View Single Post
Old August 26, 2017, 11:34 AM   #36
Senior Member
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 4,926
Jim, I looked up the ones being developed. It seems that they are working on a 5.56 and a ballistically superior six

The 5.56,imo, has nowhere for significant improvement.

Largest possible weight and velocity as well as range, terminal damage, B.C.,carrying weight, age damage, durability,simplicity, just about every advantage that I can think of.

Brass cased ammunition in small arms is the best that we can do, imo. No advantage can be gained on the 5.56 round.

Changing to a cased 6mm round would bring several advantages to the battlefield, but mostly for long range engagement. Far greater effective range. Better terminal effect on some equipment, but not necessarily so on humans. I don't necessarily see advantages in short range combat,100 yards or so. Some changes won't matter. Other changes will possibly be for the worse. Caseless still remains, imo, a truly dumb idea for small arms.
cased ammunition works, and is about as good as it can be.

The hk rounds fed square pellets and bullets from two separate magazines, right? Double the possibility of malfunction?

I'm trying very hard to see this in as many ways as possible. Over and over, all I can see is that the current system is about as good as we can make it. We have tweaked the 5.56for decades and the case for just as long. The metal maybe can be improved, but the idea is sound.

I keep addressing to myself the logistics and procurement of such a change. This isn't about a piece of equipment like an mri machine that can be replaced simply over years, this is more like a mandatory demand to replace every blood pressure device in use within a year.

But there is one good thing. NATO ammo will not go up in price, I think.
briandg is offline  
Page generated in 0.03483 seconds with 8 queries