+- 6.5 Grendel Forum (https://65grendel.com)
+-- Forum: 6.5 GRENDEL DISCUSSION FORUMS (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: 6.5 Grendel Military & Law Enforcement (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers (/showthread.php?tid=482)
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - Variable - 05-21-2015
Excellent point. I never thought about the polymer case negating the ramped jump to the chamber.
Maybe a case scaled roughly halfway between the 5.56 and 7.62 cases with a steel tipped 6.5 projo?
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - LRRPF52 - 05-21-2015
Barrels don't heat up as fast with LSAT either, since the chamber is separate, and the rotating chamber doesn't heat up as fast because the polymer absorbs a lot of the combustion heat. Since there is no neck or shoulder, the new cartridge pushes the spent case out of the chamber while feeding, so feeding and extraction happen simultaneously.
There is no need for a mechanical extractor with lip, extractor spring, or extractor pin, because the new cartridge is the extractor. It's a genius design really, eliminating some of the most problematic parts of conventional metallic cartridge operating systems. You start to see why it crushes the SAW in MTBF rates.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 05-21-2015
LRRPF52 Wrote:The 855A1 can also be configured with different bases and heads for the AP and tracer, since 855A1 has a copper jacket, a copper slug base, and a steel penetrator head.Hmm. Has this has actually been done, or are you just speculating? I ask because neither seems feasible to me.
The M855A1 penetrator has a relatively complex shape, whereas current AP rounds have tungsten carbide penetrators that are simple, pointed cylinders (due to the difficulty in machining that material).
![[Image: m855a102.jpg]](http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/m855a102.jpg)
![[Image: m993.jpg]](http://www.isbi.us/imagenes/niveles/m993.jpg)
As for a tracer bullet with the M855A1 penetrator, wouldn't the pressure from the burning propellant expel both penetrator and trace element out the front of the bullet jacket?
![[Image: IMG_1003.jpg]](http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv360/wolfganggross/group%20cutaways%201/IMG_1003.jpg)
Quote:They also have a 7.62 LSAT with a larger case, but it is still smaller and much lighter than linked 7.62 NATO.Yeah, it significantly shorter, but slightly fatter, than the 7.62 NATO round. There's a superb photo in post #184.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 05-21-2015
Variable Wrote:Maybe a case scaled roughly halfway between the 5.56 and 7.62 cases with a steel tipped 6.5 projo?Case diameter might be about halfway between those of the 5.56 and 7.62 cases, but I'd expect case length to be greater than that of the 7.62 case. That's if a heavy, high-BC bullet is used, as some here postulate. Such a 6.5mm projectile would be noticeably longer than the 7.62 M80 bullet.
![[Image: Capture1-390x263.jpg]](http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Capture1-390x263.jpg)
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 05-22-2015
More on the 7.62 LSAT LMG:
http://kitup.military.com/2015/05/textron-unveils-ultra-light-7.html#more-29809
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2015/05/21/textrons-lsat-program-unveils-7-62mm-plastic-cased-machine-gun-mockup/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - motoxxx_ryder - 05-22-2015
stanc Wrote:Hmm. Has this has actually been done, or are you just speculating? I ask because neither seems feasible to me.
The M855A1 penetrator has a relatively complex shape, whereas current AP rounds have tungsten carbide penetrators that are simple, pointed cylinders (due to the difficulty in machining that material).
As for a tracer bullet with the M855A1 penetrator, wouldn't the pressure from the burning propellant expel both penetrator and trace element out the front of the bullet jacket?
Yeah, it significantly shorter, but slightly fatter, than the 7.62 NATO round. There's a superb photo in post #184.
the tracers usually have a small cap on the back so it doesn't ignite in the barrel, if im not mistaken they typically dont ignite for 2-300 yards.
have you guys seen the LWMMG, they used the 338 norma catridge in a belt fed can of whoop ***! prob not what you want to lug aorund but it sure does look fun.
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Klr0EXZty6s[/video]
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - cory - 05-22-2015
There's a thread here where that MMG was discussed. It's about the same weight as the 240G. We got a pretty deep into a discussion on employing that MMG and a 6.5 Grendel LMG, taking the place of the SAW, 240G, and 50cal. It'd be an incredible combination.
Now with the LSAT, it seems it could be a real possibility.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 05-22-2015
motoxxx_ryder Wrote:the tracers usually have a small cap on the back so it doesn't ignite in the barrel, if im not mistaken they typically dont ignite for 2-300 yards.Yes, modern tracers are typically designed for delayed ignition, although burn starts at much less than 200 yards. However, that has nothing to do with my question.
Quote:have you guys seen the LWMMG, they used the 338 norma catridge in a belt fed can of whoop ***! prob not what you want to lug aorund but it sure does look fun.Of course it's fun. It's a machine gun!
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - Trooper - 06-11-2015
http://www.polycaseammo.com/
Article in this month’s Guns & Ammo. They are developing a poly-copper bullet plus a poly case. Looks like this might be the one that reshapes the gun industry.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - cory - 06-11-2015
Color me skeptical. I won't be relying on poly-anything bullets to protect myself or my loved ones anytime soon. I'm going to need to see a lot of real world data before I even consider biting on this.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 06-11-2015
However good it might be for civilian defensive pistol ammo, it doesn't appear suitable for general purpose, military rifle/machine gun applications.
Quote:The ARX is injection molded from a specially blended lead free, copper/polymer matrix that is designed to be tough enough to penetrate soft targets and tissue, but when it encounters tougher barriers it is designed to break up to reduce the risk for collateral damage due to over penetration.
Even though the ARX is lighter and travels at much higher velocities than conventional bullets, it will not defeat soft body armor.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 06-13-2015
NDIA presentation by Jim Schatz, looking at the Intermediate Caliber Cartridge concept:
http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2015smallarms/17354_Schatz.pdf
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - LRRPF52 - 06-13-2015
Gee whiz Batman. Somebody talking about overmatch with a mix of machineguns, SM's, and Sniper System chambered in 6.5mm to close the gap with PKM's and SVD's, along with .338MG's.
Never been done before...
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 06-13-2015
Yeah, I thought you would like that.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - BluntForceTrauma - 06-14-2015
As always, Stan, great find. Schatz has been around ever since I joined the fray in late 2003. I seem to remember some of his early presentations were equally as enthusiastic but stumped for the 6.8 SPC and featured Roberts' gel tests. I bet you could dig up some of his earlier NDIA PowerPoints.
Good to see he's coming around to an intermediate cartridge with high BC bullets. A very simple concept to grasp, one would think, for anyone with more than a beginner's knowledge of ballistics, but the fact that some have held on so long to an intermediate cartridge with low BC bullets shows the extent emotion and ego can interfere with logic.
I agree with the need for a common, intermediate cartridge (6.5mm caliber suggests itself, but .250, .260, .270 is workable) for a family of squad weapons. Must be high BC. Must have some kind of recoil mitigation ("constant recoil" seems the simplest). In my personal opinion, the 6.5 Grendel already has the highest amount of recoil acceptable for mass recruits.
I agree with .338 for a family of support weapons (sniper and heavy-er MGs).
I disagree that polymer cases will be ready any time within the next, oh, 50 years, if ever.
I would add the need for a laser-ranged, airburst, 40mm "Carl Gustav"-type launcher whose grenades have pointy, high BC nose-cones. I boil down infantry combat to an exercise in getting at infantry ensconced behind cover. Laser-ranged air-burst, if they can make it affordable and rugged, is the real game-changer here.
Anyway, as LR hinted, that presentation is kind of an eye-roller for our particular community who seems to have "got it" for quite some time now.
Good for Schatz and I hope he keeps up the good work and influences the direction of small arms development in the direction it has long needed to go.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 06-14-2015
BluntForceTrauma Wrote:As always, Stan, great find. Schatz has been around ever since I joined the fray in late 2003. I seem to remember some of his early presentations were equally as enthusiastic but stumped for the 6.8 SPC and featured Roberts' gel tests. I bet you could dig up some of his earlier NDIA PowerPoints.John, that was my recollection, too. However, it appears my memory may be faulty. I checked his past NDIA presentations and found one from 2008 that had only a single slide devoted to 6.8 SPC. And in 2011, he was fairly even-handed in covering 6.8 SPC and 6.5 Grendel: http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayAmmo11456Schatz.pdf
Quote:I agree with the need for a common, intermediate cartridge (6.5mm caliber suggests itself, but .250, .260, .270 is workable) for a family of squad weapons. Must be high BC.Concur with high-BC requirement. But, although I once argued for a common caliber, I've since come to think that a two-caliber system is better. That's due in part to Paul pointing out the issue of combat endurance, which would suffer with a rifle/carbine cartridge significantly bulkier and heavier than 5.56 NATO.
Quote:Must have some kind of recoil mitigation ("constant recoil" seems the simplest). In my personal opinion, the 6.5 Grendel already has the highest amount of recoil acceptable for mass recruits.Yeah. After shooting Greg's Grendels, which was a somewhat painful experience, I kinda wonder if it might have too much recoil for the average recruit. Of course, I was shooting left-handed for the first time in my life, which no doubt accounts at least in part for the unpleasantness. And, I'm also a long, long, looooong way from being the age of the typical recruit, which might possibly be another factor. :eek:
Quote:I agree with .338 for a family of support weapons (sniper and heavy-er MGs).Sniper rifle, okay. Machine gun, I question. The .338 just doesn't have the anti-materiel capability of the .50 caliber. It seems to me that if more range is desired for anti-personnel use than could be delivered by a 6.Xmm machine gun, it would be better in a caliber/cartridge smaller and lighter than either .338 Lapua or .338 Norma. Soldiers could carry only half as much linked .338 ammo as 7.62 NATO, and that (IMO) would be too great of a loss in combat endurance of foot-mobile infantry.
Quote:I would add the need for a laser-ranged, airburst, 40mm "Carl Gustav"-type launcher whose grenades have pointy, high BC nose-cones.I wonder if low-velocity 40mm grenades would benefit from a streamlined nose?
Quote:I boil down infantry combat to an exercise in getting at infantry ensconced behind cover. Laser-ranged air-burst, if they can make it affordable and rugged, is the real game-changer here.Oh, nooooo. Not another "game changer." That term bugs me, because rarely does anything actually change the game. :p
Quote:Anyway, as LR hinted, that presentation is kind of an eye-roller for our particular community who seems to have "got it" for quite some time now.Yes, indeed. I was a bit surprised at the number of intermediate caliber studies shown on page 18. But, I was aware of the "industry programs" on page 20, and had heard of the 6.5x43 Lapua -- which seems to be a "stretched" 6.5 Grendel -- a year or two ago.
Good for Schatz and I hope he keeps up the good work and influences the direction of small arms development in the direction it has long needed to go.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - BluntForceTrauma - 06-14-2015
I don't envision a .338 as a dismounted weapon because of ammo weight, only a vehicle-mounted replacement for M2 with more ammo capacity. You'd still have two 65G belt-fed LMGs per squad. In my scheme, I'd rely on the laser-ranged air-burst grenade launchers (LRAB) as my squad weapons giving heavy machine-gun-like effects. (They'd also have small shaped-charge and thermobaric warheads). Keeping the caliber to 40mm means you can carry more than the threat can carry RPGs. Using a Carl Gustav-type system means you can increase the velocity and range.
The "stretched" 6.5mms being experimented with are mostly, in my opinion, simply exercises in N.I.H. syndrome. Ego and emotion, again. There's no fame, glory, careers, or development dollars in going with something off-the-shelf. So we need to tweak it just a bit and endlessly. . . . Not that I'd ultimately object to any high BC intermediate they finally decided upon.
Paul makes very strong arguments for keeping 5.56, but I look at it as a judgment call. We survived WWII and Korea with much more limited personal ammo capacity, and our resupply now is at least as good as it was then. We cannot prevent all ammo shortage situations, otherwise we'd have to carry the argument to the extreme and advocate .22LR weapons and never worry about running out of ammo. There is a balance to be struck between carry quantity of ammo and capability, and that balance is a judgment call open for interpretation.
You're right, "game-changer" is overused.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - BluntForceTrauma - 06-14-2015
Oh, yes, it also struck me that Schatz reported that the 6.5mm test projectiles had the SAME LETHALITY as legacy 7.62 NATO. I'd like to see the testing upon which that statement is based.
Much to my annoyance, for the past decade we've heard from "authoritative" gel testers that for some magical reason the 6.5 caliber can't possibly be as lethal as, for example, the 6.8 caliber, with a caliber a full thirteen-thousandths of an inch larger.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 06-15-2015
BluntForceTrauma Wrote:I don't envision a .338 as a dismounted weapon because of ammo weight, only a vehicle-mounted replacement for M2 with more ammo capacity.Okay, but other people are advocating it for dismounted use, as is the manufacturer:
[video=youtube;JNB7khjOSXc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNB7khjOSXc[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNB7khjOSXc
Quote:The "stretched" 6.5mms being experimented with are mostly, in my opinion, simply exercises in N.I.H. syndrome. Ego and emotion, again. There's no fame, glory, careers, or development dollars in going with something off-the-shelf.Gee, and I thought I was cynical.
Quote:Paul makes very strong arguments for keeping 5.56, but I look at it as a judgment call. We survived WWII and Korea with much more limited personal ammo capacity, and our resupply now is at least as good as it was then. ... There is a balance to be struck between carry quantity of ammo and capability, and that balance is a judgment call open for interpretation.Of course it is. And I'm certain that the logistics of a one-caliber system could be managed. I just think that, all things considered, a two-caliber system is probably a better way to go. Just how much better, I'm not sure, and I'd really prefer a cartridge more like the 5.45x39 than the 5.56x45.
New Cartridge Developments and Implications for Dismounted Infantry Soldiers - stanc - 06-15-2015
BluntForceTrauma Wrote:Oh, yes, it also struck me that Schatz reported that the 6.5mm test projectiles had the SAME LETHALITY as legacy 7.62 NATO. I'd like to see the testing upon which that statement is based.As would I.
Quote:Much to my annoyance, for the past decade we've heard from "authoritative" gel testers that for some magical reason the 6.5 caliber can't possibly be as lethal as, for example, the 6.8 caliber, with a caliber a full thirteen-thousandths of an inch larger.I don't recall seeing any claims that 6.5mm can't be as lethal as 6.8mm. But, I do remember Gary Roberts saying that the 6.5 Grendel load which was tested, proved significantly inferior to 6.8 SPC. However, that's hardly surprising, since the 6.8mm bullets were designed specifically for the SPC round and optimized for terminal effects, whereas the 120gr 6.5mm MatchKing used in the tests was not developed for either wounding effects or the Grendel cartridge.