01-10-2012, 10:02 PM
The 7mm has better penetration at distance than even the .30-06/.30 Cal US through timber, and still penetrated the British Airborne steel helmet at 1000yds, while the .30 Cal had an advantage in that area, but both capabilities were really excessive in that regard, until you look at aircraft-mounted weapons. That is also where the Enfield would still be out-shining the 7.62 NATO, in addition to dismounts being able to carry more ammo-per space.
At some point in testing, you will always be able to show some marginally-specific target advantages to the super over-kill cartridge, but those points are rarely if ever realized by the soldier, while the weight, space, and recoil penalties are realized by him every time he carries the weapon.
For light-skinned vehicles, a 7mm with better sectional density and driven by modern powders would have the edge past 500m, while there would most likely be no real practical differences within 500m for penetration. A fat .30 cal FMJ loses gas quicker than a 7mm of similar construction. It would also be nice to have the M110/Mk11 and Mk48 chambered in 7x43mm, versus 7.62 NATO. Same goes for miniguns.
The .30-06 was way over-kill for a rifleman, and the .276 Pedersen would have been a much more appropriate chambering for the Garand, especially looking at the magazine capacity of 10rounds versus 8. That alone would have had real world results in the form of more lives saved on our side. Riflemen are primarily concerned with soft targets, and within the distances that they engaged bunkers, a .276 Pedersen would have the same practical effects, with less recoil and more capacity.
7.62x51 is the cartridge that should not have been, in my book.
At some point in testing, you will always be able to show some marginally-specific target advantages to the super over-kill cartridge, but those points are rarely if ever realized by the soldier, while the weight, space, and recoil penalties are realized by him every time he carries the weapon.
For light-skinned vehicles, a 7mm with better sectional density and driven by modern powders would have the edge past 500m, while there would most likely be no real practical differences within 500m for penetration. A fat .30 cal FMJ loses gas quicker than a 7mm of similar construction. It would also be nice to have the M110/Mk11 and Mk48 chambered in 7x43mm, versus 7.62 NATO. Same goes for miniguns.
The .30-06 was way over-kill for a rifleman, and the .276 Pedersen would have been a much more appropriate chambering for the Garand, especially looking at the magazine capacity of 10rounds versus 8. That alone would have had real world results in the form of more lives saved on our side. Riflemen are primarily concerned with soft targets, and within the distances that they engaged bunkers, a .276 Pedersen would have the same practical effects, with less recoil and more capacity.
7.62x51 is the cartridge that should not have been, in my book.