Questionable piece on a new cartridge for the military

[Baldanders]

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/08/new...#axzz5NgmUZjg7


This one, and his post the day before are....interesting.


Seems like a lot of Boomers want to see us get back to a "real man's caliber" before they die.

I can't believe some folks are still fighting the ar-15/ 5.56 adoption battle. Although I should know better.

I think a 7.62 NATO replacement would make oodles of sense, but I doubt we will see that anytime soon either.

[jetfire]

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/08/new...#axzz5NgmUZjg7


This one, and his post the day before are....interesting.


Seems like a lot of Boomers want to see us get back to a "real man's caliber" before they die.

I can't believe some folks are still fighting the ar-15/ 5.56 adoption battle. Although I should know better.

I think a 7.62 NATO replacement would make oodles of sense, but I doubt we will see that anytime soon either.

MMM Ammoland dropping that sweet clickbait.

Never mind the fact that the new 855A1 is the killingest (that’s a technical term) rifle round the military has ever fielded and is absolutely amazing.

[Baldanders]

So you're Caleb of YouTube fame correct?

Can I hire you to sing "Let it Go" at my grandaughter's next birthday party?

I've enjoyed your online work.

I don't know abouy killingest, but I know M855A1+AR+friend with bad fire discipline = I have to buy a new target stand. It sails though soft metal, leaving nice jagged sharp bits on both sides of the impact.

[jetfire]

So you're Caleb of YouTube fame correct?

Can I hire you to sing "Let it Go" at my grandaughter's next birthday party?

I've enjoyed your online work.

I don't know abouy killingest, but I know M855A1+AR+friend with bad fire discipline = I have to buy a new target stand. It sails though soft metal, leaving nice jagged sharp bits on both sides of the impact.

I like to think of myself as Youtube Notorious, not famous, and yes I will sing for money.

[KhanRad]

https://www.ammoland.com/2018/08/new...#axzz5NgmUZjg7


This one, and his post the day before are....interesting.


Seems like a lot of Boomers want to see us get back to a "real man's caliber" before they die.

I can't believe some folks are still fighting the ar-15/ 5.56 adoption battle. Although I should know better.

I think a 7.62 NATO replacement would make oodles of sense, but I doubt we will see that anytime soon either.

I can tell you that carrying around a semiauto .308 with 150rds of ammo, an optic, body armor, water, food,.....etc is an extremely taxing endeavor. The 6.5 caliber, in an intermediate sized cartridge like the .264 USA makes a lot more sense. Also, .338 is a better choice for mounted MGs and precision rifles overseas anyway. The 7.62 NATO is more of a middle ground cartridge that will likely see less use with time given better options.

[the Schwartz]

I can tell you that carrying around a semiauto .308 with 150rds of ammo, an optic, body armor, water, food,.....etc is an extremely taxing endeavor. The 6.5 caliber, in an intermediate sized cartridge like the .264 USA makes a lot more sense. Also, .338 is a better choice for mounted MGs and precision rifles overseas anyway. The 7.62 NATO is more of a middle ground cartridge that will likely see less use with time given better options.

After reading Farnam's article, I agree with you. Other than pointing out that he believes that another cartridge might be needed, the few options that he offers (and then dismisses out-of-hand) are certainly not news. 6.8 SPC, seems the most likely possibility of the few that he mentions, but the .mil hasn't jumped on it and his opining that, "the Pentagon will want to get away from the Stoner system and go back to a gas-piston rifle", is speculative at best.

Guess that I missed the point of Farnam's article...if there was one.

[jellydonut]

This is barely even an article, it's just some flowing train of thought punctuated with a lot of exclamation marks.

The mere concept that infantrymen might actually carry a rifle and a loadout for 7.62x51 again could only have been thought up by someone who hasn't tried carrying one along with loaded mags for it.

The other idea of the military being caught up on 6.8 SPC and gas pistons seems to be stuck in 2007. Other than the USMC, the military has largely realized that DI has its benefits, too, and 6.8 is dead in the water.

[ranger]

Anyone waxing poetic about Infantry carrying 308 and a basic load has never really done it. in 1981 - pre-SAW - Ranger school used to issue M14s at the Mountain Phase to simulate a "SAW like" weapon - I made the mistake of admitting I knew how to clean a M14 (compliments of JROTC) and therefore carried M14 with a basic load of mags (heavy steel) and blanks. It sucked. I was very happy to reclaim my M16A1 as soon as possible.

[Baldanders]

I can tell you that carrying around a semiauto .308 with 150rds of ammo, an optic, body armor, water, food,.....etc is an extremely taxing endeavor. The 6.5 caliber, in an intermediate sized cartridge like the .264 USA makes a lot more sense. Also, .338 is a better choice for mounted MGs and precision rifles overseas anyway. The 7.62 NATO is more of a middle ground cartridge that will likely see less use with time given better options.

I have a feeling that in 20 years or so, our armed forces will be using 5.56×45, some sort of 6.5 round with a half-polymer case and the .338 (or a ballistic equivalent). I think a polymer case for the 5.56 is far more likely than a new round.

I also think new optics/augmented reality/AI will make a far bigger difference than any new cartridge for infantrymen and especially special forces types. Materials technology should allow us to make insanely light and strong guns. I wonder how light we could make a buckytube/graphene/diamondoid receiver?

[HCM]

Instead of typing a lot, here is an excellent discussion by some relevant professionals on the idea of 7.62x51 vs 5.56. If I recall correctly it touches on things like intermediate cartridges and polymer case ammunition.