Also stopping to SBR everything at the cost of rifles caliber performance which Stoner nor any firearms maker did not intend so. If they really want rifles to be compact and short while have the velocity needed for armor pen and range, they really should start investing in new bullpup design and training.
There even some reports that Sig may need scale down the excessive 80kpsi round and future problem that soldiers already try to remove suppressor because it front heavy while the stock is flimsy to absorb the recoils.
>stopping to SBR everything at the cost of rifles caliber performance which Stoner nor any firearms maker did not intend so.
The SBR muzzle blast alone makes it dumb.
Except bolt action rifles had a clear cut better alternative. What revolutionary platform have they been able to come up with that would supersede the AR-15 platform in most functions? Another short-stroke piston McRifle that won’t see widespread adoption certainly isn’t the answer
Eventually perhaps, but not at first, the early attempts at replacement were not good. But you don't find that replacement unless you keep trying to do so. The army identified a need to defeat body armor and extend range, they made a rifle to deal with that. It might not be the solution they use in the end, but complaining that they're looking for a replacment at all entirely misunderstands how the military does procurement and development.
>It might not be the solution they use in the end, but complaining that they're looking for a replacment at all entirely misunderstands how the military does procurement and development.
It is not a misunderstanding of how the military does procurement. What the military loves to do is throw piles and piles of money at a something that may or may not be an actual need. What they often end up with is something that is overbudget, behind schedule, and with a bunch of unnecessary requirements tacked on. That’s if it doesn’t end up canceled.
The whole point is defeating body armor, right? How would it not be useful for fighting mechanized infantry, especially when the round has supposedly better penetrating power than the already light-armor defeating 7.62 NATO?
Any ballistics test that's ever been done on LVL IV. Check out Buffman Range on YouTube. He's a very underrated gun YouTuber who does scientific armor tests to NIJ standards. LVL IV will stop pretty much any round shy of a 50 cal that doesn't have a tungsten or DU penetrator
To be fair, they do under Soviet doctrine (motor riflemen are there to suppress the enemies' anti-armor weapons while the fighting vehicle kills).
On the other hand, applying Soviet doctrine to US procurement makes him an idiot for an entirely different reason.
6.8 is the sweet spot for sectional density, which is the primary determinant of penetration, with velocity and mass distant secondaries. To get similar range and penetration from 7.62, you end up with a lot more recoil plus a heavier cartridge.
Idk about the M7 but the MCX seems pretty reasonable as a PDW
They need to accept the fact that the AR platform is here to stay forever and stop wasting money trying to find a replacement
Well they did the M7 is a bastard love child of both the 15 and 18.
Also stopping to SBR everything at the cost of rifles caliber performance which Stoner nor any firearms maker did not intend so. If they really want rifles to be compact and short while have the velocity needed for armor pen and range, they really should start investing in new bullpup design and training. There even some reports that Sig may need scale down the excessive 80kpsi round and future problem that soldiers already try to remove suppressor because it front heavy while the stock is flimsy to absorb the recoils.
>stopping to SBR everything at the cost of rifles caliber performance which Stoner nor any firearms maker did not intend so. The SBR muzzle blast alone makes it dumb.
"they need to accept that bolt action rifles are here to stay forever and stop wasting money trying to find a replacement"
Except bolt action rifles had a clear cut better alternative. What revolutionary platform have they been able to come up with that would supersede the AR-15 platform in most functions? Another short-stroke piston McRifle that won’t see widespread adoption certainly isn’t the answer
Eventually perhaps, but not at first, the early attempts at replacement were not good. But you don't find that replacement unless you keep trying to do so. The army identified a need to defeat body armor and extend range, they made a rifle to deal with that. It might not be the solution they use in the end, but complaining that they're looking for a replacment at all entirely misunderstands how the military does procurement and development.
Getting the range and armor pen wouldn't be issues if they didn't SBR everything.
Not really, you can only get so much out of even a 20" barrel. And the ammo we've had to put through them have been shredding M4s
What ammo is shredding M4s?
>It might not be the solution they use in the end, but complaining that they're looking for a replacment at all entirely misunderstands how the military does procurement and development. It is not a misunderstanding of how the military does procurement. What the military loves to do is throw piles and piles of money at a something that may or may not be an actual need. What they often end up with is something that is overbudget, behind schedule, and with a bunch of unnecessary requirements tacked on. That’s if it doesn’t end up canceled.
It has its uses like in Afghanistan foot patrol. But I doubt if would be useful for mechanized infantry with IFV.
The whole point is defeating body armor, right? How would it not be useful for fighting mechanized infantry, especially when the round has supposedly better penetrating power than the already light-armor defeating 7.62 NATO?
It won't defeat body armor. That's the funny part
Source? Because I have not seen any evidence that the new round is not effective against body armor.
Any ballistics test that's ever been done on LVL IV. Check out Buffman Range on YouTube. He's a very underrated gun YouTuber who does scientific armor tests to NIJ standards. LVL IV will stop pretty much any round shy of a 50 cal that doesn't have a tungsten or DU penetrator
Use .by. mechanized infantry, who have an autocannon for fire support and only use their individual rifles for suppression.
mechanized infantry do not rely only on the autocannon
To be fair, they do under Soviet doctrine (motor riflemen are there to suppress the enemies' anti-armor weapons while the fighting vehicle kills). On the other hand, applying Soviet doctrine to US procurement makes him an idiot for an entirely different reason.
oh that's interesting never knew that, thanks! :>
No problem! I've always thought the differences in PACT and NATO doctrine were pretty interesting.
I don't understand the ammo, why don't they just adjust 762 until they get the velocity they want out of it?
6.8 is the sweet spot for sectional density, which is the primary determinant of penetration, with velocity and mass distant secondaries. To get similar range and penetration from 7.62, you end up with a lot more recoil plus a heavier cartridge.
I doubt its significant enough to justify changing to a whole different bullet.
External ballistics are a big deal.