Marine Corps Taps Trijicon to Make New Squad Common Optic

Admin

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
39,480
Likes
14,968
Location
Monadnock area, NH


The Marine Corps just selected Trijicon Inc. to make the new Squad Common Optic the service plans to start fielding in fiscal 2021.

The Feb. 21 contract, worth up to $64 million, will pay Trijicon to manufacture up to 19,000 Squad Common Optic (SCO) devices, a variable-powered optic that will allow Marines to engage targets at greater distances than the service's current 4X fixed-power Rifle Combat Optic (RCO), which is also made by Trijicon, according to a recent news release from Marine Corps Systems Command.


 

fencer

NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
11,568
Likes
8,330
Location
Southeastern Mass
But will they shoot better
The Corps puts a bigger emphasis on marksmanship than any other service. So it stands to reason that if they get better gear, they will see better results. I suspect the focus will be on the ability to engage target further down range quicker and more accurately.
But it's hard to imagine doing much better than an ACOG.
 

teamRR

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
561
Likes
370
The Corps puts a bigger emphasis on marksmanship than any other service. So it stands to reason that if they get better gear, they will see better results. I suspect the focus will be on the ability to engage target further down range quicker and more accurately.
But it's hard to imagine doing much better than an ACOG.
No authority on the subject but one of the only ACOG drawbacks is eye relief. If we ever see the super cartridges implemented they keep speaking of, maybe a change in optics is warranted?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 10, 2013
Messages
720
Likes
453
Under 2.1lbs is the objective. And I have thought 25oz optics were a bit much on a carbine. I get ruggedness and all that, but wow, heavy.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
5,190
Likes
1,683
Does this mean they'll have previously unreleased references to Bible verse's?
Was my first thought - all the stupid bullshit of sending them into servicing armories to have that ground off and come back with f***ed up loose mounts and stripped hardware (that didn’t need to be touched).

(That’s a gripe with the idiots in DC, not with Trijicon.)
 
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Dec 26, 2010
Messages
1,173
Likes
451
Why the eff does the Marine Corps think it needs to have their grunts shooting 400 meters beyond the effective range of m855? If one of my joes was shooting at haji 900 freaking meters away with his m4 he's going to feel some ass pain back at the fob.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
1,287
Likes
882
Location
Down the rabbit hole, somewhere in Paradise.


The Marine Corps just selected Trijicon Inc. to make the new Squad Common Optic the service plans to start fielding in fiscal 2021.

The Feb. 21 contract, worth up to $64 million, will pay Trijicon to manufacture up to 19,000 Squad Common Optic (SCO) devices, a variable-powered optic that will allow Marines to engage targets at greater distances than the service's current 4X fixed-power Rifle Combat Optic (RCO), which is also made by Trijicon, according to a recent news release from Marine Corps Systems Command.


OK. I qualified with the M16A4 out to 500 yards with iron sights at Parris Island. A 4X is more than enough for 5.56/.223. My Savage Axis .223 is equipped with a 4X-12X Nikon which has never been used above 4X. Sometimes, less is more.
 

Admin

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
39,480
Likes
14,968
Location
Monadnock area, NH
OK. I qualified with the M16A4 out to 500 yards with iron sights at Parris Island. A 4X is more than enough for 5.56/.223. My Savage Axis .223 is equipped with a 4X-12X Nikon which has never been used above 4X. Sometimes, less is more.
I typically let the guys currently shooting the bad guys determine what equipment they want to use.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Feb 28, 2020
Messages
1
Likes
0
Unfortunately the Marine Corps wastes a lot of money that they don’t even have, I think this is a prime example
 

Andy in NH

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
2,990
Likes
3,082
Location
SW NH
The RCO was fairly "Marine proof" - I've seen them fall off 7 ton trucks and not break.
Can't vouch for how the fall affected the zero, but in my Bn we didn't have any couldn't be re zeroed.
(Keeping track of the elevation and windage adjustment caps was a different story however.)
I'm curious to see how well the Trijicon scope does being dragged around by LCpl Smuckatelli.
 

01bmf

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
1,659
Likes
702
Location
North of the wall
Completely unconfirmed rumor is that Trijicon contracted with Primary Arms to use their ACSS reticle.

Edit: google works. Not this model, but Trijicon did make a 4x using Primary Arms ACSS.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,537
Likes
992
I typically let the guys currently shooting the bad guys determine what equipment they want to use.
Yeah, but I doubt this was chosen by a survey of grunts. The damn thing weighs over 31 ounces. It doesn't have a BDC, wind holds, or quick ranging features. It is a seriously poor choice by the Marine Corps. In this day and age when the Infantryman needs to carry increasingly more weight in the form of armor, batteries, and misc electronics, it is foolish to choose such a heavy optic. Especially when there are so many better options that shave at least 1/2 a pound, have more combat effective reticles, and have proven just as durable in combat already. Oh, not to mention that this thing is just as expensive as a damned Nightforce.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,537
Likes
992
Completely unconfirmed rumor is that Trijicon contracted with Primary Arms to use their ACSS reticle.

Edit: google works. Not this model, but Trijicon did make a 4x using Primary Arms ACSS.
Yeah, that was a nice update to the ACOG. They also offer an ACSS version of the 1.5x TA44.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,537
Likes
992
OK. I qualified with the M16A4 out to 500 yards with iron sights at Parris Island. A 4X is more than enough for 5.56/.223. My Savage Axis .223 is equipped with a 4X-12X Nikon which has never been used above 4X. Sometimes, less is more.
6-8x is definitely beneficial for 5.56, especially some of the modern cartridges used by the DoD. It's not so much for increasing shot accuracy, but positive identification of targets is so crucial in modern combat against insurgencies, terrorist organizations, and grey-zone conflict.
 

Admin

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
39,480
Likes
14,968
Location
Monadnock area, NH
Yeah, but I doubt this was chosen by a survey of grunts. The damn thing weighs over 31 ounces. It doesn't have a BDC, wind holds, or quick ranging features. It is a seriously poor choice by the Marine Corps. In this day and age when the Infantryman needs to carry increasingly more weight in the form of armor, batteries, and misc electronics, it is foolish to choose such a heavy optic. Especially when there are so many better options that shave at least 1/2 a pound, have more combat effective reticles, and have proven just as durable in combat already. Oh, not to mention that this thing is just as expensive as a damned Nightforce.
Mils are pretty combat effective.

Chief Warrant Officer 5 Christian Wade, the division gunner for 2nd Marine Division and one of the Marine Corps' preeminent weapons experts, said that equipping infantrymen with such technology, and training to know how to use the capabilities it provides, would allow them to take full advantage of their weapon and build additional versatility into their role.

"I've got a rifleman with an M27. He's got a suppressor and he's got a variable power optic," Wade said. "He can do the full range of things that rifle's capable of doing."
Gunner Wade is an expert in weapons and is widely respected in the Corps.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,537
Likes
992
Mils are pretty combat effective.
Not for the normal Infantryman. Sniper? Yup. Designated marksman? Sometimes. Normal line Infantry? Rarely.

Sure, the reticle will work for normal combat distances that are effectively POA/POI +/- a few inches. It will work for their 500 yard qual too. But the biggest issue with this is the weight and value for price.

Gunner Wade is an expert in weapons and is widely respected in the Corps.
I don’t doubt his knowledge. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes, even CW5s. The Corps also made a bunch of mistakes when designing the M16A2 “improvements” when only thinking of the flat range.

This optic is going to go down as a poor decision, and guys actually using it on dismounted patrols aren’t going to like it. There will be initial fawning over having the new thing, then they’ll be complaining about the extra weight, which is a full pound more than a Leupold Mk6 and 1.3 lbs than their existing ACOG. It’s 10 ounces heavier than LPVOs that are already considered porkers. That is major.

All that said, I’m having trouble finding all the competitors who answered the RFP. I think that would be good to know.
 
Last edited:

M60

NES Member
Rating - 100%
56   0   0
Joined
Sep 24, 2010
Messages
5,486
Likes
4,167
Location
Occupied Massachusetts
Why the eff does the Marine Corps think it needs to have their grunts shooting 400 meters beyond the effective range of m855? If one of my joes was shooting at haji 900 freaking meters away with his m4 he's going to feel some ass pain back at the fob.
So you don't believe the Corps should be able to engage targets at greater distances, if it's possible, when needed or required?
 

Reptile

NES Member
Rating - 100%
98   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
15,332
Likes
5,151
I want the beat-up ACOG's they're tossing...
Once the market get flooded with those old ACOG's - the price for new ACOG's will drop.
I don't have the numbers in front of me but ACOG's have been going cheaper in the past few years.

I'd prefer to have an ACOG for closer combat - I think...

I am not educated in the specs for optics so I'll leave that discussion to experts.
 

PappyM3

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Messages
1,537
Likes
992
...
I'd prefer to have an ACOG for closer combat - I think...
...
I love the 4x ACOGs, but one of their weaknesses is close quarters combat. The 1x setting in the VCOG would be quicker up close than the ACOG, especially since the VCOG has longer eye relief.
 

76Too

NES Member
Rating - 100%
46   0   0
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
5,222
Likes
3,256
Location
Inducky, Yusa
So you don't believe the Corps should be able to engage targets at greater distances, if it's possible, when needed or required?
Have you ever actually been to a Marine Corps qualification range? I'm just an OK shot and typically lose to a 74 year old at OCSA Garand shoots, but somehow managed to out-shoot 3 companies of Marines at my last qualification (with fixed magnification 4x Acog and M16A4). Most of these guys don't get the trigger time they need to even become proficient at identifying and clearing malfunctions, let alone be able to manipulate a variable magnification optic.

There was a very simple 'tick' with the Acog's we used, where after making an adjustment, you had to smack the thing to get the springs to move and let the adjustment register...most of the Marines I coached couldn't even handle THAT.

"Hey Marine...your shot was still in the same spot as your last group. Did you smack your optic like I told you to...?"

crickets.

I was one of the last Marines to train with irons at PI. Literally every Marine under my charge went through basic with optics. As soon as I got to my unit there was a fresh new M16A4 with an ACOG waiting for me. I've seen both sides, and actually MUCH prefer combat optics in the way of an ACOG, even though I shoot more accurately with irons. The confidence I always had that when I looked into my eyepiece, I knew what I was going to be looking at.

I'll believe it when I see it working well (and it very well may)...but for the time being, I'm a big proponent of the ACOG...simple, durable, effective out to 600m (pretty much the effective range on a point target for M855).
 

76Too

NES Member
Rating - 100%
46   0   0
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
5,222
Likes
3,256
Location
Inducky, Yusa
I love the 4x ACOGs, but one of their weaknesses is close quarters combat. The 1x setting in the VCOG would be quicker up close than the ACOG, especially since the VCOG has longer eye relief.
the problem with that is having to remember to 'set it'. all it takes is one instance of someone having theirs turned up to 11 and they're trying to engage and can't get target acquisition. at least with the acog you always knew what was going to be there when you look into/through the lens.

the best thing about the acog was shooting with both eyes open in darker conditions...you'd acquire your target with your non-dominant eye, and the eye looking through the lens would focus on the arrow-head...together they made things pretty easy in low light.
 
Top Bottom