Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
04-02-2019, 11:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-03-2019, 01:05 AM by stanc.)
n9nwo Wrote:What caused the military to consider if it was time to upgrade weapons was how the Chechnya rebels were able to fight the Russians. Neither the 5.45x39 or the 5.56x45 are designed to find in urban area where most of the buildings are stone construction. it takes a heavier round. Add to that the longer ranges needed in Afghanistan. AFAIK, Chechnya's stone buildings had nothing to do with it. The stated reason for the new round is the expectation of fighting an opponent whose soldiers wear Level IV body armor.
n9nwo Wrote:Sounds as if they are still working on what the cartridge will be. My guess is 6.8x45 I don't recall hearing about a 6.8x45 round. Is that a real cartridge?
Posts: 2,555
Threads: 383
Joined: Sep 2013
stanc Wrote:IIRC, in (at least) one of the articles it was stated that they are planning on the same basic ammo load.
Then they aren't actually saving space or weight, sort of getting back to what LRRPF52 was getting at above. Space (volume) is a real issue. Generally speaking, the increase of bulk tends be detrimental elsewhere in ability.
It will be interesting to see if that actually sticks or not. Like so many aspects, this program is going to undergo numerous modifications (which have apparently already started) that compromise intended goals in order to bring it to fruition.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
Double Naught Spy Wrote:Then they aren't actually saving space or weight, sort of getting back to what LRRPF52 was getting at above. Space (volume) is a real issue. Generally speaking, the increase of bulk tends be detrimental elsewhere in ability. Of course. It seems likely that such a cartridge -- and magazines for it -- would necessarily have more volume than even 7.62x51.
Double Naught Spy Wrote:It will be interesting to see if that actually sticks or not. Like so many aspects, this program is going to undergo numerous modifications (which have apparently already started) that compromise intended goals in order to bring it to fruition. No doubt. For that matter, I wouldn't be surprised if it suffered the same fate as its predecessor, the Interim Combat Service Rifle.
Posts: 2,555
Threads: 383
Joined: Sep 2013
Right, lots of big original claims, but now reality is setting in and what I fear is that at best they will end up with marginally better performance without the benefit of a smaller or lighter package (and one that will actually be larger and potentially heavier overall) that will fail to actually convert to better overall effectiveness on the battlefield. So this notion of committing to a program that is supposed to be the new military platform when there isn't a platform or even a cartridge yet is downright scary to me, not just the tail wagging the dog, but the flea wagging the dog. The whole process seems bassackwards.
Posts: 1,613
Threads: 24
Joined: Sep 2014
Keep up the good comments about how the balance between individual round performace and system level effectiveness needs to be worked thrugh!
To help ease our frustration about apparent stupity in our service agencies, we might want to step back and examine human factors in the weapons development community.
We see a steady turnover of military in these offices and the nominal corporate memory civilians are effective only to the extent of their persuasiveness. The wiser civilians will sometimes ‘go along with’ or even encourage an incoming career broadening military member to run with an idea so that the service man or woman can learn something.
The ‘old heads’ themselves are frequently so specialized that they don’t know about some of the factors some of the more technical members on this forum lived and breathed for decades. This, coupled with the tendency for every person to eventually move on and we can easily see why some of the initiatives overlook important facets of system optimization.
Worse, these guys and gals know that forum following requires an inordinate time to filter the brown stuff from the shoe polish because ‘every body is an expert’ and the loudest and by strident voices are often the least knowledgeable. The normal judgement is the pain is not worth the gain.
So, we should not be surprised to see poorly thought through initiatives ‘enjoying’ public airing and that they hang in longer than we think is appropriate.
shootersnotes.com
"To those who have fought and almost died for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
-- Author Unknown
"If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished!" -- Milton Berle
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
Double Naught Spy Wrote:Right, lots of big original claims, but now reality is setting in and what I fear is that at best they will end up with marginally better performance without the benefit of a smaller or lighter package (and one that will actually be larger and potentially heavier overall) that will fail to actually convert to better overall effectiveness on the battlefield. I doubt that it's practical to get a cartridge smaller than 5.56x45, that's just as effective. And if significantly greater performance is wanted, a new cartridge will of necessity have to be bigger than 5.56x45.
Double Naught Spy Wrote:So this notion of committing to a program that is supposed to be the new military platform when there isn't a platform or even a cartridge yet is downright scary to me... I think maybe you scare too easily. Similar statements of "committing to a program" were made about the ICSR, the OICW before it, and other programs going as far back as the SPIW project of the 1960s.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
05-04-2019, 10:10 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2019, 12:52 AM by stanc.)
Posts: 8,507
Threads: 241
Joined: Sep 2014
Looks like a call-out wishlist still, no tangible demonstrators to speak of.
If the low-res image is indicative of the magazine length, then that COL will have to be a Cased Telescoping Cartridge, not traditional metallic or hybrid metallic/polymer.
NRA Basic, Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, RSO
CCW, CQM, DM, Long Range Rifle Instructor
6.5 Grendel Reloading Handbooks & chamber brushes can be found here:
www.AR15buildbox.com
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
05-08-2019, 01:09 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-08-2019, 02:51 AM by stanc.)
LRRPF52 Wrote:If the low-res image is indicative of the magazine length, then that COL will have to be a Cased Telescoping Cartridge, not traditional metallic or hybrid metallic/polymer. Of course. The narrator says that it is cased-telescoped ammo, and the image shows silhouettes of a 7.62mm NATO round and a 6.8mm CT cartridge side-by-side.
What I find interesting is that they are envisioning a quad-stack magazine.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
[video=youtube;O7QqppSKGzw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7QqppSKGzw[/video]
Posts: 93
Threads: 15
Joined: Dec 2016
stanc Wrote:AFAIK, Chechnya's stone buildings had nothing to do with it. The stated reason for the new round is the expectation of fighting an opponent whose soldiers wear Level IV body armor.
I don't recall hearing about a 6.8x45 round. Is that a real cartridge?
No it is not even on the design table. But we are not going back to 6.8x51 nor using 6.8 SPC based on the 5.56x45.
And Chechnya was a factor. The 5.45x39 was not able to penetrate stone walls. Level 4 body armor also added concern.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,918
Threads: 79
Joined: Oct 2016
Leyman here - but in what way does that meet the specified requirements? Nothing about this screams M4 carbine...
The integrated data systems are interesting, but bejeezus, that things gonna be heavy with a full compliment of ammunution.
Nothing kills the incentive of men faster than a healthy sense of entitlement. Nothing kills entitlement faster than a healthy sense of achievement.
Posts: 2,555
Threads: 383
Joined: Sep 2013
stanc Wrote:6.8 Sherwood http://soldiersystems.net/2019/06/19/us-...onsulting/
![[Image: image-863.jpg]](http://soldiersystems.net/blog1/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/image-863.jpg)
Look how wide those mags are!!! Holy moly!
Some how, this whole process seems to be drifting away from the original concept.
Posts: 93
Threads: 15
Joined: Dec 2016
So far most of the designers are drifting back towards the 7.62x51. Not looking something new.
What about a plastic case to reduce weight?
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
TFB article on the VK Integrated Systems 6.8 NGSW rifle candidate: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019...programme/
![[Image: NGSW-R_Ground_03-660x495.jpg]](https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/NGSW-R_Ground_03-660x495.jpg)
Posts: 1,918
Threads: 79
Joined: Oct 2016
It's an AR10 with a battery? Sigh. Cool, but can you really call it new?
Nothing kills the incentive of men faster than a healthy sense of entitlement. Nothing kills entitlement faster than a healthy sense of achievement.
Posts: 93
Threads: 15
Joined: Dec 2016
n9nwo Wrote:So far most of the designers are drifting back towards the 7.62x51. Not looking something new.
What about a plastic case to reduce weight?
One of the submissions did suggest a plastic case. There is already a ammo manufacturer who is making plastic cases.
No one is pushing a bullpup which would make the rifle more compact. IWI Tavor 7 would be a great design.
Posts: 4,033
Threads: 106
Joined: Apr 2011
No one is pushing a bullpup rifle, probably because the US Army has never wanted a bullpup rifle.
Posts: 93
Threads: 15
Joined: Dec 2016
stanc Wrote:No one is pushing a bullpup rifle, probably because the US Army has never wanted a bullpup rifle.
Of course they do not want it. Just like they did not want the .280 British which is more like they are looking at now. And they did not want the FN-FAL either but then went with the M16.
The bullpup is a better format for CQB.
|
