces of many of our nation’s closest allies.

Waterproof, fogproof, and guaranteed to perform for life, the Mark 5HD is backed by the company’s legendary Lifetime Guarantee.”





Edited by Chris Farris - April/28/2020 at 10:40
Back to Top
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rancid Coolaid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2020 at 12:54
Hard no.
Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.
Back to Top
Scrumbag View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: October/22/2013
Location: London, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 4205
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Scrumbag Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2020 at 14:58
Anyone note that the USMC uses PMII?
Was sure I had a point when I started this post...
Back to Top
Rancid Coolaid View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar

Joined: January/19/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9318
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rancid Coolaid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2020 at 16:11
Military contracts are as often political as they are anything - maybe everything - else. And if I recall correctly, the USMC is switching to ATACRs next.

The Loopy might be awesome, but it isn't awesome BECAUSE it was adopted.

Freedom is something you take.
Respect is something you earn.
Equality is something you whine about not being given.
Back to Top
Sgt. D View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: February/20/2008
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 4525
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sgt. D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/29/2020 at 13:42
No doubt somebody is kin to somebody in contracts and appropriations. I do like Leopold but I am certain there are *MUCH* better options..........Either they were low bid or makin somebody fat in the pocket!!
DownWithTyranny!: THE GREASY PALMS GREASE WHAT THEY CAN. YOU KNOW ...
.
Take care of Soldiers, Show em how its done and do it with em, Run to the Fight & and hold your ground! I die my men go home! If you're a NCO and this ain't you. GET OUT! GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Back to Top
BeltFed View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar

Joined: February/12/2008
Location: Ky
Status: Offline
Points: 22284
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BeltFed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/30/2020 at 07:09
The Army put out the spec.s for the new scope in the bid process. The Leupold met the spec.s and turned in the low bid. Not saying there wasn't something better, they just didn't turn in the low bid. That's why the M17 and 18 pistols are Sig's and not Glock's.
Remember, it was Allen Shepherd that while he was waiting to be launched to the edge of space thought, "I'm setting here on top of a rocket that was built by the lowest bidder".
Life's concerns should be about the 120lb pack your trying to get to the top of the mountain, and not the rock in your boot.
Back to Top
Kickboxer View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Moderator

Joined: February/13/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 23679
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kickboxer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/30/2020 at 07:15
There is certainly some "good ole boy-ism", certainly there is nepotism in the huge government machine of contracting.  But that is not the major problem, only a very small portion of the problem set.  The entire contracting process is based upon erroneous assumptions and processes and that leads to errors and failures in results.  One of the biggest issues encountered in contracting is the concept of "adequacy".  "Adequate to do the job" is a subjective concept that has cost the lives of many.  This supposed adequacy is determined by personnel untrained and unfamiliar (most often, not always) with the mission of the object being obtained.  "Subject matter experts", who have never seen a field operation except perhaps in Rambo movie, are called upon to determine "adequacy" with the underlying motivation that "cheaper is better" and cheaper will get you rewarded.  In certain circumstances, actual field operators are given leeway in purchasing due to unique requirements, situations, need for successful outcomes.  However, in times of relative "calm", those "leeways" are diminished and/or removed... because we must never forget the financial rewards given to "contracting officials" for "saving money".  I have seen programs vital to ensuring success (success not just mission but reduced loss of personnel) canceled in the name of "saving money", "just good enough" items, purchased by unknowing bureaucrats, turn into disastrous failures by only marginally meeting the requirement/s.  Requirements are often "watered down" to suit contractors (who make more profit by reducing the rigor of requirements) or contracting personnel (who make more rewards for saving money).  
I am not saying that all personnel in contracting organizations are bad, there is a large set who really want to do the right thing.  However, they are trained in contracting and administration, not warfighting, engineering, science and they are highly burdened by bureaucracy, self-aggrandizement, self-promotion, self-enrichment.  Many contractors are totally devoted to preventing loss of life, providing the best technology available at the best cost possible... they generally are at odds with the management organizations who determine their "worth" to the organization.  
It is a very complex thing.
Opinion,untempered by fact,is ignorance.

There are some who do not fear death... for they are more afraid of not really living
Back to Top
Sgt. D View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: February/20/2008
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 4525
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sgt. D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/30/2020 at 09:11
Originally posted by Kickboxer Kickboxer wrote:

There is certainly some "good ole boy-ism", certainly there is nepotism in the huge government machine of contracting.  But that is not the major problem, only a very small portion of the problem set.  The entire contracting process is based upon erroneous assumptions and processes and that leads to errors and failures in results.  One of the biggest issues encountered in contracting is the concept of "adequacy".  "Adequate to do the job" is a subjective concept that has cost the lives of many.  This supposed adequacy is determined by personnel untrained and unfamiliar (most often, not always) with the mission of the object being obtained.  "Subject matter experts", who have never seen a field operation except perhaps in Rambo movie, are called upon to determine "adequacy" with the underlying motivation that "cheaper is better" and cheaper will get you rewarded.  In certain circumstances, actual field operators are given leeway in purchasing due to unique requirements, situations, need for successful outcomes.  However, in times of relative "calm", those "leeways" are diminished and/or removed... because we must never forget the financial rewards given to "contracting officials" for "saving money".  I have seen programs vital to ensuring success (success not just mission but reduced loss of personnel) canceled in the name of "saving money", "just good enough" items, purchased by unknowing bureaucrats, turn into disastrous failures by only marginally meeting the requirement/s.  Requirements are often "watered down" to suit contractors (who make more profit by reducing the rigor of requirements) or contracting personnel (who make more rewards for saving money).  
I am not saying that all personnel in contracting organizations are bad, there is a large set who really want to do the right thing.  However, they are trained in contracting and administration, not warfighting, engineering, science and they are highly burdened bureaucracy, self-aggrandizement, self-promotion, self-enrichment.  Many contractors are totally devoted to preventing loss of life, providing the best technology available at the best cost possible... they generally are at odds with the management organizations who determine their "worth" to the organization.  
It is a very complex thing.
 
Its sickening!................
When I think back on what we were given to carry out our missions in Iraq it is painfully clear that we were expendable long before we ever got orders to go. But for God, our causalities would have been ridiculous. All our firearms were atleast 30 to 40 yrs old. Our transportation had been in service in the states for 15 to 20 yrs and had to be "up armored" as best as was possible. We had to take the out going units worn out leftovers and get what we could out of it. Everything that was brought in new went to the administrative pool.
I don't know if the bureaucrats will ever face accountability for the blood on their hands but the rivers of blood run deep.
And now 15 yrs later things obviously have accelerated blatantly beyond recovery.
Even with Trump's efforts to save our country it is inevitably taking it's last breaths. I hope we get four more yrs but I no longer see any light beyond that for our Nation. 
 
This political experiment has proven to them that they have ultimately won their goals. We have been herded like cattle into compliance thru ignorance, confusion and fear. All our arms and ammunition are of no consequence. Why do you think most if not all arms and ammo manufacturers are owned by liberal bureaucrats? We are dumping tons of cash right in their pockets and they have no concern of ever facing any consequences.
 
Sorry Chris, Got on a rant. What Dan offered connects this contract to the bureaucracy that has overtaken our future.
 
Salute!
Take care of Soldiers, Show em how its done and do it with em, Run to the Fight & and hold your ground! I die my men go home! If you're a NCO and this ain't you. GET OUT! GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
EVIL OPPRESSOR

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 16337
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/30/2020 at 17:54
Originally posted by Sgt. D Sgt. D wrote:

Why do you think most if not all arms and ammo manufacturers are owned by liberal bureaucrats? 

Where did you get that factoid? Sorry brother, but I'm gonna have to wave the flag on that one.BS Flag
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
Sgt. D View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: February/20/2008
Location: North Carolina
Status: Offline
Points: 4525
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sgt. D Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2020 at 07:19
Why don't you look it yourself? If you find proof otherwise by all means I'd like to know about it. Put your B/S flag back where you pulled it from.
Take care of Soldiers, Show em how its done and do it with em, Run to the Fight & and hold your ground! I die my men go home! If you're a NCO and this ain't you. GET OUT! GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Back to Top
BeltFed View Drop Down
Optics Retard
Optics Retard
Avatar

Joined: February/12/2008
Location: Ky
Status: Offline
Points: 22284
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BeltFed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2020 at 07:29
Play nice boys. Don't make me call momerator to break you two up.
Life's concerns should be about the 120lb pack your trying to get to the top of the mountain, and not the rock in your boot.
Back to Top
koshkin View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
Dark Lord of Optics

Joined: June/15/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 13181
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote koshkin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2020 at 13:29
Originally posted by Sgt. D Sgt. D wrote:

Why don't you look it yourself? If you find proof otherwise by all means I'd like to know about it. Put your B/S flag back where you pulled it from.

You made the original claim, so in principle the onus of proof is on you.

I obviously do not know all the major manufacturers, but I know a few in the AR world and they are far from being liberals of any sort.

ILya
Back to Top
RifleDude View Drop Down
MODERATOR
MODERATOR
Avatar
EVIL OPPRESSOR

Joined: October/13/2006
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 16337
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote RifleDude Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May/01/2020 at 17:53
Originally posted by Sgt. D Sgt. D wrote:

Why don't you look it yourself? If you find proof otherwise by all means I'd like to know about it. Put your B/S flag back where you pulled it from.

I don’t have to. I personally know that’s incorrect because many of those manufacturers are my company’s customers, I know many of the big name players, and they have nothing but disdain for libs. I know for fact your statement is horse shidt. I say that as gently as possible, but nevertheless, refer to previous sentence. Besides, as Koshkin said, I didn’t make the sweeping claim, so the burden of proof isn’t on me, it’s on you.

Besides, what does any of that have to do with the topic...the scope in question?
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.