Have they designed it so that the round "tumbles" through the body rather than pass straight through? If that is the case it will do a lot of damage to anyone unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303
Printable View
Have they designed it so that the round "tumbles" through the body rather than pass straight through? If that is the case it will do a lot of damage to anyone unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrclark303
Please excuse me if I'm not overawed by a 'gasp', 'new' military cartridge. Paging through 'Cartridges of the World' you will probably find similar cartridges either in production or was in production or was developed, etc. Ditto for 'new' bullets and composite cases. What is worth keeping in mind is the military move away from miniature cartridges, to one between those from WWI/WWII use and the miniature ones. This move has slowly gained momentum in the last two decades.
Don't be surprised when similar ones 'suddenly' appear in many other countries.
I imagine the XM5 and XM250 SAW will go to the special operations folks first then the rapid deployment forces. Then other forces like regular Army, Army Reserve and National Guard folks later. The 5.56mm NATO cartridge has been developed to to fullest and is lacking in punching through the latest body armor at distance. As the 6.8x54mm/.277 Fury cartridge continues to get fielded other special ops folks in other parts of the world will adopt it as well. The Army has already looking to convert the M240 and Mini-gun to that caliber. My understanding is the round will have a chamber pressure of 80,000 psi and a muzzle velocity of over 3,000 fps out of a 13 inch barrel. SIG Sauer is already advertising a civilian version called the MCX-Spear with a MSRP of 7,999.00 US dollars. I for one will not be rushing out to order one. LOL I maybe later get a good bolt action chambered in the .277 Fury just to play with.
The high chamber pressure and velocity tells me the cartridge is quietly going to be downloaded in its life. Sooner or later, probably sooner than later. But I've been wrong before.
The Pedersen 276 cartridge was designed for military semi auto rifles many years before we saw the 7,62x51mm NATO cartridge. with new power loadings it would still make a good choice in the AR15/M16 firearm today. Note the nice taper to the cartridge case which is ideal for feeding. It gave way to the 30-06 actually 30M1 cartridge in the 1930's and died,
photo; 7,62x51 NATO and 276 PedersenAttachment 125716
Yeah, been hearing the chatter around the campus on this rifle. They have put in the 2023 budget for 29000 +/- new rifles I didn't hear how many will be the MX5 and how many will be the SAW replacement.
I think that's more an issue with a small calibre intermediate round F10, in order to offset the small calibre with stopped power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
I think 6.8x 51 mm will hit like a freight train, it packs high velocity and a reasonable bullet size to retain energy downrange.
If you get the chance to compare calibers
(tracer) side by side, it makes for a fascinating exercise, you can see the obvious limitations of 5.56mm, once over 300 yards it's adversely affected by cross winds ... If it's really blustery wind shear, forget it, you won't hit a bloody thing.
Compare it to .30-06 or 7.62x51, that just heads downrange and hits the target accurately at far greater ranges..
The Boers and the Spaniards created quite a bit of consternation in their opponents with the 7x57 Mauser at the tail end of the nineteenth century. The British went to far as to develop the P13 rifle and its .276 Enfield ammunition in response. When Teddy Roosevelt was being briefed on the replacement for the Krag he reportedly asked General Crozier, "Why not just buy the Mauser?" Seems like the new whiz bang cartridge will fall in somewhere between the 6.5 Swede and the 7 Mauser in performance, albeit in a shorter case. What goes around, comes around.
Waste of time and money for the US military. Rifles will burn out very quickly (I have heard around 1000-2000rd barrel life), and the troops can't even shoot good enough to take advantage of the range benefits of the rounds. When your troops hit a target at 300m 50% of the time in peace, and a target 100m away 50% of the time in combat, why are you trying to field a weapon which has a effective range of 1200m? And that is also with a rifle which has significantly less recoil so expect the accuracy results to drop even more with the new rifle.
True. The Brits had the same challenge with the 276 cartridge.