Shooting moving targets - automatic vs semi

[JonS]

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Ryujin]

In other news,

Mixing of different calibers as vincere mentioned seems much more likely than a new round, at least until they feel like overhauling everything and buying new weapons based on new technology, something like the LSAT plastic-cased-telescoped ammo.

Here's a excerpt from an email from an ex-Marine I know that might be intresting fro those interested.

"Also the U.S. forces using 6.8mm SPC have already dropped it according to some 2005 accounts. They couldn't get the accuracy/range out of it that they wanted or were having problems anyways with it. Although they are still looking at 6.5mm. Although not the Grendel that everyone is looking at because it would take a total rebuild for the SAW to use that cartridge (unless they're going to go to a newly designed weapon but I don't think so at least until the LSAT tech comes out). When I was in, I put up a 6.35mm (.25 cal) cartridge. Just expanded the 5.56 case mouth to except/seat the bullet but they didn't like it. They said it couldn't carry a heavy enough projectile to be worth the switch at that time (around 1989/1990). Although you can get a 100 grain bullet in that caliber, maybe heavier now. Also there are two 6.5mms: the 6.5mm Grendel which is based on the 6mm PPC and the 6.5mm MPC (created by a Marine) by doing just what I said, by widening the case mouth but keeping the same basic brass case, I think he shortened it to 43mm instead of 45mm in case length though to keep the over all length the same (although the US Military doesn't seem that impressed by it. [...] I don't think the Military will get a different standardized small arms round in my life time with the current budget crisis's and with the DoD saying 5.56mm is adequate."

[Dietrich]

In other news,

Isn't one factor precluding adoption of calibers to replace either 5.56 or 7.62 certain NATO-related treaties specifying said calibers? Or have I misheard/misread?

[astano]

Regarding the 5.56 or 7.62 is better debate. It started to look to me that squad weapons are becoming less standard. And that if we look at the brit and US there is a kind of a micro level combined arms mix going on. That seems to me to be the right way forward with a similar rationale as mult-cam.

That is, no one weapon is perfect for all sitations so compose squads/platoons with a healthy mixed bag of tools.

So a British section may have 5.56 SA80s with 40mm GL, LSW, and minimi. Pluse 7.62 GPMG, and Sharpshooter. Plus it may have attached or close by sniper and engineer attached.

And like Steve said wherever possible vehicles with GPMG, .50s and GMGs.

That's one point that usually gets left out of the which-cartridge-is-better debate, and (IMO) perhaps the best justification for keeping 5.56 as the standard cartridge. Not every soldier needs a rifle that has the 600+ yard reach of 7.62mm - that's why he has squad- and platoon-mates; as I understand it, besides GPMGs, platoons increasingly have "Designated Marksmen" with a 7.62 rifle.

If suppression is important, doesn't it make sense for the typical rifleman to be able to carry more ammo than less? I highly doubt that hajji is suppressed better when it's a 7.62 zipping past than a 5.56. And even if you were to argue (for whatever reason) that suppressive fire shouldn't be a consideration, accuracy is a problem under combat conditions, so you'd still want to be able to carry more ammunition.

So the lighter round, which you can carry more of, is a better standard choice, especially when (1) the platoon has organic weapons that can reach out and touch, (2) most soldiers probably couldn't hit a target past the effective range of 5.56 in combat conditions in the first place, especially if it's moving, and (3) at most relevant ranges*, as akd has said, the only way to kill bad guys dead is to disrupt the central nervous system.

*Of course, engagement ranges are longer in Afghanistan. Curious though if there's any statistics floating around about what distances even those are typically at. Still, I'd wager that 5.56 is "good 'nuff" for even most of those ranges.

[Battlefront.com]

This thread is being locked up. I think the discussion has been completed, but if someone disagrees and wishes to start up a new thread about 5.56 vs. 7.62 then please do.

Steve