|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 10, 2017, 12:26 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2016
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,147
|
More Rumors of a New Military Cartridge
More Rumors of a new military cartridge chambered in 6.8 magnum, whatever that is....
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...-magnum-round/ |
December 10, 2017, 12:27 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,717
|
Here we go again. Sheesh. Every few months, a new military cartridge. I will believe it when they start changing out guns.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
December 10, 2017, 12:53 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 12,453
|
TFB is not any kind of spokesman for anybody's military. The picture looks like a drawing from a computer game Beta.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count! |
December 10, 2017, 01:06 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 1998
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 4,307
|
Correct, and they have to stir to pot to keep readers engaged. The more clicks they get, the more reposts they get, the more they will put out this kind of drivel.
|
December 11, 2017, 07:43 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Posts: 369
|
I'm sorry but TFB has really gone downhill at this point. I used to check in daily on their page... but as of late it seems like it's just one dude on there speculating AND WHINING about the militaries buisness without a actual clue as to what is going on like your typical armchair quarterback. It would seem to me that they've gone the way of CNN and other "news" sources... Big BREAKING headlines for articles with no real substance.
They need to hire some new writers and for gods sake get rid of some of their Youtube personalities... James is the only one left that I even tune in for... Everybody else seems to be the most anti-social, awkward people I've ever seen. Seems like mismanagement to me. Sorry, I've just been feeling this way for a while and it is disheartening because they were my go-to time killer at work haha. |
December 11, 2017, 08:56 PM | #6 | |
Junior member
Join Date: July 26, 2001
Location: midwest
Posts: 2,374
|
Quote:
Isn't that what a .308 is? |
|
December 11, 2017, 11:12 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2016
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,147
|
Who knows. Could be the 270USA.
|
December 11, 2017, 11:19 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 8,236
|
Man, to think of all those things in popular science and popular mechanics magazines that never came to light... this is the same thing.
|
December 12, 2017, 12:07 PM | #9 |
Junior member
Join Date: November 9, 2017
Posts: 59
|
A decade ago it was the 6.5 Grendel, now it's the 6.5 Creedmore... and whatever the hell this cartridge is.
The 6.5 Creedmore is really taking off though, I ALMOST gave in on my last rifle purchase. But resisted and stuck with a .308. |
December 12, 2017, 02:08 PM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
|
Quote:
The project to find a replacement for 5.56x45 is still going on. And as various candidate systems emerge, they are subjected to limited tests. And with both the military press and gun press hungry for information about an area that has been largely stagnant since Vietnam, each is featured on the cover with the question of whether this is the new round. If you're a betting man, you would put your money on "No". The military wants caseless or polymer cased ammunition for both the weight savings but also to reduce the need for copper and zinc. It will settle for a brass case round if those other development efforts fail to turn up something workable, but right now everything that comes out and gets a limited field trial should be regarded as a design study and not the next big thing. |
|
December 12, 2017, 11:29 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,652
|
To change caliber is a HUGE undertaking in the military. The logistics involved is frightening. The military will likely not adopt a new caliber until they look at adopting a new weapon system altogether. Changing barrels/bolts/magazines/ammo contracts, all while convincing other NATO countries of the need to do so, is no small task. To undertake this task, it will take more than an extra 150 ft/lbs of energy and rounds capable of an extra 200-300 yards effective range (area already covered by 7.62).
I'm with hdwhit. I think we have the m4 and 5.56 until a fairly radical innovation comes about. Like case-less ammo. |
December 13, 2017, 02:05 AM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2006
Posts: 1,482
|
A few months ago the Army ended its official search for a new battle rifle, opting not to choose any candidate and just stick with what they have.
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-a...l-rifle-2017-9 I think this is either latent info or fabricated. I've not seen any announcement in any official military venue of the reopening of competition, or even consideration, of a new rifle system.
__________________
NRA Life Member "We have enough gun control. What we need is idiot control." |
December 13, 2017, 08:55 AM | #13 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2016
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,147
|
The article you referenced is for scrapping the 7.62 mm Interim Combat Service Rifle. My take on that was that it was a stop gap until they could develop something better. I think the search for a new battle rifle hasn't ended, only the Interim Combat Service Rifle program.
|
December 13, 2017, 09:32 AM | #14 | ||
Junior member
Join Date: November 9, 2017
Posts: 59
|
They could stick with the M16 platform if they wanted and just change calibers. That would reduce a lot of the headache from changing over, especially in the weapons training aspect.
Ultimately, I think it comes down to tactics. Fire and Maneuver is the name of the game now, which means a LOT of covering fire and ammo expenditure. Dropping from 30 round mags of 5.56 to 20 round mags of .308 or 6.5 goes against our current tactics. The ammo load out/or weight carried would change significantly. Here's a nice little 'chart', where I took the weight differences that I quote below. http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=159381 Quote:
Quote:
So we would be going from 6 magazines to 9, and almost doubling the weight we carry in ammo if we keep the same loadout. Figure on double mag pouches, and you're trying to find somewhere on your flak to attach 1 to 2 more pouches. And there ain't much room as it is. And then maybe their is some discussion of the 'wound over kill' concept, that wounding hurts an enemy force more than deaths. (Which is of piss poor comfort to the Soldiers/Marines the wounded enemy are still trying to kill) Just some thoughts. Last edited by TracerTesterman; December 13, 2017 at 09:38 AM. |
||
December 13, 2017, 05:40 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 22, 2017
Posts: 1,011
|
Quote:
Moreover the very article you link to cites the Army Times as saying: "While the Army is working on an ammunition-and-rifle combo between 5.56 mm and 7.62 mm caliber to replace the M4/M16 rifle platform, the ICSR will no longer be sought to stand in while that long-term plan goes on." |
|
December 14, 2017, 04:16 AM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 28, 2006
Posts: 1,482
|
Hmmm, I'll have to dig a little more. Maybe I am confusing that with this.
__________________
NRA Life Member "We have enough gun control. What we need is idiot control." |
December 15, 2017, 03:59 AM | #17 |
Junior member
Join Date: October 20, 2012
Posts: 5,854
|
Should be an awesome tactical assault weapons system platform system game changer overmatch cartridge unit.
Bruh. |
|
|