+- 6.5 Grendel Forum (https://65grendel.com)
+-- Forum: 6.5 GRENDEL DISCUSSION FORUMS (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: 6.5 Grendel Military & Law Enforcement (https://65grendel.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" (/showthread.php?tid=6789)
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - BluntForceTrauma - 11-26-2013
I just got an email from Jane's Defence Weekly noting that the Army is, again, studying small arms calibers. I quote:
US Army to Study New Small-arms Calibers
The US Army has announced a 'Caliber Configuration Study' to support two new small-arms programmes, designated CLAWS (Combat Lightweight Automatic Weapon System) and LDAM (Lightweight Dismounted Automatic Machinegun). The announcement was made at an NDIA (National Defense Industries Association) conference held in mid-November at the Army's Picatinny Arsenal.
Anybody got more info about this?
John
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - woohoo - 11-26-2013
HANKA Wrote:I just got an email from Jane's Defence Weekly noting that the Army is, again, studying small arms calibers. I quote:
US Army to Study New Small-arms Calibers
The US Army has announced a 'Caliber Configuration Study' to support two new small-arms programmes, designated CLAWS (Combat Lightweight Automatic Weapon System) and LDAM (Lightweight Dismounted Automatic Machinegun). The announcement was made at an NDIA (National Defense Industries Association) conference held in mid-November at the Army's Picatinny Arsenal.
Anybody got more info about this?
John
Guardsman posted this on another site.
"Yesterday a reduced NDIA event was held at Picatinny Arsenal. Given the recent Federal shutdown and budget sequestration, it was a much more limited event than last year. However, there was one extremely important public announcement.
The US Army has initiated a new 'Caliber Configuration Study' to support two new programs:
CLAWS - Combat Lightweight Automatic Weapon System
Envisioned to replace carbine (12"), assault rifle (16"), SDM/ DMR (20") and SAW / LMG (24"), may also include a subcompact weapon. Requirement mandates a modular system reconfigurable by the operator with interchangeable barrel, stock, accessories etc. All within the art of the possible. Caliber TBD from pending CCS caliber study.
LDAM - Lighweight Dismounted Automatic Machinegun
Envisioned to replace the Medium Machine Gun and possibly the HMG (.50 BMG).Something like GD .338 Norma MMG, but caliber again TBD from the CCS caliber study.
This announcement means we will see a proper industry-developed, army-endorsed and government-funded effort to produce what we have been discussing ad infinitum here for years.
My expectation is that the following calibres will be evaluated for CLAWS:
- 6.35 / .250 (6.35 x 43 mm)
- 6.5 / .260 (6.5 x 45 mm)
- 6.86 / .270 (6.86 x 45 mm)
- 7.0 / .280 (7 x 46 mm)
All lead free. All convertible to polymer case options.
For LDAM, the requirement is less well-defined at this stage, but is expected to look at larger calibers along the following lines:
- 8.59 / .338 (8.59 x 70 Lapua or 8.59 x 64 mm Norma)
- 9 /.354 (9 x 90 mm MEN)
- 10.6 / .416 (10.6 x 83 Barrett)
Variety of ammunition types. All convertible to polymer case options.
Expect this to drive our discussions to an entirely different level. The most important potential outcome is that the US may again unilaterally adopt a new and different cartridge to the rest of NATO. A standardisation competition will be held to align non-US alliance members use of it, just as we did with 5.56 x 45 mm. "
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - BluntForceTrauma - 11-26-2013
I'm gonna place my bet early and predict that whatever cartridge results from this will validate the 6.5 Grendel concept: compact case, high SD, high BC bullet. Physics is on our side!
Should be fun to watch what they finally recommend and subsequently do NOT adopt due to institutional inertia.
John
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - woohoo - 11-26-2013
Going green will mean testing with new bullets, not what is on the market already. There has been enough experimenting with solid copper designs to show that a .25 G7 BC is about the limit with a 5 cal long bullet with a 3 cal ogive in any caliber and all calibers can produce the same BCs. The weights will be apx 115-125gr.
IMO which doesn't mean jack, the 6.35 is too light and the 7mms are too heavy to meet the weight reduction goals. A green 6.5 bullet with a .25 BC will be as long as the 139 Lapua but needs a hybrid ogive along with the other features above.
You're right, they will say yes that looks good but we're sticking with the 5.56 and 308 because it has worked for 50 years.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - LRRPF52 - 11-26-2013
My prediction:
5.56 NATO polymer case with heavier projectile
7.62 NATO polymer case with some new bullet
They will run into issues with the polymer cases in high-volume, but it will be such that they feel they can improve upon them enough to be viable. Someone will ask if we can have a new .257 or 6.5mm in polymer case to cover all the individual shoulder-fired weapons, which can be converted to with the quick-barrel change system at a later date, while the 5.56 and 7.62 polymer case chamberings are used to test long-term viability of in the current weapon systems to get a fleet survey over x number of years.
The polymer case and quick barrel change capabilities combined will revolutionize soldier's load if the polymer case proves viable. Existing weapon designs for shoulder-fired will likely include:
* LMT MRP AR15 frame
* LMT 7.62 MWSE
* FN SCAR-H
This is an area where the Grendel would actually hold an advantage against all the other polymer cartridges for a shoulder-fired system, and in a word: pressure.
The performance demands for NATO chamberings traditionally have relied on the US's infatuation with cramming high mv performance into as small of a case as possible, which is hard on weapons. It's going to be even harder on "space-aged" plastic/metal hybrid cases. Physics says that a lower-pressure cartridge will allow longer strings of fire, and longer weapon life, in more extreme operating environments (like high temps in the desert, as well as low temps in the arctic).
The best possible outcome would be the phase-out of 7.62 NATO, as long as an equally-capable cartridge and system with less weight and more efficient projectiles replaces it.
Even if they keep 7.62 NATO in a polymer case that is viable in the long-term, it will be a God-send to dismounted Infantry and Combat Arms soldiers.
![[Image: pcp_rounds-tm-tfb.jpg]](http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/pcp_rounds-tm-tfb.jpg)
![[Image: pcp_belted-tm-tfb.jpg]](http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/pcp_belted-tm-tfb.jpg)
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - BluntForceTrauma - 11-26-2013
What's the state-of-the-art in polymer today and in the next five years? My impression is that it's still not so good. Whatever happened to that commercial stuff from a couple years ago? PCM or some such? That still around?
John
P.S. Anyone know the weight savings of polymer vs. steel case?
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - woohoo - 11-26-2013
PCP is still around and word is they may be starting a new manufacturing facility in the south east.
30% savings but not sure if that is 30% of case weight or 30% of complete cartridge weight.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - Michael - 11-26-2013
LRRPF52 Wrote:My prediction:
5.56 NATO polymer case with heavier projectile
7.62 NATO polymer case with some new bullet
Agreed. And if not polymer, some other type of 'new' case and/or bullet material.
Anyone know anything about ceramic bullets?
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - hm2 clark - 11-26-2013
I predict that any weight savings on a polymer case will be erased by new and added gear to hump. Perhaps a video camera on every soldiers rifle like a fighter planes gun camera to help better (micro)manage the battle space.?
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - LRRPF52 - 11-27-2013
hm2 clark Wrote:I predict that any weight savings on a polymer case will be erased by new and added gear to hump. Perhaps a video camera on every soldiers rifle like a fighter planes gun camera to help better (micro)manage the battle space.?
Combat cameras have been in-play and a planned addition for Objective Force Warrior, or Force 21-whatever they're calling it now. It started as Land Warrior, and I was in 2 different units that tested Land Warrior systems in the late 1990's, as well as 2000 in the 82nd Airborne.
In addition to the weapon-mounted camera, which is interfaced with the Helmet-Mounted Display, there was also a digital compass, magazine well mounted mouse pad, and planned LRF capabilities integrated with your fire control network. The M4 carbine then became a faster call-for-fire platform, like a SOFLAM, since the radio/computer/gps was integrated into the individual soldier's vest, in a ruggedized, submersible case the size of a small radio.
Not sure where the program is in its current state of development, but they did combat-deploy a unit within a Stryker Brigade with Land Warrior for real-world testing.
![[Image: size0-army.mil-2008-05-28-125813.jpg]](http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/-images/2008/05/28/16154/size0-army.mil-2008-05-28-125813.jpg)
![[Image: frifoto8-13-10.jpg]](http://4gwar.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/frifoto8-13-10.jpg)
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - hm2 clark - 11-27-2013
Ahh.. but if we had light enough ammo we could then have our guys carry a good enough camera on each rifle so the POTUS watch it all in realtime and give his orders to the soldier in the field directly! Think how much better that would be.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - Guardsman26 - 11-27-2013
Woohoo,
Thanks for posting my comment from Tony William's forum.
Based on my knowledge of this topic, I think this is the beginning of the bitter end for 5.56mm. It is possible that we could adopt a polymer 7.62mm round, but a polymer 6.5mm Grendel would weigh more or less the same as 5.56mm NATO - or to put it another way: 7.62mm performance in a 5.56mm package.
That has to be compelling. As I've said before, giving a military spec projectile a little more oomph will require a longer case. The latter will also be needed to accommodate a tracer round. So, a 6.5x46mm round firing a 7 or 8 gram bullet at 800-840 mps seems a very likely scenario. Add a lead-free projectile that fragments in the same way as a 5.56mm M855A1 EPR, and you're in business.
Basically, the Grendel is the perfect start point for the CCS. I'm very interested to see how this evolves.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - SHORT-N-SASSY - 11-27-2013
woohoo Wrote:Going green will mean testing with new bullets, not what is on the market already. There has been enough experimenting with solid copper designs to show that a .25 G7 BC is about the limit with a 5 cal long bullet with a 3 cal ogive in any caliber and all calibers can produce the same BCs. The weights will be apx 115-125gr.
IMO which doesn't mean jack, the 6.35 is too light and the 7mms are too heavy to meet the weight reduction goals. A green 6.5 bullet with a .25 BC will be as long as the 139 Lapua but needs a hybrid ogive along with the other features above.
You're right, they will say yes that looks good but we're sticking with the 5.56 and 308 because it has worked for 50 years.
woohoo,
Re the 6.5 X 45mm case loaded with solid copper projectiles, what cartridge overall length are we looking at?
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - woohoo - 11-27-2013
SHORT-N-SASSY Wrote:woohoo,
Re the 6.5 X 45mm case loaded with solid copper projectiles, what cartridge overall length are we looking at?
If using a design similar to mine with a .25 G7 BC the length of the bullet is about the length of the 139 Lapua. If I seat the bullet where only the boattail is in the powder column the COAL will be 2.7" That is close enough to call it a 308 length. The Carcano diameter case will feed from 308 Pmags so that is what I am using, a lightweight 308 with Pmags. A SCAR 17 would be the best combat platform at this time.
BTW, that is a 111gr bullet. I have another turned bullet designed for the 264/Grendel that weighs 100 grains and has a G7 BC of .25. Figure that can be pushed apx 200 fps faster than a 123 with nearly the same BC as the 123 Amax.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - SHORT-N-SASSY - 11-27-2013
woohoo Wrote:If using a design similar to mine with a .25 G7 BC the length of the bullet is about the length of the 139 Lapua. If I seat the bullet where only the boattail is in the powder column the COAL will be 2.7" That is close enough to call it a 308 length. The Carcano diameter case will feed from 308 Pmags so that is what I am using, a lightweight 308 with Pmags. A SCAR 17 would be the best combat platform at this time.
BTW, that is a 111gr bullet. I have another turned bullet designed for the 264/Grendel that weighs 100 grains and has a G7 BC of .25. Figure that can be pushed apx 200 fps faster than a 123 with nearly the same BC as the 123 Amax.
"Going Green": a whole new ball game! Thank you.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - woohoo - 11-27-2013
The consensus by most about the GPC is that it should be able to meet or exceed the performance of the 308 while using military type green bullets or the make it possible to engage the enemy using the 7.62x54 with 24" barrels. The firearm should be typical configuration of current use. Carbines 12-14.5" barrels, DMRs 20"barrels or less, LMGs short barrels for dismounted and possibly 20-24" for mounted. The ammo should weigh 20% less than the 308. The recoil should be as little as possible to help controllability of the firearm.
The AR15 is not large enough or strong enough to handle a more powerful cartridge in combat conditions.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - XcountryRider - 11-27-2013
woohoo Wrote:If using a design similar to mine with a .25 G7 BC the length of the bullet is about the length of the 139 Lapua. If I seat the bullet where only the boattail is in the powder column the COAL will be 2.7" That is close enough to call it a 308 length. The Carcano diameter case will feed from 308 Pmags so that is what I am using, a lightweight 308 with Pmags. A SCAR 17 would be the best combat platform at this time.
BTW, that is a 111gr bullet. I have another turned bullet designed for the 264/Grendel that weighs 100 grains and has a G7 BC of .25. Figure that can be pushed apx 200 fps faster than a 123 with nearly the same BC as the 123 Amax.
That would be nice in a hunting bullet.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - LRRPF52 - 11-27-2013
SOCOM is getting away from 20" guns for the DM's and Snipers. KAC M110K1 is what the units are going to on the SOF side, with SCAR-H's sprinkled here and there.
![[Image: KACGoodiesjpeg.jpg]](http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o505/TroyBFreeman/KACGoodiesjpeg.jpg)
Nobody wants a 20" gun anymore, especially when you take shooting from positions other than prone (reality) into account.
Even with the 30% weight reduction of the polymer/metal cases, 7.62 NATO ammunition profile is such that it occupies a lot of space on the soldier's load, especially with armor. The weight becomes more tolerable, but not the bulk. I wonder if this CLAWS program has a dominance of level-headed end-users influencing the demand, or mostly inexperienced and novice testers.
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - BluntForceTrauma - 11-27-2013
Still not "feelin' " the need for 7.62 NATO equivalency.
Yes, better performance is always, uh, "better." But to put it bluntly, I'm willing to give up some "performance" in order to keep RECOIL manageable. Low recoil INCREASES hits among newly trained soldiers. The 6.5 Grendel, or something very similar (.25 Grendel, 6.5 Grendel, 6.8 Grendel), can ALREADY match 7.62 at 1000 yards for those rare occasions when necessary.
Keep the big picture in mind: Two 6.5 Grendel loadings (105gr for AR, 120gr for DMR/LMG) COMBINED with the new airburst grenade launchers are gonna do pretty much everything man-portable small arms need doing.
Unless the state-of-the-art makes BIG advances soon, trying for 7.62 NATO performance is simply going to make the cartridge and weapons more bulky than necessary.
I'll compromise on a bigger cartridge if you compromise on vastly improved recoil management, something along the lines of a perfected constant recoil system.
John
P.S. This lead-free program irks me to no end. If we get in a serious shooting war with, oh, China, I say F*CK the Sierra Club (or whoever the hell drives "green" policy in our damn military) and use equipment that WINS the war. Can we finally get some adults in charge of national defense? We'll worry about the environmentalists wetting themselves later. . . .
New Army "Caliber Configuration Study" - LRRPF52 - 11-27-2013
At least some of the belt-fed weapons systems and DMR's need to meet or exceed 7.62x54R capabilities. You will understand if engaged from a distance with one. That system does have reach, penetration, and the PKM is lightweight, unlike out 7.62 NATO belt-fed weapons.
This is the most important thing that needs to be addressed from a small arms perspective, not individual service carbines. Get lit up by belt-fed 7.62, and you will want equal or more firepower with reach, from as light or a lighter belt-fed that is working with the DM's.
A 130gr cup & core 6.5mm can accomplish that. A lighter solid/alloy projectile with high BC can as well.