Time for a 7.62 personal weapon...

... again?

Just wondering given the current main theatre in which the Army is operating; is it worth considering the longer range, greater killing power vs. carriage of ammunition debate again?
Instead of just saying lets have 7.62 why not find a good calibre.

Bearing in mind we only adopted 7.62 and then 5.56 because the Spams said to do so.

The 7mm of the old British .280 round was said to be very good round, for replacing the .303 in use at the time, with all the attendant features required in abundance. It was indeed better than the 7.62

The yanks and Russians have trialled 6mm for MG purposes but the yanks want to stick with a standard round.... ie 7.62
The weight soldiers are carrying on patrol is now at human limits .A heavier personal weapon and heavier ammo is really what is needed.I haven't heard any complaints about sa 80 not killing people .
There are some thoughts that a new sharpshooter rifle (to replace the L96) should be 7.62mm and off the shelf rather than go through a long winded and troublesome procurement. The HK417 is already being used by elements of UK forces albeit as a personal weapon but it gets very favourable reviews and is reliable and accurate. I can't see us going for a larger calibre personal weapon; if anything I think it is going to get smaller to assist in reducing the weight burden.
As I read this, it is hitting home that arrse.co.uk has changed a lot since I first joined. It's no longer possible to assume that the majority of posters have served and really do know what they're on about.

Not that I can talk, having been a student since the start.
No experience of using but having seen what a SLR did at reasonable distances and then seeing the results close up at many post-mortem examinations, I would say it was very effective. Almost anywhere in the body mass got a result. The aorta don't like it up 'em sir!
comedy dave said:
Isn't 7.62mm the same as .303" and 5.56mm same .22"? or thereabouts?
7.62=.308, 5.56=.223 or thereabouts ;)
daywalker said:
Bravo_Bravo said:
Too heavy, sight not optical...
Since when could you not fit an optical sight to a G3 ? :?
Fit a picatinny rail and you can fit pretty much any sight you want to..... even a torch.

Fit with a STANAG rail and you can fit SUSAT. :D
comedy dave said:
Isn't 7.62mm the same as .303" and 5.56mm same .22"? or thereabouts?
If you are simply asking if you have the metric conversion correct: then use this http://www.metric-conversions.org/ and get it precise.

If you are asking “is a 5.56mm round about the same as a .22 inch round?” then you have to be more specific about which 5.56mm round you are comparing with which .22 inch round. Ditto for 7.62mm v .303 inch.

IMHO the easy way to tell the difference between somebody who knows about ammunition and somebody who does not, is that the ignorant think that calibre is all there is to know about a round.
Have been told engagements are taking place at either long range or up close .So more reliance on support weapons such as sf and Hmg and bayonets and pistols at the other end .

Similar threads

Latest Threads