10-13-2020, 10:35 PM
Won't be the first time the .mil had unrealistic expectations.
The only advantage I can think of that a 6.8mm bullet has over a 6.5, for example, is mass in a shorter frame. Overcome the BC disadvantage by just increasing MV... typical to over-muscle something instead of looking for the optimum fit.
But-- and I float this idea as an out of box type -- perhaps the whole "advantage" is not military but political. Think - if conceived by obamanites or other swamp-like critters, then finding a way to keep it out of the civilian market might be the objective no one is talking about but the real one nevertheless.
Let's do some brainstorming on why - other than good military performance - someone would spec out a rig like this. Because "good for the military" or "good for battle" might not be the objective after all.
Remember the nuclear-powered Air Force bomber? What an albatross.
The only advantage I can think of that a 6.8mm bullet has over a 6.5, for example, is mass in a shorter frame. Overcome the BC disadvantage by just increasing MV... typical to over-muscle something instead of looking for the optimum fit.
But-- and I float this idea as an out of box type -- perhaps the whole "advantage" is not military but political. Think - if conceived by obamanites or other swamp-like critters, then finding a way to keep it out of the civilian market might be the objective no one is talking about but the real one nevertheless.
Let's do some brainstorming on why - other than good military performance - someone would spec out a rig like this. Because "good for the military" or "good for battle" might not be the objective after all.
Remember the nuclear-powered Air Force bomber? What an albatross.
"Down the floor, out the door, Go Brandon Go!!!!!"