New True Velocity Manufacturing Article

[Battalion13]

Article:
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2020...ply-chain/

[BluntForceTrauma]

Chatted with the True Velocity guys at SHOT Show 2020 and they seemed solid — even when I played Devil's Advocate and grilled them from every angle, hoping to catch them in some bullshit marketing smoke and mirrors.

Therefore, I hope the technology truly is as good as they claim, and I wish them every success — and 6.5 Grendel and 6mmARC offerings!

I hope military leadership is receptive to new concepts and we don't have a repeat of the 1930s when Walter Christie's tank designs revolutionized the concept — but were ignored in the U.S. and instead became the basis for Russia's T-34.

Experimental Minigun in True Velocity .338 Norma Magnum photo attached – just for fun.

[VASCAR2]

Wow, that 338 Norma Magnum mini gun would sure put a stream of lead further out than the 7.62x51 version.

[stanc]

[video=youtube;bL1wF-nCGc4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL1wF-nCGc4[/video]

[VASCAR2]

I’d still rather see the same technology used with a 6.5 caliber bullet instead of 6.8. Your still carrying a lot heavier weapon in the AR-10 platform than the AR-15 platform. Use the same polymer case design in a 6.5 Grendel or 6 ARC with higher velocity in a lighter weapon with lighter recoil.

[A5BLASTER]

I’d still rather see the same technology used with a 6.5 caliber bullet instead of 6.8. Your still carrying a lot heavier weapon in the AR-10 platform than the AR-15 platform. Use the same polymer case design in a 6.5 Grendel or 6 ARC with higher velocity in a lighter weapon with lighter recoil.

Agreed.

6.8/277 cal is so 1960's tech.

[Fess]

My understanding is that the goal was a particular amount of energy delivered at a particular long range, using EPR (Enhanced Performance Round) bullets. These bullets are made with steel and copper, similar to M855A1, but with higher BC. The lower density of the EPR design vs a lead core bullet drove the need for a diameter larger bullet to meet whatever goal they had set. I know that Textron was working on a 6.5mm cased-telescoped cartridge that utilized a lead-cored bullet prior to the NGSW project.

Of course, the actual relevance of the Army's chosen goal is up for debate.

The switch to lead-free bullets has affected other projects. I had contact with the fellow developing the .277 Sidewinder round for potential military approval a few years ago. It was actually a cartridge based on the 30 Remington that his father had started on several decades ago. He had based the round on achieving a certain amount of retained energy at something like 800 or 1000m. When the Army switched away from lead-cored bullets, the BC's on bullets that fit his cartridge dropped to where he could no longer reach his goal.

[biodsl]

I guess this is backing the train way, way up, but..

From the video "We're currently sending our soldiers and marines onto the battlefield....at an adversary that's got superior ammunition with greater effective range who's now wearing level III body armor."

Who are they talking about?

[A5BLASTER]

I guess this is backing the train way, way up, but..

From the video "We're currently sending our soldiers and marines onto the battlefield....at an adversary that's got superior ammunition with greater effective range who's now wearing level III body armor."

Who are they talking about?

Well since no military in the world fields anything other then ar,ak type weapons and ammo.

I'm guessing they are talking about US tax payers?

[stanc]

I’d still rather see the same technology used with a 6.5 caliber bullet instead of 6.8. Your still carrying a lot heavier weapon in the AR-10 platform than the AR-15 platform. Use the same polymer case design in a 6.5 Grendel or 6 ARC with higher velocity in a lighter weapon with lighter recoil.

My understanding is that the Army conducted tests a few years ago and determined that 6.8mm was the smallest caliber that would defeat modern hard body armor at long range. It seems very unlikely that 6 ARC or 6.5 Grendel would be capable of achieving the desired performance.

Agreed.

6.8/277 cal is so 1960's tech.

LOL. 6.5/.264 is 1890's tech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6.5%C3%9755mm_Swedish

I guess this is backing the train way, way up, but..

From the video "We're currently sending our soldiers and marines onto the battlefield....at an adversary that's got superior ammunition with greater effective range who's now wearing level III body armor."

Who are they talking about?

He's misstating the case. The rationale for NGSW is concern of Army leadership about the possibility of future combat against opponents like the Russians, who field Level IV body armor that stops 5.56 M855A1.

I imagine the "greater effective range" comment refers mainly to 5.56x45 weapons versus 7.62x54R weapons like those below, a comparison that's been done by others.

[Fess]

Level III body armor is appearing all over the world. It is pretty inexpensive these days. Its been seen in Afghanistan, Sudan, etc. That is what has driven the energy-at-range component of the NGSW program. Again, it is open to debate on whether the particular goals they have chosen are the best ones.

7.62x54mmR weapons like the SVD and PK machineguns technically outrange their 7.62x51 rivals. The US has also been shortening the barrels on various weapons, which makes that difference greater. This NDIA presentation goes into detail on the "range gap" of various weapon systems and proposes solutions (largely 6.5mm, BTW) https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloud...Schatz.pdf

Here is another article that makes the argument that longer-ranged weapons, in this case using a GPC (General Purpose Cartridge) for use in both rifles and machineguns should be adopted. https://quarryhs.co.uk/TNG2.pdf
This article notes that many attacks against US forces are beyond the effective range of 5.56x45 weapons: "An American Rifleman article from Feb 2011 stated "U.S. Army data....reveals that more than half of the war’s small arms engagements are now beyond 500 meters, with the enemy employing heavier weapons and then withdrawing before air support or artillery fire can arrive"." I should note that he recommends a cartridge similar the the Grendel, but slightly more powerful.

BTW: When researching this answer, I came across a photo of a Textron 6.5mm EPR cased-telescoped round in the GPC article. Apparently, my previous comment on it ONLY being developed for lead-cored bullets was incorrect.

[biodsl]

Thanks, all. Just wanted to confirm his exaggeration. Nothing wrong with planning for the future. Just don't make it sound like we're totally behind the power curve.

[biodsl]

I'm guessing they are talking about US tax payers?

Now that right there is funny! Or tragic!

[BluntForceTrauma]

Good humor always has a grain of truth....