this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
10 points (81.2% liked)

guns

1186 readers
2 users here now

Keep it civil.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Great, now they'll have to rename them to Current Generation Squad Weapons.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (2 children)

i guess this is the ammo, from the wiki:

The .277 Fury or 6.8×51mm Common Cartridge,[4][5] (designated as the .277 SIG Fury by the SAAMI[1]) is a centerfire rimless bottlenecked rifle cartridge announced by SIG Sauer in late 2019.[2] Its hybrid three-piece cartridge case has a steel case head and brass body connected by an aluminum locking washer to support the high chamber pressure of 80,000 psi (551.6 MPa).[2]

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

That’s the one. The bi-Metal, high pressure cased rounds are supposed to defeat hard body armor better.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

US: "Everyone, we're going to change to 5.56. Get with the program."

Everyone: [reluctantly changes to 5.56]

US: "We're abandoning 5.56. 6.8 is the new standard. Get with the program."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

It has been 44 years since 5.56mm was NATO standardized, and 60 years since the U.S. was using it as a service caliber. I think it’s a bit unfair to characterize it as a flip-flop for the U.S. Army (not even all of the U.S. military) to change after such a long time.

So far the new 6.8mm is an Army exclusive project, so it’s a bit of a live experiment and not being thrust on the rest of US branches, much less all of NATO.

I’m honestly not sure if this particular route is a good idea or not, but we’ve clearly hit the limit of what 5.56mm can do, and if hard armor is actually a concern there needs to be some change in cartridge.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Let me have this one please

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Lol, nothing against you.

If you want a narrative like your original, 7.62mm NATO is much better.

1945: British develop the .280 (7mm) intermediate round.

1951: US military Project SALVO confirms that intermediate cartridges were a superior service round at the time.

1951: British show off the EM-2 as a viable rifle for their .280 round.

1954: Despite all evidence for intermediate rounds the US adopts the M14 in 7.62mm NATO and pushes the full caliber standard.

1954: British adopt the L1A1 in 7.62mm NATO instead of the EM-2 because they want to standardize with the US.

1964: US adopts 5.56mm.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Arma 3 got it wrong! But they were only 0.3mm off.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

6.5mm Grendel was a cartridge with a lot of hype behind it. While I don’t think Arma 3 specifies Grendel (I’m not an Arma expert) both the game and real world round are x39mm so I have to assume that was not a coincidence.