I saw this over at Soldier Systems https://soldiersystems.net/2023/01/1...ctorate-iwtsd/
I'm a bit confused as to how this fits in with NGSW, but I think it's a cool piece of kit, and the technology shows some innovation.
Seems to be an "AR-12.5" sort of design (halfway in between AR-15 and AR-10 in size). Does anyone know more?
Looks cool - I wonder if FN will ever sell a civilian version.
Reading that whole article, though, I can't help but ponder how sheltered these research directorate dweebs are. They're great at filling paragraphs with word salad acronyms and $50 words that brief well, but they DESPERATELY need to remember their end audience. All this stuff is eventually getting handed to E3's and E4's, who all make gutter humor jokes with every other breath. So calling a new cartridge the 'LICC' is going to get immediate derisive snorts and gutter jokes, even from NCO's.
The AR12 has been a topic of discussion for ~10 years, alongside the goal of whats been known as the 'General Purpose Cartridge' (GPC)Originally Posted by jbrimlow
AR15: 2.25" COL
AR12: 2.50" COL
AR10: 2.75" COL
The GPC goal was a cartridge that could equal or exceed the effective range of 7.62x51, with lower ammunition weight, less recoil, lighter rifle, and a 25+rd magazine.
The theory of the GPC was that the 5.56 and 7.62 would be replaced with a single, 6 to 6.5mm intermediate cartridge, giving the entire squad the ability to be effective out to 600m+.
Dozens of cartridges and VLD projectiles were computer modeled by enthusiasts, biz, and the military to meet this goal. Turns out theres a lot of cartridges, some as low as .204 in caliber, that could be viable 600m cartridges if given a VLD projectile with a frag threshold of 1700fps (the estimate of the US military EPR frag velocity.)
Jim Schatz was a huge proponent, as was Anthony Williams:
https://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/0...weapon-system/
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovc...nyWilliams.pdf
Presentation of the .264 USA, the predascesor to FN's new offering:
However up until today, these cartridges were largely theoretical, as there was no viable AR12 platform, and no lightweight case design has yet emerged thats ready to be fielded.
And when 6.8 NGSW was released - not a intermediate but rather a magnum cartridge - most thought the GPC concept was dead.
Needless to say I was beyond shocked seeing this offering by FN.
The Soldier Systems article that reads like an FN advertisement is suggesting that this rifle is a completely independent design that came after the competitive bid for the NGSW that went to Sig Sauer. I’m having a hard time believing that. I suspect that whatever was submitted for the NGSW by FN became the basis for this rifle.The AR12 has been a topic of discussion for ~10 years, alongside the goal of whats been known as the 'General Purpose Cartridge' (GPC)
AR15: 2.25" COL
AR12: 2.50" COL
AR10: 2.75" COL
The GPC goal was a cartridge that could equal or exceed the effective range of 7.62x51, with lower ammunition weight, less recoil, lighter rifle, and a 25+rd magazine.
The theory of the GPC was that the 5.56 and 7.62 would be replaced with a single, 6 to 6.5mm intermediate cartridge, giving the entire squad the ability to be effective out to 600m+.
Dozens of cartridges and VLD projectiles were computer modeled by enthusiasts, biz, and the military to meet this goal. Turns out theres a lot of cartridges, some as low as .204 in caliber, that could be viable 600m cartridges if given a VLD projectile with a frag threshold of 1700fps (the estimate of the US military EPR frag velocity.)
Jim Schatz was a huge proponent, as was Anthony Williams:
https://soldiersystems.net/2017/04/0...weapon-system/
https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovc...nyWilliams.pdf
Presentation of the .264 USA, the predascesor to FN's new offering:
However up until today, these cartridges were largely theoretical, as there was no viable AR12 platform, and no lightweight case design has yet emerged thats ready to be fielded.
And when 6.8 NGSW was released - not a intermediate but rather a magnum cartridge - most thought the GPC concept was dead.
Needless to say I was beyond shocked seeing this offering by FN.
Regardless, why does Uncle Sugar keep cranking out solicitations and RFPs for intermediate+P (ie magnum lite) calibers. We already committed a fortune evaluating the NGSW program that has very little chance of surviving the logistic realities of the expeditionary conflicts that we tend to fight. There is very little chance that the Spear or .277 Fury are going to see widespread deployment, and there is zero chance that we can afford to field TWO boutique, hard-to-manufacture calibers. Did we really need to fund another 6.5-6.8+P boondoggle? Or, is this just another O-8 throwing some conciliatory cash FN’s way to secure the retirement option?
I like my rifles like my women - short, light, fast, brown, and suppressed.
OK. If we assume that we need something with more OAL, and perhaps more cartridge diameter than SAAMI-spec 5.56x45mm, and something with less OAL and diameter than 7.62x51mm, and if we move away from the Gov't/Military procurement/desire, what are the local optimums of case diameters and OALs?
I see a lower bound of a "stretched receiver" setup for 95+ grain projo in the good ole' 5.56mm, perhaps at the original 855A1 higher pressure. I could also see something like a .236 with a 100-110 VLD projo in something like a SPC(x43mm) or Grendel(x39mm).
I do tend think I'd want 30 round continuous-curve mags, but I don't get the charging handle alterations- I'm perfectly happy with AR charging handles.
How about it? Where are you at? What is your AR-12?
Per the PF Code of Conduct, I have a commercial interest in the StreakTM product as sold by Ammo, Inc.
When I took a crack at the cartridge, I came up with a cartridge concept I called the 6mm CAKE - as in, "have your cake and eat it too."
6mm 85gr VLD EPR 0.229 G7 BC @ 3,000fps from a 16" barrel. Case would be a 6mm HAGAR, run at 62kpsi (5.56 psi), with a longer COL for using lead free VLD projectiles.
CAKE
-Cartridge less then weight of 5.56 brass when polymer or lightweight steel used; weight below 7.62x39 if brass used
-Recoil equal or less then 7.62x39
-Narrow case allows 30rd magazines (same length as 30rd 6.8spc LWRC Six8 mag)
-Fragmentation range (1700fps zone) beyond 7.62x51 M80A1
Rifle would be a 0.25" COL extended Six8 with a beefier bolt rated for 62kpsi.
Well then, hell yes. Who else and what else?
Per the PF Code of Conduct, I have a commercial interest in the StreakTM product as sold by Ammo, Inc.
More drones of all types, more artillery: tubes and mobile rocket systems, integrated and effective EW and counter-drone systems. Something like 80-90 percent of casualties on both sides in Ukraine have been due to artillery and it hasn’t been uncommon for small units on both sides to have been rendered combat ineffective due to casualties before even getting to fire their rifles.Well then, hell yes. Who else and what else?
The current conflict in Europe is providing good evidence that folks had figured this shit out by the end of WW2 and now after Afghanistan we’re trying to go all. 276 Enfield like the Brits did after their experience fighting the Boers in South Africa.
ETA: both sides seem happy with 5.45 5.56 and even 7.62x39. The only real complaint I’ve seen brought up by either side is that the 9x39 subsonics lack penetration and the guns don’t stand up well to a heavy firing schedule.
Last edited by Caballoflaco; 01-17-2023 at 02:25 AM.
I still struggle with the idea of ignoring over a century of battlefield data about engagement ranges to address a nearly singular situation of being outranged by beltfed machineguns in mountain terrain by fielding a heavier, harder kicking and blastier rifle.
I'm interested more in the non-military usage of "AR-12" and its corresponding caliber(s).
In a military sense, literally everything else is more important than individual rifles. As a military power, we're better off buying more missiles and drones than messing around with rifles. No argument there.
In a non-military application, it seems like the gap between 5.56mm and 7.62mm is worth some solutions beyond and between putting the SPC and x39mm families of cartridges into "AR-15", and having the Creedmoor and x51mm families of cartridges into "AR-10". It's interesting to read about ideas people have for that in-between. It's an interesting note that 9x39mm is wearing out guns.
Per the PF Code of Conduct, I have a commercial interest in the StreakTM product as sold by Ammo, Inc.
Reply With Quote
