10-22-2020, 09:03 PM
BluntForceTrauma Wrote:Caliber is relative to the external and terminal ballistic performance required, and thus is driven by the performance parameters set forth.Yes. Isn't that precisely what the Army did?
The point is to select the smallest caliber in order to keep system overall bulk down that will achieve the performance parameters.
BluntForceTrauma Wrote:As far as a 6.8 NGSW goes, a 6.5 NGSW would have achieved the exact same performance, only with better external ballistics.A dubious claim. IIRC, the Army reportedly tested a range of calibers, and determined that those smaller than 6.8mm failed to give the desired performance.
Plus, reducing caliber to 6.5mm would give a reduction in cartridge diameter of little more than one hundredth of an inch (0.01").
The difference in system bulk -- gun, mag, cartridge -- would be virtually nil, and magazine capacity would remain at 20 rounds.
