05-17-2011, 07:57 PM
John,
I understand your perspective. I've noticed that it's really easy for us to tunnel-in on the M4/5.56 caliber topic when wearing our civilian hats since we don't commonly own & shoot belt-fed machineguns, but from the end-user perspective in an Infantry Squad, the M4 is the strong link in maneuverability and close quarters out to 100m engagements. The riflemen sometimes don't even bother competing with the SAW and 240 gunners when distant targets are being engaged with the pigs, 203's, and now DMR's.
The 5.56 is great for shooting people within 100m and often gives sufficient target effects out to 450m, being that good hits on target take the guy out of the fight. Would I like to throw a switch and have the Grendel at 300m plus? Yes, but not at the sacrifice of the other end of the spectrum, which a light assault rifle load could actually address, but then we're back to the distance limitation again, and since we won't be swapping out linked ammo and mag-fed ammo as a rule, we effectively would be back to a two-caliber system, with less mag capacity for my door-kickers, alley cats, and trench sweepers, while every other threat assault rifle will have at least a 30rd mag.
One thing I would hate to see lost is the mag capacity in the M4 30rd mag profile/weight, and the handling and blast characteristics in close quarters. Running my 16" Grendel with 100gr NBT's has shown me how little recoil can be achieved with it, but there's still the issue of mag capacity/mag profile/and added weight. Let's just say that most dismounted small units that use light infantry tactics around the world who also have a choice of weapons-even outside their country's service rifle, almost unanimously choose the M4A1 in 5.56 NATO, or a similar carbine based on the M16 family of weapons, and you hear very little complaints from them about 5.56 NATO in a carbine.
The big limiting systems right now are the SAW and the M240. They are what is screaming, "Fix me! Fix me!" I have been tracking the KAC LMG since its introduction, as well as some of the background weapons and ideas it sprang from, and that is an awesome little LMG. I don't know why Knight's isn't pushing it harder. History says that the "new" Auto Rifleman approach using the coffin mags will fail, although I hope that I'm wrong, since that is what the Marines are going with for a replacement/augmentation for the SAW. A lot of that system's success will rest solely on the shoulders of those 60rd mags from Surefire and Magpul, and I hope they can pull it off...really. Once a coffin mag goes Tango Uniform, you're screwed, since the ammo can often only be retrieved by removing the floor plate. We'll see how those mags turn out soon enough.
What requires the move away from a package like the KAC LMG is that it has a conventional barrel arrangement, which will not be long enough to support a caliber that will exceed the M80/7.62 ballistics. Maybe 6.5 Grendel in the KAC LMG could duplicate 7.62 NATO out to 600m from the short barrel, but that would be a stretch I think given the limitation of needing mass-produced bullets, not Scenars, VLD's, or SMK's. The main things the KAC LMG have going for it are lightweight, constant recoil, and low profile. If it were introduced, you would see guys actually wanting to carry it, versus the dread of humping the SAW.
In order to duplicate the low-profile of such an LMG, and match or exceed 7.62 NATO ballistics past 600m, a longer barrel is needed, which means it needs to be a bullpup LMG. With a pulsed-stage propellant, it's theoretically possible to get the Grendel to increase MV with heavier bullets, and not exceed pressure limits in current brass, but it's only theoretical right now. That propellant would revolutionize metallic-cased ammunition technology, but remains an idea currently. Even if I had the fully-funded R&D infrastructure to pursue it, it might end up being a flop, and would most likely entail some unforeseen challenges that could spell its doom.
For the Grendel to be a viable replacement for 7.62, I think it needs to push at least a 130gr, if not 140gr FMJ at 2800 fps, which we all would never try right now, even with a bolt gun. I'm not even sure my .260 Rem could do that safely in my gas gun, as I'm running with light pressure signs pushing the 123 Scenars and 130gr VLD's currently.
I'm basically looking for 6.5 Swede ballistics with the 140's. I wouldn't want to enter and clear a room/building with that type of a cartridge in my carbines normally, for a bunch of obvious reasons, but my gunners would do well supporting the riflemen in MOUT with that system. This is one of the areas where 5.56 makes its money, and does it well, and the close-in barrier defeat characteristics of something like a 6.5 Swede would really give soldiers a tangible sense of destructive.suppressive power over the SAW, while leaving the ungainly 240 in the dust.
LRRPF52
I understand your perspective. I've noticed that it's really easy for us to tunnel-in on the M4/5.56 caliber topic when wearing our civilian hats since we don't commonly own & shoot belt-fed machineguns, but from the end-user perspective in an Infantry Squad, the M4 is the strong link in maneuverability and close quarters out to 100m engagements. The riflemen sometimes don't even bother competing with the SAW and 240 gunners when distant targets are being engaged with the pigs, 203's, and now DMR's.
The 5.56 is great for shooting people within 100m and often gives sufficient target effects out to 450m, being that good hits on target take the guy out of the fight. Would I like to throw a switch and have the Grendel at 300m plus? Yes, but not at the sacrifice of the other end of the spectrum, which a light assault rifle load could actually address, but then we're back to the distance limitation again, and since we won't be swapping out linked ammo and mag-fed ammo as a rule, we effectively would be back to a two-caliber system, with less mag capacity for my door-kickers, alley cats, and trench sweepers, while every other threat assault rifle will have at least a 30rd mag.
One thing I would hate to see lost is the mag capacity in the M4 30rd mag profile/weight, and the handling and blast characteristics in close quarters. Running my 16" Grendel with 100gr NBT's has shown me how little recoil can be achieved with it, but there's still the issue of mag capacity/mag profile/and added weight. Let's just say that most dismounted small units that use light infantry tactics around the world who also have a choice of weapons-even outside their country's service rifle, almost unanimously choose the M4A1 in 5.56 NATO, or a similar carbine based on the M16 family of weapons, and you hear very little complaints from them about 5.56 NATO in a carbine.
The big limiting systems right now are the SAW and the M240. They are what is screaming, "Fix me! Fix me!" I have been tracking the KAC LMG since its introduction, as well as some of the background weapons and ideas it sprang from, and that is an awesome little LMG. I don't know why Knight's isn't pushing it harder. History says that the "new" Auto Rifleman approach using the coffin mags will fail, although I hope that I'm wrong, since that is what the Marines are going with for a replacement/augmentation for the SAW. A lot of that system's success will rest solely on the shoulders of those 60rd mags from Surefire and Magpul, and I hope they can pull it off...really. Once a coffin mag goes Tango Uniform, you're screwed, since the ammo can often only be retrieved by removing the floor plate. We'll see how those mags turn out soon enough.
What requires the move away from a package like the KAC LMG is that it has a conventional barrel arrangement, which will not be long enough to support a caliber that will exceed the M80/7.62 ballistics. Maybe 6.5 Grendel in the KAC LMG could duplicate 7.62 NATO out to 600m from the short barrel, but that would be a stretch I think given the limitation of needing mass-produced bullets, not Scenars, VLD's, or SMK's. The main things the KAC LMG have going for it are lightweight, constant recoil, and low profile. If it were introduced, you would see guys actually wanting to carry it, versus the dread of humping the SAW.
In order to duplicate the low-profile of such an LMG, and match or exceed 7.62 NATO ballistics past 600m, a longer barrel is needed, which means it needs to be a bullpup LMG. With a pulsed-stage propellant, it's theoretically possible to get the Grendel to increase MV with heavier bullets, and not exceed pressure limits in current brass, but it's only theoretical right now. That propellant would revolutionize metallic-cased ammunition technology, but remains an idea currently. Even if I had the fully-funded R&D infrastructure to pursue it, it might end up being a flop, and would most likely entail some unforeseen challenges that could spell its doom.
For the Grendel to be a viable replacement for 7.62, I think it needs to push at least a 130gr, if not 140gr FMJ at 2800 fps, which we all would never try right now, even with a bolt gun. I'm not even sure my .260 Rem could do that safely in my gas gun, as I'm running with light pressure signs pushing the 123 Scenars and 130gr VLD's currently.
I'm basically looking for 6.5 Swede ballistics with the 140's. I wouldn't want to enter and clear a room/building with that type of a cartridge in my carbines normally, for a bunch of obvious reasons, but my gunners would do well supporting the riflemen in MOUT with that system. This is one of the areas where 5.56 makes its money, and does it well, and the close-in barrier defeat characteristics of something like a 6.5 Swede would really give soldiers a tangible sense of destructive.suppressive power over the SAW, while leaving the ungainly 240 in the dust.
LRRPF52