Northrop Grumman has unveiled its next-generation M230 Link Fed (M230LF) Dual Feed Bushmaster Chain Gun.
For the first time, the new 30x113mm chain gun allows operators to switch between two ammunition feed paths, enhancing flexibility and operational efficiency.
According to a press release, this development eliminates the need for mixed ammunition belts, allowing for a quick change between advanced ammunition types with the flip of a switch.
The M230LF Dual Feed is designed to address both aerial and ground threats. A typical ammunition loadout includes XM1211 proximity-fuzed rounds for countering uncrewed aerial systems (C-UAS) and XM1198 high explosive, dual-purpose rounds for anti-armour engagements.
The dual-feed system allows operators to switch between these rounds seamlessly, ensuring targets are met with the most appropriate ammunition, saving time and reducing logistical complexity. This capability is expected to significantly enhance mission flexibility and lethality in rapidly evolving combat environments.
Dave Fine, vice president of armament systems at Northrop Grumman, highlighted the significance of this advancement: “The M230LF Dual Feed Bushmaster Chain Gun offers new flexibility by switching between ammunition paths using dual-feed technology. Using advanced technology combined with five decades of battle-proven experience, this next-generation cannon will empower operators to quickly respond to threats.”
The M230LF Dual Feed is currently at Technology Readiness Level 6, and live fire demonstrations are planned for early 2025.
This system retains 60% part commonality with the single-feed M230LF, making maintenance quicker and reducing downtime, while continuing to offer the single-feed option for customers who prefer that configuration.
Is it as reliable in the field I wonder. If so a great asset.
curious if it could be fit to the Ares RWS for an IFV-lite
You cannot get an 8-man infantry section into an Ares.
Watch and shoot, watch and shoot.
😉
I wasn’t talking about a warrior replacement, that said putting it on Boxer is a better idea
An IFV carries an Infantry section, though, and Ares can’t do that.
On Boxer – why not? It needs more than a MG.
Most IFV only carry 6 Men. Including Bradley, Puma, and most CV90. Even the upgraded warrior was expected to reduce its dismount strength to 7. So 6 in an ARES derivative would not be as a reduction as one may think.
Did we buy the same RS4 for Ares as we did for Boxer? If so, then theoretically at least the options top out at .50 cal. and 40 mm GMG I believe…
Unless I’m wrong, the M230 is a shorter barrelled (and maybe shorter cartridge) version of the 30 mm Chain Gun you’d find on most IFVs, so isn’t going to have the same penetration that you might be expecting. Obviously a step up from .50 cal. though, and may mean that it does fit on an RS4 due to the lower recoil.
Looks like an rs4 but can’t find any info, if it is then m230 is probably out as the larger rs6 is listed as being compatible with the m230, so the idea hinges on it not being rs4. The cartridge is the same as the Aden’s but the most common anti armour munition is an HEDP with equivalent penetration to 40mm HEDP. It definitely wouldn’t have the same punch as any true IFV’s gun but would have the best of both 40mm and .50 with an additional anti-drone capability. That’s potentially a huge increase in capability using systems that are… Read more »
I agree with you, just because it’s not as big a hitter as a full fat IFV autocannon doesn’t mean it wouldn’t bring real benefit to the British Army.
I did a little look, and Kongsberg have just qualified the ‘XM914’ RWS to run the MF230 on a JLTV. I’ve not been able to work out which of Kongsberg’s product line the RWS is, but it certainly doesn’t look bigger than an RS4- so there’s hope.
Sadly that RWS looks like an rs6 but I’ve heard rumour an rs4 can be swapped for an rs6.
Ah, that’s a shame…
You’d think it wouldn’t be all that different wouldn’t you, from a technical perspective. And it can’t cost much in the grand scheme of things to change 1 in 5 to an RS6?
The feed mechanism is very exposed. Not ballistically protected.
If it is fired remotely and the crew of the AFV are protected from catastrophic ammo detonation, then this is more affordable and lighter than a manned turret
Yep, I am aware that a RWS is remotely operated. Crew are inside the vehicle. My point is that the feed mech without any ballistic protection could be easily damaged by incoming fire.
Useful upgrade for the Rivers.
That remote mount looks like it could fit on a Boxer. Affordable upgrade?
RS6 might have been a better choice in the first place if we weren’t intent on .50 cal. I’d hope Thales had tested out the possibility, but that kind of thing seems not to be encouraged.
The RT60 would be the gold standard choice, as it can mount the CTAS40.
RS4 can be upgraded to RS6 in service, so at least we should do that.
What does Thales have to do with this subject?
Thales produce the RS4 in the UK under license