05-17-2011, 04:14 AM
JASmith...Should I say Bird Dog, Oscar Deuce, Bronco, or Misty...
Really, the most important improvement that can be realized is not necessarily the caliber, but the weight and profile of the LMG. I figure since there seem to be several options for at least duplicating 7.62 ballistics in a much smaller/lighter cartridge, why not exceed it some as well. Even if that isn't done, Joe is still left with two very heavy pigs right now that don't warrant the weight and size, so the lightweight LMG should be pursued regardless. It will also fit into the new concepts being fielded with Joint land component forces, objective warrior or whatever they call it now, and thinking of soldiers and weapons as combined systems.
Caliber change in MG's is much easier since most western MG's have a quick barrel change system. Offering a modular system that could run on 5.56 NATO, 7.62 NATO, and other cartridges between those in size would only add to the appeal factor, but when it would be demonstrated that it could replace both linked ammunition systems for dismounts, that would turn heads.
Biggest obstacles that I see are barrel life with hot-rodded smaller cases, finding appropriate bullets for mass-production during this major swing in demand for eco-friendly bullets, finding links for smaller than 7.62/larger than 5.56, and feed pawl geometry development and T&E. If solids are demanded by Uncle Sugar, driving bands would actually help with barrel life since there is much less bearing surface. I think John Sullivan has been looking into this lately as well, since he mentioned it in a Small Arms Review article within the past 3 years.
Roger on the common caliber nomenclature...WILCO :o
LRRPF52
Really, the most important improvement that can be realized is not necessarily the caliber, but the weight and profile of the LMG. I figure since there seem to be several options for at least duplicating 7.62 ballistics in a much smaller/lighter cartridge, why not exceed it some as well. Even if that isn't done, Joe is still left with two very heavy pigs right now that don't warrant the weight and size, so the lightweight LMG should be pursued regardless. It will also fit into the new concepts being fielded with Joint land component forces, objective warrior or whatever they call it now, and thinking of soldiers and weapons as combined systems.
Caliber change in MG's is much easier since most western MG's have a quick barrel change system. Offering a modular system that could run on 5.56 NATO, 7.62 NATO, and other cartridges between those in size would only add to the appeal factor, but when it would be demonstrated that it could replace both linked ammunition systems for dismounts, that would turn heads.
Biggest obstacles that I see are barrel life with hot-rodded smaller cases, finding appropriate bullets for mass-production during this major swing in demand for eco-friendly bullets, finding links for smaller than 7.62/larger than 5.56, and feed pawl geometry development and T&E. If solids are demanded by Uncle Sugar, driving bands would actually help with barrel life since there is much less bearing surface. I think John Sullivan has been looking into this lately as well, since he mentioned it in a Small Arms Review article within the past 3 years.
Roger on the common caliber nomenclature...WILCO :o
LRRPF52