- cross-posted to:
- military
- cross-posted to:
- military
You must log in or register to comment.
Great, now they’ll have to rename them to Current Generation Squad Weapons.
i guess this is the ammo, from the wiki:
The .277 Fury or 6.8×51mm Common Cartridge,[4][5] (designated as the .277 SIG Fury by the SAAMI[1]) is a centerfire rimless bottlenecked rifle cartridge announced by SIG Sauer in late 2019.[2] Its hybrid three-piece cartridge case has a steel case head and brass body connected by an aluminum locking washer to support the high chamber pressure of 80,000 psi (551.6 MPa).[2]
That’s the one. The bi-Metal, high pressure cased rounds are supposed to defeat hard body armor better.
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.
1945: British develop the .280 (7mm) intermediate round.
1951: US military Project SALVO confirms that intermediate cartridges were a superior service round at the time.
1951: British show off the EM-2 as a viable rifle for their .280 round.
1954: Despite all evidence for intermediate rounds the US adopts the M14 in 7.62mm NATO and pushes the full caliber standard.
1954: British adopt the L1A1 in 7.62mm NATO instead of the EM-2 because they want to standardize with the US.
1964: US adopts 5.56mm.
Missing step 3: “Level IV plates get invented and become common.”
Certainly interested to see how this develops. Unfortunately on the civilian side we see its the combo of Sig premium pricing plus “military contract” premium, so if these become available in the proper caliber they’re gonna cost like $6K.
I also wonder about the longevity of the barrels in there. High pressures necessarily equate to parts wear and shot-out barrels.
The longevity issue is partially mitigated by the Army training with a full brass cased reduced range round that is lower pressure, and keeping the high pressure rounds as a combat load.
The 6.8mm brass cased rounds are already available for civilian purchase and they are indeed crazy expensive. The 6.8mm version of the MCX Spear is coming and going to be certainly very expensive. I don’t see the cost coming down unless the rifle is such a hit with the military that it becomes the new wholesale standard. Right now despite being officially adopted it seems like a specific situation rifle for the Army that is going to a lot of the forces most likely to pivot to a hypothetical fight with China. I think it really depends on how all that plays out to determine if the rifle sticks around or quietly gets retired.
Arma 3 got it wrong! But they were only 0.3mm off.
6.5mm Grendel was a cartridge with a lot of hype behind it. While I don’t think Arma 3 specifies Grendel (I’m not an Arma expert) both the game and real world round are x39mm so I have to assume that was not a coincidence.
