The Firing Line Forums

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

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 11, 2017, 05:08 PM   #51
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,996
I don't know what kind of body armor the enemy or criminal organizations are using but unless it is the ceramic plate kind, it won't do jack against rifle bullets like 5.56mm...
Body armor is generally rated in tests concentrating on perpendicular impacts without first penetrating any sort of cover/concealment barrier. A piece of glass and sharp angle greatly improve performance.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 06:29 PM   #52
Senior Member
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,049
what are you trying to say exactly?

What was said is true soft armor won't stop a rifle round.. no matter if the rifle round is design to be armor penetrating or not.

you have metal plates that will stop it, or ceramics, the plates stop it thru sheer strength, the ceramics stop it by absorbing the energy.. they crack but the bullet does not get thru.

ever see that circus act where the guy has cinder blocks broken over his chest with a sledge hammer?

NO NO despite the hype he is not in fact the strongest man on earth.
JoeSixpack is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 07:22 PM   #53
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2016
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 767
Read today where they are only need 6069 units and not 50,000.
ed308 is offline  
Old August 11, 2017, 08:31 PM   #54
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2007
Posts: 1,079
Level 3 steel will defeat 5.56 AP rounds and will absorb multiple hits. Level 3 ceramic armor has a tendency to shatter and it is somewhat sensitive to impact, such as dropping on a hard surface. Level 3 steel can absorb the impact of .308 rounds without penetration as can ceramics, but you may be out of the fight due to trauma as a result of impact alone. New developments in body armor will have a significant impact on effectiveness of currently employed rounds. Don't forget that the US is currently involved in the development of augments that will enable the infantry soldier to handle much greater loads. It is only logical to assume that further developments of said augments will lead to a complete suit of armor that would be capable of defeating most rounds today. Try to imagine downscaled Chobham armor that fully covers each soldier. Equipped with an HUD that includes IR/FLIR, integrated commo, and bio filters it will indeed be difficult to defeat. It will happen within the next 50 years. The single greatest limiting factor now is the system necessary to power such a suit. It may seem far-fetched, but around 85% of the technology necessary already exists.
ronl is offline  
Old August 12, 2017, 02:00 PM   #55
Senior Member
Join Date: September 25, 2011
Posts: 147
To those saying this is a is not.

50,000 units is tentative and can and will change. The Army will increase the contract ceiling as time goes on. This is why you do not see a price for the IDIQ, because the Q has not been decided.

50,000 is to judge how fast these can be developed and fielded.

This will be replacing the M4 across all BCTs eventually, with the end goal being the "interim" term.

Meaning that once the Army completes it's SAAC study they will then apply the design of the XM1158 ADVAP round into whatever 6-7mm round is decided upon.

The SAAC study is looking at 23 different rounds in the 6-7mm range, all of which require a larger rifle to work in.

Hence why the Army is doing the ICSR.

The ICSR will be able to easily be adopted to the new Intermediate ADVAP round with a barrel and magazine swap, maybe bolt depending on what round is chosen.

However until that happens the rifles will be using M80A1, M993, and XM1158 ADVAP that is about 1yr away from being fielded, it will replace M993.
Sinlessorrow is offline  
Old September 21, 2017, 07:36 PM   #56
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,594
Well, that was short-lived:
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old September 22, 2017, 01:23 AM   #57
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 4,122
Well I appreciate you coming back and updating the thread.
DaleA is offline  
Old September 22, 2017, 07:28 AM   #58
Senior Member
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Location: Where the deer and the antelope roam.
Posts: 2,321
The replacement is already there. The M110, just use a shorter barrel and a butt stock better suited for the infantry squad member VS the sniper.
Retired Law Enforcement
U. S. Army Veteran
My rifle and pistol are tools, I am the weapon.
Nanuk is offline  
Old September 22, 2017, 07:51 AM   #59
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2009
Posts: 1,026
That was a short try. Seems that Army has killed the idea.

“Remember, no matter where you go, there you are.” - Confucius
"When you find a find a big kettle of crazy, it's best not to stir it." - Dilbert
COSteve is offline  
Old September 22, 2017, 08:40 AM   #60
Senior Member
Join Date: June 22, 2000
Location: Brandon FL USA
Posts: 508
Done before begun
Just face shoot the criminal was the advice I was given. Old tech new tech, face shooting will nearly always take the wrong doing out of a bad guy.
GLK is offline  
Old September 22, 2017, 08:52 AM   #61
Senior Member
Join Date: November 5, 2016
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 767
This idea of the interim 7.62 rifle always struck me as a waste of money of anyway. They might as well keep what they've got since they are planning to replace the the 5.56 with a 6.5 cartridge or the latest and greatest round, whatever that is. I guess to that General, it's the LSAT round. That would make sense as it solves the weight issue.
ed308 is offline  
Old September 22, 2017, 09:10 AM   #62
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,594
Yeah, I always wondered why you'd go to the trouble of an "Interim" rifle when the LSAT technology was finally starting to ripen. I guess the new Chief of Staff saw an LSAT demo and had the same thought.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  

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 06:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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:
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.05981 seconds with 8 queries