Sig is releasing their NGSW Entrant (MCX-SPEAR)

[TGS]

Thanks Schwartz. We’ve seen enough instances of M993 and other .308 tungsten penetrators be defeated by newer Level 4 plates at velocities less than 2600-2800 fps. Unless Uncle Sam has the secret sauce for some new heavy metal bullets, I’m thinking that round 2700-2900 fps may be the lower limit needed to reliably penetrate today’s Level 4 and tomorrow’s next generation plates, right?

There's zero way the M1186 can realistically be expected to penetrate Level 4. As @Default.mp3 pointed out, it's the structural equivalent of M855A1 or M80A1. It's an EPR round, not a tungsten carbide AP round like M995 and M993.

One of the parts that we on the internet might be misunderstanding in this equation is whether Level 4 is actually the standard the Army is shooting for. We use Level 4 a lot, but I can't remember if Level 4 was specifically referenced in any of the briefing materials as the goal. It's very possible that the Army is shooting for GOST 5A, the current defeat level fielded by Russia's "Ratnik" 6B45 armor. That would seem much more realistic, since if I recall correctly GOST 5a is rated for 7.62x39 BZ-API.

Still, the problem with that goal in reality is that the Russians are mixing in issue of the "Granit" series of plates...in particular with the units that you really want to be able to shoot deader, quicker (SOF, crack assault/vanguard units, maybe @Caballoflaco can add more context). The Granit plates can be had up to GOST 6 (or whatever that new rating system they're using is, BR6?). This plate is capable of defeating all known AP rounds short of 50BMG API (edited to add) and M993. Note that there is no M993 analogue in the 6.8x51 chambering...atleast, not that has been made public.

So, in reality, it's still falling short from its intended purpose of overmatch/AP capability.

[Ndbbm]

There's zero way the M1186 can realistically be expected to penetrate Level 4. As @Default.mp3 pointed out, it's the structural equivalent of M855A1 or M80A1. It's an EPR round, not a tungsten carbide AP round like M995 and M993.
Note that there is no M993 analogue in the 6.8x51 chambering...atleast, not that has been made public.

So, in reality, it's still falling short from its intended purpose of overmatch/AP capability.

Doing some searching I found this talking about XM1184 special purpose ammo for the ngsw program. Think this is supposed to be the higher pressure ap ammo. The info is under project EC2 Advanced Amour Piercing. I’m posting the link because my phone didn’t want to copy and paste the section for some reason.

https://www.dacis.com/budget/budget_...603639A_77.pdf

[TGS]

Doing some searching I found this talking about XM1184 special purpose ammo for the ngsw program. Think this is supposed to be the higher pressure ap ammo. The info is under project EC2 Advanced Amour Piercing. I’m posting the link because my phone didn’t want to copy and paste the section for some reason.

https://www.dacis.com/budget/budget_...603639A_77.pdf

Thanks for posting that. ADVAP is one of the R&D programs I referenced earlier (I think...I believe its an EPR structure but with a heavy metal penetrator instead of hardened steel). It's been going on for a decade and, AFAIK, is still experimental.

The 6.8x51 types actually being put into full production for issue, AFAIK, are the high pressure general purpose (1186), reduced range, blank, tracer, and marking round.

ETA:to be more clear, there are multiple different experimental AP rounds that have been type classified for the 6.8x51....XM1184 ADVAP is not a sure thing. There's traditional steel core penetrators, M993 tungsten ported to the 6.8 caliber, even a round that is functionally similar to the SLAP. None of them have been chosen to be put into full rate production/standard issue, is what I was trying to get across. As it stands right now, troops being issued the M7 will not have access to any of these outside of a specific experimental trial basis...they won't be stocked for use. As it stands, if we go to war with a near peer, we are stuck with the M1186.

[JSGlock34]

I'm share the skepticism about the M7; personally I'm more intrigued by the M250 SAW replacement.

[Sensei]

To summarize, the exact armor penetration capability of the Army’s bullets that are still in development remain unknown. Although Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Mark Milley was quoted in one G&A article that the eventual rifle and ammo package will be able to, “defeat any body armor, any planned body armor that we know of in the future,” what we have today will not defeat a Level 4 plate. https://www.gunsandammo.com/editoria...rtridge/457153

That means there is a strong argument to be made that our soldiers would be less lethal tomorrow than anytime in the past 50 years in the 0-300 meter ranges that have dominated the battlefield over that time period. Yes, I know that we’ve be frustrated by PK-type 7.62x54R fire from beyond 800 meters in A-Stan, but those instances were dwarfed by the engagements under 300 meters. I’m not even convinced that this rifle has the accuracy and legs to address that beyond 600 meter threat. I encountered that threat 2 times in my career, and each time it was dealt with a caliber much greater than .30 (think .50 and 40mm). Thus, my take as of today is that the range juice is not worth the weight and capacity squeeze.

[the Schwartz]

To summarize, the exact armor penetration capability of the Army’s bullets that are still in development remain unknown. Although Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Mark Milley was quoted in one G&A article that the eventual rifle and ammo package will be able to, “defeat any body armor, any planned body armor that we know of in the future,” what we have today will not defeat a Level 4 plate. https://www.gunsandammo.com/editoria...rtridge/457153

That means there is a strong argument to be made that our soldiers would be less lethal tomorrow than anytime in the past 50 years in the 0-300 meter ranges that have dominated the battlefield over that time period. Yes, I know that we’ve be frustrated by PK-type 7.62x54R fire from beyond 800 meters in A-Stan, but those instances were dwarfed by the engagements under 300 meters. I’m not even convinced that this rifle has the accuracy and legs to address that beyond 600 meter threat. I encountered that threat 2 times in my career, and each time it was dealt with a caliber much greater than .30 (think .50 and 40mm). Thus, my take as of today is that the range juice is not worth the weight and capacity squeeze.

General Milley's remarks confirm what I have suspected all along; the people responsible for developing this system are not going to allow the system to go a field without an AP round. It's hard to imagine that there not an ongoing R&D process focusing on material appropriate construction of such a round. The $64,000 question is when will the system, complete with task-appropriate components, be ready to field?