05-09-2011, 11:36 PM
Gene,
Thanks for throwing down the gauntlet!!
Tony has a good start on a requirements list to replace both cartridges.
There are some items, e. g., desired trajectory, that may be subject to debate.
As we've discussed in other fora, using a single cartridge to attain all of the objectives for an assault rifle and for a general purpose machine gun is extraordinarily challenging given current technology. Ample precedent exists for multiple ammunition types in existing military cartridges. Can we require a single cartridge, but allow at least two loads? An example would be a comparatively light bullet high velocity round for the rifle, and a heavier bullet long range round for belt-fed weapons.
Also, a testable penetration requirement has been stated in lines 4 and 5 of Tony's draft. The 250 mm of penetration coupled with a yawing bullet establishes a significant permanent wound cavity independent of kinetic energy. This lets us use a different lethality metric than kinetic energy and eliminates a potentially controversial requirement.
Thanks for throwing down the gauntlet!!
Tony has a good start on a requirements list to replace both cartridges.
There are some items, e. g., desired trajectory, that may be subject to debate.
As we've discussed in other fora, using a single cartridge to attain all of the objectives for an assault rifle and for a general purpose machine gun is extraordinarily challenging given current technology. Ample precedent exists for multiple ammunition types in existing military cartridges. Can we require a single cartridge, but allow at least two loads? An example would be a comparatively light bullet high velocity round for the rifle, and a heavier bullet long range round for belt-fed weapons.
Also, a testable penetration requirement has been stated in lines 4 and 5 of Tony's draft. The 250 mm of penetration coupled with a yawing bullet establishes a significant permanent wound cavity independent of kinetic energy. This lets us use a different lethality metric than kinetic energy and eliminates a potentially controversial requirement.