09-03-2011, 03:21 AM
stanc Wrote:I disagree. As I read it, the proposal by LRRPF52 is for a Grendel LMG "to provide the same downrange benefits as 7.62 GMPG's such as the PKM and MAG58." Since he also notes the potential for a one-caliber system using 6.5 Grendel, that means it would have to be good enough to not only replace 7.62x54R in the V4 armies, it would have to be good enough to not be outranged by the PKMs used by the Russian army (the threat for which the V4 nations created a military alliance).
I don't know if it's necessary to match terminal performance, although the closer we can get to equal performance, the better. More importantly, I think it's vital to match effective range, for the reason noted above.
Absolutely, a comparison of weapon and ammo weights should be part of any presentation.
OK, I see what you are getting at. We just have to demonstrate that we have an equivalent effective range, not equal terminal effects.
How do we define effective range? 50% hit probability was the U.S. Army definition assuming you had the ability to disable the target at that range.
I think we'll have at least as good hit probability, but how do define disabling ability?