Spitzer

I never worked at the National Head Quarters, that's very true.

I know the G-36 was developed way later than the M4, and I never expressed otherwise. But any step forward for seomthing newer, better & more davanced is expensive, thats the general rule. Ofcourse how big an advance it will be to convert to a new product needs to be carefully considered, and perhaps then the better G-36 isn't worth the trouble. But the bottom line still is that the US needs to start thinking about a replacement. For now the AR-15 is doing its job well, but in the future higher tolerances are going to be a must.

Btw, what are your thoughts on moving over to a larger caliber std. assault rifle round, replacing the old 5.56x45 NATO ??

Expat Canuck

The 5.56 was the move forward, why go back now?

Spitzer

I have to disagree there Canuck.

The 5.56x45mm NATO is a very lethal round to be hit by, at close ranges it generates huge traumas to the internal organs. However there has always been some real issues plaguing this round, affecting its combat effectiveness, and that is its limited penetration capability & effective range. For this reason a conversion to a larger 6.8mm caliber round is under consideration.

http://www.strategypage.com/military...cartridge.aspx

My opinion is that a conversion to this new caliber round should be made as soon as possible.

ofogs

What do we know about the ballistics of the 6.8mm round, particularly the terminal ballistics? I've heard all kinds of nice stories about it, but I'd love to see some hard data.

Officer of Engineers

I love the idea but at this moment, there's not enough push to get this through.

Really don't know at the moment. The round is still experimental as far as the militaries are concerned. I don't think they've even decided on the powder mix yet.

__________________
Chimo

cato

OOE,
The 6.8 SPC is proofed and ready for combat. From what I understand at least one SFG took 6.8 uppers down(on the 2 way)range. Open source stuff indicates that the improvement at the +250 meter range didn't justify the loss of magazine capacity, and lengthened follow up time between shots. Controlled pairs came slower. I believe the USMC gave some thought to adopting the SPC, but economy of scale issues put the kaibash on it, maybe one of the former Jarheads around these here parts knows more about it.

All in all, a good, relatively more powerful cartridge firing a heavier (115 gr. ball) bullet, with slightly improved barrier penetration and marginally improved ballistics at the +250 meter range (out of a 14.5" bbl.) than Green Tip. But with the negatives stated above. I would posit that the way forward is not the adoption of a new caliber, with the logistical nightmare across the board that would entail, but the widespread adoption of a heavier 5.56 round such as the Mk262, already entering in limited service in the SDM role.

Thanks,
Cato

BadKharma

That would be cavitation.

gunnut

Whoa, I didn't know there's a 77gr bullet for the 5.56mm. I've always used M-193 and SS109 surplus rounds.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

omon

there is, i.m guessing a boattail. got to need faster twist for long guys.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

Officer of Engineers

I so stand corrected ... and I agree that it is a trade off (though I disagree with the ammo capacity part. We're talking less than half a pound difference with the same number of rounds. If I can do with the FN-FAL C1, the soldiers today can do without the grenade launcher that they will never use.

The primary argument against has always been replacing the entire logistics chain. To this date, we have not gotten rid of the 7.62NATO (GPMG), so introducing another calibre is a nightmare and a half.

HOWEVER, it is strange the Chinese went with the 5.8mm (AN EXTREMELY marginal improvement over the 5.56 when compared to the investment involved). If they had moved over to the 6mm range, we would've been forced to move to the 6.8.

ofogs

I thought one of the selling points of 6.8 was that you could still fit something like 28 rounds into a magazine the size of a standard M4 mag. If that is the case, I would think the difference between a 196 round basic load and 210 to be minimal.

Mk 262 isn't a good combat round. It's built for accuracy, but except for such applications as the SDM, the improvements aren't one most soldiers will take advantage of. The bullet does not perform well when you add in such things as intermediate barriers (vehicles, walls, body armor, etc), which are highly prevalent on the battlefield.

cato

OFOGS,
I was under the impression that 6.8 mag reliably fed 25 6.8mm rounds, and that the STANAG won't feed the round reliably at all (which was one of Remington's original selling points). I may be off, as I am certainly out of the loop (whatever loop that may be). As to the 262, I was aware that it traded some barrier penetration for longer fragmentation ranges, but was unaware that it came up so short. I've spoken with some local LEOs (LAPD, LACoSD) who use the 77gr. (or 75gr.) rounds to great effect in their 16" patrol carbines. That, as we all know ,though, is an entirely different ball o' wax from the game you guys play. Have your SDM's been issued the 262, or are they using good ol green tip? There are some photos of gelatin and barrier penetration tests for the 6.8 SPC OTM(but not ball) round floating about on duh intraweb, I'll see if they can be linked here.

Stay safe,
Cato

cato

OOE,
I've found myself scrtaching my head at the Chinese choice of the 5.8mm round. The CHICOM 5.8 dosen't have a stellar reputation for wound ballistics, compared to the fragmenting nature of the 5.56, or the exagerated yawing of the 5.45. Granted, simply in terms of wight and overall load, it is superior to the 7.62, but seems to bring nothing to the table other than a HUGE logistical nightmare of replacing every infantry rifle and squad machinegun in the PLA.

The problem with the U.S. military (and any of our allies who chose to get in on the deal), as you stated, is mainly big picture logistics stuff. However losing 1/6 of your magazine capacity seems signifigant when the amount of improvement in lethality within real combat ranges is, in terms of harm done to the target, negligable. Also a new service rifle in 6.8 would have to be used by chicks and girly-men along with the hairy chested combat arms types. Recoil therefore becomes an issue. Yeah, we could do it, yeah, it's a better round, hell no it's not worth it. Just this amateur's opinion.

Thanks,
Cato

1 Observer

6.8x43mm SPC Cartridge for Urban Warfare CQB and Short-to-Medium-Range Sniping
Posted on Sunday, November 30 @ 20:58:19 PST by davidc


by David Crane
david@defensereview.com
Anybody who's been keeping abreast of small arms and ammo develpments in the USSOCOM arena should already be aware fo the 6.8x43mm SPC a.k.a. "6.8mm Remington SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge)" cartridge concept. The 6.8x43mm Special Purpose Cartridge (SPC) was conceived and designed with the help of members of the U.S. Army 5th Special Forces Group as a much better answer for urban warfare and CQB (Close Quarters Battle) than the 62gr 5.56x45mm NATO round, and a much better short and intermediate distance sniping round than the 77 gr. 5.56mm round that's been utilized of late in the SPR (Special Purpose Rifle) by U.S. Spec-Ops personnel in the Middle East.

The 6.8x43mm SPC was designed for the M16 rifle/M4 Carbine (or SOPMOD CQB Subcarbine) weapons platform. All an operator needs to do in order to convert his M4 Carbine or SOPMOD CQB subcarbine is...

switch out his 5.56mm upper receiver and replace it with the 6.8x43mm SPC upper. It's interesting that Barrett Rifles is currently manufacturing 6.8x43mm upper receivers for the military (specifically for SOCOM end users). As far as DefRev is aware, this is Barrett's first foray into the AR-15/M16 platform weapons arena.

According to one of DefRev's sources (as of about 8 months ago--that's right, we sat on the info), the 6.8x43mm enjoys roughly the same trajectory as 7.62x51mm out to 600 yards. The 6.8x43mm round weighs 115gr. and has a velocity of 2750 to 2850 fps. It accomplishes all this through the use of a special propellant powder. By the way, you get all this performance with only a 2-round loss of magazine capacity. Not bad.

The same source also said (at that time) that Remington was set to produce 10 million rounds. 7 million will feature Hornady bullets, and 3 million will have a bonded bullet (not sure which manufacturer).

The following excerpts come from an interesting webpage, which is operated and maintained by Phil West:

"On 17th June 2003 I received an email from a Cris Murry: "This is a reply to the guess work all the supposed smart people are doing on the 6.8x43mm. It would appear that our operational security is working real well. But here are a few bits for you guys to chew on. Its not made from a .25 Rem. case, or reforming .223 brass, how do I know, I designed it. It has nearly the same flight path as the 7.62x51mm M80 ball round out to 650 meters. Delivers approx 4 times the energy on target at 300 meters compared to a SS109 round. The gel block tests are awesome. It drops a 150-300 lbs feral hogs like an axe, also works great on whitetails. My first choice was 7mm projectiles, but the users wanted something with a flatter trajectory, closer to the 5.56. Tested all calibers 6mm, 6.5mm, .25, 6.8 (.270 for Americans, oh actually the Chinese came up with the 6.8x63mm in the 1930s), didn't do much testing in .30, because it would only be an American M43 cartridge. This was not a private endeavourer nor a fully sanctioned government project, just users and a gun builder making a better product for our guys on the ground, in harms way." "

The 6.8mm Remington SPC is an intermediate length rifle cartridge based on the 30 Remington case. Designed to function in M4/M16 type rifles, the 6.8mm Remington SPC was specifically developed to provide increased reliability, incapacitation, and accuracy not only at close quarters combat distance, but ranges out to 500 meters.

The 6.8mm Remington SPC, (Special Purpose Cartridge) will be offered in three versions for 2004, including Remington's new Premier® Match, line of ammunition. The 115 grain MatchKing® BTHP bullet will deliver a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps and 2002 ft-lbs of energy while providing low felt recoil and 1 MOA accuracy at 100 yards. The 6.8mm Remington SPC will also be available in both BTHP and Metal-Case 115 grain versions." "

Looks good, looks to be a quicker putter downer ... I'd give up the extra rounds.

1 Observer

It's the heavier bullets coupled with the proliferation of M-4's (and even shorter like 10- 14.5" barrels) that gave rise to this whole thing.
Turns out that the point at witch the round slows to around 2400 fps comprises its max effective range. And out of those shorter barrels that range is too short. Psycologicaly (sic?) The bigger round seems more comforting ... whether that is effectively true or not.