LRRPF52 Wrote:200rds of 6.5mm CT will weigh what 100rds of linked 7.62 NATO M80 currently does, or less.

That's a huge significance for logistics at the micro and macro levels.

I'm only seeing positives, not negatives.

stanc Wrote:Well, you're exaggerating a bit, in that it's more like 160 rds of linked 6.5 CT vs 100 rds of linked 7.62 NATO, but yeah, for the 6.5 CT machine gun, it looks to be all good.

For the 6.5 CT carbine, not so much. Much heavier and a bit longer than the M4, with 20-rd magazines that are fatter than, and just as tall as, 30-rd 5.56 magazines.

LRRPF52 Wrote:No, I didn't exaggerate. If you look closely in the charts, they are talking about a different 7.62 NATO load with a 130gr projectile, which weighs less than M80 147gr, which is what I'm used to carrying.

100rds of 7.62 M80 linked is 7lbs. You tend to remember these things when you've been a Gunner, Assistant Gunner, or Ammo Bearer. When you're the AG and AB in one man, you really remember them.

Quote:I have no interest in the carbine at this stage. The LMG is where it is at for CT.

VASCAR2 Wrote:I'm curious if the CT 6.5 could be put into a Bullpup...

VASCAR2 Wrote:I'm curious if the CT 6.5 could be put into a Bullpup, it might make an ambidextrous Bullpup to heavy. Neat stuff thanks for posting Stan.

[SIZE="3"]Actually, Canada is working on a Bullpup rifle using Cased Telescoped (CT) technology:
http://www.casr.ca/bg-future-small-arms-research.htm
http://www.gizmag.com/smart-gun-evolution-military-weapon/36091/


[/SIZE]

[SIZE="3"]"Maybe a new Canadian Smart Gun chambered for 6.5mm?"

(http://www.casr.ca/bg-future-small-arms-research.htm)
[/SIZE]

Quote:Textron Systems unveiled its new 6.5mm case-telescoped carbine at Modern Day Marine 2016.

The weighted model represents Textron’s latest effort to develop a new age of infantry weapons that fire weight-saving, case-telescoped ammunition.

Textron has made significant advancements in this technology with its Light Weight Small Arms Technology, or LSAT – an Army funded program that has so far yielded working lightweight machine guns in both 5.56mm and 7.62mm.

The new 6.5 CS carbine emerged out of an intermediate caliber study Textron conducted in 2014, according to Ben Cole, project engineer.

Currently, the empty weight of the mock-up carbine is 8.7 pounds. A magazine loaded with 20 rounds of case-telescoped 6.5mm ammunition adds one pound. An M4A1 weighs 7.74 pounds empty and about 8.74 pounds with a loaded 30-round mag.

Case-telescoped ammunition is about 40-percent lighter when you compare it to the standard brass ammo in the same caliber, Cole said.

The 123 grain 6.5mm has a muzzle velocity of about 3,000 feet per second, Cole said.

Comparatively, the 62 grain bullet on the M855A1 has a muzzle velocity of 2,970 feet per second, according to U.S. Army data.

“If you take this 6.5mm bullet at our muzzle velocity, it’s 300 percent more down-range energy than the M855A1,” Cole said. “So for a minimal weight gain, you would have significantly more down-range lethality.”

Textron officials hope to have a working prototype to begin testing early next year, Cole said.

“We are trying to go after the next requirement for soldier rifles,” Cole said.

http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/textron-shows-off-new-6-5mm-case-telescoped-carbine.html

BluntForceTrauma Wrote:Good find, Stan, although I see no reason they couldn't streamline the nose.

VASCAR2 Wrote:I'm curious if the CT 6.5 could be put into a Bullpup, it might make an ambidextrous Bullpup to heavy. Neat stuff thanks for posting Stan.

Quote:TFB: You obviously have to have a separate chamber and a separate barrel unit. One thing that might be a negative is that on a revolver you have a gap there, where gas can escape. Do you have that problem, or have you found a solution to that?

KP: For case telescoped, the front of the cartridge actually seals the breech, and the plastic flows into the empty space. It’s sort of a balancing act to let the cartridge expand and flow, but not so much that you can’t get the case out of there. It obturates the chamber just like it would with a brass case.

Quote:TFB: Originally, LSAT focused on a 5.56mm weapon, but now the focus with CTSAS appears to be a 6.5mm weapon. How did this change come about? Was it a decision from the Infantry School, or an internal development by CTSAS? Is the 6.5mm now the focus of CTSAS, or a side project?

KP: Based on the success of the original 5.56mm CT system, we were given funding from the Army to pursue a Medium Machine Gun (typically 7.62mm) and a Carbine. The 6.5mm ammunition came about as a result of an optimization study that was done strictly for the CT configuration. Both new weapon systems can be used with either a 7.62mm CT cartridge or the 6.5mm CT cartridge.

* * *

TFB: The 6.5mm CT according to LSAT’s slides weighs 15.4 grams per shot, compared to the 12 grams per shot of brass-cased 5.56mm. In a couple of articles I wrote, I examined the weight penalty of using a round this heavy as a replacement for both 5.56mm and 7.62mm. Does the CTSAS program consider this weight penalty acceptable, or not? If so, is the idea to reduce the number of rounds carried by the infantryman in exchange for greater effectiveness of the individual projectiles, or is the 15.4 grams just the current state of things, the weight of ammunition expected to decrease with development?

KP: Since the 6.5mm is a heavier projectile than the 5.56mm, and it requires more propellant to achieve the necessary velocity, it will probably always be heavier than the 5.56mm round. This is an option that is being offered for a round that provides considerably more range and performance than even the 7.62mm, so that is actually a better comparison. The trade-off between weight and performance is totally up to the user community, and not the technology developer.

Essayons Wrote:I think the rising chamber design is why the barrel of the LSAT carbine is short compared to an M4.