Ordinance has the right concept, but the wrong cartridge. It looks like they’re seeking to replace both the five.Fifty six and the 7.62 with the SOCOR 6.8mm. I assume for a mild, team served weapon they have to cross returned to the whole 30.06 system gun and eliminate the .308 totally.
In a preceding discussion I indicated that the .257 might be a very good alternative for the .223. I’ve been studying it similarly, and it looks like a 6mm (.243) “secant ogive” of 87 grains could supply the exceptional outcomes. With a ballistic coefficient of approximately .400 its advanced to the 62 grain 5.Fifty six, and still has decent velocity. As you might recognise, the flatter the trajectory, the less difficult it’s far to live on course.
This bullet might nonetheless be effective to approximately 500 meters, that’s to mention very powerful at one hundred-300 meters. And long range powerful – as in complete automobile suppressive hearth – out to perhaps one thousand meters. The largest concern with the five.56mm is that it isn’t lethal out to the stages that ordinary troops are capable of goal with proper training (et. Al., did any of you qualify in the back of the grenade shed?)
A slightly heavier and large diameter bullet could solve the problem without sacrificing enough speed and therefore trajectory. If Ordinance foregoes politics and Ballistic Helmet definitely try’s to do the proper factor, I suppose they need to provide you with the same conclusion. The simplest different thing they need is to eliminate that stupid crimp in the center of the cartridge. It was imagined to prevent humans from taking pictures avenue cartridges in the full vehicle M-sixteen, but all of us recognise how easy it’s far to alter.
This gives similar powder extent to the 6.Eight, which doesn’t have the crimp either. The purpose for the ball propellant become to shop money, however in the context of a brand new cartridge, it makes sense to spend a bit extra on powder to shop weight (together with retooling.)
The ballistics of the 7.62×51(.308) and the 30-06 are nearly identical, in military loads. Why exchange? Our 7.62 guns can use ammo from any of our Allies. I do not think any military uses 30-06 any longer. If they still have some of the old Browning MGs, they have been transformed to 7.Sixty two.
I’m not knocking the 30-06. It’s a best cartridge, I personal 4 30-06 rifles. An benefit of the 7.62 is it is shorter than the 30-06(7.62×63), that 1/2 inch way the action has 1 inch much less to journey throughout firing. The shorter movement weighs less.
Any Grunt will let you know, lighter is nearly continually is higher.
I can be mistaken, but I agree with the Mexican Army nonetheless uses the “Mendoza” which is chambered in 30-06 (7.63 X sixty three). It’s their very own layout, and I think used the best ideas from the BREN, and BAR for its operation.
As some distance as replacing the NATO 5.56mm, it’s in no way going to manifest until every body in NATO, or watching for to be in NATO, will agree to a commonplace new round, and re-chamber all in their weapons for this reason, and possibilities are they can not have the funds for to do this.