User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 2:11:51 PM EDT
[#1]
The author states M995 will penetrate current body armor at 500 meters
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 4:10:33 PM EDT
[#2]
Hmmm I would have to agree, the whole program is dumb and a waste of money.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 4:23:45 PM EDT
[#3]
6.8 for the win
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 4:30:51 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hmmm I would have to agree, the whole program is dumb and a waste of money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 5:55:41 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At least for the majority of troops the juice doesn't seem like it would be worth the squeeze. Maybe in some specific roles like SAW or DM more power or range might be better. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 9:26:34 PM EDT
[#6]
Lol... since when did cost become a factor with a US Gov. Program ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2019 9:38:55 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol... since when did cost become a factor with a US Gov. Program ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/22/2019 11:15:10 PM EDT
[#8]
So what is wrong with 556 as a general use combat round ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/24/2019 6:34:13 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So what is wrong with 556 as a general use combat round ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/26/2019 1:13:57 PM EDT
[#10]
damn some of the posters on that article are retarded.....
"There hasn't been a substantial technological advance in ammunition since the advent of smokeless powder." pretty sure TSX, Mk318 and M855A1 and substantial technological advancements arent they? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2019 5:10:19 AM EDT
[#11]
Of course we CAN afford it.
Doesn't mean it's a worthwhile expendature. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2019 5:17:38 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So what is wrong with 556 as a general use combat round ? Are there rounds that work better than 5.56 as a short barreled carbine round? Yes. Are there rounds that work better as long distance precision rifle rounds? Yes. Are there rounds that work better as belt fed machinegun rounds? Yes. Are there rounds that work better in their ability to fit good enough into the above rolls for squad-sized elements that benefits from being able to pool ammo among different kinds of weapon systems? No, not really. An argument could be made for 6.8 SPC being a good replacement for 5.56 for how we use it. But I think the benefits of 6.8 SPC over 5.56 are trivial enough to not be worth overhauling our ammo stockpiles, manufacturing plants, and ability to pool ammo with NATO allies. The whole premise behind this new cartridge and weapon they're developing is that General Miley thinks it's really important for every soldier to be able to penetrate Level 4 armor at 600 meters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2019 8:00:27 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The whole premise behind this new cartridge and weapon they're developing is that General Miley thinks it's really important for every soldier to be able to penetrate Level 4 armor at 600 meters. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/5/2019 10:45:21 AM EDT
[#14]
So this "Russian individual" the article is quoting is critical of the idea that U.S./NATO may be going to the 6.8mm from 5.56mm for various reasons and then at the end of the article says Russia should switch back to the 7.62 with improvement from the 5.45. I am confused... Is it not a good idea or is it a good idea?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/6/2019 4:32:32 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Isnt that why we went to the green tip ammo also...? Needed to penetrate a Russki helmet a x yards or am I making shit up M855 was designed and tested for penetrating Soviet standard issue steel helmets. I forget exactly what distance they wanted it to work at, but that was the design premise of M855. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/6/2019 5:28:15 AM EDT
[#16]
Technically we are so far in debt we shouldn’t buy anything new. Yet here we are.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/6/2019 3:04:46 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Technically we are so far in debt we shouldn’t buy anything new. Yet here we are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/6/2019 10:15:28 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, that's correct. You aren't making anything up. M855 was designed and tested for penetrating Soviet standard issue steel helmets. I forget exactly what distance they wanted it to work at, but that was the design premise of M855. The problem with tungsten penetrators is the US does not produce much domestically and would have to import it. The top ten sources of tungsten are: 1) China (64,000 metric tons) 2) Russia (3,537) 3) Canada (2,194) 4) Bolivia (1,247) 5) Vietnam (1,050) 6) Portugal (763) 7) Austria (706) 8) Rwanda (700) 9) Spain (542) 10) Brazil (381) US production - 215 tons Assuming the penetrator core weighs 20 grains, or 1.296 gm, 300 million rounds would require all of Brazil's tungsten production for a year. 300 million rounds is a large order, but not unheard of. Then of course there are the 7.62mm AP, .Caliber .50 AP, 20mm, 25mm, 30mm that use tungsten, as well as some AT projectiles. 100 million rounds of Caliber .50 consume all of Spain's production for a year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/27/2019 10:00:37 PM EDT
[#19]
It seems this is going to happen. It will be fine guys. Other countries will have to upgrade as well. It will hurt their finances more than ours. Cheap light body armor, drones, vehicles require the upgrade.
I wouldn’t want to engage armored drones with 5.56 Weight savings in the case and logistics of one unified cartridges offset the negatives to some degree. Tungsten rounds will be saved for war. A steel penetrator or copper round will serve for training. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2020 9:16:25 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nothing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So what is wrong with 556 as a general use combat round ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/21/2020 12:28:08 PM EDT
[#21]
And 6.8 isn't affected by the fleet yaw issue like 5.56.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2020 1:33:21 PM EDT
[#22]
NATO standardization would no doubt make it too costly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2020 2:10:23 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
NATO standardization would no doubt make it too costly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/25/2020 2:29:06 PM EDT
[#24]
Maybe there isn't enough kickbacks in small arms to make it worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2020 3:13:48 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And 6.8 isn't affected by the fleet yaw issue like 5.56. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2020 3:14:24 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lots wrong. 6.8 performs well out of short(er) barreled rifles and it is much more barrier blind - something of vital importance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2020 6:22:27 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The author states M995 will penetrate current body armor at 500 meters |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2020 12:26:56 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Modern barrier blind ammo in 5.56 negates that issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/26/2020 12:49:15 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Link to comparison study between 5.56 and 6.8? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Modern barrier blind ammo in 5.56 negates that issue. There’s not even a final version of this new “6.8” cartridge for anyone to test. So no, we don’t know how it performs out of shorter barrels or through barriers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2020 6:52:48 PM EDT
[#30]
The brits did a bunch of ammo testing in the 50-60’s.
They ended up at 6.8 as the best blend of lethality, range, tracer payload, and ap performance. The 6.5 had better ballistics but lacked tracer payload, needed more barrel, and bled pigs slower Iirc. The 30-325 cal killed pigs faster but did so with a other shortfalls like recoil bullet weight and drop. They settled on 280 as the best middle ground. They used anesthisized pigs for the ballistic testing. And timed death from various bullet strikes. Veterinarians did postmortems. That’s how they ended up with the 280 Brit given a specific case size. Same principal here. 22 works well for many things but ap and tracer performance require overly long bullets to get there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/27/2020 9:17:37 PM EDT
[#31]
Replace Tungsten with Depleted Uranium.
Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2020 11:25:22 PM EDT
[#32]
Russian propagandist trolling? And National Interest puts it out?
Shocker |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
