User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:08:42 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
7.62 NATO is aweful. It's almost 3 times as heavy as 5.56. And all that extra weight, buys you just 200-250 meters. 550 point target range vs 800 point target range. MK262 can even mimic a 7.62 NATO trajectory. So even a well made 5.56 round can level with shitty ass 7.62 NATO. That cartridge is a shit show, it does nothing dramatically better than 5.56. And in testing 5.56 has shown to be more lethal than 7.62 You are also limited not by your cartridge range. You are limited by how soon you can spot the enemy. And most of the time, unless you glue a pair of binos, you cannot see a camouflaged enemy beyond 200 meters. So guess what? You are using a heavy ass, crappy capability round, for 99% of the time engaging targets no further out than 200 meters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:09:34 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's why they have been pouring their money into extractable polymer hybrid 7.62 cartridges, which they supposedly have working. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:10:19 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So after 8 years as an 03, what experience taught you 5.56 M995 AP won't penetrate Level III armor? Also, describe new TTPs that allow you as an infantryman to fight Russians infantry, without arty, tanks, fights, bombers, subs, and missile silos fighting one another? If all those happen, you aren't going to want a 7.62 rifle, you are going to want a davy crockett nuclear recoilless rifle. New TTPs don't work because after ever COIN proxie war the Army promises it won't fight them again, instead trying to prep for a near peer MCO fight in which the Army actually plays only a minor tole because of emphasis on strategic weapons. Then, because the near peer war can't happen we end up in another COIN proxie war and we have to spend years relearning how to fight them. And the only reason is because near peer MCO pays the defense industry a lot more than COIN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:10:27 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Still requires a heavier rifle, larger mags and provides less capacity. Dumb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:13:13 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's why they have been pouring their money into extractable polymer hybrid 7.62 cartridges, which they supposedly have working. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:15:06 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which is why the ICSR is happening. Supposedly they will eventually convert it to a intermediate round determined by the SAAC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:15:39 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's why they have been pouring their money into extractable polymer hybrid 7.62 cartridges, which they supposedly have working. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:15:49 PM EDT
[#8]
I wonder if this thread was how people looked at the ar platform when it first popped up. Time will tell, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:17:00 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder if this thread was how people looked at the ar platform when it first popped up. Time will tell, I suppose. Who knows We could all be wrong and the ICSR could be the best thing since sliced bread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:18:41 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most likely. Who knows We could all be wrong and the ICSR could be the best thing since sliced bread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:29:30 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL Who knows maybe the ICSR will be the second coming. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:32:11 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Okay. I didn't mind. It worked well enough. The cartridge can be improved upon. Now some brain-dead GO wants to go backward. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:33:59 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
We never engaged dudes eith armor. Dudes behind cover, sure. But we should just plan on COIN. 5.56 is fine. We shouldn't try to improve anything. The sort of subtle hint the Army's small arms community tried using against Milley but he didn't budge. They used every excuse because its a terrible idea, he told them to do it, just like he told them to implement chick infantry. We shouldn't be fixing shit that ain't broken. But Milley isn't trying to fix shit, he's trying to use Russia as a boogeyman to gain more funding at a time when we aren't exactly tossing money away at the Army. What conflict will infantry fight? Name the hypothetical enemy and the conflict location and type. What near peer nuclear power do you think we should blow all our money on? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:34:39 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't ask you to be sarcastic, i asked whether your extensive experience allowed you to know 5.56 M995 cant take out body armor. Because if it can, why are we needing 7.62? The sort of subtle hint the Army's small arms community tried using against Milley but he didn't budge. They used every excuse because its a terrible idea, he told them to do it, just like he told them to implement chick infantry. We shouldn't be fixing shit that ain't broken. But Milley isn't trying to fix shit, he's trying to use Russia as a boogeyman to gain more funding at a time when we aren't exactly tossing money away at the Army. What conflict will infantry fight? Name the hypothetical enemy and the conflict location and type. What near peer nuclear power do you think we should blow all our money on? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:36:23 PM EDT
[#15]
This thread...LOL
Weak troll. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:37:27 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread...LOL Weak troll. https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=c3a0df63ed769522a0cdf3df867774e8&tab=core&_cview=1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:38:53 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M995 only defeats armor to 50M or so, from what testing I've seen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:40:13 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
7.62 NATO is aweful. It's almost 3 times as heavy as 5.56. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:41:12 PM EDT
[#19]
They'll be as mobile as a street light.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:42:01 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Everyone said the 5.56 M16 was the worst thing ever and look how that turned out for us. Who knows maybe the ICSR will be the second coming. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
LOL Who knows maybe the ICSR will be the second coming. In what world is any of this a real problem necessitating we trade out a proven caliber and gun, especially since we get 1/2 -1/3 less ammo, per same weight? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:42:05 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't ask you to be sarcastic, i asked whether your extensive experience allowed you to know 5.56 M995 cant take out body armor. Because if it can, why are we needing 7.62? The sort of subtle hint the Army's small arms community tried using against Milley but he didn't budge. They used every excuse because its a terrible idea, he told them to do it, just like he told them to implement chick infantry. We shouldn't be fixing shit that ain't broken. But Milley isn't trying to fix shit, he's trying to use Russia as a boogeyman to gain more funding at a time when we aren't exactly tossing money away at the Army. What conflict will infantry fight? Name the hypothetical enemy and the conflict location and type. What near peer nuclear power do you think we should blow all our money on? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:42:13 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nope. It's 2 times as heavy, not 3 times. http://sadefensejournal.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/mar06.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:43:16 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M995 only defeats armor to 50M or so, from what testing I've seen. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I didn't ask you to be sarcastic, i asked whether your extensive experience allowed you to know 5.56 M995 cant take out body armor. Because if it can, why are we needing 7.62? The sort of subtle hint the Army's small arms community tried using against Milley but he didn't budge. They used every excuse because its a terrible idea, he told them to do it, just like he told them to implement chick infantry. We shouldn't be fixing shit that ain't broken. But Milley isn't trying to fix shit, he's trying to use Russia as a boogeyman to gain more funding at a time when we aren't exactly tossing money away at the Army. What conflict will infantry fight? Name the hypothetical enemy and the conflict location and type. What near peer nuclear power do you think we should blow all our money on? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:44:46 PM EDT
[#24]
No russian suit can stop transwonder woman
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:45:08 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Didn't see much m995. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I didn't ask you to be sarcastic, i asked whether your extensive experience allowed you to know 5.56 M995 cant take out body armor. Because if it can, why are we needing 7.62? The sort of subtle hint the Army's small arms community tried using against Milley but he didn't budge. They used every excuse because its a terrible idea, he told them to do it, just like he told them to implement chick infantry. We shouldn't be fixing shit that ain't broken. But Milley isn't trying to fix shit, he's trying to use Russia as a boogeyman to gain more funding at a time when we aren't exactly tossing money away at the Army. What conflict will infantry fight? Name the hypothetical enemy and the conflict location and type. What near peer nuclear power do you think we should blow all our money on? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:46:39 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep such a troll. This is a made up RFP, not happening move along and all that. https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=c3a0df63ed769522a0cdf3df867774e8&tab=core&_cview=1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:48:02 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What I want to know is how is that thing powered and how long can it run? Because once the batteries crap out on it all it is is a bunch of metal strapped to your back. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2017 11:49:50 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Because we've done this before. We went to 7.62 NATO for service rifle and it didn't work for shit. It recoiled too much, harder to teach, heavier gun, heavier ammo. Even with polymer ammo its going to be heavier. And what are we gaining? A slight uptick with yet undeveloped AP ammo at penetrating a purely hypothetical Level IV enemy body armor when current 5.56 AP already does the job, a slight uptick in suppressive fire "scare factor," a slight uptick in downrange energy for terminal ballistics at area fire distances (600-800 meters). In what world is any of this a real problem necessitating we trade out a proven caliber and gun, especially since we get 1/2 -1/3 less ammo, per same weight? We do however have a metric ton of M993 vs M995, That's another big reason for Milley wanting this from what I've read and heard. Look I'm not saying it's right, but things have changed since the 7.62 M14. Maybe a modern 7.62 rifle using a small frame AR pattern like this.(ignore the scope and bipod) 
Maybe that could work. I don't know one way or another and my gut says it's the wrong way to go, but I could also be wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:01:02 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No one is disputing if it's happening. We're stating that it is dumb as fuck and a waste of resources that could be used on actually producing a more capable platform while degrading the capabilities of the people in harm's way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:02:31 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is about Russia,but more so about funding. Soldiers involved already confirmed on Primary and Secondary that 7.62 is about Russia |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:03:40 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it's a limited issue only to riflemen in units facing the Russkis, it can be a good thing. Lessons learned from use of the ICSR could result in improvements to the CT carbine, which in its current form has the same undesirable characteristics as the ICSR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:04:51 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What you have seen? As in secret sources emailing you powerpoints? Anything open source that the rest of us can see? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:07:26 AM EDT
[#33]
...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:10:22 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
M995 only defeats armor to 50M or so, from what testing I've seen. If you want to shoot through hard plates I would think a .260 Rem or 6.5mm Creedmoor would be a better solution compared to 7.62x51mm NATO |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:11:31 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread...LOL Weak troll. Concern trolling on this topic again since the previous act did not go well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:11:40 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The other issue is Tungsten Carbine is expensive and we don't have enough of it. We do however have a metric ton of M993 vs M995, That's another big reason for Milley wanting this from what I've read and heard. Look I'm not saying it's right, but things have changed since the 7.62 M14. Maybe a modern 7.62 rifle using a small frame AR pattern like this.(ignore the scope and bipod) http://2ht1mik98ka4dogie28vqc4y.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Remington_CSASS001-670x353.jpg Maybe that could work. I don't know one way or another and my gut says it's the wrong way to go, but I could also be wrong. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Because we've done this before. We went to 7.62 NATO for service rifle and it didn't work for shit. It recoiled too much, harder to teach, heavier gun, heavier ammo. Even with polymer ammo its going to be heavier. And what are we gaining? A slight uptick with yet undeveloped AP ammo at penetrating a purely hypothetical Level IV enemy body armor when current 5.56 AP already does the job, a slight uptick in suppressive fire "scare factor," a slight uptick in downrange energy for terminal ballistics at area fire distances (600-800 meters). In what world is any of this a real problem necessitating we trade out a proven caliber and gun, especially since we get 1/2 -1/3 less ammo, per same weight? We do however have a metric ton of M993 vs M995, That's another big reason for Milley wanting this from what I've read and heard. Look I'm not saying it's right, but things have changed since the 7.62 M14. Maybe a modern 7.62 rifle using a small frame AR pattern like this.(ignore the scope and bipod) http://2ht1mik98ka4dogie28vqc4y.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Remington_CSASS001-670x353.jpg Maybe that could work. I don't know one way or another and my gut says it's the wrong way to go, but I could also be wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:14:08 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've shot through Level IV with 6.5mm Grendel AP at 100 yards from a 20 inch barrel If you want to shoot through hard plates I would think a .260 Rem or 6.5mm Creedmoor would be a better solution compared to 7.62x51mm NATO |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:17:05 AM EDT
[#38]
Here we are:
Full circle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:17:59 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I actually like this design. Nice and streamlined. If it wasn't for the enlarged mag well it looks like a 5.56 gun. Def lighter than some other 7.62 offerings, not that the ammo isn't still heavy as tits Those are the new way forward for the AR-10, everyone is making one. PSA, Adams Arms, Remington, etc. You can get a AR-10 in the 6.7-7.5lb range. These would be the ideal way to do the ICSR IMO. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:18:38 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've shot through Level IV with 6.5mm Grendel AP at 100 yards from a 20 inch barrel If you want to shoot through hard plates I would think a .260 Rem or 6.5mm Creedmoor would be a better solution compared to 7.62x51mm NATO Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
M995 only defeats armor to 50M or so, from what testing I've seen. If you want to shoot through hard plates I would think a .260 Rem or 6.5mm Creedmoor would be a better solution compared to 7.62x51mm NATO |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:28:22 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you want to shoot through hard plates I would think a .260 Rem or 6.5mm Creedmoor would be a better solution compared to 7.62x51mm NATO |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:32:08 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
According to the people involved [the ICSR] will be eventually issued to all active duty personnel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:42:53 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Tungsten tipped 6.5? This was years ago because my wife was still in the Army at the time and she's been out since 2012. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:44:30 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which people? Milley? Is it official, in writing? Link to statement? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:47:23 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
7.62 ammo is already in the system, ready for immediate use. It would take some time to develop, test, manufacture, and field all of the 6.5 loads that would be required. A small frame AR-10 weighing 7lbs, suppressed, and firing polymer cased M80A1 and XM1158 could be a decent setup. Determining that though is beyond me. Also M80A1 is a nasty round, I wouldn't mind seeing a .264USA EPR setup.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:54:06 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it's a limited issue only to riflemen in units facing the Russkis, it can be a good thing. Lessons learned from use of the ICSR could result in improvements to the CT carbine, which in its current form has the same undesirable characteristics as the ICSR. Hell, start producing polymer cased 70+grain 5.56. It will always be a useful round until caseless or similar level breakthrough happens, which is a long ways off at this rate. Even the hybrids are going to be rough in close quarters, 5.56 will be around for a long time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:56:51 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let's also not forget they want these guns to be suppressor ready and every gun will be issued with a suppressor. A small frame AR-10 weighing 7lbs, suppressed, and firing polymer cased M80A1 and XM1158 could be a decent setup. Determining that though is beyond me. Also M80A1 is a nasty round, I wouldn't mind seeing a .264USA EPR setup. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/414147/Untitled1-293226.JPG Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
7.62 ammo is already in the system, ready for immediate use. It would take some time to develop, test, manufacture, and field all of the 6.5 loads that would be required. A small frame AR-10 weighing 7lbs, suppressed, and firing polymer cased M80A1 and XM1158 could be a decent setup. Determining that though is beyond me. Also M80A1 is a nasty round, I wouldn't mind seeing a .264USA EPR setup. https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/414147/Untitled1-293226.JPG LOL explains a lot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:57:46 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh, you're one of those dudes that forgets the ultra majority of rounds hit dirt. LOL explains a lot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 12:59:26 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're still going to spend billions implementing this. Why not spend those dollars in a concentrated manner developing the next real platform upgrade instead of going back to a round we have abandoned before with good results? Then we have to spend billions unfucking everything when this GO retires to go consult for his buddy that snagged this contract. Hell, start producing polymer cased 70+grain 5.56. It will always be a useful round until caseless or similar level breakthrough happens, which is a long ways off at this rate. Even the hybrids are going to be rough in close quarters, 5.56 will be around for a long time. 7.62 is just the interim caliber until they decide on the end goal caliber. It will be a caliber that does not fit in the AR-15 and will require a new rifle anyways, so get the rifle now and when the caliber is here just get a new barrel and magazines and convert them over....That's the idea at least. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2017 1:01:08 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
He's worried about an armor system at a trade show? Horse shit. If he's the one pushing this, then he has a nice job waiting for him upon retirement or a new house.
|
|
|
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.
