03-17-2011, 01:53 AM
I have only recently joined this forum, but I have for many years been arguing the case, wherever and whenever I can, for a general-purpose 6.5mm to 7mm round to replace both 5.56mm and 7.62mm NATO cartridges in the next generation of weapons. I have done this in several articles in magazines such as Small Arms Review / Small Arms Defence Journal, Tactical Operator and Jane's Defence Weekly, plus a book (Assault Rifle, written with Max Popenker) and in conference presentations to the military in the UK and the USA.
In a nutshell, my argument is simply this:
1. The 5.56mm NATO has consistently shown in combat that it is limited in effective range and unreliable in its terminal effects and penetration even within that range. As a result, US, UK and other troops in Afghanistan are increasingly carrying 7.62mm NATO rifles and MGs.
2. The 7.62mm gets the job done, but it is unnecessarily heavy (a real problem for carrying ammo for MGs) and has too much recoil to be controllable in automatic rifle fire.
3. As demonstrated by the 6.8mm Rem, it is possible to develop a far more effective cartridge than the 5.56mm without incurring a lot of extra weight and recoil. However, the 6.8mm doesn't have the range to replace the 7.62mm too.
4. A cartridge using low-drag, long-range bullets like the 6.5mm Grendel at the bottom of the calibre range, and the British 7x43 EM-2 at the top, could replace both rounds: matching the long-range ballistics of the 7.62mm with less weight and recoil, and being more reliably effective than 5.56mm at any range.
5. Replacing two rounds with one general-purpose one would bring several benefits: it would halve the number of weapons to be acquired, supported and trained for; enable all soldiers in a section to share the same ammo; and ensure that soldiers are not caught out with the "wrong" type of weapon if the combat range changes suddenly during a patrol.
The current version of my illustrated presentation on this subject is on my website HERE.
I am currently suggesting to anyone in the military who will listen that the best way to test the intermediate calibre concept is to acquire some Grendel rifles and ammo and give them to soldiers, to let them test issues such as ballistics, terminal effectiveness and recoil control. For this purpose it wouldn't be essential for these to have automatic fire capability, but presumably if a military asked nicely some rifles could be delivered with selective fire trigger units?
In a nutshell, my argument is simply this:
1. The 5.56mm NATO has consistently shown in combat that it is limited in effective range and unreliable in its terminal effects and penetration even within that range. As a result, US, UK and other troops in Afghanistan are increasingly carrying 7.62mm NATO rifles and MGs.
2. The 7.62mm gets the job done, but it is unnecessarily heavy (a real problem for carrying ammo for MGs) and has too much recoil to be controllable in automatic rifle fire.
3. As demonstrated by the 6.8mm Rem, it is possible to develop a far more effective cartridge than the 5.56mm without incurring a lot of extra weight and recoil. However, the 6.8mm doesn't have the range to replace the 7.62mm too.
4. A cartridge using low-drag, long-range bullets like the 6.5mm Grendel at the bottom of the calibre range, and the British 7x43 EM-2 at the top, could replace both rounds: matching the long-range ballistics of the 7.62mm with less weight and recoil, and being more reliably effective than 5.56mm at any range.
5. Replacing two rounds with one general-purpose one would bring several benefits: it would halve the number of weapons to be acquired, supported and trained for; enable all soldiers in a section to share the same ammo; and ensure that soldiers are not caught out with the "wrong" type of weapon if the combat range changes suddenly during a patrol.
The current version of my illustrated presentation on this subject is on my website HERE.
I am currently suggesting to anyone in the military who will listen that the best way to test the intermediate calibre concept is to acquire some Grendel rifles and ammo and give them to soldiers, to let them test issues such as ballistics, terminal effectiveness and recoil control. For this purpose it wouldn't be essential for these to have automatic fire capability, but presumably if a military asked nicely some rifles could be delivered with selective fire trigger units?