|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
 
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/7/2005 7:22 PM
Posts: 6,666,
Visits: 289
|
|
Should the military adopt one universal cartridge for all battle rifles, machineguns, and sniper rifles as was the case in WWI? This was attemped with the adoption of 7.62mm NATO cartridge in 1955, but was a failure. Recently the Chineese have adopted a 5.8mm Universal cartridge for all of their small arms. Now, with the advent of the Remington 6.8x43mm SPR cartridge, this could be a possibility for the US Military.
My own personal opinion is that regardless of the logisical cost savings, we should maintain 2 different cartridges. 1 for assault rifles and 1 for sniping rifles and machinguns. I would like to see the 6.8mm SPR replace 5.56mm for all assault rifles and SAWs; with 7.62 NATO kept for medium machineguns and sniping rifles. However, if a universal cartridge were adopted, a compromise could be made by having 2 different loadings. A light load for rifles and a heavy loading for machinegun and sniping rifle use.
What are your opinions on this? Should the US military attempt adopt one universal cartridge or stay with 2 Infantry cartridges?
|
|
|
|
|
Hard Charger
Group: Registered User
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:45 AM
Posts: 1,595,
Visits: 2,047
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Delta_6
However, if a universal cartridge were adopted, a compromise could be made by having 2 different loadings. A light load for rifles and a heavy loading for machinegun and sniping rifle use.
What are your opinions on this? Should the US military attempt adopt one universal cartridge or stay with 2 Infantry cartridges?
Only problem I can foresee is that you would have to have a pretty foolproof method of preventing accidental mixing of the high-pressure rounds into the low-pressure guns.
The only reason we are using the 7.62 NATO is because of its historical use within the military. If we're revising cartridges, there's no reason not to go to something more suitable for sniping, like the .300 Win Mag or even the new .300 WSM. Then all the rifles and MGs could be equipped with all 6.8mm rounds.
Martin  "When I'm in command, every mission is a suicide mission" - Zapp Branigan, Futurama
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Yesterday @ 4:31 PM
Posts: 5,241,
Visits: 3,780
|
|
We have seen this so many times: .45 cal cartridge for the, model 1911 pistol, which was interchangable with the Thompson submachinegun.
30.06 cartridge: which was interchangeable with the M-1 Garand, and the Browning Automatic Rifle.
5.56 cartridge which was interchangable with the M-16 series rifle and the SAW, or Squad Auto-matic rifle.
7.62 cartridge: which was interchangeable with the M-14, and the M-60 machine-gun.
9.mm cartridge: which was interchangeable with the Beretta, and a large family of sub-machingun's.
This conflict most certainly will bring about another such cartidge with at least 2 if not 3 weapon systems. H&K is working on this for us as America does not seem to ba able to find any other Armament Manufacture's like Browning, Colt, or S&W, which would be able to satisfy our future need of a weapons platform form that we would be able to engage future conflicts.
------------------------------------------------------------ Out of every 100 men, ten shouldn't even be there, Eighty are just targets, Nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back." - Hericletus, circa 500 BC ----------------------------------------------------------- 
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 6/10/2006 7:52 AM
Posts: 4,296,
Visits: 382
|
|
quote:
1 for assault rifles and 1 for sniping rifles and machinguns.
absolutley. One round does not fit all.
quote:
However, if a universal cartridge were adopted, a compromise could be made by having 2 different loadings. A light load for rifles and a heavy loading for machinegun and sniping rifle use
I gotta agree with Martin here, quote:
Only problem I can foresee is that you would have to have a pretty foolproof method of preventing accidental mixing of the high-pressure rounds into the low-pressure guns.
you'd almost certainly get some contamination.
quote:
The only reason we are using the 7.62 NATO is because of its historical use within the military. If we're revising cartridges, there's no reason not to go to something more suitable for sniping, like the .300 Win Mag
quote:
7.62 NATO kept for medium machineguns and sniping rifles
I was under the impression that all NATO armies were going to .300 Win Mag. I know we are, and the Brits are. Isn't it happening right across the board?
Make The Voices Stop!
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/7/2005 7:22 PM
Posts: 6,666,
Visits: 289
|
|
quote:
Only problem I can foresee is that you would have to have a pretty foolproof method of preventing accidental mixing of the high-pressure rounds into the low-pressure guns.
The intent of my statement was not to create a high pressure round and a low pressure round per se. My intent would be to provide a lighter 6.8mm bullet at a higher velocity for the rifle vs. a heavier 6.8mm bullet at a lower velocity for machinegun and sniper rifle use. Both would have chamber pressures that are safe to fire in all the weapons. They would be marked on the bullet tip with a different color paint to distinguish between loose rounds.
Basically it would give the option of using two different bullet weights. Think of it as being analogous to being able to fire both 55 grain 5.56 and 77 grain 5.56 from the same M16A2/A4.
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Registered User
Last Login: 10/2/2005 10:13 PM
Posts: 5,502,
Visits: 70
|
|
I like the 6.8mm and another higher powered round. .300 Win Mag is nice. I have heard a lot about the .338 lapua lately too. I thing an M-240 designed for this would be very heavy though.
Remember that when you make the cartrige heavier, you make the rifle heavier.
Go with God, but make Him walk the point.
If you load a mudfoot down with a lot of gadgets he has to watch somebody a lot more simply equipped - say with a stone axe - will sneak up and bash his head in while he is trying to read a Vernier. - Robert Heinlein
|
|
|
|
|
Regular Joe
Group: Registered User
Last Login: 10/31/2004 11:42 AM
Posts: 121,
Visits: 1
|
|
I'm going to come out and say it. 300 Mag sucks, as a military round. You'd have MG barrel lives measured in single digit belt counts, and all your troops would be deaf. It also isn't that good a round for LR when you get down to it.
I think we could consolidtate on one bore size, with two different cartridges. I posted this concept elsewhere.
6.8x43 for your assault rifles and SAW's, and something like 6.8x51(approx) for your snipers and GPMG's. It would NOT be based on the 308 Win case, something fatter, maybe like a 284Winchester without that stupid rebated rim. Looking for a 160gn VLD bullet at about 2700fps MV, with a 100gn or so hardcore AP round at 3300-3400fps or so. You can use the same 100gn HCAP projectile from the 6.8x43 case for your AP load for the assault rifle, when needed.
A VLD bullet of about .625 BC at 2700fps would be flatter, with less blast and recoil, and greater barrel life than the 300Win Mag, which is only used by SOCOM BTW. Europe is going to 338Lapua, and guys with SOCOM seem interested in the Lapua too. Me, I think 50caliber Browning is fine for your long range anti material use. Shooting people at long range(1200m plus) is a real long odds bet regardless of what rd you're using. Stalk closer, or use something with HE, like maybe a lightweight 60mm or 81mm mortar with a laser guided rd, eh? That's about the same weight as your 50cal Barret, and they just tested a laser guidance package for the 71mm rocket that should easily work on a mortar rd. Which is better, plink or Kaboom? S/F...Ken M
"It's easy to be hard, it's hard to be smart"
|
|
|
|
| | |