05-21-2011, 05:02 AM
Fella's
It doesn't take a tour to the Stan to tell you that 5.56 NATO, or pretty much any service rifle cartridge, gets blown around by the wind at distance. Even my .260 is affected by heavy winds, as are .300 Win Mags. The only cartridge I know of stepping up that displays significant resistance to winds is the .338 LM, so even with a 130gr or 140gr 7mm or 6.5mm going 2600-2800 fps, you will still need to be trained in wind-doping to make a hit on-target. Guess how many 1st-term soldiers are trained in wind-doping skills? Less than a fraction of a percent, and those are the very rare few that get any precision rifle training in a sniper billet, or designated marksman course, as the US has been implementing. Proper wind-dope training means on the range, not in some classroom.
The US Marines actually train for wind-doping, but their ranges were traditionally stress-free until recently, when the Corps has undergone drastic changes to their entire marksmanship program. Friends of mine who are in the Marines tell me it's actually fun/stressful and practically-focused, in addition to the traditional course of fire they did all along.
Whether a guy has an M4 or an L129A1, if he can't dope the wind, he's only distributing harassment fire, which only encourages the goat-rapers. Any references to the lethality of 7.62 NATO at 1000m will almost always be from GPMG's in most environments, especially since the wind can be horrendous in open terrain. Equipping the whole lot of 1st-term soldiers with L129A1's will only produce more 7.62 NATO harassment fire, and really suck when it comes time to kick in mudhuts. Muzzle blast from that weapon is guaranteed to cause some serious hearing damage, above and beyond 5.56 NATO, since you need double muffs and plugs to deal with 7.62 in enclosed spaces. It feels like getting punched in the nose when a 7.62 rifle or MG is being discharged in the room you're in.
The LMT .308 (L129A1) is also a beast of a rifle/carbine when you pick it up, unless the UK got some pencil weight barrels, but all the pics show to me pretty hefty pipes that look exactly like the one my friend has. The 16" LMT .308 feels as heavy as my 22" .260 with a very hefty barrel. My barrel is a heavy contour that tapers from 1.2" down to a .880", then steps up to the gas block at .936", and is .9" out to the muzzle. Not fun for a rifleman to carry. When I felt the LMT, I was immediately soured by its weight, which is heavier than normal due to the increased length barrel extension used in the monolithic upper receiver.
While Grendels would make the load lighter than .308, they would be wasting harassment fire at the enemy, so there is a more important training factor to this equation than caliber if you want to increase hit probability with any existing caliber that will fit into a practical rifleman load-out, which 7.62 NATO is not. The only way around this is new technology with near hyper-sonic projectiles that defeat wind deflection with extreme velocity, which might not be a bad avenue to start looking down if armies refuse to conduct worthwhile marksmanship training.
LRRPF52
It doesn't take a tour to the Stan to tell you that 5.56 NATO, or pretty much any service rifle cartridge, gets blown around by the wind at distance. Even my .260 is affected by heavy winds, as are .300 Win Mags. The only cartridge I know of stepping up that displays significant resistance to winds is the .338 LM, so even with a 130gr or 140gr 7mm or 6.5mm going 2600-2800 fps, you will still need to be trained in wind-doping to make a hit on-target. Guess how many 1st-term soldiers are trained in wind-doping skills? Less than a fraction of a percent, and those are the very rare few that get any precision rifle training in a sniper billet, or designated marksman course, as the US has been implementing. Proper wind-dope training means on the range, not in some classroom.
The US Marines actually train for wind-doping, but their ranges were traditionally stress-free until recently, when the Corps has undergone drastic changes to their entire marksmanship program. Friends of mine who are in the Marines tell me it's actually fun/stressful and practically-focused, in addition to the traditional course of fire they did all along.
Whether a guy has an M4 or an L129A1, if he can't dope the wind, he's only distributing harassment fire, which only encourages the goat-rapers. Any references to the lethality of 7.62 NATO at 1000m will almost always be from GPMG's in most environments, especially since the wind can be horrendous in open terrain. Equipping the whole lot of 1st-term soldiers with L129A1's will only produce more 7.62 NATO harassment fire, and really suck when it comes time to kick in mudhuts. Muzzle blast from that weapon is guaranteed to cause some serious hearing damage, above and beyond 5.56 NATO, since you need double muffs and plugs to deal with 7.62 in enclosed spaces. It feels like getting punched in the nose when a 7.62 rifle or MG is being discharged in the room you're in.
The LMT .308 (L129A1) is also a beast of a rifle/carbine when you pick it up, unless the UK got some pencil weight barrels, but all the pics show to me pretty hefty pipes that look exactly like the one my friend has. The 16" LMT .308 feels as heavy as my 22" .260 with a very hefty barrel. My barrel is a heavy contour that tapers from 1.2" down to a .880", then steps up to the gas block at .936", and is .9" out to the muzzle. Not fun for a rifleman to carry. When I felt the LMT, I was immediately soured by its weight, which is heavier than normal due to the increased length barrel extension used in the monolithic upper receiver.
While Grendels would make the load lighter than .308, they would be wasting harassment fire at the enemy, so there is a more important training factor to this equation than caliber if you want to increase hit probability with any existing caliber that will fit into a practical rifleman load-out, which 7.62 NATO is not. The only way around this is new technology with near hyper-sonic projectiles that defeat wind deflection with extreme velocity, which might not be a bad avenue to start looking down if armies refuse to conduct worthwhile marksmanship training.
LRRPF52