The NG-IHPS is the Army’s newest combat helmet, replacing the previously fielded Integrated Head Protection System, the Advanced Combat Helmet, and the Enhanced Combat Helmet. The combat-ready NG-IHPS consists of a retention system, suspension system, helmet cover and a night vision device bracket that is able to integrate a mandible protector, hearing protection, communications and heads-up displays like the Integrated Visual Augmentation System and the Enhanced Night Vision Goggle-Binocular.

“This fielding marks significant progress for Soldier protective equipment as it equips Soldiers with protection against relevant battlefield threats, and the innovative helmet design is a purpose-built platform for integration now, and with future Soldier-enabling devices,” said Lt. Col. Ken Elgort, product manager for Soldier Protective Equipment.

The NG-IHPS, which will be fielded to the close-combat force, interfaces with the next generation of night vision devices, while the mandible protector mounts onto the front of the NG-IHPS for additional protection. The mandible protector is fielded to 6% of the force operating in a mounted configuration.

“The NG-IHPS provides increased ballistic and fragmentation protection while reducing the weight required to previously reach this protection level by 40%,” said Maj. Matthew Nulk, assistant program manager of the Head Protection Team. “This is world-leading rifle threat protection we’re providing to our Soldiers.”

According to Alex de Groot, lead engineer for the Head Protection Team, “The boltless retention system and night vision device bracket mount on without compromising the helmet’s structural integrity, thus increasing protection.”

PEO Soldier will equip the 2nd and 3rd Brigade Combat Teams, 82nd Airborne Division, this quarter and will complete fielding to all close-combat force units over the next three years.

Program Executive Office Soldier is responsible for the rapid prototyping, procurement and fielding of equipment for Soldiers. NG-IHPS is part of the Soldier Survivability portfolio, the largest portfolio within PEO Soldier. The NG-IHPS is one part of the Soldier Protection System, which also includes the Modular Scalable Vest, the Ballistic Combat Shirt, the Blast Pelvic Protector and the Vital Torso Protection hard armor plates.

A squad of Soldiers from Fort Riley, Kansas, recently wrapped up a crucial two-week Soldier touchpoint on the Army’s XM30 Combat Vehicle program. The XM30 is a fighting vehicle that the Army will begin to field by the end of the decade, bringing new capabilities to the fight and transforming Armored Brigade Combat Teams.

“I appreciate the level of focus and interest the engineers and design team who are working on the XM30 have in our input,” said Sgt. 1st Class Isaac Busch, 1-18 Infantry, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division. “The XM30 will be a massive upgrade in lethality for our formations.”

Busch was one of a dozen Soldiers who spent much of January at the Detroit Arsenal, reviewing plans and interacting with mock-ups of potential future designs of the XM30, providing insights on what the Soldiers liked or didn’t like about the possible designs. Two vendors — General Dynamics Land Systems and American Rheinmetall Vehicles — are under contract by the Army to provide prototype vehicles for test and evaluation. Ultimately, one vendor’s vehicle will be selected, in late Fiscal Year 2027, for production. The touchpoint allowed the two vendors to get feedback from the ultimate end user before beginning to build the first prototypes.

“My Soldiers have hundreds, probably thousands of hours of on the ground experience in the Bradley [Fighting Vehicle], both as a dismount and in the turret,” Busch said. “We’re using that experience to advise on what we believe works best, based on that experience.”

Among the key features Busch noted and commented on in the future XM30 design were next generation optics, fire control systems and a 50mm weapon system, all of which he said will increase the ability of future formations to engage with and defeat new and greater threats on the battlefield.

Such inputs are at the core of the “Soldier-centric design” approach the Army is using to develop the XM30, which will replace the M2 Bradley in infantry and scout formations.

“The Soldier, specifically our infantry squads, will be the ones who are using the XM30 on the battlefield of tomorrow. It only makes sense to get their inputs on how the vehicle is designed,” said Brig. Gen. Geoffrey Norman, director of the Next Generation Combat Vehicles Cross-Functional Team (NGCV CFT).

The NGCV CFT is working closely with the Program Executive Office – Ground Combat Systems (PEO-GCS) and other Army commands on the development of the XM30. Both NGCV CFT and PEO-GCS are based at the Detroit Arsenal, the center of the Army’s vehicle design prowess and of the nearby American automotive industry.

The Soldier touchpoint included a number of practical drills, such as timing how long it took a team of Soldiers to dismount from various possible vehicle design configurations. It also included more nuanced discussions about access and placement of panels that provide exterior situation awareness for the Soldiers, and how the engine will be accessible for field-level maintenance. One conversation focused on the configuration of the vehicle’s rear access ramp, which directly impacts a Soldier’s ability to enter or exit the vehicle quickly.

The January Soldier touchpoint is part of the ongoing series of iterations between the Army and the two vendors that have marked the XM30 effort from the start.

Another insight from the touchpoint centered on an area one may not generally consider a priority for an armored combat vehicle — comfort for the Soldier.

“You may have Soldiers who are going to be in the compartment for a long time. You want those Soldiers to be as fresh as possible, ready to immediately dismount and be at top performance to engage an enemy,” said Staff Sgt. John Buenavista, another of the Fort Riley Soldiers who participated in the touchpoint. “I look forward to what XM30 will bring to my unit, whatever unit I may be in, as they start to roll out.”

Up until quite recently, the 338 Lapua Magnum cartridge was the preeminent sniper caliber with 338 Norma Magnum looking ready to surpass its popularity. The war in Ukraine caused a resurgence in the Lapua caliber, gifting it a stay of execution, of sorts. There were numerous weapons systems available at the time sniper ammunition was needed, and 338 Lapua Mag fit the bill. It’s unclear how much this spike may add to its life span, though. Some say a decade or more. Regardless, the long-term implications for the round’s future use my today’s militaries are the same. 338 Norma Magnum is set to take the Lapua’s place on the throne of tactical long-range cartridges.

This article will dig a little deeper and provide more information about round’s ascension.

Let’s start with what’s included in the 338 NM kingdom and what is not. Its will eventually reign over the future of U.S. military and law enforcement sniper applications. It will not be the king of civilian long-range precision competitions like “The King of Two Miles.”  It does not have the necessary powder capacity to dominate that domain. That arena will be left to larger platform cartridges for the foreseeable future. It does have a chance at becoming the King of One Mile… however, its little brother, 300 Norma Magnum, seems to have a better shot in this dominion since there’s no need for projectile payload in a target shooting competition.

The jury is out on whether the 338 NM will be the king of international military and law enforcement, as these groups fully adopted the 338 Lapua Mag (however, the U.S. didn’t). Eventually, in 10 to 20 years, the 338 NM will replace the 338 Lapua Mag in any holdout groups or countries. This is because the 338 NM can do everything the 338 Lapua Mag can do, but in a slightly smaller package. This includes smaller rifle actions and chambers, slightly less brass, and slightly less propellants. This might be irrelevant to the individual shooter, but it’s significant to defense departments when they’re paying for millions of rounds.

SO WHY THE CHANGE IN THE U.S.?

The U.S. has held .50 caliber and 300 Winchester Magnum as the prior sniper caliber of choice.  There was a brief glimmer of hope for 338 Lapua Mag in 2014, when Remington Defense won the U.S. Department of Defense’s Precision Sniper Rifle (The Mk 21) competition that fired 338 Lapua Mag, 300 Winchester Magnum, and 308 Winchester. This program failed. However, military and law enforcement officers need a man-portable, robust system that can reach extreme distances in the range of 2500 to 3000 meters. The .50 caliber could meet that requirement; however, the weight of the weapon and the ammunition were and are always a challenge.

In addition, the .50 caliber faced some political stigma as being “overkill”, especially in LE and other applications. The .50 caliber Browning Machine Gun (50 BMG) started its life as a military machine gun round that was anti-material and anti-personnel. Ronnie Barrett turned the .50 caliber into a shoulder fired weapon in the 1980’s. His modern rifle design and muzzle break made shooting the .50 caliber manageable. However, the 660-grain payload is devastating on human targets and in any scenario besides combat the risk of extensive collateral damage to people and property is typically deemed too great for the round to be considered in any civilian roles, and even in some military roles, as well. 

WHAT ABOUT 300 WIN MAG?

Historically, 300 Win Mag has struggled with longer distances, and it’s a belted magnum. Belted magnums headspace off the belt at the base of the cartridge instead of the shoulder. Headspacing from the shoulder is universally considered to give consistently better accuracy. In addition, the 300 Win Mag is only a .30 caliber bullet, and it does not have the ability to go up to 300 grains, as the .338 bullets can and do. This reduces kinetic energy and limits the round’s use in the destruction of vehicles. It also has a major impact on armor piercing capabilities in 300 grains with a tungsten core.  Taking out an engine block is well within the scope of a 300 grain Armor Piercing projectile. 

Moreover, the new Barrett MK 22 MRAD (Kudos again to Ronnie) is the next generation sniper weapon system, and it comes chambered in 338 NM, 300 NM, and 308 Win. This is the first weapon that has been chambered in the 338 NM for the U.S. armed forces. In addition, the Army/SOCOM is ordering these rifle systems by the truckload. Barrett’s initial contract from the Army is nearly $50m for around 2,800 weapon systems. This contract (W15QKN21F0192) was awarded in March 2021. Around $8m was funded with the base award and the rest will be rolled out over the term of the 5-year indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract. The contract is forecasted to be completed in March 2026. This does not include all the weapons that will be ordered by other (three-letter) agencies. Under the contract, weapons will probably be delivered to the Army, Navy, Air Force, USMC, and SOCOM, as the Army is typically the central buying hub for the various services. In addition, the U.S. Army recently awarded a 5-year, $157m contract to Sig Sauer for ammunition in both the 300 NM and 338 NM calibers.

SOCOM’S LATEST MACHINE GUN

The Lightweight Medium Machine Gun (LWMMG) in 338 Norma Mag has been around since 2012. General Dynamics created this next generation weapon system to get .50 cal performance but at the weight of a standard machine gun. General Dynamics was ahead of their time with a great idea. Unfortunately, their effort was unsuccessful and was basically forgotten. Then, around 2020, SOCOM identified the need for a lightweight medium machine gun in 338 Norma Mag and has been ramping up for a full weapon competition ever since. This included an ammunition contract for the 338 Norma Mag Multi-Purpose round that was awarded to UDC USA, Inc. There have been a couple of evaluation contracts for weapons, including one that was won by SIG Sauer for its MG 338 machine guns in 338 NM. The main competition will close in early 2024 and maybe we’ll have a winner in late 2024.

SO WHY THE 338 NM NOW? 

The 338 Lapua Mag has been the king of the international sniper community for decades. This caliber and weight bullet range (250 to 300 grains, typical) is the right combination for this application. However, the latest modern propellants are fine-tuned for maximum performance and can get the .338 caliber bullet to the ideal velocities in the smaller chassis of the 338 Norma Magnum, which could not be accomplished 30 years ago in the 338 Lapua. In addition, the shorter length of the Norma cartridge opens up the number of rifle actions that can fire the round. 

The number of actions that can fit the 338 Lapua Mag length cartridge is limited. The 338 Lapua Mag is designed to be fired in a belt-fed machine gun. However, since the 1980’s there haven’t been any serious weapon development efforts to fire the 338 Lapua Mag in a machine gun. The 338 NM has been fired in machine guns since General Dynamics created the prototype Lightweight Medium Machine Gun in 2012. This powerhouse system was never adopted by any domestic or international military group, though.

NO BETTER ALTERNATIVE

Why doesn’t the sniper community use “king of two miles” calibers like 375 Cheytac or 375 Enabler? The KO2M distance is 3219 meters. According to the competition’s rules, weapons cannot exceed 40 pounds. Compare this to the Barrett MRAD (MK22) at an extremely light 15.2 pounds. The length of a typical KO2M rifle is 1500mm to 1600mm and is not collapsible. Again, compare this to the MRAD at 1255mm, fully extended, and much shorter when collapsed for transport. The KO2M weapons and calibers are not designed for combat, they are designed for maximum accuracy at maximum distance. Therefore, a larger and heavier cartridge is not an issue, as no one is carrying these rifle systems for days.

WHO DESIGNED THE 338 NM CALIBER?  

Jimmie Sloan is the inventor of the 338 NM caliber. It began as a wildcat caliber in 2008 and entered production with Norma in 2009. It was certified by CIP in 2010. So, clearly, this wildcat was on the fast track to success from the very beginning.

ADOPTION HEADWINDS  

The only competitor to the 338 NM is its brother the 300 NM. At worst, they could end up being co-kings. The 300 NM would dominate in precision long-range and the 338 NM would dominate in combat and anti-material requirements. I believe the 300 NM has an advantage in the number of great bullets available to deploy. I think the 338 NM will see more bullets developed for it in the near future. One popular commercial website has 286 products for .30 caliber bullets and only 72 in .338 caliber bullets. The numbers will never be equal, though, since there are so many .30 caliber cartridge offerings and so few in 338. The additional payload capabilities of the 338 NM allow it to carry more tungsten in a penetrator or other increased energetic materials for downrange impact.

THE FUTURE OF 338 NORMA MAGNUM

Expect to see the following in the coming years for the 338 NM:

• More companies will offer sniper and hunting rifles chambered in this caliber. First, because it’s a good caliber, and second to follow suit with what the U.S. government is using.  
• More weapon systems will be offered in 338 NM. In the past, the systems were created by the end user and there was no standardization. The 408 Cheytac was one of the first to be offered as a complete system based on a cartridge and now Barrett follows suit with its MK 22 MRAD (if you have a spare $22k). These packages included: a weapon, barrels, optics (day and night), a ballistic computer system, and more.
• A suite of military tactical ammunition will be developed, similar to the way the .50 caliber spawned a suite of purpose-built cartridges. This will include sniper rounds and machine gun rounds. Right now, the U.S. military only has two rounds for this caliber, the Army’s M1162 300-grain AP round and SOCOM’s 272-grain Multi-Purpose round. The .50 caliber currently has around a dozen fielded options, dozens of commercial variations, and a couple dozen inactive configurations. Obvious potential versions would include a tracer, M962 Saboted Light Armor Piercing (SLAP), and Mk211 (High Explosive Armor Piercing), or as near to these versions as requested by the government.

SIGNIFICANT GROWING PAINS

This is the first time in history a sniper caliber will become a machine gun caliber. This is nothing to be taken lightly, this may well be a major undertaking. There will be challenges now in the development of future rifles. There will be challenges down the road with sniper ammo not running in machine guns and machine gun ammo not being able to hit the broadside of a barn.

There are significant differences between ammunition optimized for long-range precision use and use in a machine gun. For instance, the brass thicknesses between sniper-grade and machine gun-grade cartridges are different. There are also major differences in the hardness, seating depth, and performance of primers that must be optimized for the two, very different, applications. Ammunition issues across sniper and machine gun platforms using the same caliber may come with a dearth of problems such as accuracy, reliability and other performance issues related to operating temperatures, barrel erosion, and even wear and breakage of weapon system components that may be novel to each system.

It’s clear that long-range precision ammo and machine gun ammo are not interchangeable. The two will have to be developed separately, end-users must learn to differentiate them through education, and they must be carefully segregated in the field in order to maintain safety and performance. Let’s not forget that the .50 caliber cartridge had significant growing pains when it went from a machine gun caliber to a sniper caliber. So, history tells us these issues can be overcome.

On the whole, however, this is an exciting transition in the ammunition and weapon worlds. We should all be looking forward to the enhanced capabilities afforded by the continuing adoption of 338 Norma Magnum. More to follow… 100% guaranteed.

The Army is continuing its efforts to modernize the force and build towards the Army of 2030 and beyond. To support that effort, Program Executive Officer (PEO) Soldier is engaging with soldiers at the ground level to get to the fundamental truth of how soldiers are equipped in the operational environment and what gear they have modified or purchased for mission, environment, comfort and personal effect.

PEO Soldier’s Assistant Program Executive Officer (APEO) Soldier has been conducting Operational Kit (O.K.) Analysis with the operational force to collect this data.

O.K. Analysis seeks to address a multitude of objectives to help shape the Army of 2030 and the future soldier. The effort looks to proactively identify opportunities utilizing the Soldier Enhancement Program (SEP), influence materiel change proposals, identify equipment training challenges and address installation Soldier equipment logistics challenges.

“The idea behind O.K. Analysis was hatched by APEO Soldier’s Senior Enlisted Advisor, Mast Sgt. Josh Kaplan,” said Col. Douglas Copeland, Assistant Program Executive Officer, PEO Soldier. “He identified the need to bridge the gap between what we think soldiers and squads carry as materiel developers and what is actually used out in the field.”

In launching the initiative, MSG Kaplan took a couple of key steps: First, he created a community of interest across various stakeholders . Second, he worked with Sgt. Major Daniel Rose, PEO Soldier Sergeant Major, to combine the O.K. Analysis event with the PEO Soldier Capabilities Demonstration, which informs the force of our current and emerging capabilities in the PEO Soldier portfolio. This strategy allows PEO Soldier to gain Soldier feedback about on operational needs and determine exactly how PEO capabilities are impacting the Force.

The goal is to provide operational context to the acquisition force, said SGM Rose. “We’re trying to explain to the acquisition professionals here at PEO Soldier and stakeholders in the Army enterprise how soldiers are using the equipment that they are designing, procuring and fielding in the operational environment. What we found is that sometimes they won’t be using the equipment the way it was designed to be used. We try to bring that kind of context back to the acquisition force to help them as they’re designing and procuring new pieces of equipment.”

The O.K. Analysis team kicked off the program at USARCENT in Kuwait in March 2023 and has since engaged with the 11^th Airborne and 25^th Infantry Divisions. As a result, PEO Soldier has, to date, collected data from eight Squads and worked with senior leadership to establish an equipment baseline across the Army’s operational units.

The effort goes beyond simply questioning soldiers about their thoughts and experience with PEO Soldier capabilities. MSG Kaplan explained, “We deploy a team of senior NCOs with extensive operational experience and extremely smart government contractors who carry out an array of responsibilities, such as data collection, statistics, logistics, and photography. We collect several thousand lines of data, hundreds of photos and several hours of interviews that are analyzed as a part of an out-brief to communities of interest, then added to our holistic database for further analysis.”

After taking part in PEO Soldier’s O.K. Analysis engagement, Sgt. Major Brian Disque, G-3, 5 and 7 Sergeant Major, USARCENT, stated that he was very impressed with its effectiveness and potential benefits. He explained, “It is a very ambitious effort to answer an important question: What gear are soldiers actually using and why? PEO Soldier took the idea of unit outreach and feedback to the next level with a meticulous approach to data collection to better understand the perspectives of soldiers across the Army. The wealth of data collected will be very useful when informing future efforts to outfit our soldiers. All of the Army should be grateful that this team was willing to roll up their sleeves and get out to all corners of our Army to answer these questions.”

This effort has already returned positive outcomes. Through the O.K. Analysis initiative, PEO Soldier has been able to strengthen critical partnerships with the Maneuver Center of Excellence, DEVCOM and several Army Corps. PEO Soldier has also been able to facilitate the establishment of Environmental Working Groups with these communities of interest, which include items discovered through the O.K. Analysis effort.

“The most important benefit of O.K. Analysis is to ensure that the soldier’s voice is heard, including senior leaders in operational units who have important soldier equipment insights,” Kaplan said. “We do this in the form of detailed equipment inventories, pictures and candid interviews that are shared with the enterprise. If someone asks, ‘Why is soldier equipment getting heavier?’, our team can say, ‘Let me show you.’ There is a lot of power in that.”

Disque agreed, noting, “For USARCENT and our deployed force, the opportunity to provide our candid feedback to the professional data collection team is of immediate benefit. Innovation is one of our top priorities, and we are always searching for ways to bring innovative concepts to our area of responsibility (AOR). Soldier kit is one of those topics for which there is no shortage of great ideas out there, often based on real-world feedback from operating environments across the CENTCOM AOR – you just have to ask the right questions, which I am confident the PEO Soldier team executed to perfection.”

Through this effort, PEO Soldier began an Army-wide innovation synchronization effort that encompasses 18th Airborne Corps’ Eagle Works, I Corps’ Lightning Lab, USARCENT and PEO Soldier’s Soldier Integration Facility. This will allow stakeholders to collaborate and share data and integration solutions across the Close Combat Integration Enterprise (CCIE).

“Any opportunity to connect our modernization efforts to deployed soldiers on a mission is valuable,” said Disque. “Some of the most innovative ideas come from operating in a deployed environment, and for the PEO team to have access to soldiers that served recently in Syria and other areas is tremendous.”

Kaplan and his team have proactively submitted proposals for the Soldier Enhancement Program (SEP) on behalf of soldiers through the O.K. Analysis. The SEP is a process designed to help the Army enhance soldiers’ ability to execute their combat mission by evaluating prototypes and commercially available items submitted by soldiers and industry. Since its inception six months ago, PEO Soldier has identified 23 potential SEP opportunities, which is an exponential increase relative to recent years. Soldiers, senior leaders and industry are also able to submit their own proposals utilizing PEO Soldier’s website.

“Soldiers are very innovative,” said Kaplan. “There is always that one soldier in the squad who can create ways for his unit to become more lethal. This initiative highlights innovative solutions so communities of interest can stay on pace with the operational force.”

Command Sgt. Major Joseph Gaskin, Command Sergeant Major, 1/11 Airborne Division, added to that assessment by stating, “Any effort the Army uses to better inform equipment requirements from the soldier on the ground is value added to our formation. The O.K Analysis comprehensive program captured data that will assist leaders to better understand what risk the soldier’s load presents as we operate in the extreme cold of our operational environment.”

PEO Soldier will continue its O.K. Analysis effort by visiting soldiers with the 3^rd Infantry Division in October and engaging with U.S. Army Europe in the second quarter of 2024. This ongoing effort will collect and share data amongst the CCIE to help shape the Army’s modernization efforts moving into 2030 and beyond.

PEO Soldier is now encouraging other interested U.S. Army operational divisions to reach out and schedule an O.K. Analysis of their area of responsibility.

 “We look forward to expanding our O.K. Analysis across the Army’s operational units to further collaboration, leverage creative innovation and enable proactive capability development for soldier equipment,” said Copeland.