The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: Semi-automatics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 25, 2019, 05:54 PM   #126
2damnold4this
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,434
Quote:
The ammunition is already selected and ready to be produced.

My impression was that the ammunition had yet to be selected. Can you tell us more about the ammunition that was selected? I'd be interested to know more about it.
2damnold4this is offline  
Old August 25, 2019, 06:08 PM   #127
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
My impression was that the ammunition had yet to be selected. Can you tell us more about the ammunition that was selected? I'd be interested to know more about it.
2damnold4this is online now
Quote:
156. Question: Is the USG interested in vendor-supplied Surrogate and/or GP projectile production efforts to supply PON participants?

Response: No, the Government is planning to provide the surrogate and GP projectiles to the PON participants.
Quote:
161. Question: In Attachment 3, is USG interested in other 6.8mm projectile technology that becomes available during the estimated 27 month PON effort?

Response: No, the Government intends to provide the 6.8mm projectile.

file:///C:/Users/19109/Downloads/NGSW_Industry_Questions_&_Comments_152_-_281_Part_2.pdf

The Government already has the ammunition it wants.....
davidsog is offline  
Old August 25, 2019, 06:14 PM   #128
2damnold4this
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,434
Projectiles aren't complete rounds of ammunition. Has the Army selected a projectile or has it selected a round of ammunition?
2damnold4this is offline  
Old August 25, 2019, 07:45 PM   #129
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,426
Quote:
The Army left it up to vendors to design the type of 6.8mm cartridge they wanted to use in their prototypes, Hodne said, adding that some gun makers went with "traditional bottleneck" brass cartridges while others used newer, case-telescoped cartridges.
https://www.military.com/daily-news/...y-weapons.html

Quote:
The service's goal is to select a final design for both weapons from a single provider in the first quarter of 2022 and begin replacing M4s and M249s in an infantry brigade combat team (IBCT) in the first quarter of 2023, said Hodne, director of the Army's Soldier Lethality Cross Functional Team.
Still seems to me that the final cartridges and weapons don’t exist yet.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 12:58 PM   #130
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
Still seems to me that the final cartridges and weapons don’t exist yet.
That is kind of a dumb and obvious statement. It is PON...That means PROJECT OPPORTUNITY NOTICE. No the final cartriages are not available but they are shooting real cartriadges on ranges and the 27 month timeline is counting down.

It is calling for 27 months of initial prototyping and then iterative prototyping for at least 8 years. What that means is the Army will begin fielding the design they accept in 27 months. The design team and manufacturer is on the hook for any design changes that are required for at least the next 8 years. Data will be collected in the units to assist in that.

It is kind of like how we got from the M16 to the M4 carbine......

Quote:
5. Question: Why reference either [(flying supersonic and managing recoil)] in relation to the baseline 5.56mm at that much extra power?

Response: The “Ammunition” includes an assembled cartridge case with propellant, primer, and a Government provided 6.8 millimeter projectiles. Reference DRAFT NGSW PON, Attachment 3 – Ammunition Data for more information on the ammunition. For the Government’s desired capabilities, reference DRAFT NGSW PON Attachment 13 – Capability
Matrix.
Attachment 3 is not available to the public. The government knows exactly what it wants and has supplied projectiles.

It is not going to stifle engineering creativity or ingenuity as long as the ammunition meets the already achieved performance for lethality.

I do not think it is very hard to understand nor is it some intellectual exercise.

Facts are 5.56mm is obsolete on today's battlefield. You can cry me a river over it but it does not matter what you think on the subject.


The Army wants the 6.8mm round and at least the performance it already achieved.

It could care less if vendor engineers achieve that performance with ceaseless ammunition, telescoping, or plain ol' brass. The engineers that can come up with the most battlefield advantages and lowest cost in the timeline the Army has set will win. Whoever's prototype offers the most advantages will win the contract.

It is that simple. 5.56mm is obsolete and will be replaced. The projectiles the Army wants are being slung downrange at the performance the Army wants as we type in this thread.

http://soldiersystems.net/2019/01/31...-weapons-ngsw/

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportun...=core&_cview=1

Last edited by davidsog; August 26, 2019 at 01:05 PM.
davidsog is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 01:14 PM   #131
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,426
Quote:
IIRC, 2021 is the deadline to be fielded.
from your own post
You’ve insisted over and over that this is a done deal... and it’s not.
Nothing is done until it happens.

All I’ve contended is that this deadline is too short, that it may not even pass muster or get approved.
Definitely not going to happen by 2021... with 2020 just a few short months away.

This is a pretty significant upgrade... not only from the 5.56, this aims to replace all that’s been tried. The energy they want isn’t possible from an M4 sized weapon, not without increasing weight and loosing ammunition capacity
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 01:34 PM   #132
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 6,745
I don't know--people have succeeded in making LR308 builds that came all the way down to 6 lbs--even under; then it becomes a game of recoil management and being tuff enough for sustained fire. Hard for me to imagine a high BC/SD .277 bullet that will conform to present day AR/M4 magazine specs and be able to go out long range as well; I'm guessing they end up somewhere between the AR and LR (rem 30 comes to mind).
__________________
If you’re ever hiking in the woods and you get lost, just look up and find the brightest star in the sky and you’ll know which way space is.
I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk!
stagpanther is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 01:40 PM   #133
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
from your own post
That is NOT my date. That is the US Army timeline as they have put out to the vendors.
davidsog is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 01:43 PM   #134
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,426
Ok, doesn’t seem as realistic now.

I honestly hope this goes through, but I have doubts. If anything, a lot will be learned even if a replacement isn’t selected by this program. I will follow this until the end.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 08:18 PM   #135
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
It’s horsehockey. Let’s just look at the published requirements. We need a 6.8mm EPR projectile that can penetrate any currently or near term fielded body armor at 600m. It also needs to still deliver accuracy after 10,000 rounds.

Those are two contradictory requirements. For this to happen the Army has to deliver technology no small arms manufacturer has ever showcased.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 08:19 PM   #136
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Obsolescence is a powerful motivator.
davidsog is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 08:21 PM   #137
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
Those are two contradictory requirements.
No. Modern Barrel design can easily exceed a life of 10,000 rounds.

Quote:
We need a 6.8mm EPR projectile that can penetrate any currently or near term fielded body armor at 600m.
That has already been done and why the Army supplies the projectiles.....
davidsog is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 08:21 PM   #138
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
It’s an underwear gnome project.

Quote:
No. Modern Barrel design can easily exceed a life of 10,000 rounds.
Not in a 6.8 caliber round that can punch level 4 plates at 600m - and the actual requirement isn’t 10,000 rounds, it is something like (going from memory cause I’m not going to look it up for this stupid conversation) “less than 10% increase in dispersion after 10k rounds.”
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 08:38 PM   #139
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
“Right now, the feedback looks like we are going to a 6.8 mm round,” Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said recently.

The service has a list of its top six modernization priorities and “soldier lethality” is one of the items. The most high-profile program in that category is the squad automatic rifle. Army Secretary Mark Esper at the Association of the United States Army annual conference — while promising the service is speeding up the way it does acquisition — singled out the program as one that would see prototypes in the near future.

“The bottom line is that we are committed to a new rifle,” Milley told reporters.
Quote:
He added: “We don’t want to speak too much about its technical capabilities because our adversaries watch these things very closely.”
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine....-caliber-round
davidsog is offline  
Old August 26, 2019, 08:43 PM   #140
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
Not in a 6.8 caliber round that can punch level 4 plates at 600m - and the actual requirement isn’t 10,000 rounds, it is something like (going from memory cause I’m not going to look it up for this stupid conversation) “less than 10% increase in dispersion after 10k rounds.”
Why do you think that is impossible? We had conventional barrels that had 60,000 round plus and still going strong.

All of this exist's right now and at least six vendors are tweaking it to gain efficiencies.

https://twitter.com/nicholadrummond/...784960?lang=en
davidsog is offline  
Old August 28, 2019, 01:20 AM   #141
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
Quote:
Why do you think that is impossible? We had conventional barrels that had 60,000 round plus and still going strong.
How many of those had 80k+ psi chamber pressures and what do you define as “still going strong?” Not keyholing?
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 28, 2019, 11:59 AM   #142
davidsog
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 13, 2018
Posts: 1,123
Quote:
How many of those had 80k+ psi chamber pressures and what do you define as “still going strong?” Not keyholing?
They are undergoing testing right now. Testing that will end is adoption of the new 6.8mm round for US Army.

Obsolescence is a powerful motivator.

This isn't going to the moon or some huge unobtainable engineering leap.

The specification calls for 60-80k. 60k is current 7.62mm NATO standard chamber pressure and 80k represents a 25% increase. Remington 7mm Magnum is 65k...

I think folks are being somewhat melodramatic in a vacuum.
davidsog is offline  
Old August 28, 2019, 12:58 PM   #143
rickyrick
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 15, 2010
Posts: 7,426
7mm magnum that will last 60,000 rounds? Take my money if that existed.
rickyrick is offline  
Old August 28, 2019, 01:50 PM   #144
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,960
Do we have a velocity? Early rumors had it up in the .270 Weatherby range.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old August 29, 2019, 03:31 AM   #145
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
In the recent press release for their NGSW entry, Mars, Inc. and Cobalt Kinetics claim to be launching a 140gr 6.8 bullet at 3,200fps from an 18” barrel.
See: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...-ngsw-program/

It looks like they are using a traditional case though - basically just a fat WSSM style case.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 29, 2019, 06:39 AM   #146
stagpanther
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 2, 2014
Posts: 6,745
Quote:
In the recent press release for their NGSW entry, Mars, Inc. and Cobalt Kinetics claim to be launching a 140gr 6.8 bullet at 3,200fps from an 18” barrel.
See: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...-ngsw-program/

It looks like they are using a traditional case though - basically just a fat WSSM style case.
Right off the bat it looks like a "fatty" double stack magazine based system, while they can work; that puts significant sidewall pressure on the magazines and also puts pressure on the spring/follower which in turn makes it harder to get reliable feed from the lips. Magazines will probably cost as much--and weigh as much loaded--as the rifle.
__________________
If you’re ever hiking in the woods and you get lost, just look up and find the brightest star in the sky and you’ll know which way space is.
I am NOT an expert--I do not have any formal experience or certification in firearms use or testing; use any information I post at your own risk!
stagpanther is offline  
Old August 29, 2019, 08:18 AM   #147
ed308
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 5, 2016
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,018
Stag, your link is not working. Interesting the felt recoil for the .308 version was similar to a .223/5.56. Here's the link:

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...-ngsw-program/
ed308 is offline  
Old August 29, 2019, 09:11 AM   #148
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
Quote:
Stag, your link is not working.
TFL truncates links, so if you quote someone else’s truncated link, the link won’t work (unless you go into VBB and fix it]). The original link will still work however, even though it looks the same as the quoted link.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 29, 2019, 10:38 AM   #149
2damnold4this
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 12, 2009
Location: Athens, Georgia
Posts: 2,434
Does it say how many rounds that magazine holds and what the loaded rifle will weigh?

On edit: I see it says 20 rounds in a magazine.
2damnold4this is offline  
Old August 29, 2019, 11:05 AM   #150
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,335
The MARS rifle is 8lbs with a 13” barrel. Not sure if that is loaded or unloaded, with optics, etc. There is also a 70rd drum.

Honestly, I have a hard time seeing that one being the winner.

ETA: A similar dark-horse entry, the XR68 from VK weighs “less than 9lbs unloaded” with a 16” barrel and no optics.

Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; August 29, 2019 at 11:21 AM.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 -5. The time now is 01:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11742 seconds with 9 queries