Testing, testing...

[JASmith]

Tony,

You've done very well at positing the next family of weapons and ammunition, but an immediate step to that family may be larger than can be swallowed just now. Try to think incrementally from where we are today and where we need to go.

That depends on how the plastic-cased technology is introduced. One thing is for sure - both the guns and ammo will require entirely different manufacturing techniques than are used at present, so there's no particular advantage in retaining an existing calibre: they could and should start with a clean sheet.

Our enthusiasm needs to be tempered by the knowledge that fear of the unknown will always make change an incremental process -- unless our noses really get rubbed in it. At that point it may be too late...

The second point is that there isn't and never will be any relaxation of the pressure to reduce the weight of portable equipment and consumables (like ammo) so if the Army can get long-range performance comparable with the 7.62mm but with lighter ammo, they're likely to go for as much saving as possible. Which takes us back to a 6.5 to 7mm round.

Which is why a plastic-cased 5.56 with attachable 12 ga grenade launcher (already with plastic cases) may end up being a preferred solution. This could happen in spite of the superiority of the 6-6.5 mm class of bullets and cartridges as a result of "incremental" and "minimum weight" arguments combined.

That (multiple ammunition types) could work in theory, but it seems to have a dubious history in practice. Both Spain and Japan introduced low-recoil versions of the 7.62mm NATO for rifle use, but these didn't seem to last. The Chinese also introduced light (assault rifle, LMG) and heavy (sniper rifle, GPMG) versions of their 5.8x42, but have begun to move towards a compromise "universal" loading instead. Maybe the complication is felt not to be worth it.

We already have multiple ammunition types big time in both 5.56 and 7.62. The only remaining step is to allow the bullet weight in belted ammunition to be different than for box magazines. Indeed, there is no reason for a 100 round box magazine to have the same bullet weight as the 30 round assault rifle magazine.

Cheers!
Joe