ARmy Rumour SErvice

**Pompeii** · 29-04-2008, 16:53

Not a weapons bod by any means but i've always liked the idea of a common layout used for different calibers e.g. http://www.steyr-aug.com/aug9mm.htm and http://www.naitdist.com/products/m16k.html for tankies and what not. I'm probably talking out of my arrse though.

**EX_STAB** · 29-04-2008, 16:55

Investment in marksmanship would go a long way. I gather that a particular AAR when the Short Range Desert Group got ambushed in Basra was interesting. They happened to have a number of competitive shooters in the unit that got bumped. Quite a high batting average against the Jihadis on that one I was told.

**LCPL_Bull** · 29-04-2008, 23:09

Originally Posted by Mr_Deputy

This is a French system. Called PAPOP.
Two words sum it up for me :

1. Suitcase.
2. Gay.

Lol looks like something from the terminator

**instinct** · 02-05-2008, 13:38

well as a replacement for the .5 Browning the FN brg15 in 15.5 x 115 mm

**brighton hippy** · 02-05-2008, 19:19

something like the fn2000 although a bit gay looking has already been designed with space for fist like gubbins.
not sure going to get a slightly heavy 7mm cartridge does it really give a vast improvement over 5.56?

**geordie_g** · 02-05-2008, 21:38

Bit of super glue and some stickyback plastic, should be able to affix a sharp pointy thing to most weapons, surely?

**Gun_Nut** · 03-05-2008, 00:17

Interesting debate about the optimum calibres for military use. However, before we all get too excited about 6-7mm calibres being superior to 5.56, we should remember that bullet design as well as calibre has a huge impact on lethality. Wound ballistics isn't a particularly pleasant subject, but it is important when it comes to designing new small arms ammunition.

5.56 is generally effective because the bullets come apart when they hit at high velocity. This is down to the composite design with a tempered steel tip, lead core and a cannelure that acts as a fracture point. Compare that to 7.62x39: bigger and heavier bullet, but the stronger construction of the bullet (with a solid, mild steel core) means no fragmentation and therefore lower lethality.

stabradop · 03-05-2008, 00:30

Wheres hardmong with his G22? :-D

**Gun_Nut** · 03-05-2008, 00:32

Originally Posted by stabradop

Wheres hardmong with his G22?

Indeed! It would make an ideal military weapon.

**EX_STAB** · 04-05-2008, 20:42

Originally Posted by Gun_Nut

Interesting debate about the optimum calibres for military use. However, before we all get too excited about 6-7mm calibres being superior to 5.56, we should remember that bullet design as well as calibre has a huge impact on lethality. Wound ballistics isn't a particularly pleasant subject, but it is important when it comes to designing new small arms ammunition.

5.56 is generally effective because the bullets come apart when they hit at high velocity. This is down to the composite design with a tempered steel tip, lead core and a cannelure that acts as a fracture point. Compare that to 7.62x39: bigger and heavier bullet, but the stronger construction of the bullet (with a solid, mild steel core) means no fragmentation and therefore lower lethality.

That's a fairly incomplete chart. Add in 7.62x54R, 7.62 Nato (L2A2), 7.62 sniper/match (L42A?) and you would have a more useful comparator.

Frankly, I'd add 303 Mk7 in too and see what that did.

What a lot of these ballistic tests fail to consider is that the enemy tend not to stand about in the open waiting to get shot so you need a projectile that will kill or seriously injure them after it has passed through some hard cover - 12 inches of earth, a brick wall etc. It needs to do this at ranges out to 500 - 600m in my opinion.

Consider what range a 7.62x54R machine gun can engage us from. We need to be able to punch through his mud brick sangar at the same range.