12-17-2023, 03:14 AM
Neat!
Will Russia adopt? No. They lack the financial resources; but more to the point, the fundamental question on adoption isn't "Is it a better performing round?" The question is: "Is it materially better that it make a meaningful impact on battlefield outcomes?" or "is it of similar or otherwise acceptable efficacy while freeing limited wartime resources that can now be used on other priorities?" or "is this coinciding with related material upgrades being planned already, and so of minimal additional cost and logistics impact?"
This is my problem with M855A1. Because the answer is not yes to either of those, and is actually a negative to a no, on the last two. Instead M855A1 answered the only USA question of: "Does it minimize the environmental impact on the battlefield of the people we're trying to kill?"
That's not entirely true, as M855A1 arguable has improved armor piecing impacts, and with the common issue of body armor, it's possible that M855A1 will affect the outcome on the battlefield. This isn't to say the outcome of any particular gunfight, but the actual battle, and change the outcome on the battlefield. I would argue no, and that the resources could have been better spent on an extra 200 rounds of aimed fire with M855 (or M193) - is my own opinion.
And so, on that logic, will a Russian 6mm Grendel version of 6ARC, incorporate an improved armor piecing capability that materially enhances capabilites to counter common battle field armor? If the answer is "Yes", then that's a solid Smaybe that they will adopt anyway.
Will Russia adopt? No. They lack the financial resources; but more to the point, the fundamental question on adoption isn't "Is it a better performing round?" The question is: "Is it materially better that it make a meaningful impact on battlefield outcomes?" or "is it of similar or otherwise acceptable efficacy while freeing limited wartime resources that can now be used on other priorities?" or "is this coinciding with related material upgrades being planned already, and so of minimal additional cost and logistics impact?"
This is my problem with M855A1. Because the answer is not yes to either of those, and is actually a negative to a no, on the last two. Instead M855A1 answered the only USA question of: "Does it minimize the environmental impact on the battlefield of the people we're trying to kill?"
That's not entirely true, as M855A1 arguable has improved armor piecing impacts, and with the common issue of body armor, it's possible that M855A1 will affect the outcome on the battlefield. This isn't to say the outcome of any particular gunfight, but the actual battle, and change the outcome on the battlefield. I would argue no, and that the resources could have been better spent on an extra 200 rounds of aimed fire with M855 (or M193) - is my own opinion.
And so, on that logic, will a Russian 6mm Grendel version of 6ARC, incorporate an improved armor piecing capability that materially enhances capabilites to counter common battle field armor? If the answer is "Yes", then that's a solid Smaybe that they will adopt anyway.
4x P100