Results 1 to 20 of 978

Thread: The Roles and Weapons with the Squad

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwigrunt View Post
    That looks interesting and promising. But we are not there yet. So that will not help today's grunts.

    Also, I should think that this totally new ammo should be (yet another) opportunity to come up with a better, half way between calibre....
    I assume you mean something like the 6.5 grendel or 6.8 SPC? While that would increase the terminal effect (6.8), or both terminal and external ballistics (6.5) of IWs, it would also decrease the "punch" so-to-speak, of GPMGs and LMGs (if the Mk 48 sticks). I feel as if the strength of the GPMG/LMG is more important than the strength of the IW as far as modern war is concerned. Also, the 6.5 proponents who say the 6.5 grendel has superior external ballistics than .308 are comparing open tip/high-bc ammo with a pretty standard ball for .308.

    Even when looking for a mid-way point, I don't think the designs shown with the 6.5 and 6.8 are the way to go. They're (relatively) inefficient at increasing energy. A better investment would be developing sabot ammunition for small-arms. A 7.62x39 round generates about 2000 Joules of energy, and has a poor trajectory compared to 5.56. A 7.62x51 with a 5.56 bullet wrapped in a sabot will generate 2400 - 3000 Joules, have a far superior trajectory, far better armor penetration, and it will weigh roughly the same as M43 7.62x39. Essentially what I am advocating is that you should increase powder weight when you want to save weight, not bullet weight.
    Last edited by Blah; 01-21-2011 at 11:47 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •