+- 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 Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW (/showthread.php?tid=1206)
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 06-03-2016
FYI
[video=youtube;Dk_RBt3Sr6I]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk_RBt3Sr6I[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk_RBt3Sr6I
[video=youtube;OqTbTC9UbYQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqTbTC9UbYQ[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqTbTC9UbYQ
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - lrgrendel - 06-03-2016
stanc Wrote:FYI
[video=youtube;Dk_RBt3Sr6I]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk_RBt3Sr6I[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk_RBt3Sr6I
[video=youtube;OqTbTC9UbYQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqTbTC9UbYQ[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqTbTC9UbYQ
That 2nd video has it has a max range of 3600M????
Am I reading this wrong????
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - alicea8541 - 06-03-2016
Marine Corps usually gives two ranges for weapons.
Max Effective Range= how far you can engage target
Max Range= how far the bullet will travel
example for an M16A2
Max effective= 800 meters
Max range= 3534 meters
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - ah1whiskey - 06-03-2016
stanc Wrote:I'd say it's not really stupid, but is instead an example of equipping to fight the last war.
The IAR actually makes a lot of sense for the requirements of urban combat that Marines encountered in Iraq:
[video=youtube;M0mTMIdrUtw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0mTMIdrUtw[/video]
However, the IAR is a poor choice to provide sustained, supporting fires needed for the long range fights in Afghanistan:
[video=youtube;UiUTzTCQ33I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiUTzTCQ33I[/video]
true and i can recall another m16-lmg in the pre saw days == it was a poor excuse for a real LMG
a belt fed LMG would be better -- what about that kinght light weight LMG in 6.5 grendel??--lol
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - dwalters66 - 12-15-2016
An old thread but i want to add something. The adoption of a magazine fed infantry automatic weapon to replace belt fed light machine guns (SAWs) opens the way up for ht 6.5 Grendel. One of the problems of the 6.5 gr is that it is very difficult to adapt to metal linked ammo. Saudi Arabia actually considered the 6.5 gr but dropped the issue after it was determined that it was out of the question for belt fed SAWs.
Now, with the Marines adopting the M27, this all needs to be reconsidered.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - cory - 12-15-2016
dwalters66 Wrote:... One of the problems of the 6.5 gr is that it is very difficult to adapt to metal linked ammo. Saudi Arabia actually considered the 6.5 gr but dropped the issue after it was determined that it was out of the question for belt fed SAWs...
Can you please back the first statement up with facts and not conjecture?
Of course it wouldn't work in the saw in the same way the 6.5 Grendel will not work in 5.56 magazines. Completely different parent case. It has nothing to do with the links.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - BluntForceTrauma - 12-15-2016
dwalters66 Wrote:One of the problems of the 6.5 gr is that it is very difficult to adapt to metal linked ammo.
This is a rumor based on conjecture by Stan Crist. I've been watching this misinformation go 'round the world. Fascinating how internet rumor takes on a life of its own.
Consider the RPD with metal-linked 7.62x39 Russian ammo. Parent case for the 6.5 Grendel. Proof of concept?
My conjecture, which is just as valid as Stan's, is that there'd be no problem making 65G metal-linked belts. So there. Let's see THAT rumor go 'round the world.
dwalters66 Wrote:Saudi Arabia actually considered the 6.5 gr but dropped the issue after it was determined that it was out of the question for belt fed SAWs.
Afraid I'm going to have to jump on this statement, too, and ask for a high standard of evidence. Got a source for this?
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - JASmith - 12-16-2016
BFT has it right -- I would go so far as to say that developing disintegrating links for the Grendel is a straight forward engineering and manufacturing process exercise.
The only reason it has not been done is that no one has asked for it with appropriate funding to support the effort.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - LRRPF52 - 12-16-2016
With LSAT, there is no need to mess around with metallic cartridge designs anymore for an LMG, and they're already working with 6.5mm LSAT as we speak.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
dwalters66 Wrote:An old thread but i want to add something. The adoption of a magazine fed infantry automatic weapon to replace belt fed light machine guns (SAWs) opens the way up for ht 6.5 Grendel. One of the problems of the 6.5 gr is that it is very difficult to adapt to metal linked ammo. Saudi Arabia actually considered the 6.5 gr but dropped the issue after it was determined that it was out of the question for belt fed SAWs.I think a Grendelized M27 IAR would very likely attract interest within the USMC. And, as you indicate, such a project could be accomplished far more easily (and much more affordably) than would be the case with a belt-fed LMG in this caliber.
Now, with the Marines adopting the M27, this all needs to be reconsidered.
FWIW, there were discussions on this subject in the old Grendel forum, with a couple of Horde members very interested in making a Grendel IAR, although no work was actually ever done.
FYI: http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthread.php?9031-Designing-a-Grendel-IAR&p=99013&viewfull=1#post99013
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
dwalters66 Wrote:One of the problems of the 6.5 gr is that it is very difficult to adapt to metal linked ammo.
BluntForceTrauma Wrote:This is a rumor based on conjecture by Stan Crist. I've been watching this misinformation go 'round the world. Fascinating how internet rumor takes on a life of its own.Fascinating, indeed. Sorta like using "conjecture" to describe the facts that I presented a decade ago. :p
What I said in my 2005 magazine article is that the 6.8 SPC case dimensions appear to be far more compatible with the M27-type link configuration than is the shorter 6.5 Grendel case. The result is that it would necessarily be more difficult to design a viable link for the Grendel case. These are demonstrable facts, not conjecture.
Quote:Consider the RPD with metal-linked 7.62x39 Russian ammo. Parent case for the 6.5 Grendel. Proof of concept?6.5 Grendel rounds certainly seem to fit very nicely in RPD links ( http://www.xcrforum.com/forum/attachments/6424d1378913221-mk46-caliber-conversion-image0422.jpg ), but even if they should offer reliable feeding, they give ZERO proof that viable disintegrating links are possible.
Quote:My conjecture, which is just as valid as Stan's, is that there'd be no problem making 65G metal-linked belts. So there. Let's see THAT rumor go 'round the world.Unfortunately, your conjecture that viable links can be designed and fabricated for 6.5 Grendel is no more than unsubstantiated conjecture, in contrast to the links made for 6.8 SPC machine guns.
![[Image: 6.8mm_SPC_250_large.jpg?2467293996503807719]](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1060/7254/files/6.8mm_SPC_250_large.jpg?2467293996503807719)
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
JASmith Wrote:BFT has it right -- I would go so far as to say that developing disintegrating links for the Grendel is a straight forward engineering and manufacturing process exercise.Trouble is, there is no proof that you are right in that opinion. It may be that suitable disintegrating links for 6.5 Grendel are not feasible. Unless/until somebody actually does it, it'll remain imaginary.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - cory - 12-16-2016
stanc Wrote:...What I said in my 2005 magazine article is that the 6.8 SPC case dimensions appear to be far more compatible with the M27-type link configuration than is the shorter 6.5 Grendel case. The result is that it would necessarily be more difficult to design a viable link for the Grendel case. These are demonstrable facts, not conjecture.
These may very well be facts, but it doesn't mean they're worth the paper they were written. Their meaningless other than to demonstrate that disintegrating links can and will work on a short rifle cartridge.
No one has ever claimed that the M27 link would work if you just took a pair of pliers to them.
Of course the links need to be designed specifically for the Grendel. You have 2 engineers here, one with extensive experience (JASmith), telling you that this is a straight forward simple engineering process. This isn't putting a man on the moon.
The only reason that it hasn't been done is that there is no business justification for doing the work.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
cory Wrote:These may very well be facts, but it doesn't mean they're worth the paper they were written. Their meaningless other than to demonstrate that disintegrating links can and will work on a short rifle cartridge.LOL. Sure.
Quote:No one has ever claimed that the M27 link would work if you just took a pair of pliers to them.And that's the kind of poor reading comprehension which took my statement that "it would be more difficult to design a viable link for 6.5 Grendel" and distorted it to mean "creating a link for 6.5 Grendel is impossible."
I distinctly said "[SIZE="5"]M27-type[/SIZE] link," not "M27 link."
Quote:Of course the links need to be designed specifically for the Grendel. You have 2 engineers here, one with extensive experience (JASmith), telling you that this is a straight forward simple engineering process.Again, LOL. Does either of said engineers have any experience whatsoever in the design and development of metallic links, let alone the operation and functioning of machine guns?
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - JASmith - 12-16-2016
Stan,
Apologies in advance for a more personal response than normal, but you have shown that the PM channel is not respected.
The last time we got into this line of discussion, things did not end well. Are you again trying to stir up a senseless debate along the lines of "He said, She said" ???
The reason it did not end well is that you appear to be more bent on harming the Grendel rather than simply remaining neutral. The only "fact" about your discussion about the M27-type link is that you posted it. You did not claim the compatibility as a fact but as an apparent suitability.
You then proceeded to engage in the written equivalent of screaming contests when anyone voiced even a mild alternative to your intuitive claims.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
JASmith Wrote:Stan,Apologies not necessary, Joe.
Apologies in advance for a more personal response than normal...
Quote:...but you have shown that the PM channel is not respected.:confused: I have no idea what you mean by that.
Quote:The last time we got into this line of discussion, things did not end well. Are you again trying to stir up a senseless debate along the lines of "He said, She said" ???:confused: Again, no idea what you mean by such an odd question.
Quote:The only "fact" about your discussion about the M27-type link is that you posted it. You did not claim the compatibility as a fact but as an apparent suitability.Fact: As I stated in 2005, the 6.8 SPC case dimensions are compatible with the M27 link configuration except for loop diameter. This statement has been proven correct by MGA's development of the M68 link, which is identical to the M27 link except for having loops of the correct diameter to fit the 6.8 SPC case.
Fact: The 6.5 Grendel case not only is too fat for the M27 link, but the head-to-shoulder dimension does not permit the necessary shoulder extension for proper interface with the M249 feed pawls, or the cartridge stop on the M249 feed tray. (See attached photos.)
Quote:You then proceeded to engage in the written equivalent of screaming contests when anyone voiced even a mild alternative to your intuitive claims.So, you consider my noting that the very unconventional concepts for link designs are of questionable value is your idea of the written equivalent of screaming??? LOL.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - JASmith - 12-16-2016
But then, when you confuse your own speculation with a hard conclusion that the Grendel is incompatible with links, you cross a line.
It is no where near a proven fact, yet the reader is led to believe your speculation is a fact.
That is line that must not be crossed in the engineering and scientific world. The persistence in doing so explains why you get such strong push back.
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
JASmith Wrote:But then, when you confuse your own speculation with a hard conclusion that the Grendel is incompatible with links, you cross a line.Reading comprehension. I NEVER said the Grendel is incompatible with links. I said that designing a link for it would not be as simple as for 6.8 SPC.
It is no where near a proven fact, yet the reader is led to believe your speculation is a fact.
The dimensional differences between the M27 link design, the M249 feed pawls, M249 feed tray cartridge stop, and the 6.5 Grendel case dimensions are not speculation; they are measureable, and clearly not conducive to a simple change in link loop diameter, as was done with the 6.8 SPC.
Quote:That is line that must not be crossed in the engineering and scientific world.Actually, the line that should not be crossed in the engineering and scientific world is to say, "Even though there is no evidence that it's true, I want it to be true, therefore it is true."
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - cory - 12-16-2016
stanc Wrote:Reading comprehension. I NEVER said the Grendel is incompatible with links. I said that designing a link for it would not be as simple as for 6.8 SPC.
The dimensional differences between the M27 link design, the M249 feed pawls, M249 feed tray cartridge stop, and the 6.5 Grendel case dimensions are not speculation; they are measureable, and clearly not conducive to a simple change in link loop diameter, as was done with the 6.8 SPC.
Actually, the line that should not be crossed in the engineering and scientific world is to say, "Even though there is no evidence that it's true, I want it to be true, therefore it is true."
No this is what's called engineering judgement. This ability is primarily what we get paid for.
You almost made me shoot coffee out my nose with this "I never." On multiple occasions you've taken the hard line stance that "it hasn't been done, so until it has been done my stance is that it can't be done."
New Marine Corps weapon to replace SAW - stanc - 12-16-2016
cory Wrote:No this is what's called engineering judgement. This ability is primarily what we get paid for.Riiiiiiiiiight. And which of you engineers here have any experience in the design and development of metallic links, and the operation and functioning of machine guns?
Quote:You almost made me shoot coffee out my nose with this "I never." On multiple occasions you've taken the hard line stance that "it hasn't been done, so until it has been done my stance is that it can't be done."Again you're in error. My usual stance is, "if it hasn't been done, and there's no evidence that it can be done, I'll remain skeptical until it actually is done."
In this particular case, viable disintegrating links for the 6.5 Grendel round are only an imagined possibility, not a demonstrated reality.
OTOH, everything currently exists that would be needed to build a Grendel IAR, as per the post by dwalters66.