12-23-2015, 03:41 PM
JASmith Wrote:Having debated in favor of and having not just a few arguments on the topic, I reluctantly concluded that the factors driving the choice of the 5.56 in the first place are even more strongly present today. That conclusion, however, does not mean that I agree with the notion that the best path for the next infantry cartridge is a smaller, not larger, footrprint in all respects that the current 5.56 NATO.Although there have been proposals in the past for micro-caliber cartridges, I haven't seen anyone in the military or industry currently advocating going smaller than 5.56mm. Afghanistan seems to have had the opposite effect, making it likely that any 5.56 replacement will be bigger, not smaller.
Quote:The best we can do is to understand and articluste the cartridge in terms of its effectiveness and impact on logistics tail in the combined arms role and articulate that understanding. This gives those who are truly able to influence the influencers ammunition to support the political arguments.IMO, it would help to do so by demonstrating that there would actually be a worthwhile improvement to be had from switching to a cartridge like 6.5 Grendel.
So far, I've seen negligible testing done by Horde members, and what little has been done has given mixed results. Some here have done very long range shooting, with promising results. OTOH, in penetration testing of 6.5 Grendel 100gr FMJ versus cinder block, the result was no better than 5.56mm.