User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:06:05 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Imaging all those COPs in Afghanistan if they only had 7.62. I believe the 10th mountain division had one battle where they ran Black on everything but 5.56, they also killed a ton of guys during it if I'm remembering the story right. Imagine if they had nothing but 7.62/.50/40mm, they would all be dead today. Yep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:06:07 PM EDT
[#2]
I hope whoever chose the p320 as the Army's sidearm isn't on the same panel that chooses the next rifle. If they are we may never win another war!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:07:17 PM EDT
[#3]
BRB going to make a video that shows an AR15 will go off if you drop it
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:11:50 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Randy Shugart's use of an M-14 seems to be a case against 7.62 and for 5.56. According to open source reports the Blackhawk was not over run until all the rifle ammo had been expended. Paul Howe is obviously a great shot but he was using irons in Mogadishu. Paul Howe was a plus decade long veteran of CAG and had done numerous combat deployments with them before being deployed to Task Force Ranger as an Assaulter Platoon Team Leader. Are you suggesting he didn't know how to use iron sights? Those dudes got 10-30,000 rds a month of training ammo for just carbine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:13:28 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
BRB going to make a video that shows an AR15 will go off if you drop it 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:14:30 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because we don't have forts built out of m993 and SLAP. That's why 7.62 is the answer to Milley. I get that, I watched the P&S modcast too. I'm not asking what logistically makes sense, I'm asking purely about performance of AP ammo. I have to believe the military tested both ammo against SAPI and ESAPI and even XSAPI. I wonder what the results were. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:16:26 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shugart wasn't an assaulter, he was in the Recce Troop, he was a sniper and his job during all missions in Mog was to provide aerial fire support using precision fires while the MH-60 circled overhead. He chose to use an M14 while others were using CAR-15s but his circumstances are nothing like a traditional infantryman. Apples and oranges. Paul Howe was a plus decade long veteran of CAG and had done numerous combat deployments with them before being deployed to Task Force Ranger as an Assaulter Platoon Team Leader. Are you suggesting he didn't know how to use iron sights? Those dudes got 10-30,000 rds a month of training ammo for just carbine. I bet you think it took 100 goat herders to kill the 4 SEALs in Red Wings to... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:19:50 PM EDT
[#8]
What is wrong with the 6.5 Grendel?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:20:26 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is wrong with the 6.5 Grendel? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:21:26 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is a known fact that even technically dead people can continue to fight after being shot. Case in point, my ex-business partner was in Somalia with an NGO and was ambushed by the Kenyan border. His Somali driver took a 12.7mm to the torso but still drove out of the ambush while returning fire out the window with a pistol. The driver died but stayed in the fight for a critical minute. There is no magic bullet (at least in small arms). No small arms caliber guarantees that the target will be 'dead right there'. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One of the guys who spent his career in Ranger Regiment and other elements within SOF mentioned it, but there is no open video footage I'm aware of. I do know for a fact that most of the events were monitored heavily with several different aerial surveillance platforms. Take a civilian author interviewing the few people he could for the book, and do the math. Is he going to be talking with guys in the unit, or first-term guys in Battalion the most? What makes a more catching story? Elite career shooters with over a decade of SOF experience average make hits consistently and the enemy goes down or.... ....Mattel death rifle doesn't kill enemy because it's too weak and anemic. Another older guy who has a career covering the Grenada invasion through GWOT, with real-world deployments with actual witnessing and creating effects on target with M193, M855, SOST, Mk.262, 70gr TSX, and M855A1 said they never had a problem stacking enemy like corkwood with any of the different loads, and it wasn't until Bowden's book that the BS gained traction and spread throughout the gun community and military like wildfire. M855 isn't nearly as bad as social media made it out to be, but I think at this point we can agree that M855 does have some issues shot out of a shorter barrel (and Howe was using a 14.5" CAR-15), with issues of fleet yaw and velocity thresholds for reliable fragmentation. But Howe isn't anti-5.56, that's all he uses nowadays while training, which should be a testament that he likes the platform. Case in point, my ex-business partner was in Somalia with an NGO and was ambushed by the Kenyan border. His Somali driver took a 12.7mm to the torso but still drove out of the ambush while returning fire out the window with a pistol. The driver died but stayed in the fight for a critical minute. There is no magic bullet (at least in small arms). No small arms caliber guarantees that the target will be 'dead right there'. I think Bowden and others blew up something Howe mentioned as a valid criticism during the formal AAR/hot wash that CAG did following the fight and stuff he mentioned in Bowden's book because he was pissed that nobody in JSOC was taking the AAR issues seriously. Then those comments were blown up out of proportion into a political talking point against 5.56 as a whole, which is bullshit. I really couldn't ask for a better caliber knowing what I know now, especially with new ammo. Most valid criticism I had when I was in Iraq with my M4 and M855 ammo was that it wasn't all that great against car windows and mud courtyard or house walls. But M855A1 does much better with the former and it turns out even .50 BMG can't do the latter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:27:53 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What is wrong with the 6.5 Grendel? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:28:35 PM EDT
[#12]
Col Milley was one of my BCs in Korea, and supported out efforts to institute a DM program in the line companies.
That said, I'm not on board with this push for 7.62 NATO rifles for every swinging Joe in Brigade Combat Teams. If they do a test platoon at Benning, be prepared to hear nothing but complaints when Joes and NCOs start stacking mags on their vests. There's going to be some major suckage going on. This idea is monstrously retarded and I originally thought it was an April fools' joke. Nope, they're dead serious. Defeating body armor is the stated reason, yet defeating body armor is not how you produce casualties. There's this funny thing that soldiers do when shot at. When you hear rounds cracking by your face and spitting secondary frag all over, you want to find a hole and crawl in it if you can, but since you can't, you get behind something. Partial exposures and runners is what you might see, maybe 3-7% (at best) of a dismounted infantry unit will actually see the enemy, whether in urban or green. Units that use more optics and stand-off distances get to observe the enemy more, which nowadays means more aerial platforms and armor, along with Snipers and FOs. For partial exposures, the armor worn on the chest is rarely even in presentation. Helmets, faces, and arms are the most common exposed targets. 7.62 NATO AP does nothing to address this that 5.56 doesn't do, especially M855A1. If they actually issue 7.62 NATO rifles en masse and take away M4s, you will see a rise in small arms-related kills after overrun of their positions due to running black on ammo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:30:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Col Milley was one of my BCs in Korea, and supported out efforts to institute a DM program in the line companies. That said, I'm not on board with this push for 7.62 NATO rifles for every swinging Joe in Brigade Combat Teams. If they do a test platoon at Benning, be prepared to hear nothing but complaints when Joes and NCOs start stacking mags on their vests. There's going to be some major suckage going on. This idea is monstrously retarded and I originally thought it was an April fools' joke. Nope, they're dead serious. Defeating body armor is the stated reason, yet defeating body armor is not how you produce casualties. There's this funny thing that soldiers do when shot at. When you hear rounds cracking by your face and spitting secondary frag all over, you want to find a hole and crawl in it if you can, but since you can't, you get behind something. Partial exposures and runners is what you might see, maybe 3-7% (at best) of a dismounted infantry unit will actually see the enemy, whether in urban or green. Units that use more optics and stand-off distances get to observe the enemy more, which nowadays means more aerial platforms and armor, along with Snipers and FOs. For partial exposures, the armor worn on the chest is rarely even in presentation. Helmets, faces, and arms are the most common exposed targets. 7.62 NATO AP does nothing to address this that 5.56 doesn't do, especially M855A1. If they actually issue 7.62 NATO rifles en masse and take away M4s, you will see a rise in small arms-related kills after overrun of their positions due to running black on ammo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:31:05 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you suggesting Paul Howe is a super human, incapable of flinching or missing as people try to kill you? I bet you think it took 100 goat herders to kill the 4 SEALs in Red Wings to... But comparing a couple of vanilla white team SDV SEAL guys, completely untrained in recon who basically committed suicide by fucked up planning and execution, to the innate abilities of a senior NCO and TL in SFOD-D is fucking stupid. Paul Howe was a professional killer in every sense of the word. He knew how to utilize the equipment he possessed. Did he miss at time? Of course he did, but I'm not playing the Korean War M1 Carbine bullshit with him, because there is no fucking way that dude wasn't hitting some targets. *I posted pretty extensively about Red Wings years ago, like here Besides the point, Howe is right. Lowered velocity from 14.5" and varying angles in which the target presents itself creates fleet yaw issues with M855 that cause a failure to fragment, meaning ice pick and no tumbling. And that was probably the only time he was ever shooting people high as fuck on equivalent to Walter White level meth so that takes some getting used to. Hell, its a near foregone conclusion nowadays that if we're fighting Jihadis anywhere there is a good chance they are going to be high on a combat cocktail of provigil, opiates, meth, etc. We know it now and that helps us understand what we will see in combat in the future in terms of putting dicks in dirt. But they didn't know that then because Americans in 1993 didn't have the experience and data for terminal ballistics against jacked up Somali gunmen for hire in the middle of their daily tweeker binge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:32:16 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a dumb caliber. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the 6.5 Grendel? Can't wait for the 300blk boys to show |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:38:50 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Besides the point, he's right. Lowered velocity from 14.5" and varying angles in which the target presents itself creates fleet yaw issues with M855 that cause a failure to fragment, meaning ice pick and no tumbling. .  Attached FileAlthough according to my Recon Marine buddy M855A1 ice picks jihadis and Mk318 blows giant 2-4" holes in them....I rolled my eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:40:00 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Needs a larger bolt for longevity. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the 6.5 Grendel? Metallurgy deals with this, but you could cut costs for bolt material by making a slightly larger bolt like the SCAR-L bolt size, which requires a slightly larger barrel extension, which requires a slightly larger upper receiver tunnel for the barrel extension, which requires a larger thread OD for the barrel nut, which requires different handguard dimensions. Or you could just address it with metallurgy and processes like Bill A. and Colt did (7.62x39 Sporter). POF has an AR15 chambered in .308 with an AR15 bolt head, really thin walls, but uses AerMet similar to the LMT enhanced. I'm still an advocate for something like Grendel for DMs and LMGs if they don't buy into LSAT, not every dismounted combat arms soldier in a Combat Brigade like they're crazy talking with this 7.62 NATO abortion idea. It's like they forgot that you have: PLs (don't shoot, should be shooting in most cases, and when they do shoot, it's close range personal defense) PSGs (runs logistics more than anything, while advising the PL and coaching, mentoring, developing the Squad Leaders and Team Leaders) FOs (FOs don't shoot their weapons unless being overrun or chance contact at close range) Combat Medics (same as above) Grenadiers: Are we going to underling 230s on a 12lb 7.62 NATO rifle before optics and accessories? Show me on the Grenadier's load where you're going to stack a basic load of magazines for his 7.62 NATO rifle, in addition to his 40mm bombs. Ammo Bearers for Gun Teams? Assistant Gunners? (most important weapon is the binos, but most units don't understand this and maybe give it lip service) Combat Engineers? (clearing obstacles and breaching barriers are more their focus, not engaging targets with their rifles at distance) K-9 Handlers? (they need CQBR M4A1 or smaller, suppressed) There is something seriously wrong with this latest obsession with 7.62 NATO rifles that throws everything we know out the window related to how we are organized and fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:41:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Problem solved. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/414147/IMG_20170608_140758-275881.JPG Although according to my Recon Marine buddy M855A1 ice picks jihadis and Mk318 blows giant 2-4" holes in them....I rolled my eyes. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Besides the point, he's right. Lowered velocity from 14.5" and varying angles in which the target presents itself creates fleet yaw issues with M855 that cause a failure to fragment, meaning ice pick and no tumbling. . https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/414147/IMG_20170608_140758-275881.JPG Although according to my Recon Marine buddy M855A1 ice picks jihadis and Mk318 blows giant 2-4" holes in them....I rolled my eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:42:29 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ever look at a SCAR-H bolt? Metallurgy deals with this, but you could cut costs for bolt material by making a slightly larger bolt like the SCAR-L bolt size, which requires a slightly larger barrel extension, which requires a slightly larger upper receiver tunnel for the barrel extension, which requires a larger thread OD for the barrel nut, which requires different handguard dimensions. Or you could just address it with metallurgy and processes like Bill A. and Colt did (7.62x39 Sporter). POF has an AR15 chambered in .308 with an AR15 bolt head, really thin walls, but uses AerMet similar to the LMT enhanced. I'm still an advocate for something like Grendel for DMs and LMGs if they don't buy into LSAT, not every dismounted combat arms soldier in a Combat Brigade like they're crazy talking with this 7.62 NATO abortion idea. It's like they forgot that you have: PLs (don't shoot, should be shooting in most cases, and when they do shoot, it's close range personal defense) PSGs (runs logistics more than anything, while advising the PL and coaching, mentoring, developing the Squad Leaders and Team Leaders) FOs (FOs don't shoot their weapons unless being overrun or chance contact at close range) Combat Medics (same as above) Grenadiers: Are we going to underling 230s on a 12lb 7.62 NATO rifle before optics and accessories? Show me on the Grenadier's load where you're going to stack a basic load of magazines for his 7.62 NATO rifle, in addition to his 40mm bombs. Ammo Bearers for Gun Teams? Assistant Gunners? (most important weapon is the binos, but most units don't understand this and maybe give it lip service) Combat Engineers? (clearing obstacles and breaching barriers are more their focus, not engaging targets with their rifles at distance) K-9 Handlers? (they need CQBR M4A1 or smaller, suppressed) There is something seriously wrong with this latest obsession with 7.62 NATO rifles that throws everything we know out the window related to how we are organized and fight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:43:06 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
EPM's suck, get a PMAG I was just testing my lonely 11 EPMs that day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 3:44:16 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have 160 Pmags. I was just testing my lonely 11 EPMs that day. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
EPM's suck, get a PMAG I was just testing my lonely 11 EPMs that day. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:06:07 PM EDT
[#22]
so there's a need to see M995 vs Level IV body armor? Does it matter if it's a commercial level IV, or should I be sourcing the latest SAPI variant?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:10:02 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so there's a need to see M995 vs Level IV body armor? Does it matter if it's a commercial level IV, or should I be sourcing the latest SAPI variant? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:10:20 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so there's a need to see M995 vs Level IV body armor? Does it matter if it's a commercial level IV, or should I be sourcing the latest SAPI variant? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:21:33 PM EDT
[#25]
so, is there any data about whether M855A1 defeats the armor that GEN Milley wants to defeat with 7.62? I hear all these wonderful things about M855A1, and it's like GEN Milley never heard of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:25:13 PM EDT
[#26]
 ......About time..!!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:30:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
NIJ is NIJ, right? What is the closest rating for ESAPI? The M993 test I had done, AR500 Armor's plate couldn't stop it, and what penetrated did 20"+ of gel. the RMA 1145# still failed to stop it, but overall penetration of what penetrated was less than that of AR500 Armors. If every agrees that to be fair against the M993 test, I can repeat it with the same plates I used in that test; RMA 1145/55 and the AR500 Armor Level IV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:31:06 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's a dumb caliber. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What is wrong with the 6.5 Grendel? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:33:36 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It gets tricky.. NIJ is minimum standards. EX some lower end level IVs will literally take 1 hit of M2AP and blow into bits of useless garbage... There are Level IV plates that will stop 6 rounds of M2AP and still probably stop other lesser threats. There are many in between. The M993 test I had done, AR500 Armor's plate couldn't stop it, and what penetrated did 20"+ of gel. the RMA 1145# still failed to stop it, but overall penetration of what penetrated was less than that of AR500 Armors. If every agrees that to be fair against the M993 test, I can repeat it with the same plates I used in that test; RMA 1145/55 and the AR500 Armor Level IV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:34:41 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
NIJ is NIJ, right? What is the closest rating for ESAPI? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
so there's a need to see M995 vs Level IV body armor? Does it matter if it's a commercial level IV, or should I be sourcing the latest SAPI variant? It doesn't translate cleanly IMHO, until level V and VI(LOL) are researched. Really wish I could give specific info, worked for an armor company as a QA for a bit. Although I think they want tight lips for the other products we made beyond basic plates. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:35:07 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think what people would like to see is realistic combat ranges, or limiting the velocity to replicate it. 100-300 meters. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It gets tricky.. NIJ is minimum standards. EX some lower end level IVs will literally take 1 hit of M2AP and blow into bits of useless garbage... There are Level IV plates that will stop 6 rounds of M2AP and still probably stop other lesser threats. There are many in between. The M993 test I had done, AR500 Armor's plate couldn't stop it, and what penetrated did 20"+ of gel. the RMA 1145# still failed to stop it, but overall penetration of what penetrated was less than that of AR500 Armors. If every agrees that to be fair against the M993 test, I can repeat it with the same plates I used in that test; RMA 1145/55 and the AR500 Armor Level IV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:39:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To shoot heads and arms that are partially exposed, which reduces the range down to 200 and less in most cases. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It gets tricky.. NIJ is minimum standards. EX some lower end level IVs will literally take 1 hit of M2AP and blow into bits of useless garbage... There are Level IV plates that will stop 6 rounds of M2AP and still probably stop other lesser threats. There are many in between. The M993 test I had done, AR500 Armor's plate couldn't stop it, and what penetrated did 20"+ of gel. the RMA 1145# still failed to stop it, but overall penetration of what penetrated was less than that of AR500 Armors. If every agrees that to be fair against the M993 test, I can repeat it with the same plates I used in that test; RMA 1145/55 and the AR500 Armor Level IV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:40:49 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think what people would like to see is realistic combat ranges, or limiting the velocity to replicate it. 100-300 meters. On that end, I already know of a Level IV (RMA #1199) plate that defeats M995 @ 100m simulated velocity. This was tested at an actual ballistic lab. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:42:06 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so, is there any data about whether M855A1 defeats the armor that GEN Milley wants to defeat with 7.62? I hear all these wonderful things about M855A1, and it's like GEN Milley never heard of it. M80A1 is the 7.62 equivalent, it also is not an AP round and cannot defeat body armor any better than it's 5.56 brother. However as LRRPF has said, in combat the head, neck, and arms are the most exposed parts. No armor there. Any really good AP round designed for defeating ceramic armor will ice pick the tissue behind it. I'd take a killer fragmenting round over a AP round in combat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:44:30 PM EDT
[#35]
Perhaps this has been brought up already, but what about putting a lighter 270 bullet in a 5.56 case?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:47:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Perhaps this has been brought up already, but what about putting a lighter 270 bullet in a 5.56 case? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 4:51:29 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M855A1 blows holes in flesh, it however is not an AP round. It's a ball round. The M855A1 Cartridge: A Long Time Coming by John Plaster |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:03:34 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M855A1 was originally designed to have a tungsten milled tip not steel, but that we didn't have enough national stockpile so they went with steel. Even so, its still AP ammo to some degree and it still possessing good frag effects, It's just not piercing SAPI/ESAPI equivalent armor. Even M855 was an AP round too, SS109 was implemented based on its ability to pierce Soviet helmets. The M855A1 Cartridge: A Long Time Coming by John Plaster It's def AP against anything below NIJ IV. Maybe I'm just naive but I just don't understand Milleys obsession over AP. I mean yes to a degree it's important, but most AP rounds ice pick the soft tissue behind the armor, and as LRRPF52 pointed out in combat the torso is usually not exposed, and even if it is the front and rear armor are only present at near perfectly parallel angled to the person shooting you. Those shots are more in CQB areas and houses, yet even then 90% of the body is still exposed flesh. I'd rather a accurate round that catastrophically fragments in soft tissue than one that defeats armor yet ice pics the flesh. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:09:31 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I had no idea it was intended to be Tungsten. Good stuff there. It's def AP against anything below NIJ IV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:15:10 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M855A1 blows holes in flesh, it however is not an AP round. It's a ball round. M80A1 is the 7.62 equivalent, it also is not an AP round and cannot defeat body armor any better than it's 5.56 brother. However as LRRPF has said, in combat the head, neck, and arms are the most exposed parts. No armor there. Any really good AP round designed for defeating ceramic armor will ice pick the tissue behind it. I'd take a killer fragmenting round over a AP round in combat. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:15:37 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My guess is that new AP round that Milley et al are yapping about is probably just the original tungsten version of M855A1 and M80A1. The US doesn't have tungsten stockpile for all issue penetrators to be made out of tungsten but we do have enough for limited AP fielding with all tungsten penetrators instead of just the cores. So lot more material and its in a much better place for increasing penetration over M993/995. If it can be made to work in 5.56 why change at all? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:17:00 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wouldn't call this ice pick: Then again we don't know how it reacts at combat distances.. https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4435/36301159232_d8c5766933_b.jpg https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4433/36423504516_befabda474_b.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:20:36 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've always heard M995 and M993 ice pick at combat distances once they breach the armor as the jacket gets shredded on the armor and only the tungsten core makes it through the armor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:20:48 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe I'm just naive but I just don't understand Milleys obsession over AP. I mean yes to a degree it's important, but most AP rounds ice pick the soft tissue behind the armor, and as LRRPF52 pointed out in combat the torso is usually not exposed, and even if it is the front and rear armor are only present at near perfectly parallel angled to the person shooting you. Those shots are more in CQB areas and houses, yet even then 90% of the body is still exposed flesh. I'd rather a accurate round that catastrophically fragments in soft tissue than one that defeats armor yet ice pics the flesh. Possible motives I can think of Milley doesn't come out as a criminal asshole: - AP penetration against Russian plates for those Soldiers he has deployed in E. Europe worried about the Russians. He can't do shit to give them more arty, more tanks, but maybe the best he is actually capable of doing to help their morale is to give them a better penetrating ammo. - Maybe he has a real hard-on for 7.62 NATO. LRRP says as his BC he broke out old M14s and issued them out, so even back then he was pro 308. The last thing he remembers about small arms is old news, but he is a general so fuck other people's opinions. - He is getting the Army to lean forward to eventually go to an intermediate cartridge that wont fit in an AR15 platform. Why build and issue out an updated M4 if in five years we'll be using a cartridge that doesn't fit in it? If the future is going to be plastic cased intermediate rounds being shot out of a short barreled AR10, then why not just get a jump on it now? We'll have all the BII and mags and pouches and shit already, the only thing we need to change is caliber later on. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:31:36 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And Shinseki should have known better than believing that stealing the Ranger's beret wouldn't actually turn the rest of the army into Rangers. Whatever these guys used to be by the time they make four star they've politicians in uniform who've been given nothing but platitudes from yes men subordinates for well over a decade. They are in the worst position to make good decisions about equipment and that's unfortunately a big part of their job. The last time Milley gave a shit about small arms was when he commanded a battalion a long time ago, and not in combat. He's not doing research on his own and it sounds like he discarded the advice from all the SMEs to go 7.62. In other words, he's the quintessential Army chief of staff, on par with all his predecessors. Possible motives I can think of Milley doesn't come out as a criminal asshole: - AP penetration against Russian plates for those Soldiers he has deployed in E. Europe worried about the Russians. He can't do shit to give them more arty, more tanks, but maybe the best he is actually capable of doing to help their morale is to give them a better penetrating ammo. - Maybe he has a real hard-on for 7.62 NATO. LRRP says as his BC he broke out old M14s and issued them out, so even back then he was pro 308. The last thing he remembers about small arms is old news, but he is a general so fuck other people's opinions. - He is getting the Army to lean forward to eventually go to an intermediate cartridge that wont fit in an AR15 platform. Why build and issue out an updated M4 if in five years we'll be using a cartridge that doesn't fit in it? If the future is going to be plastic cased intermediate rounds being shot out of a short barreled AR10, then why not just get a jump on it now? We'll have all the BII and mags and pouches and shit already, the only thing we need to change is caliber later on.  Attached FileNo mention of durability, and only required to fire 210 rounds before a stoppage? Not only that but the more velocity your gun offers and the more accurate the higher it'll score? It sounds like they want SS barreled 20" guns, and given they only need to be able to fire 210 rounds on full auto....Idk I just don't understand it. Initially the requirements for the M4 was 600 MRBS and 3,000 MRBEFF. Granted now days it's easily quadruples both of those requirements. However this ICSR has from what I can decipher a requirement of 210 MRBS and no durability requirement. To me that seems criminally inept. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:38:17 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It certainly sounds possible, but the criteria for these rifles is laughably incompetent. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/414147/IMG_3392-275957.JPG No mention of durability, and only required to fire 210 rounds before a stoppage? Not only that but the more velocity your gun offers and the more accurate the higher it'll score? It sounds like they want SS barreled 20" guns, and given they only need to be able to fire 210 rounds on full auto....Idk I just don't understand it. Initially the requirements for the M4 was 600 MRBS and 3,000 MRBEFF. Granted now days it's easily quadruples both of those requirements. However this ICSR has from what I can decipher a requirement of 210 MRBS and no durability requirement. To me that seems criminally inept. And remember that at the end of the day every single current senior ranking officer and NCO in the Army has accepted that trannies will serve openly and that females will serve in combat arms. They might not like it but they wont fight it, it wont be the hill in which they will die on. Think about the person who makes that decision, those individuals are in key leadership positions and they have demonstrated to their subordinates that they have zero honor or courage, they are in it for power and monetary reward (if nothing more than pay, pension, Tricare, and a good job after they retire). They are fucked up human beings and those sort, who infest all levels of our military, aren't the sort who make good decisions regarding anything in life. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 5:39:05 PM EDT
[#47]
Maybe the failings of the HK G28 CSASS have lead us to this point.
I know it remains unfunded with no intention to fund the CSASS from what I'm told. Maybe they are righting that wrong(I've also been told it performed poorly in the trials as well, but had the best "package" thus was chosen) and going to pick a decent rifle with this. However my gut fears the SCAR which also has a notorious habit of breaking down. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 6:10:08 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's you who cannot read my friend. The quote from one of the guys in charge of the program indicates (as it has been for a while) a new SDM rifle. That was specifically referenced in your article, but they posted it as 'see the Army wants a new rifle'. The purchase for 50K rifles isn't enough for the USMC, let alone a service the size of the US Army. This is more a replacement for the 5.56 SDMs the Army has. You see fantasies by writers aren't info or analysis - it's wishful thinking. Thinking that isn't supported by Army leadership nor the size of the contract. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 6:18:40 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
NIJ doesn't test at those distances, and doesn't the army perform all of their testing at 25'? But I do understand why someone would want to see that. On that end, I already know of a Level IV (RMA #1199) plate that defeats M995 @ 100m simulated velocity. This was tested at an actual ballistic lab. I was already planning on buying the #1999's due to the weight, but if they are stopping M995 @ 100m that's really impressive. Also, thanks again for all the great testing you do Subscribed to your Patreon a month or two ago.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2017 6:25:20 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read just fine, but you see I also read the reference links and understand what is going on. The quote from one of the guys in charge of the program indicates (as it has been for a while) a new SDM rifle. That was specifically referenced in your article, but they posted it as 'see the Army wants a new rifle'. The purchase for 50K rifles isn't enough for the USMC, let alone a service the size of the US Army. This is more a replacement for the 5.56 SDMs the Army has. You see fantasies by writers aren't info or analysis - it's wishful thinking. Thinking that isn't supported by Army leadership nor the size of the contract. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I read just fine, but you see I also read the reference links and understand what is going on. The quote from one of the guys in charge of the program indicates (as it has been for a while) a new SDM rifle. That was specifically referenced in your article, but they posted it as 'see the Army wants a new rifle'. The purchase for 50K rifles isn't enough for the USMC, let alone a service the size of the US Army. This is more a replacement for the 5.56 SDMs the Army has. You see fantasies by writers aren't info or analysis - it's wishful thinking. Thinking that isn't supported by Army leadership nor the size of the contract. http://soldiersystems.net/2017/08/06/us-army-issues-solicitation-for/ The key you overlook is this. Eventually, they plan to issue an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity for up to 50,000 examples of the ICSR. However, the Army reserves the right to adjust that amount, including purchasing more. 50,000 is just a start and the Army reserved the right to change the ceiling on the contract to buy as many rifles as they need. This is very much a push to replace the M4 within BCTs. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
