Retro Fulton/Anderson 604/SP1 clone Range Report - WOW!

[Sentryduty]

I'll be interested to see what Darren will say about that thought...not sure if he got to handle the original C8...

A temporary replacement Warrant Officer's we got on tour had one, we actually ridiculed him about it, showing up to war with a dinky pencil barreled, "Fat Strat" gun. Joking aside I did have the chance to handle it but not fire it, it was a nicely balanced gun.

My own opinion, well as a personal weapon I would like to have one, and may set out to build a clone yet, as a main line war fighting gun I have to highlight a few shortcomings.

The "pencil" barrel is handy and light weight but does have some compatibility issues with the M203 grenade launcher, and apparently they can suffer during sustained fire (but I have no experience/observations with a C8 in that situation).

Otherwise, my only concern is the barrel length, which came about after reading the (2004?) trails and evaluation report on the C7A2 upgrade. The question everyone was asking was "Why did we not just go to Carbines?".

I too wondered the same.

I recognize I am going to sound like one of those mystery men that claim to have seen "secret" documents and never offer evidence, but I did at one time have a copy of of the .pdf file on my DND computer and it was an UNCLAS document, but I lost it due to inadequate data backups on my own part. I still cannot find it open source, but to paraphrase it I recall the following:

When testing the 20" C7A1 Barrel against the the 15.7" C8 barrel the main concern was the drop in velocity and effect on terminal ballistic performance of the 5.56 C77 round.

The document set a certain velocity threshold where the 5.56 upon striking an enemy would not effectively kill/incapacitate, I cannot recall that number, but it was somewhere around the speed when a 5.56 round would no longer tumble when striking the medium. For simplicity, the document considered the tumble effect extremely important to effectiveness.

The 20" barrel would support velocities above that threshold to a maximum of 400m (round figures) the carbine length barrel (only 4.3" shorter) was found to only achieve the same out to 150m, after that the performance became very unreliable.

From the army standpoint of the infantry section in battle needing a 400m effective range, I think this was the main design decision to maintain the 20" rifle length barrel when the C7A2 was rolled out. I would be daft to think that cost did not play a factor as well, but I think performance was the main driver in the 20" barrel.

All that said, I did carry C8A3 overseas for a month or so, and while the 1kg C79A1 Elcan sight, heavy barrel and M203 mounting sleeve did bog the Carbine down, it was a lightweight change coming from a C7A2 with M203A1, C79A1 sight, PAQ-4 Lazer, Tri-ad rail, PRR switch, and whatever other do-dads where mandated to hang off of it.

I think the CAR-15/C8 et all Carbines are a really nice package and it leads me to draw parallels with the M1 Carbine, if I take the ballistic testing at face value, I would have to grudgingly concede that a 20" barrel is required to make the 5.56mm a battlefield performer.


Reference C77 Ball - from General Dynamics
Ball C77
SCA_5.56_BallC77The NATO qualified 5.56 X 45 mm Ball cartridge. It is equivalent to the SS109 and M855 cartridges. Its projectile comprises a hardened steel penetrator and lead core in a gilding metal jacket. The maximum chamber pressure is well below the maximum NATO limit, ensuring that the ammunition in safe to use. The C77 cartridge functions properly in all NATO nominated weapons.
Nominal Muzzle Velocity : 910 m/s
Nominal Bullet Weight : 4 g. (62 grains)
Muzzle Energy : 1,500 joules (minimum)
Accuracy: 20 cm maximum standard deviation at 550 m.
Penetration
1020 steel plate (Hardness = 50/70 Rb; thickness = 3 mm) at 570 m