It has been 44 years since 5.56mm was NATO standardized, and 60 years since the U.S. was using it as a service caliber. I think it’s a bit unfair to characterize it as a flip-flop for the U.S. Army (not even all of the U.S. military) to change after such a long time.
So far the new 6.8mm is an Army exclusive project, so it’s a bit of a live experiment and not being thrust on the rest of US branches, much less all of NATO.
I’m honestly not sure if this particular route is a good idea or not, but we’ve clearly hit the limit of what 5.56mm can do, and if hard armor is actually a concern there needs to be some change in cartridge.
US: “Everyone, we’re going to change to 5.56. Get with the program.”
Everyone: [reluctantly changes to 5.56]
US: “We’re abandoning 5.56. 6.8 is the new standard. Get with the program.”
It has been 44 years since 5.56mm was NATO standardized, and 60 years since the U.S. was using it as a service caliber. I think it’s a bit unfair to characterize it as a flip-flop for the U.S. Army (not even all of the U.S. military) to change after such a long time.
So far the new 6.8mm is an Army exclusive project, so it’s a bit of a live experiment and not being thrust on the rest of US branches, much less all of NATO.
I’m honestly not sure if this particular route is a good idea or not, but we’ve clearly hit the limit of what 5.56mm can do, and if hard armor is actually a concern there needs to be some change in cartridge.
Let me have this one please
Lol, nothing against you.
If you want a narrative like your original, 7.62mm NATO is much better.
Missing step 3: “Level IV plates get invented and become common.”