[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Poll-Next NATO Service Round (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 11/27/2009 5:54:31 PM EDT
| Rifles come and go and so do Cartridges...as others are developed which are better. |
|
Quoted: Rifles come and go and so do Cartridges...as others are developed which are better. .17cal something, years from now when they figure out some sort of hypervelocity weapon... Or a caseless 5.xxmm The historical trend, is that as arms tech advances, calibers get smaller 6.8SPC would be a technological step BACKWARDS... The cost-benefit, in the end, will keep 5.56 around until we go caseless, consumable-case, or similar... In the end - ESPECIALLY in a neer-peer conflict vice the present 4GW/COIN, individual rifles aren't all that critical - most of the casualties are produced by air/artillery & crew served weapons... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rifles come and go and so do Cartridges...as others are developed which are better. .17cal something, years from now when they figure out some sort of hypervelocity weapon... Or a caseless 5.xxmm The historical trend, is that as arms tech advances, calibers get smaller 6.8SPC would be a technological step BACKWARDS... The cost-benefit, in the end, will keep 5.56 around until we go caseless, consumable-case, or similar... In the end - ESPECIALLY in a neer-peer conflict vice the present 4GW/COIN, individual rifles aren't all that critical - most of the casualties are produced by air/artillery & crew served weapons... Which will never happen. The Germans tried back in the late 1980's. But they didn't expect re-unification with their eastern kin, and the high costs that go along with such a venture. Money to field the next step in service rifle technology suddenly became scarce. Thus, with the exception of the already in-service rifles being relegated to special forces, the G11 died a quiet death. Caseless ammo/firearms would be a tougher sell in the United States. The firearms community tends to be overly traditional and skeptical of new advances. The military tends to share a similar level of traditionalism. Thus, the 5.56mm and 7.62mm will be around for decades to come. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Rifles come and go and so do Cartridges...as others are developed which are better. .17cal something, years from now when they figure out some sort of hypervelocity weapon... Or a caseless 5.xxmm The historical trend, is that as arms tech advances, calibers get smaller 6.8SPC would be a technological step BACKWARDS... The cost-benefit, in the end, will keep 5.56 around until we go caseless, consumable-case, or similar... In the end - ESPECIALLY in a neer-peer conflict vice the present 4GW/COIN, individual rifles aren't all that critical - most of the casualties are produced by air/artillery & crew served weapons... However, the world - and specifically, conflict centers - are more urbanized and building materials / methods have changed since the last NATO selection. Being able to get through thicker or denser cover requires more mass, end-stop. I can see NATO deciding to switch to a 6.5 or a 6.8 if it showed a demonstrable cover neutralization and a minimal impact on engagement range and combat load. |
|
Quoted:
The Problem with Caseless ammo, is that the brass in regular ammunition carries away a lot of excess heat energy. You don't have that with Caseless Ammunition. Instead Barrels heat up faster. Plus... Consider extraction of a round. You must be able to clear a weapon. I voted 6.8mm. I don't buy the hypervelocity thing. |
| Actually I have thought as of late the best service rifle round would be a 243 Winchester Lets call it the 6MM NATO. Negligible recoil, larger case capacity and more energy than a 5.56 and the use of hi BC long range bullets like the Berger VLD and Sierra MK . you could use a 75 or 90 grain FMJ round as your standard round and you would have a high velocity ass whipper. Of course that would require issuing a rifle like the AR10 and in this kinder gentler military . I am certain that would be a problem. |
|
Quoted:
Actually I have thought as of late the best service rifle round would be a 243 Winchester Lets call it the 6MM NATO. Negligible recoil, larger case capacity and more energy than a 5.56 and the use of hi BC long range bullets like the Berger VLD and Sierra MK . you could use a 75 or 90 grain FMJ round as your standard round and you would have a high velocity ass whipper. Of course that would require issuing a rifle like the AR10 and in this kinder gentler military . I am certain that would be a problem. based on the wiki article that round seems like a viable cartridge |
|
6.8 SPC II, I guess. I really don't think they will give up on 5.56 or 7.62 anytime soon.
I think the powerhouses of R&D are going to be underfunded until the next major round of conflicts, and production of the existing standard will rev back up with no time to develop new. If the conflict lasts long enough, the economic surge will fund crazy new tech. But if NATO does standardize a new one before all that, I'll guess 6.8 SPC II. |
|
Quoted: It is extremely viable; First of all it is based on a 7.62 NATO case , there are a numerous weapons systems in existence that are already designed to handle the cartridge. All that is required is a re barrel to the new caliber, M14, AR10 , FN FAL , SCAR H , G3 etc etc etc. You use already available magazines and weapons parts. THe M240, M60 and others can all be chambered to the new caliber as well. Substantially reduced recoil allowing for more useful accuracy as well as rapid fire and greater energy than 5.56 as well as greater range. The 243 and 6mm Remington are 30-06 class cartridges in respect to the ranges they will effectively reach to and kill at. The trade off and there always is one is that you have to use a rifle designed for the cartridge. Still this makes more sense than most any other thing out there and is closest to a reasonable compromise. Quoted: Actually I have thought as of late the best service rifle round would be a 243 Winchester Lets call it the 6MM NATO. Negligible recoil, larger case capacity and more energy than a 5.56 and the use of hi BC long range bullets like the Berger VLD and Sierra MK . you could use a 75 or 90 grain FMJ round as your standard round and you would have a high velocity ass whipper. Of course that would require issuing a rifle like the AR10 and in this kinder gentler military . I am certain that would be a problem. based on the wiki article that round seems like a viable cartridge |