US Army Next Generation rifle/support weapon

So your plan for dealing with the enemy having body armour is to hope that their infantry are so highly motivated and dedicated to victory that they decide to not wear any?

That's certainly a novel idea.
Apparently that's your idea.

I was kinda looking to a future where mission accomplishment and PPE were in a kinda balance.

That balance would be one where the squaddie in contact would not feel unable to accomplish the mission because they were absurdly over-burdened with stuff that did not contribute to successfully achieving the task at hand,

In my book, that judgement call would best be made at Company - maybe even patrol level as was the norm in W Belfast in the early 1980s

Not in Whitehall.
 
Last edited:
Apparently that's your idea.

I was kinda looking to a future where mission accomplishment and PPE were in a kinda balance.

That balance would be one where the squaddie in contact would not feel unable to accomplish the mission because they were absurdly over-burdened with stuff that did not contribute successfully to achieving the task at hand,

In my book, that judgement call would best be made at Company - maybe even patrol level as was the norm in W Belfast in the early 1980s

Not in Whitehall.
Your response may be appropriate if the question were "what is the appropriate amount of protection various circumstances?" If we continue the medieval analogy, they didn't simply always wear the maximum amount of armour available to them all the time, but rather tailored it according to their current conditions and what they needed to achieve.

However, that wasn't the question being discussed. What was being discussed was how do "we" deal with an enemy wearing body armour. The current American response appears to simply be "use a bigger gun to hit it harder".

The point that I raised was that we may need to adapt our tactics in ways that are not necessarily obvious at the moment. Others made suggestions about how "we" may need to fight differently.

You suggested that this was "Back-Asswards thinking". You then went off on a tangent.

If you are suggesting that wearing the maximum amount of body armour may not always be the best or even safest way of doing things, I don't think that anyone here would argue with that. However that has nothing to do with either what we were talking about or the post you replied to.
 
Last edited:

TamH70

MIA
Here's a short video on the new scope the wunderwaffe is going to be equipped with. It's also rather funny, to my taste anyway.

Banging legumes...

 
Here's a short video on the new scope the wunderwaffe is going to be equipped with. It's also rather funny, to my taste anyway.

Banging legumes...


He may be right, but ONLY if the US Army invests enough training time into making the PBI a skilled user, in situations other than flat/ one-way range shooting.

If the legends are halfway to the truth, the USMC (the Corps that gave the world JFK's assassin) is markedly more committed to, and better at, turning its recruits into combat shooters than the US Army, where - despite recruiting from a population where legal gun ownership is a commonplace - from the anecdata I've consumed over time, small-arms/ personal weapon proficiency is not markedly greater than is the norm in Brit units of the same Arm of Service.

Happy to have any of my illusions shattered, BTW.
 
He may be right, but ONLY if the US Army invests enough training time into making the PBI a skilled user, in situations other than flat/ one-way range shooting.

If the legends are halfway to the truth, the USMC (the Corps that gave the world JFK's assassin) is markedly more committed to, and better at, turning its recruits into combat shooters than the US Army, where - despite recruiting from a population where legal gun ownership is a commonplace - from the anecdata I've consumed over time, small-arms/ personal weapon proficiency is not markedly greater than is the norm in Brit units of the same Arm of Service.

Happy to have any of my illusions shattered, BTW.
The Marine Corps has changed it's Marksmanship program significantly.
The old days of just shooting at known distance targets are over.
The Marines also allow their recruits to qualify with optics and the Army is back to iron sights first then optics.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
Your response may be appropriate if the question were "what is the appropriate amount of protection various circumstances?" If we continue the medieval analogy, they didn't simply always wear the maximum amount of armour available to them all the time, but rather tailored it according to their current conditions and what they needed to achieve.

However, that wasn't the question being discussed. What was being discussed was how do "we" deal with an enemy wearing body armour. The current American response appears to simply be "use a bigger gun to hit it harder".

The point that I raised was that we may need to adapt our tactics in ways that are not necessarily obvious at the moment. Others made suggestions about how "we" may need to fight differently.

You suggested that this was "Back-Asswards thinking". You then went off on a tangent.

If you are suggesting that wearing the maximum amount of body armour may not always be the best or even safest way of doing things, I don't think that anyone here would argue with that. However that has nothing to do with either what we were talking about or the post you replied to.

The data they've posted is from a 16in, rather than 13in, barrel and without the suppressor. Still some wonk on youtube took some cat 4 plates and smacked a few 6.5s in at 15 yards and 3000 fps. Didn't penetrate. So anything proof against 7.62.... Don't see how this new gump thing is going to defeat it.

Now if they are specifically talking about Chinese body armour then just wait for them to deploy lots and then upgrade the armour somewhat.

Seems they've managed to cram half the barrel length and similar performance into a package considerably heavier than our EM2. And badly balanced, no doubt ruinously expensive to boot.

Probably makes an awful lot of sense for the LMG. Though I did expect composite cases to be the next innovation.

Not seeing how it's going to be transgender lesbian friendly, will there be designated safe spaces for millenials?
 

kalliste

Old-Salt
My hot take on this is that it's just the usual looting the taxpayer nonsense. Since when did an individual rifleman's weapon make much difference. The special forces guys get whatever fancy nonsense they want.

The war we have as an example right now with two European armies going at it the artillery is doing most of the death and destruction, as per since forever. Make sure the squad belt fed machine gun and any crew served weapons on vehicles are firing something with a bit of go in it and the problem of body armour is solved. The riflemen are only keeping peoples' heads down anyway. Spraying 5.56 in the general direction is good enough for that and you can carry a lot more of that than this new stuff.

If anything they should have pepped up the 7.62x51 load for machine guns and gone back to ridiculous and expensive "future weapons" projects that come to nothing and that don't really cause any nuisance to the people doing real work.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
Curiously the proposal which used polymer cases for a 30% weight saving per cartridge and a 20% reduction in chamber heating was rejected. Which certainly would have made a difference.
 

TamH70

MIA
Curiously the proposal which used polymer cases for a 30% weight saving per cartridge and a 20% reduction in chamber heating was rejected. Which certainly would have made a difference.

I am not so sure that ammunition was specced for the kind of insane performance that the military brass wanted.
 

Hairy-boab

War Hero
My hot take on this is that it's just the usual looting the taxpayer nonsense. Since when did an individual rifleman's weapon make much difference. The special forces guys get whatever fancy nonsense they want.

The war we have as an example right now with two European armies going at it the artillery is doing most of the death and destruction, as per since forever. Make sure the squad belt fed machine gun and any crew served weapons on vehicles are firing something with a bit of go in it and the problem of body armour is solved. The riflemen are only keeping peoples' heads down anyway. Spraying 5.56 in the general direction is good enough for that and you can carry a lot more of that than this new stuff.

If anything they should have pepped up the 7.62x51 load for machine guns and gone back to ridiculous and expensive "future weapons" projects that come to nothing and that don't really cause any nuisance to the people doing real work.
Isn't it just the old story of preparing for the last war, i.e. longer range engagments against tribesmen in Afghanistan?
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
I am not so sure that ammunition was specced for the kind of insane performance that the military brass wanted.

It was, just in a different way. Winning proposal upped the chamber pressure to get performance from a very short barrel, with suppressor, the competing proposal was a bullpup ( which the gumps don't understand) with a long barrel to achieve similar results.

Tests of the civilian version of the polymer cases put it in the same bracket as match ammo. Probably pricey, but so is weight at the end of a log train.

Edit: Haven't seen anything regarding polymer cases for things like 12.7 or 20, 30mm yet but one might presume the weight savings there are more significant.
 
Isn't it just the old story of preparing for the last war, i.e. longer range engagments against tribesmen in Afghanistan?
A1980308-4C00-4FCC-852C-EABAAE4D9345.png

These guys have a big military budget.
They are procuring PC’s and the inserts that 5.56 is struggling to defeat. The M855A1 is about as far as one can go. Now it is time to upgrade to a round that will kill anyone.

Failure to adapt is not a good trait.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
View attachment 677749
These guys have a big military budget.
They are procuring PC’s and the inserts that 5.56 is struggling to defeat. The M855A1 is about as far as one can go. Now it is time to upgrade to a round that will kill anyone.

Failure to adapt is not a good trait.

As I mentioned upthread, 6.5mm at 3000 fps didn't defeat commercial armour at 15 yards. No doubt other youtube videos are available with pumpkins, watermelons, bottles of fizzy pop and ballistic gel... There always are.

Once the ballistics are known designing the body armour to defeat it at x range is both trivial and cheap to do.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
As I mentioned upthread, 6.5mm at 3000 fps didn't defeat commercial armour at 15 yards. No doubt other youtube videos are available with pumpkins, watermelons, bottles of fizzy pop and ballistic gel... There always are.

Once the ballistics are known designing the body armour to defeat it at x range is both trivial and cheap to do.
There comes a trade off point where weight of body armour and weight of ammo become excessive. Also the injuries caused by a stopped in the body armour projectile are often enough to take someone out of the fight for a while if not several days.
 

TamH70

MIA
It was, just in a different way. Winning proposal upped the chamber pressure to get performance from a very short barrel, with suppressor, the competing proposal was a bullpup ( which the gumps don't understand) with a long barrel to achieve similar results.

Tests of the civilian version of the polymer cases put it in the same bracket as match ammo. Probably pricey, but so is weight at the end of a log train.

Edit: Haven't seen anything regarding polymer cases for things like 12.7 or 20, 30mm yet but one might presume the weight savings there are more significant.

I think that the makers of the computer game ARMA 3 had discussions with a boutique AR-15 manufacturer from the States, a mob called CMMG if l recall correctly, and one of the outcomes of those talks was polymer-cased ammunition for everything from 5.56mm up, including .338 Lapua and Norma Magnum, and fifty-cal Browning.

I am almost certain that they were chatting to Textron as well about polymer cased stuff.

If l was a betting man, I would chuck a couple of quid on polymer cased ammo coming to both the military and civ-div in the medium term future. Those trials have proved that the concept works, and guns work with it.
 
As I mentioned upthread, 6.5mm at 3000 fps didn't defeat commercial armour at 15 yards. No doubt other youtube videos are available with pumpkins, watermelons, bottles of fizzy pop and ballistic gel... There always are.

Once the ballistics are known designing the body armour to defeat it at x range is both trivial and cheap to do.
The 6.8 round is a new kettle of fish.
Have fun designing insets to defeat it with very small frames to lug it around.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
If l was a betting man, I would chuck a couple of quid on polymer cased ammo coming to both the military and civ-div in the medium term future. Those trials have proved that the concept works, and guns work with it.
There is a video somewhere on here showing polymer MG links for the PKM in trials including operational trials.
Weight can be saved by other means than lightening the actual round itself.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Have fun designing insets to defeat it with very small frames to lug it around.
Unfortunately the round wont carry on and take out the three running behind him. Korean war tactics could still be used!
 

Hairy-boab

War Hero
The 6.8 round is a new kettle of fish.
Have fun designing insets to defeat it with very small frames to lug it around.
You make a good point (i'm just dipping into this). I’m curious what proportion of Chinese troops will ultimately be equipped with body armour, and if they have more flexibility to ditch it?

It is very interesting to see the divergence between US expectations for future conflict and e.g the “fighting light” thread here.

I suppose they would behave quite differently if e.g invading Taiwan or going full on Korean War redux.
 

Latest Threads

Top