What will be the new service round of the US Military? And what exactly is MAC on about?
I’ve always heard stories of guys in Vietnam loving the M14 because it had the power to punch through thick brush without being knocked off the direction of travel.
>t. dumb phoneposter
Other urls found in this thread:
>t. dumb phoneposter
That's fine. Phones are for people on the zoom. People who post from their faggot ass desktops and laptops are no-life motherfuckers who don't belong on Jow Forums. Flick related is the average non-phoneposter. See what I did with the language? Twisted it around to favor phoneposters. I like to imagine a teenage girl tapping her phone, before I kick down the front door, march up the stairs with music building up, and aim my aimpoint alt-right gangster glock 40 at her, just to ask her what she's gonna say. The response? I lied about the video, here's the image with her response. I THINK I POOPED. YEAH I WON. YEAHHH SHE GOT SCARED. YES OH YES PLEASE PLEASE YOU PLEASE PLEASE (YOU)
.308 gets bucked by brush too user, durr guns like .35 remington and 45-70 are fat and slow, only ones that really dont care about hitting brush.
The Army is in the process of adopting a 135 grain low drag 6.8mm projectile in a polymer CT case with a target velocity of 3300-3500 feet per second.
Think of having a semi auto service rifle chambered in 7mm magnum.
Full power infantry rifles were practically obsolete post WWII but the US forced NATO to adopt 7.62mm because of America's traditional fascination with the myth of our prowess as individual marksmen.
The M14 was also a behind schedule, super over budget finicky kludge of a gun that was inferior to all of it's contemporaries, but Ordnance was gonna do what Ordnance was gonna do.
The trashfire that was the T44 and how Ordnance deliberately tried to sabotage the M16 program (people were almost convicted of treason) is a large part of why we don't have government arsenals anymore; people tying their careers to pet projects literally got americans killed
sounds cool
based schizoposter returns
All NATO members used cartridges in the same class as 7.62x51 when it was created as a NATO standardized round.
Couldn't we just make a new bullet for the 5.56? Like take a 75 grain bthp but give it a M855A1 makeover. The bullet will still be traveling fast as fuck but with a heavier penetrator. Or is this too spoopy of a concept for /k?
6.5 Grendel 22" barrelled bullpup would be the most efficient combination. No doubt the US military will go for some retarded compromise or cater to domestic companies like it always does. I thought the military was supposed to be innovative?
Dat recoil tho
Not in our lifetime. A new cartridge would need to be both at least three times better than current rounds and convince the entirety of NATO it's worth bringing new guns and ammo into the supply chain as a standard issue. The 5.56 and 7.62 more or less cover anything general infantry currently needs.
The Army is concerned about the proliferation of body armor and wants something with enough punch to go through it at longer distances.
So.....75 grain bullet with hardened steel core penetrator?
Army has always been trying to find some bullshit 6.8 caseless ammo because they're autistic. Chances are we see man portable rail guns before we see this crap.
m14 was always shit btw.
The Mk262 is a 77gr bullet designed for the Mk12 rifle and apparently had an effective range of 700m. I heard (from Small Arms Solutions, so might want a 2nd source) that SOCOM loved the round but big Army never got around to even trying it out.
The new 6.8 magnum round is not replacing 5.56 or 7.62x51.
I won't be satisfied til we adopt .577/450
That would be an extremely long projectile if you are talking SCHV.
For general use or for spooky boys? Because we both know special forces 'adopting' something usually means they requisitioned a handful of them.
The big Army doesn't use Mk262 because its DMR rifles are in 7.62x51.
It’s for infantry, and infantry only.
Everybody else keeps their M4.
Forward stationed units, so in Europe/Korea.
The army is going to flush a billion dollars down the toilet of the American defense industry and then stick with what they already have, just like they did the last eight fucking times
They do this every few years where they shit themselves looking for something "superior". They'll probably find something thats genuinely a good idea and may even put out an experimental contract for manufacturers to make new rifles in this new round. Many will try but at the end of the trials the Army will probably go "well we have to replace like a million m16's and m4's then and thats just not worth it thanks for your offers"
The last time 'they' did this, industry was lobbying hard that the M4 was not reliable. So the Army gave them a chance to offer a rifle significantly more reliable than an M4, and none delivered because industry was full of shit and just wanted a rifle contract.
MAC is either willfully ignorant or being intentionally dishonest by suggesting this is 6.8 SPC.
>target velocity of 3300-3500
With what fucking recoil mechanism? And out of what length of barrel? Is this for a GPMG, or are they ignoring all their own literature showing that future conflicts are likely to be heavily urbanized?
The Army is the king for planning for past wars and never for future wars. I truly believe that if we are to get into a high intensity conflict, regardless if it is against an actual nation or insurgents. That there will be a massive die off due to leaders and Irag/Afghanistan vets trying to apply tactics that worked there and getting annihilated because of it.
>driving humvee's directly into towns without dismounting
>having Platoons operate independently when they are unable to do so instead of having companies
>carrying 1200 rounds of ammo as an AR when you should only be carrying 600
>getting flanked and fucked because of it
>overemphasis on hearts and minds tactics
>etc
The Army trying to replace the 5.56 with a heavier, slower round is just further proof of how fucking out of the loop the Army really is. So they develop a round that can reach out to 800 meters. Who fucking cares when all the fighting is gonna be done within 300?
How much crack did you smoke today?
Look at Textron's CT carbine, yes it is a realistic desired velocity because of the chamber pressure poly CT allows.
They’re also designing this new rifle for cqc as well.
Derpfucks should just make 5.56 longer to fit more powder and longer/heavier bullets and switch to ar10 action. Fucking spastics. 224 Valkyrie cases are too fat meaning less bullets in same length mag. Need longer cases and wider mags aka ar10 length case with I'd say 90 grain 5.56 bullets and lighter faster AP rounds.
NATO wanted .280 British
None, look it up. There were congressional inquiries, several people just barely missed being convicted of treason
Smaller isn't always better when it comes to piercing armor. This is proven by the penetration ability of the the 9x39 SP6 round. The US should just adopt something like the mk262 round with the addition of a tool steel penetrator.
>NATO wanted .280 British
Not only did they not want .280 British, there was little difference in the performance between .280 British and 7.62x51 at the time.
>The Army trying to replace the 5.56 with a heavier, slower round
>slower
Are you not aware of how fast 5.56 goes?
>none delivered
Literally every single rifle tested had superior reliability to the M4
Not gonna happen.
Not gonna happen.
Yup.
Yup.
Yup.
The military has 50+ years of investment in the AR/5.56 combination. The cost of changing to a new rifle and/or round would be absolutely fucking astronomical, and would be a logistical nightmare the likes of which has never been seen in US military history. I say this every time this topic comes up: a little bit ballistically better round isn't worth the trouble. One twice as good isn't worth the trouble. One ten times as good *might* be worth the trouble. Maybe. But there's no such round, and there won't be anytime soon or really, probably ever.
I'm waiting for you to post the dust test results which had nothing to do with the performance of the rifles.
It will be a bullet in the 6.5 mm range.
The round already exists and the Army wants a rifle in it, this is a far cry from the Army giving lip service to industry or congress.
The Army always "wants it", until someone reminds them what the logistics involved in adopting it will cost, and then they go back to 5.56.
This shit never goes anywhere and isn't going to this time, either.
Tell us how many times the Army has adopted a new round and then gone back to 5.56, I'll wait.
>Tell us how many times the Army has adopted a new round and then gone back to 5.56, I'll wait.
Uhh... you do know that 5.56 is the current Army round and has been for 50+ years, right?
that's the first time I saw Tim from Military Arms utter a cuss word
>The Army always "wants it", until someone reminds them what the logistics involved in adopting it will cost, and then they go back to 5.56.
Name the 'it' that the Army had to give up on and go back to 5.56
>Name the 'it' that the Army had to give up on and go back to 5.56
Literally every other round in existence because every time they've considered something else they've stuck with 5.56, which is because they figured out that changing is a really stupid idea.
>"I'll prove that switching from 5.56 to something else isn't a dumb idea by pointing out that the military hasn't switched away from 5.56 in over half a century despite lots of opportunities to do so."
Take a minute to really think of how stupid this argument is.
>the reliability test had nothing to do with the performance of the rifles
lol
When you are forced to strawman...
>when you are unaware of the test in question but still need to involve yourself in the discussion
When you are too stupid to argue with...
...you resort to using strawmen.
That's cool and all, but you're still not overcoming the increased recoil. I'm already imagining the shitshow of barrel rise from a full auto .270 Weatherby Magnum out of a 7-9lbs carbine.
The M4 replacement (NGSW-R) will probably be semi auto only while the M249 replacement (NGSW-AR) will be full auto.
No, you just don't know what a strawman is. Just stop.
> Alright guys, time to clear this fucking house. Franklin, you're on point. Yeah, I know we're out of flashbangs, dipshit. Just put the fucking muzzle halfway inside the door and pull the trigger.
>A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.
Also, a reminder that Popular Mechanics literally specializes in articles and covers about tech that never happens.
Okay but stating the definition of a strawman that you found on Google doesn't show that's what I did. Just stop.
Reportedly the projectile already exists and it is 6.8. Likely because of weight targets which may not lend themselves as well to 6.5 in lead-free.
>stop pointing out that my response was a strawman
Right but having one ammo supply chain for infantry and another one for everybody else would be an absolute fucking nightmare for logistics, so that's not going to happen.
I’m laughing because i know who he is but god damnit I didn’t get to see it before it was deleted
Ssh, logistics are irrelevant to modern warfare. Target ID at extended ranges is a meme. What matters is that we're bringing back real marksmanship so our guys can finally 1vs3 PKM emplacements past 900m with nothing more than our balls and unmagnified optics.
>>How much crack did you smoke today?
>None, look it up.
Okay I looked it up and this book here says you smoked a shit ton of crack.
>I TRIED SO HARD
>AND GOT SO FAR
>BUT IN THE END
>IT DOESN'T EVEN MATTER
(once again) is right..
military arms hit my exact thought right on the head at the end. "if anything we need a smaller, faster (perhaps saboted) bullet to defeat armor."
it wouldn't hurt to have some 6.8s in the mix in.. say Afghanistan for example. however, i believe we would be fucking up incredibly if we were to phase out the M16 platform in general.
ar15s are gay as fuck we have had a desperate need to replace then with a cool gun for a long time
Why would 6.8 be better for Afghanistan? If the problem is taking pot shots at range, why would a slower cartridge with a worse shaped bullet be the solution?
MAC's had his tinfoil hat on too tight since the P320 fiasco. His imagination is getting the better of him
>physics dictate
It should be "physics dictates." Physics is singular.
Are you making the mistake of thinking the 6.8 round the Army is going for is 6.8 SPC?
>Who fucking cares when all the fighting is gonna be done within 300?
That's literally what they said about 5.56 and then Afghanistan happened.
Excellent example of a strawman.
Yes your response was an excellent strawman.
Pot shots at range with a fast small boolet don't count when they arrive at the destination with little more energy than a thrown rock and got blown off course by the wind. Big boolet that goes marginally slower but flies straight and still has energy left is better.
Sure would be embarrassing if this issue wasn't pretty much resolved in the late 40s before somebody decided to fuck everything up in the name of shooting matches.
Afghanistan is a barren wasteland that, if we were fighting a high intensity conflict there, would be done primarily through armored warfare. Infantry have little place in desert warfare other than holding towns and choke points if there are any. Even still, a lot of the gunfights there still happen at around 300-400 meters. Well within the range of M4's.
>if we were fighting a high intensity conflict there
But there was high intensity conflict there
>would be done primarily through armored warfare
And it emphasized infantry and vehicles in equal measure. Sometimes they get blown up from the sky, sometimes they had to do it the old fashioned way and shoot straight with their rifles.
It is bad enough to build your battle doctrines around the last war, but it is even worse to build them around imaginary ones.
Literally didn't. Testers were untrained on M16 burst cams, so every incomplete burst was falsely counted as a jam.
>>we need a smaller bullet to defeat russian body armors
Smaller than 5,56 mm?!
This is not acceptable even for the standards of a South Korean woman.
I have an idea: at this point just start to shoot insults to russian soldiers, maybe some of them will have the possibility to reach their alcoholic heart and kill them.
Just don't send any more leftists in the front...because they will try to start things such as "you white priviledge, CIS gender, alcoholic"
Those kind of things sexually arouse the Russian soldier....
more effective against unarmored targets at ranges 5.56 stops fragmenting, and better ballistic coefficient.
i believe these options should be available, but not forced. there is no "one gun" for every scenario, and unfortunately, the terrain of Afghanistan is so fucked to you could logically argue for or against bringing any weapon to patrol most any given 10 mile radius.
tldr; i'm not saying 6.8 would be intrinsically better, more so that having additional options to pick from given the quarry is always a good thing
Nigger they've been studying stupid side by side rounds and all kinds of shit for years, they wont end up adopting shit. Again. Just like the other time we saw the same thing.
but the main point of my original comment is that we aren't actually pushing the envelope of technological and militaristic development by changing to rounds which are more lethal against unarmored targets. unless they are planning on putting depleted uranium/tungsten (etc.) penetrators in 6.8s or something and making them the new standard, its a step in the wrong direction considering new age armors.
i think making fairly well armored, lightweight, agile, and fast, dune buggies with mounted MGs more common would add considerably more combat effectiveness against both unorganized and organized combatants than any 5.56-7.62 intermediary
>6.8
6.5 is more likely with its sweet spot of BC, speed, and barrel life
People conflate low recoil infantry loads which performed like 7.62x39mm while being heavier with full-power loads intended more for machine guns.
No, he's talking about the late-development rounds, which were loaded hot as fuck to appease the raging autism for .308 that certain fudds had. FN and NATO wanted 280 FALs you could actually go full retard with, said fudds essentially wanted to keep what they could already shoot nice groups with.
You're a fucking idiot. Willfully ignorant with the amount of information surrounding that whole ordeal you illiterate fuckstick. Maybe someone will be kind and spoonfeed you.
Did you try looking up your ass? You probably had that picture of that dweeb from gwar saved on your phone already, youre sickening. Probably a bubba as well.
What the fuck. Over half of the combat fatalities in the world wars had been attributed to 6mm or similar ammonia, and we've spent a century developing new calibres only to pick up where truly industrialized mass produced rifles started.
ammo* not ammonia
t. Also phone poster
>6.8spc
Retards.
6.5 Grendel is better in everyway.
>Couldn't we just make a new bullet for the 5.56
No. Sorry, but unlike what was drilled into your head, 5.56 is a bad round that needs to die.
6.5 Grendel all the way.
Thos a thousand percent. Could replace both 5.56 and 7.62
>The 5.56 and 7.62 more or less cover anything general infantry currently needs.
And the 6.5 Grendel could and would cover both.
I get the impression you are regurgitating something you read and don't actually understand why that claim was being made.