Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply |
Member |
5.56 and the M4 are not going anywhere. No one is selling off 5.56. The Army actually cut its rifle ammo purchases awhile back because ammo was not being used. Getting ranges and time in the training calendar are the biggest limiting factor. There are so many training mandates on units it would take 400 days to complete all the mandatory" training for the year. | |||
|
Let's be careful out there |
My Secret Squirell buddy says it is happening, and it will be an entirely different cartridge and projectile | |||
|
Member |
Polymer cases in .260 Remington from the in-the-know-deep-operator I heard from. GW. | |||
|
Member |
I would think the .260 would be high on the list. But from what I've read, the .264 smokes all of them. | |||
|
Member |
SOCOM is testing .260 Remington And 6.5 Creedmoor as COTS (commercial off the shelf) purchase sniper rifle rounds, not as battle rifle or M4/5.56 replacements. In the long term, the Army / AMU is testing and developing the .264 USA and .277 USA as potential replacements for both 5.56 and 7.62x51. This is not a short term solution. They are at least 5-10 years out. Both of these programs are parallel to the 7.62 interim rifle program, not instead of. | |||
|
fugitive from reality |
Catchy names. It's interesting to see the whole 6.5mm-7mm development thing come full circle. _____________________________ 'I'm pretty fly for a white guy'. | |||
|
Fighting the good fight |
Cancelled. ~7 weeks from announcement to cancellation. From http://www.thefirearmblog.com/...m-cancelled-icsr-no/
| |||
|
Peace through superior firepower |
Shocking | |||
|
half-genius, half-wit |
The original .280 British, as fielded in the outstanding bullpup EM2 in the late 1940's would have solved ALL these little arguments. The LMG/support weapon version was even better. tac | |||
|
Doin' what I can with what I got |
Applause! Applause! Applause! ---------------------------------------- Death smiles at us all. Be sure you smile back. | |||
|
Member |
Although the .280 British may have solved some of the arguments, it's unlikely that it would have solved all of them. Given the: - variety of weapons systems and their functional goals, - physical constraints of ammo using brass cases, nitrocellulose-based powders, and lead/copper alloy bullets, - physical limitations of the troops who carry and operate the various weapon systems, - politics of choosing weapons systems, both among various countries and within a given country, I doubt any single chambering will considered optimal for all rifle systems. Furthermore, even in the remote chance that a single rifle chambering becomes academically accepted as optimal, I doubt that it would be universally deployed. | |||
|
Member |
This article has a slightly different take on why is was canceled. To me, the interim rifle never made much sense if they were planning to switch to a new caliber in the future. http://www.popularmechanics.co...replacement-is-dead/ | |||
|
Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 |
Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |