Army selects 6.8mm as the new common round...

[RC20]

Can't argue with the stopping effectiveness of the '06 though...if this 6.8 is based on the .30 Remington, I may be wrong, but I think that cartridge originated as competition for the 30-30 Winchester but never rivaled the 30-30 in popularity.

The military is mostly using penetrating rounds. Stopping power between a hole poked through you with 30 calk vs a 24 caliber a negligible.

5.56 is limited in range and more so with the short M4. Standard round is 62 gr now (velocity lower) and some special ones in the 70 gr area.

Troops are being out ranged, ergo, the Sand Boxes are not Vietnam.

Troops are running around in vehicles and want the shorter M4.

Conventionally the best option is a Change barrel rifle ala the Robertson Arms XCR.

Not to change in the filed but issue (or installed) as the situation demands, anywhere from all short to all long and options for some of each in between.

Where that all falls out with CTL ammo? New ball game.

But an expanding type hunting bullet is the best choice for curretn ops.

You never will get an affordable round that can do everything you want.

[stagpanther]

Nothing to do with this announcement (as far as I know)--I've heard vague rumors of a rifle cartridge using a self-propelled projectile that renders all previous notions of velocity/range from powder-driven cartridges obsolete.

[Mobuck]

The criteria for an infantry combat round has changed significantly since 1964(?) when we were involved in SE Asia. Toting massive amounts of 7.62x51 ammo and a 9# rifle was a killer in the heat and jungle conditions. The AR with it's much lighter ammo made carrying more ammo for the same weight feasible.
Now, most of our troops don't walk to their battles and support is more available so we're back to looking for heavier rounds with more range. Problem is troop acceptance and ability to handle the increased recoil so compromises must be made.
Too many troops who really have no firearms knowledge beyond what is taught in basic training make multiple rounds in similar platforms problematic. A complete change of cartridge prevents intermingling of ammo but puts the entire current stockpiles in the dumpster.
One consideration is the "universal cartridge theory" that will never work. Handing a powerful rifle/ammo package to inexperienced troops will be a disaster. Marksmanship will go down the tube and the advantages of longer range will be moot since they can't hit anything due to poor shooting skills.
A "moderate power" cartridge substituted into a familiar platform will reduce training time and failure to perform under stress while maintaining a level of accuracy adequate for the purposes while increasing close range stopping effect.

[marine6680]

Troops walk a lot more in the current day and age than you may realize.

But it isn't just the times riding back and forth... Actual on the ground combat is when weight is really a big deal. When you are getting shot at, it starts to matter a whole lot more.

The combat load of the individual infantryman has also grown a great deal. Usually more ammo than typical combat loads, comm equipment, body armor using plates, support equipment... And the crap they throw on the rifles, makes them as heavy or more so than the old steel and wood...

I believe the old target was 60-80lb but the current load is 120-150lb carried into combat actions. Might need to double check those numbers, but I am pretty sure the current load is well over 100lbs.

This has actually become a concern... The insurgent forces are packing light... They have a basic combat load of ammo, and their clothes... Maybe some basic radios.

This has caused issues for our troops, as they are weighed down and can not move and react as quickly when under fire. Proper maneuver tactics require a good bit of moving to take advantage of better positions and terrain features.

Our guys know how to do it... But are getting out paced by guys who are able to move faster due to not carrying so much extra weight.

So light is still a necessity... And easy to control automatic or rapid fire is still critical as well.

[TruthTellers]

In a barrel under 16 inches, the 5.56 is not the most effective cartridge. We've all seen the SBR comparisons between .300 BLK and .223/5.56 and the larger caliber is better.

With urban combat being a larger and larger focus, I'm certain the Army is looking at shortening barrel lengths even more on M4's, yet increasing short range lethalilty, so the departure from a .22 caliber rifle for all situations is happening. Will 6.8 be the new caliber? Idk.

5.56 is fine for typical combat uses. In a SAW, I never liked the idea of a 5.56. A machine gun is meant to suppress an enemy, penetrate barriers, destroy light cover, disable light vehicles and a 5.56 is a poor choice.

[marine6680]

For the M4, they really should be using a 16in barrel. A midlength gas system would be helpful as well, especially with the new m855a1 ammo. I think the new HK rifles the Marines are using are 16in, but not 100% on that.

With good training, 16in is not a hindrance indoors. The weight of all the crap hanging at the muzzle, like lights and the laser system (that thing is bulky) are more of an issue than the length. Heck, I learned to kick doors using a 20in A2, and 16in with a collapsed stock feels short in comparison.

The problem with going shorter than 16in, is that it kills your long range ability... And the average grunt is a general purpose tool, so a rifle that specializes in close range indoor use would be a liability past a hundred yards or so.

16in is a good length for general purpose use.

The joys of main combat rifle selection... Balancing all the needs of the majority of the main expected use cases...

[davidsog]

Army has selected the 6.8mm as the new common round

LMAO!

Yeah that is because your wonder bullet 5.56mm is so deadly and DoD is just too stupid to test them.

[RC20]

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...squad-weapons/

[Sharkbite]

Army has selected the 6.8mm as the new common round
LMAO!

Yeah that is because your wonder bullet 5.56mm is so deadly and DoD is just too stupid to test them.

Guess who’s back and still cant figure out the difference between mil ammo and civilian offerings.

[davidsog]

Is that what it is?

Think about it? Is your job to mix metal and meat, watch gray matter splatter, and make grown me cry for their Gods and their Mothers?

No.

So the folks that get paid to do that know much less about it than Bubba at the gunshow?

Or maybe, As PT Barnum says, "There is a sucker born every minute!" Just Maybe, there are folks lined up to take your dollar at that gunshow with wonder bullets!

[Sharkbite]

Think about it? Is your job to mix metal and meat, watch gray matter splatter, and make grown me cry for their Gods and their Mothers?

Well, ive been either operational or in a training billet for the past 30 years. All my adult life has been either in the Mil, LEO (patrol and SWAT) or as a Govt security contractor (all over the world).

When deployed overseas we had to use the issued ammo. The meant FMJ in our M4’s. Same as the mil guys. That stuff did not work as well as the ammo i used in the cilvian world. It just DIDNT.

There is NO WAY a M855 round will do the damage a TAP round will. ESPECIALLY out of a short barrel (10.5”) gun.

So, based on the Mil need to stick to FMJ bullets AND the desire to field shorter guns, a step up in bullet size makes sense.

[marine6680]

Or maybe just maybe... The average boot is of average intellect, and has either little or no technical understanding of weapons, ammunition, and ballistics. If they have any prior knowledge of firearms, it is likely of poor quality, from the average bubba gun owning family members. (What I am say is... They are not experts, nor inherently gifted with the ability to simply understand intuitively the underlying mechanics of the various elements pertaining to firearms and their application as a means of deadly force)

Their training consists on the stuff necessary to be effective in combat. They know how to use their weapons, they know the basics of how they function. They know bullets go bang and put holes in bad guys.

How the bullets makes the bad man go bye bye is not part of the training.

Meaning... If you want to be educated on how bullets actually work... You have to learn it elsewhere. The military has no need to teach the combat elements terminal ballistics, they teach rudimentary external ballistics for ranged shooting, and snipers get a better course in that due to their role... Shooting bad guys does not make you an expert in terminal ballistics. At best it is anecdotal experience about a single bullet type, in an uncontrolled environment, where outside factors can not be accounted for, nor can the mindset of the user be accounted for.

Almost all information about firearms, firearm function and maintenance, ammunition, bullet types and terminal performance, that is floating around the average military combat unit... Is complete, or dang near complete crap. (Actually this applies to most information of this type anywhere, as most gun owners do not take the time to educate themselves using reliable sources, and the same bad info passes around the gun shops and hunting cabin)


So... You want to be knowledgeable about actual terminal performance of ammunition, the affects of psychological factors on the part of the guy doing the shooting, and the guy getting shot... And understand the mental biases and faults in logic of the average person when it comes to anecdotal experience... To learn the math and how the scientific process works...

Well... That is something you have to learn on your own. The military isn't going to teach that, nor is trigger time going to teach you anything objective. It's not useless what you learn first hand, but it is very limited in applicability...


Also... What Sharkbite said...

[SIGSHR]

They're constantly trying to reinvent the wheel, use technology to make up for lack of training-and leadership. The Army had more crack shots when they used the Trapdoor Springfield, the Krag, the M1903.

[davidsog]

There is NO WAY a M855 round will do the damage a TAP round will. ESPECIALLY out of a short barrel (10.5”) gun.

Well NONE of the reproducible, scientific testing backs that up.



Why do you think DoD scrapped the 5.56mm in favor of the 6.8??

[davidsog]

When deployed overseas we had to use the issued ammo.

I agree that what the regular forces soldier on with is not the same as others in the inventory.

You should have volunteered and passed selection if you wanted better stuff. Otherwise you can lag ~10 years behind the latest and greatest.

There absolutely is and was a lethality issue in SBR 5.56mm rifles at CQB ranges and there is NO wonder bullet available that changes that.

So....6.8mm is the result.

[Jim Watson]

No, another study is the result.
Have to keep those staff grade officers and DoD wonks busy.
A change of infantry weapon is a long way out.

[Double Naught Spy]

Why do you think DoD scrapped the 5.56mm in favor of the 6.8??

They haven't exactly scrapped the 5.56. They don't even have a 6.8 that is functional. They are developing a cartridge and platform. If they can't get it to work right, it may not even be implemented. Other programs have failed in the past. While the military has been looking for a replacement for the 5.56 for a long time, for a long time they have been unable to replace it.

With that said, I won't be surprised if they get it developed using X parameters, field it, and then screw it up by applying L, Q, Y and Z parameters later and wondering why it doesn't work right.

[Sharkbite]

You should have volunteered and passed selection if you wanted better stuff. Otherwise you can lag ~10 years behind the latest and greatest.

I guess literacy is an issue with you. I was a Contract employee at that time. Both for DoS and OGA for almost 10 years. I had the opportunity to work alongside some CAG guys on a couple of VP visits to Iraq. They provided the CAT element for the moves from the airport to the PM’s residence.

Sitting around on venue waiting gave us some time to eat shawarma and chat. None of them was using any special ammo. In fact they tried (and succeeded) in getting a few boxes of pistol ammo from us (Fed Hydrashok). But they had the same rifle ammo as we did.

And AGAIN you cant understand that there are WAY better options in 556 ammo then what the Mil uses.

[xandi]

So an other yet another replacement round trials
Wouldn’t it be cheap just to hire a team of engineers and machinest to continue to develop and test new projectiles/cartridges

[davidsog]

Double Naught Spy

Thanks for imparting your wisdom on my intentionally gross generalization!



On a side note....

Begging hydrashocks from contractors......

Credible...totally credible...not really.

[davidsog]

I had the opportunity to work alongside some CAG guys on a couple of VP visits to Iraq. They provided the CAT element for the moves from the airport to the PM’s residence.

Here is a true story. The 25S who was the NCOIC of our commo support element got hired as a shooter by the contractors who are doing that job.

[Sharkbite]

Not sure how thats germain to the topic. A lot of SF guys worked these contracts. My teams medic was a former 18d.

Our detail had a wide assortment of Mil SF guys. Former LE (like myself) All good dudes.

We worked “trades” for gear and goodies all the time

[Sharkbite]

Begging hydrashocks from contractors.....

Nobody was begging. They had some stuff to trade and couldnt get that ammo thru the supply chain. We liked what they offered and a deal was made. Simple as that.

We also traded cases of beer for cases of lobster tails, both in A-stan and Iraq. Made the BBQ’s really nice.

[ed308]

Here's Popular Mechanics' take on the new 6.8 round...

https://www.popularmechanics.com/mil...t-replace-556/

[marine6680]

Sigshr...

What kind of mythical training do you think they had back in the trap door days? Sure they trained to shoot long range, but studies found that most waited until the enemy was much closer than the distances they trained to shoot anyway.

Current training is better than back then, on the whole anyway. You still get marksmanship training... But less emphasis is placed on it for the average boot. The Marines still push the 500yd training in boot and as part of the annual qualifications.

But modern warfare has changed from back then, you just don't need every person in a squad to be a crack shot at 500yds. Modern weapons with full auto capabilities changed how these things go down.


Davidsog...

There is plenty of independent testing and studies on various 5.56 ammunition. The FBI and several major police agencies have done their own testing. The USMC in conjunction with a Federal LE agency tested the Mk262 back in 2002... And found it a significant improvement over m855. There are tests on other ammo types outside of the military's perview as well.

All the reputable testing shows that various 5.56/223 ammo loadings available to civilians and law enforcement, have performance that beats what the military has fielded in an official manner. Like m855, or mk262...

5.56 is known to be lackluster from an SBR, unless you pick your ammo very carefully... This is nothing new, nor a condemnation of the caliber on the whole.


The military can not field certain types of ammo... AT ALL... Not even the SF guys. Maybe... Maybe if there is a really secret juju mission, they will use ammo not from inventory, but no missions that the US government would be willing to acknowledge will use anything other than the approved ammo.

I don't know where you get the idea that the SF guys get all this special juju ammo, but they don't.

Sharkbite has given his own account of how the SF guys could not get anything outside of the approved ammo. They had to barter with outside entities to get HP pistol rounds.

The SF guys did get some ammo types well before the general troops ever seen it... They got the mk262 and there was the mk318 as well... Both offered improved performance over m855, with mk318 being the best of them, being that it upsets and fragments faster, and at lower velocities than mk262 can do so. Both are actually pretty effective on the whole though... But most guys never seen it when issued ammo. I have heard accounts from SF guys who got to use the Mk262 and mk318, and they had very favorable opinions of those rounds.

Mk262 and mk318 are loaded with open tip match grade bullets... They are not HP ammo in the traditional sense, as they are not designed to expand like the hunting or defensive oriented HP bullets are. The HP is a byproduct of the manufacturing process used to make a very consistent bullet. This fact, that OTM bullets are not designed to expand or otherwise be more lethal... Is the only reason they are allowed for combat use. The fact that they more readily yaw and fragment when hitting a soft medium, are just happy happenstance.


Spend a little time on YouTube and you can find some videos from knowledgable and properly equiped people, showing the testing of many types of 5.56/223. They are not strictly scientific studies, but they are easy to access and provide a general idea of what we are talking about.


Once again, these videos are just examples, they are not evidence in and of themselves.

Mk318 gel test, from an SBR

M855 gel test

A general discussion about the best 5.56/223 for defense use Notice that M855 is not in there... And it shows the gel tests as they talk about the different bullets.

But you can see in the videos, the difference in wound track between the different bullet types.

Not ideal method, or rigorous testing as I said, just info that gives a rough overview that is easy to access and link here. The test results from independent testing of various LE agencies and other groups isn't as easy to come by.