03-17-2011, 02:38 PM
Gene:
The .303 Mk VII was the standard British ball round in both World Wars, and this was given a light-alloy tip filler as standard "for ballistic reasons", but it must surely have helped rapid yaw and upset on impact. Sometimes the aluminium filler was replaced by other lightweight materials when aluminium was in short supply. The bullet wasn't boat-tailed but even so, I've never read any complaints about its performance or lethality at normal (up to 1,000 yards) fighting ranges. There was a Mk VIII round which used a boat-tailed bullet and was loaded to a higher pressure to increase the velocity, but this was designed for the Vickers MMGs, to enable them to shoot at 4,000+ yards...
Your description of range-testing the rounds makes a very good point - all theoretical performance calculations of any type need to be backed up by thorough practical testing. The ideal is of course to try them on one of the radar-equipped test ranges which give precise information about actual velocities at different ranges, trajectories, wind drift etc. Terminal effectiveness and barrier penetration also need to be exhaustively checked, as far as they can be, before being finally confirmed in combat.
I think it is important for any cartridge being offered as a potential replacement for the 7.62mm to be able to match the M80's ballistics and terminal effectiveness at 1,000 m, otherwise it will be rejected and the 7.62mm retained.
The .303 Mk VII was the standard British ball round in both World Wars, and this was given a light-alloy tip filler as standard "for ballistic reasons", but it must surely have helped rapid yaw and upset on impact. Sometimes the aluminium filler was replaced by other lightweight materials when aluminium was in short supply. The bullet wasn't boat-tailed but even so, I've never read any complaints about its performance or lethality at normal (up to 1,000 yards) fighting ranges. There was a Mk VIII round which used a boat-tailed bullet and was loaded to a higher pressure to increase the velocity, but this was designed for the Vickers MMGs, to enable them to shoot at 4,000+ yards...
Your description of range-testing the rounds makes a very good point - all theoretical performance calculations of any type need to be backed up by thorough practical testing. The ideal is of course to try them on one of the radar-equipped test ranges which give precise information about actual velocities at different ranges, trajectories, wind drift etc. Terminal effectiveness and barrier penetration also need to be exhaustively checked, as far as they can be, before being finally confirmed in combat.
I think it is important for any cartridge being offered as a potential replacement for the 7.62mm to be able to match the M80's ballistics and terminal effectiveness at 1,000 m, otherwise it will be rejected and the 7.62mm retained.