Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire 101st Airborne soldiers are first to receive new Next Gen Squad Weapon

Anyone else in NATO with knowledge will not follow our lead.


They wanted something smaller than a full power round, around .270.
We insisted on 7.62, they acquiesced.
10 years later we adopted the 5.56.
Left them hanging with a tremendous investment in something they never wanted.


Now, almost 60 years later, we adopt a 270, high tech, high pressure, high expense,
unproven round.


I'd give the Uncle a 🖕!

Seems like they figure this round will let soldiers make one shot kills further out. Okay.

The dream of well aimed individual fire by rank and file soldiers has always been that, a dream. From volleys of arrows to massed infantry with muskets to machine guns to machine guns firing faster to assault rifles, putting as many projectiles into a given area gets hits. Trained troops can hit targets, but most of them rightfully don't want to expose themselves long enough to acquire a good sight picture, breathe, aim and squeeze.

The NRA was formed after the Civil War in large part to improve marksmanship of the recruits, the generals being dissatisfied with the accuracy of their soldiers.

The Germans figured out that targets rarely presented themselves for more than a few seconds so the MG 34 and 42 were designed to put as many rounds as possible into an area in a short time. They also figured out that most combat engagements take place within 400 yards so they created the Sturmgewehr.

In Korea, troops armed with .30-06 rifles lethal to 1000 yards often would not engage targets much beyond 200 yards. Part of that was the mountainous terrain which prevented them from seeing the enemy further than that but also because they knew their chances of actually hitting what they were aiming at decreased quickly beyond 200 yards, so they just saved their ammo. When a firefight happened, fire often started with the BAR then spread outwards to the individual riflemen from there. Lots of lead in the air does the trick.

Generals always fight the last war. In an area where good visibility extends out hundreds or thousands of yards, a weapon firing a projectile lethal at longer ranges makes sense. But even with a more lethal projectile, putting lots of lead where the enemy is will get hits.



This is just my educated and well regarded opinion, but an updated Wehrmacht squad organization still seems to make the most sense - it's built around an automatic weapon capable of sustained fire, a designated marksman who can make well aimed hits on distant targets, a grenadier and then a bunch of guys to carry ammo for the machine gun and also contribute to the general storm of lead. The bottom line is still having lots and lots of ammo when and where you need it.

Now I guess civilian ammo manufacturers will go all out producing this round for the DOD and leave the civilian market without ammo again. I'm glad I have more than my family and close friends will need for the rest of my days.

The Sig steel base cartridge is ingenious since it allows for 80,000 PSi, but why not employ that concept in a Grendel-based cartridge (.22 ARC for example with an 80 grain pill or 6mm ARC with a 105 grain pill? You could motivate it at +3000 fps from a 16.5" barrel and still use the M4. With the 6mm ARC, 800-yard performance would be within an eyelash of the .227 Sig Fury but with much lighter ammo and rifle.

Personally, I'd rather have 100 rounds of a cartridge that will lay an enemy combatant on his ass than 400 rounds of ammo that I've got to shoot him 4 times to put down, all the while hoping he doesn't clack off a hidden IED while he's flopping around.
5.56 had no business as a war cartridge.

Didn't the 70 grain bullets fix the M4? Obviously the 6.5 Grendal was too simple for big military contracts. Heavy projectiles like AK. Best range of match proven bullets already in production and well developed was just too damn obvious.

Tell me you know nothing about infantry tactics without telling me you nothing of infantry tactics.

How many rounds of barrel life you think an 80k PSI 6mm will go?

Improved ballistics and long term same ammo for MG as for the average Joe. Simplified logistics. That same setup with a 20 inch barrel would make an excellent DMR rifle. Ballistics are far superior to 223. Will there be growing pains? Yes. Will every old fudd and fogey complain? Yes. Let's recall the complaints against the 223 in Nam, ie inferior penetration. I've seen plenty of hogs require multiple 223 hits at 200 yards where a 6.5CM or better will put them down with authority. I'm very much looking forward o getting my hands on a civilian version of this new 277 in an AR platform with full 80k psi ammo. Should be a winner.

You believed the average grunt could make consistent hits with iron sights on man-sized targets at 1,000 yards?

Did you read the rest of the sentence and if so, why would you put words in my mouth when my original words were quite different than yours?

"In Korea, troops armed with .30-06 rifles lethal to 1000 yards often would not engage targets much beyond 200 yards."

"...they knew their chances of actually hitting what they were aiming at decreased quickly beyond 200 yards, so they just saved their ammo."

The subject here is lethality of the projectile. The .30-06 projectile is lethal at 1000 rounds; the troops were armed with a weapon that could conceivably kill at 1000 yards. The point being that even though they had a weapon with long range lethality, they did not try to hit targets that far because they knew their chances of hitting were slim and slimmer.

Nowhere did I say "I believe they could make consistent hits with iron sights on man-sized targets at 1,000 yards". My assertion is exactly the opposite of your assumption as to what I believe, which is that the average soldier cannot make accurate,well aimed hits at longer ranges during the heat and stress of battle. That's backed up by what the soldiers themselves actually reported.

And if someone wants a citation, I got that from the book "Battlefield Analysis of Infantry Weapons" by S. L. A. Marshal, which as it's titled, is an analysis of the effectiveness and actual use by the soldiers of each of the many Infantry weapons employed during the Korean War.


Geez, read and respond to what I actually wrote, would ya?

As unpopular as it might be among those who bluff and boast,
with 0 actual knowledge.

A whole damn bunch of shooting with no target actually in sight is darn worthwhile.

All this talk as if it's common to take prone and casually pick off enemy combatants,
like shooting Prarie dogs!

Sometimes.

Sometimes they be shootin back.
For some reason, rounds/ hit drops then?🤣🤣🤣🤣


Then there is this thing called fire and maneuver.





But that's just stuff soldiers do.


Feal men line 'em up and get 3 per round.
While smoking a cigarette.
Just like Wayne John.

I asked you a question. Why do upset?

Since we have been at war almost continuously for the last 20 years or better in the middle east, I would think some lessons have been learned by those who care to pay attention. Close encounters were relatively rare in those theaters as it was common for the muzzies to open fire from distant wood lines, ditches, or windows in mud huts that the 5.56 couldn't easily penetrate. In fact I read a couple reports that there were investigations by IG after complaints that our soldiers were executing Taliban soldiers because so many of them were shot in the head. What it turned out to be was that was the only part of their bodies exposed shooting from windows so that was where killing shots almost always landed.

However, in open country the 5.56 tends to run out of energy pretty quickly and penetrating even the most miniscule armor used by some muzzies was an issue at times at extended ranges. Hopefully, this new round will answer some of those problems, along with the fire control system including a scope for more accurate shooting if I understand the as issued version of the new weapon. As any new weapon, only real way to test is in real combat with real soldiers and I assume that will happen soon enough- whether it is already planned or not... let's hope they are right and this new weapons systems saves lives but I'm not yet convinced.

That’s actually funny as hell.



P

I am upset because I find your question extremely insulting, since it implies an invalid belief on my part that was refuted in the entirety of what I had written, which you conveniently left out.

E.g., "If pigs had wings, hollow bones and weighed as much as birds, they could fly. But they do not, therefore they can't."


You believe pigs could fly?



However, in the interests of clarity, no, I do not believe that the average grunt could make consistent hits on man-sized targets at 1,000 yards.

Currently the M7/SPEAR has accuracy issues and the M4 will out reach it, each using same optic.

General Milley's pet project.

It's likely the M7/SPEAR will die faster than the SCAR 16.

The DI Stoner system AR will stay on the top of the hill.

I was going for a Haiku but needed the 4th line.

"The primer is sealed with a new material which, surprisingly, resembles a polymerized rendition of "Cheeto's dust" said a factory rep."

Yeah, West Point didn't teach me sh-it about infantry tactics.
Where did you learn your infantry tactics?

Tell us about "fire and maneuver" and why less bullets is better than more bullets.