Go Back   Maryland Shooters > The Arsenal > Rifles
Don't Have An Account? Register Here

Join MD Shooters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 14th, 2018, 10:25 AM #11
fbi_surveillance_van fbi_surveillance_van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 603
fbi_surveillance_van fbi_surveillance_van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 603
The "caseless" telescoping polymer ammo concept is cool. I have no major objections to them replacing the SAW, but I think replacing the M4 with something chambered in this is a bad idea. As Clandestine pointed out, the recoil is going to be significantly greater than 5.56 (heavier projectile being pushed to as high as 3500 fps out of a 14.5"ish barrel). Assuming they get to the point of testing this in an assault rifle format, I don't think the tests will be favorable unless they cook the books.

I am glad the Army is throwing down the dev money to try something new. Relying on the free market for completely revolutionary solutions to the admittedly overblown neo-Soviet threat of new body armor is a bad idea. That said I still think the 6.8 caseless telescoping is going to be a flop to replace the M4. Maybe after they get done watching this cartridge push a bunch of 140lb privates around the range while they flinch from the recoil and miss in a comical fashion, they will start looking at smaller projectiles and solutions that don't torch barrels after 1500 rounds. I expect caseless telescoping really is part of a solution to replacing the M4 with a truly better weapon, but until we develop standard issue exoskeletons, I don't think high recoil firearms are in the cards.
fbi_surveillance_van is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2018, 03:36 PM #12
Invicta Invicta is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 141
Invicta Invicta is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by clandestine View Post
Sadly this will cost lives. Rounds that generate the chamber pressures and velocity they are seeking will lead to extraction issues and massive throat erosion.

Then they will issue these harder recoiling and heavier systems to female combat troops.
That was my exact thought when I saw this story too. Then the guns will be called sexist because they're more difficult to handle. Just like the new iPhones
Invicta is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2018, 05:05 PM #13
jrumann59's Avatar
jrumann59 jrumann59 is offline
DILLIGAF
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,365
jrumann59 jrumann59 is offline
DILLIGAF
jrumann59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,365
I feel powder propelled guns are pretty much at their limit for combat. Overall innovation is flat I think once they make the next jump to man portable rail type guns or energy weapons is the next point of innovation. The current mouse trap really cannot be made significantly better.
jrumann59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2018, 06:51 PM #14
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,744
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrumann59 View Post
I feel powder propelled guns are pretty much at their limit for combat. Overall innovation is flat I think once they make the next jump to man portable rail type guns or energy weapons is the next point of innovation. The current mouse trap really cannot be made significantly better.
Oh, they can keep refining it. Things like plasma enhanced combustion are possibly on the horizon. Basically you have a tungsten wire inside the case and instead of a chemical explosive shock sensitive primer, you jolt the tungsten wire with about 100,000 volts, vaporizing it in to a plasma and igniting the properllant faster and much more evenly.

It is being experimented with more for tank guns to develop a 120mm tank gun with roughly the performance of a 140mm gun. Last I had heard they were pushing about 25% more muzzle energy without doing things like making radically bigger cases, mostly just more efficient combustion and being able to load the case to higher capacity.

Which does mean you need to handle the extra pressure...

No idea what will be fielded or when. Cased telescoping ammo doesnít play well with magazines. Yet. Which I think has been one of the biggest hold backs on just introducing it. Crew served light and medium machineguns using it have passed all tests I am aware of and appear to work AWESOME.

For the threat of improved Russian body armor, it is less anscare if Russia using it, than it is every half assed dust bin army buying or being supplied by Russia with it. Of course part of what I say it, learn to aim at the legs or arms. Canít armor all of a person and a 5.56 to the leg is going to remove you from being an effective combatant most of the time.

I also donít think we should sit on our butts waiting until it is introduced for us to react. I think a better option is look at a 5.56 case telescoped ammo for an m4/m16 replacement. Introduce a SAW and a squad level DMR using the same case telescoped 7.62 based round pushing basically the same energy levels as M80 is now.

But instead of 130gr at around 3000fps use SLAP rounds. Something like a 90gr .224 caliber projectile of copper skinned hardened steel. If you are spitting out a total of 100gr (including sabot) at 4000fps...

That should have pretty decent armor penetration at moderate ranges and track like a damn laser beam.

SLAPs are usually tungsten, but no reason they have to be. I bet you could make a tool steel cored SLAP at cents per round rather than the typical $2 or so for tungsten.

Also so what if tungsten cored would be a more effective armor penetrator. Not cheap enough to armor everyone with it. Also so what if your typical infantry guy canít penetrate fancy armor. Part so combatants are going to be unarmored (until exoskeletons) and still vulnerable. Also you then have the squad level machineguns and DMRs that ARE deadly threats to even srmrored infantry at reasonable ranges.

Iíd be shocked if a 90gr .224 tool steel projectile couldnít penetrate any infantry armor currently fielded or on the drawing board at a couple of hundred yards when you kick it out of the muzzle at 4000fps.

PS SLAP also had the advantage of low barrel wear for the velocities you are generating.
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 15th, 2018, 06:55 PM #15
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,744
lazarus lazarus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Invicta View Post
That was my exact thought when I saw this story too. Then the guns will be called sexist because they're more difficult to handle. Just like the new iPhones
Also to take misogyny out of it for a second, unless it turns out commanders arenít following the rules, female combat troops have to hack the same requirements male ones do.

I doubt you are going to see any 5 foot 2, 95lb flyweight women hacking the requirements for a combat infantry position. Probably the ones who do make (at least the couple examples I know of) are more like 5í8Ē something and a shite load of muscled 150lbs.

Probably could break a number of the smaller male privates in half, that Iíve seen anyway.
lazarus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16th, 2018, 03:57 PM #16
Sirex's Avatar
Sirex Sirex is offline
Powered by natural gas
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westminster, MD
Posts: 5,527
Images: 1
Sirex Sirex is offline
Powered by natural gas
Sirex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westminster, MD
Posts: 5,527
Images: 1
This would be disastrous for me, as I planned on picking up military supplies of 5.56 off the battlefield during the zombie apocalypse. I don't have anything that uses 6.8. 6.5 Grendel, sure. I guess I need to make a .3 spacer then.
__________________
A student said to the master in the garden, "You teach me fighting, but talk about peace. How do you reconcile the two?"

The master replied, "It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener in a war."


"Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid."
Sirex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2018, 06:47 PM #17
snallygaster's Avatar
snallygaster snallygaster is offline
Old Appalachia
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Wintergreen, VA
Posts: 8,402
snallygaster snallygaster is offline
Old Appalachia
snallygaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Wintergreen, VA
Posts: 8,402
Another article on the topic. https://www.tactical-life.com/news/u...zvnf-ula4AV8eo
__________________
You cannot be brave from a distance.
snallygaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2018, 07:03 PM #18
Racer Doug14's Avatar
Racer Doug14 Racer Doug14 is online now
Thread killer
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Millers Maryland
Posts: 5,291
Racer Doug14 Racer Doug14 is online now
Thread killer
Racer Doug14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Millers Maryland
Posts: 5,291
LWRC currently has the Six8 rifle. I believe its chambered for the 6.8spc2 load. I really like this. Almost bought one. The cost and availability of it killed that. Would be nice if they designed it in a DI operating system.
__________________
NRA
MSI
24th ID,C Co.3rd ENG Bat.'89-'93
Racer Doug14 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2018, 07:17 PM #19
Bullfrog's Avatar
Bullfrog Bullfrog is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 2,192
Images: 2
Bullfrog Bullfrog is online now
Senior Member
Bullfrog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Carroll County
Posts: 2,192
Images: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus View Post
Also to take misogyny out of it for a second, unless it turns out commanders aren’t following the rules, female combat troops have to hack the same requirements male ones do.

I doubt you are going to see any 5 foot 2, 95lb flyweight women hacking the requirements for a combat infantry position. Probably the ones who do make (at least the couple examples I know of) are more like 5’8” something and a shite load of muscled 150lbs.

Probably could break a number of the smaller male privates in half, that I’ve seen anyway.
No doubt all of that is true, but the 5'2" 95 lb soldiers who sit behind a desk doing logistics or intell work have to go do their range quals too, and some will be complaining.

And when they don't get promoted as fast as they think they should, no matter the reason, some of them will point at the weapons they can't handle and therefore weren't given the opportunity to deploy, etc etc.

This goes for some of the men too, although the excuses themselves may vary.
Bullfrog is online now   Reply With Quote
Old November 2nd, 2018, 07:29 PM #20
Racer Doug14's Avatar
Racer Doug14 Racer Doug14 is online now
Thread killer
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Millers Maryland
Posts: 5,291
Racer Doug14 Racer Doug14 is online now
Thread killer
Racer Doug14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Millers Maryland
Posts: 5,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullfrog View Post
No doubt all of that is true, but the 5'2" 95 lb soldiers who sit behind a desk doing logistics or intell work have to go do their range quals too, and some will be complaining.

And when they don't get promoted as fast as they think they should, no matter the reason, some of them will point at the weapons they can't handle and therefore weren't given the opportunity to deploy, etc etc.

This goes for some of the men too, although the excuses themselves may vary.
I would invision a transition for support units to the new weapons system after all combat arms. Logistics can handle it....hahaha
__________________
NRA
MSI
24th ID,C Co.3rd ENG Bat.'89-'93
Racer Doug14 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Home Page > Forum List > The Arsenal > Rifles


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2018, Congregate Media, LP Privacy Policy Terms of Service