Looks like our military or at least the army is going to 6.8mm

Army Picks Gunmakers for Next Test Phase of Future Infantry Weapons

Army Picks Gunmakers for Next Test Phase of Future Infantry Weapons - CZ-USA

Army Picks Gunmakers for Next Test Phase of Future Infantry Weapons

 

Good Deal, of course the 6.8 will increase the load out weight by twice to 4 times the weight of each round and soon we will be back to a 9++ battle rifle.

Plus a heavier barrel.

Sooner or later Physics always bites you in the butt when you try to sell a bad idea such as a 6lb battle rifle and a 223 round @55 grains and a 20 round magazine.

Lite Weight is for Boy Scouts.

 

Can do some things about the weight. Aluminum cases instead of brass (cheapest since they fit in existing firearms) cased telescoping rounds or even maybe caseless telescoping rounds.

 

Weight is a huge consideration more so now with a good mix of men and women in the military. I recently started teaching the wife to shoot an AR-15 (specifically a S&W M&P) and the first words out of her mouth, "It's heavy!" which I found to be quite a shock since it's only 6 pounds but balance also plays into it. She handled a Israeli X95 bullpup and never said a word which is 7+ pounds but is shorter than an M4 with the same barrel length. And, frankly, I am starting to wonder if Bullpups might be the solution to many of the modern days problems...actually, I am considering getting a X95 which the Israeli forces have now implemented. It's pretty sweet in a very small and tight package, piston also.

Advances continue in ammunition as @mysterymet points out, caseless ammo would weigh only about 1/3 of normal ammo of same caliber. I also read an article where the Germans were testing plastic casings which would allow them to carry 3X the ammo at the same weight.

Personally, I am not so sure it will be the 6.8 round... I think they have held off going to a new rifle for good reasons, the major one being the M4 does the job pretty well and is reliable with general maintenance. The other major reason is there are huge advancements coming in the near future. And, of course, we have been in constant conflict for years so not such a great time to make a major change.

 

I never once complained when carrying a 7.62X51 over the M-4, nor did the ammo load out cause me any concern of "Running Dry" when the shit went down hill fast! In fact, I always rather enjoyed the larger fighting rifles in general, and would have been happy to have carried a M-1 Garand were that still a option! I grew up surrounded by real American Manly Men, men who carried a Garand for YEARS in combat, and were happy to do so! Weapon weight is less important then balance and shoot ability when the shit gets sporty! Am I surprised by this move, Nope, but I will say, they should have just stuck with the 7.62X51 and saved us all a bunch of money, while training troupes to suck it up cupcake and pack that rifle like your life depends on it!

 

There are lots of ways to lighten your load. The only things you got to carry are weapons, ammo, and water! The only time that I might compline about the weight of ammo is if I had to carry a ammo can of it...give me a shoulder strap or two cans and you wont hear a word.

 

I honestly think part of the 5.56 strategy was wounding the enemy so they would have to tie up resources keeping them alive. 7.62x51 is too good at killing. If they are looking at existing M4/AR16 compatible cartridges I sure wish they take a look at the 6.5 Grendel vs 6.8 SPC - flatter, more energy, better penetration...

 

No comms? No meds? No chow? No shelter? No... LOL! I did some mountain training one time which quickly proved to me a few things like how important food becomes as does a bit of shelter... Amazing how weak you get and so quickly when you are really burning the calories, especially in cold or hot environments.

Yeah, I got to agree. I suppose one can make the argument that a lowering of the rifle weight has allowed an increase in ammo loadout, think it was 200 rounds for years then went to 300, but the 7.62x51 did it all and did it very well - still does.

There is some interesting reading about how we actually got the M-16...actually seems sort of shady, IIRC there was only one individual who was in favor of the M-16 and think he was in charge of either procurement or development, can't remember, but no one else really wanted it. I cannot understand why they simple didn't go with the FAL? I fear it had more to do with national pride than anything...

 

Ha! I was hoping this subject would come up! Hold On Tight, gonna cook your noodle!
5.56, the be all/ end all of military cartridges par excellence! Yea, not so much!
The original concept sure did look good on paper, wounding several of the enemy would tie up serious numbers of personal to tend to the wounded, care for them back behind the lines in the trauma tents, and thus the enemy would loose his effectiveness and his will to fight, let alone his superior moral will!

NOTHING of the sort ever actually happened! for over 60 years, we have been fighting enemies who don't give two shits about their fallen comrades, don't bother to tend to their wounds, much less drag them off the field dead or alive! All of our fighting has been against rag tag militia, gorilla and insurgents who don't care one bit for the end goals, only the fight right in front of them! So, wounding one doesn't shorten the fight by one second! We had high hopes that the 5.56 would be just the ticket, our solders could carry a lot of it ( Some carried over 1000 rounds) and could fight their way through just about anything! Vietnam was the trial, and the proof was swift in coming, enemy solders don't just throw up their arms and quit fighting because you killed one or two and wounded many, no they fight even harder, because YOU didn't kill them outright in the first place! Next was that little dust up down south in the central Americas, again, same results, lots of wounded, few dead, and a fight that dragged on far longer then it needed, and once again, American Boys were uselessly slaughtered by an inferior enemy, same as Vietnam! Then we had the first go around in the sand box, a place I am intimately familiar with, and once again, the 5.56 was a seriously deficient performer, made even worse with the switch to the Penetrator Loads ( M-855, Green Tip) and what was already really bad became much worse!
Still, we kept on doing as we had always done, the Balkans was another repeat, what little we actually did, didn't shorten things one second! Then back to the sand box to finish the job we some how fucked up the first time, and had to go back again and finally kick their asses back to the stone age, and yet again, the 5.56 was absolutely dismal! Then off to the mountains of hell Assganastan, where we started all over with the intent to kick some ass, yet we got the same results over and over and over!
60+ years of stupid, nearsighted political policy hamstringing the U.S. Mil. into prolonged fights with few tactical results, in a manor inconsistent with actually winning a fight!
I cannot tell you how many times I was in a fire fight, firing my weapon at the enemy, and watching my rounds hitting the sand several hundred yards short of my enemy, having to wait for them to get close enough to seriously threaten me and those around me, finally being able to connect, only to have several rounds pass clean through with barely a missed step, or a momentary second where I could exploit the situation! In WW-II, the Mighty M-1 Garand or the M-1903 could accurately lay down suppressing fire at distances you couldn't hardly see, and you didn't have to worry about having an enemy combatant getting back up after a single hit ANYWHERE, picking up his AK and resuming fire on your position, NO, he went down, and he fucking stayed down forever!
Missions where I was the D.M, and carried ether the M-21,M-24, or M-40 ( My Favored rifle) enemies couldn't even get close enough to see us, let alone fire on us, and with a few choice rounds down range, I could turn the fight and make them pay for every step forward! I could pin them in place and then cover so that a flanking force could finish them off! No one hit ever got up, and not once did one of his buddies ever check on him or provide any care what so ever, only taking his ammo and moving on!
We as a fighting force lost our fighting strength when we allowed politicians to dictate the terms of war fighting, and removing THE most effective ammo and weapons we had, both the mighty .30 U.S.1903, and later the Mighty M-80 7.62X51 NATO!


So, we have finally pulled our heads outta our asses and decided to change the chambering to something a tiny bit more powerful, and we hope to change how we fight based on that, all I can say is WOW, i'm sure glad I don't have to suffer through that, as dismal as the 5.56 was, I can see this new chambering being hardly any better then what came before! I say quit fucking around, go back to the 7.62X51 and be done with it, train the kiddos to actually use it, love it, and carry it! Teach them to be RIFLEMEN and to make each and every round count! Tell them to Man the Fuck Up and Carry that Rifle like your life depends on it, no matter how heavy it may be! In short, go back to being the Baddest Mean Green Fighting Machine on the fucking planet! Hell, bring back the M-14, I would sign back up then, and as old and broken as I am now, I would still march circles around today's Kids, Proudly Hoisting that 11 pound monster, and 240 rounds of .30 cal Freedom seeds!

 

That has always been my mindset, but I never served so I've kept my mouth shut. My preps include AR-15's since they are also easier for slighter people since I may not have 19 YO men at my disposal, but the AR308 is for me! I don't believe in "spray and pray" the odds just don't support it. I believe, especially in a situation where ammo may be hard to find, that fewer well placed shots are the ticket, and a round like the 7.62x51 makes people have to work harder to find effective barriers.

If I'm being attacked I want the attacker stopped, and nothing stops and attacker better a dirt nap. I also think that hearing the report of 7.62 when the attacker has something lighter is akin to hearing a pump shotgun go schlunk-clunk in the night. IMO they should either perfect the lighter variants of the AR-10 or go with the FAL. Nothing like your enemy knowing that you just might pull off that 1,000 yard shot.

 

As a Civilian, the AR is a practical and useful Carbine WITH the correct ammo! I really looked into the AMMO situation carefully and have settled on what makes for a VERY effective and efficient weapon system! HEAVY bullets of the soft point or hollow point variety will make for a much better option, given all that, plus my experience with the system is that it is only as good as it's ammo! 55 Gr varminators or other "explosive" type bullets can be frighteningly effectively, and even a hit to the plates from such a round is going to cause a lot of trauma to the face from the spray!
Still, nothing says you care like a 7.62X51 from a Long Ways Off, and a hit to anywhere is pretty much gonna put a tango down for good!
And lets not forget the Bolt Actions and lever Actions, most pack a serious wallop far beyond the 5.56 and many of those hunting rifles can be capable of serious distance and stopping power with basic hunting ammo!
Having see a Sheriffs Coroner autopsies of a shooting accident involving a .243 Winchester, I can tell you, THAT was seriously nasty!
3600 Feet per second 100 gr soft point basically emptied out the torso of all internals and seriously messed up the rest of the internal tissues and bones! .30/06 180 gr softpoint pretty much cut a man in half, and the .300 Win Mag 200 gr soft point took a few people with yellow bags and a shovel and mop to recover the body!

 

All it takes is to replace the upper and magazines, issue it to a group of troops and see what happens.

 

If you can't win a war, then load your soldiers down with more gear. Maybe that is why the military is developing exoskeletons for our troops, so they can carry more high tech gear and lose more wars. Comms, that is a radioman. Meds, that is a medic. Shelter, many armies make-do with greatcoats and blankets. Our very expensive military has/ is losing to rice farmers and goat herders.

 

to my way of thinkin 6.5 grendel is a viable cartridge...

 

Depends on the barrel length. Shorter CQB or longer Range?
6.8 is a choice if you use a 16 to 18 inch barrel. Also good in a canned AR15 in a 200 grain subsonic.

 

@HK_User "All it takes is to replace the upper and magazines, issue it to a group of troops and see what happens."
Yeah, that is how they phased in the M4... I was thinking more in terms of 'costs' as since we are in constant state of conflict, there is never enough money in the DoD budget.

Thinking about what you said "All it takes is to replace the upper and magazines" I wonder if that is what they are considering? It would be a true cost cutter in procurement and since it's basically the same system, very little new training would be required if any, another huge cost savings. I bet that's a consideration for them or even a stop gap to buy some time until new ammo/firearm technology is here.

 

And they might have already tried that, Who'd a known, supply, armory, few others!

 

Textron says it has delivered the first prototype of what could be the U.S. Army’s next standard-issue rifle, which will replace its M4 carbines, for testing. The company also says its design could be a springboard for more advanced small arms developments in the future.

The Rhode-island headquartered defense contractor’s AAI Corporation subsidiary is the one in charge of the conglomerate’s submission for what Army refers formally as the Next Generation Squad Weapons program (NGSW). This effort includes plans for a new infantry rifle to take the place of the M4, or NGSW-R, and an automatic rifle replacement for the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW), known as the NGSW-AR.

US Army Wants Its Future Automatic Rifle to Adapt to Other RolesBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
The Army Is Once Again Looking to Replace the 5.56mm CartridgeBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
Army To Replace M249 SAWs With New Squad Automatic Rifles Only In 'Close-Combat' UnitsBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
US Army Seeks a New Battle Rifle for Piercing Advanced Body ArmorBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
Congress Set To Put the Brakes On Marine Plans To Buy More Of Its Popular M27 RiflesBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
AAI’s delivery, which Textron announced on Mar. 25, 2019, is a technology demonstrator, known as the NGSW-Technology, or NGSW-T. It is the first of five guns that it will eventually supply to the Army as part of this initial phase of the NGSW-R competition. The service's latest budget request for the 2020 Fiscal Year asks for more than $30 million to support the ongoing research and development.

We don’t know exactly what AAI’s design looks like, but an official press release stated that it leverages nearly 15 years of the company’s work on advanced small arms using what is known as cased-telescoped (CT) ammunition. In a traditional small arms cartridge, the bullet itself sits in place at the top of a metallic case filled with gunpowder. CT ammunition nestles the bullet inside the case with the gunpowder, shortening its overall length, which in turn allows for the length of the overall weapon to be more compact. It also makes the rounds themselves more compact, reducing the physical space required to store it, in magazines or elsewhere, reducing the burdens on troops and logistical chains.


Joseph Trevithick
A comparison of traditional brass-cased ammunition, at left, and cased-telescoped ammunition, at right.

However, the Army’s NGSW requirements call for any submissions to use a special 6.8mm cartridge, known as the XM1186, which has a traditional configuration. This new round promises to have better range, improved accuracy at longer distances, and greater armor penetration capability over the existing 5.56x45mm ammunition the service uses now. The Army's 2020 Fiscal Year budget request says the service is also developing a "special purpose" variant of the 6.8mm round, known as the XM1184, but does not explain how the two cartridges differ.

AAI publicly unveiled a CT rifle design in 2018, which would be the obvious starting place for its gun chambered in the Army’s desired 6.8mm ammunition. The existing weapon has a general shape very similar to the service’s existing M4 carbine and features many of the same controls as other AR-15/M16-series firearms and derivatives, including the fire control selector and t-shaped charging handle.


Joseph Trevithick
AAI's cased-telescoped rifle concept is seen at the far right, next to examples of the company's squad automatic rifle prototypes chambered in this same ammunition, as well as completely caseless rounds.

This general commonality with the Army’s existing standard issue weapon could make it particularly attractive. Any time a major U.S. military service adopts a new rifle, it's not only a major logistical undertaking, but one that puts significant strains on training, as well.

If what is known as the manual of arms – the typical actions associated with operating the gun, such as firing it, using its various controls, and clearing jams – between the M4 and whatever the Army adopts next remain largely the same, it would make it infinitely easier to integrate it into basic training and transition existing units to the new guns. The service says the new rifles will also feature standard rail accessories attachment points, allowing personnel to use existing lights, visible and infrared laser pointers, vertical forward grips, and other add-ons.


NATO
US Army soldiers in Afghanistan train with their M4 carbines.

There is also a requirement for the guns to be able to accept a suppressor, something typically associated with special operations forces that is now looking to become more of a standard issue item for regular combat units. Suppressors, which help eliminate muzzle flash and reduce the sound of firing, can help conceal friendly forces from the enemy, especially at night, and help reduce the overall din of battle, making it easier for troops to communicate. “It's [6.8mm] a higher caliber and a louder system, so the suppressor will help operationally,” Arthur Fiorellini, the NGSW program team leader at the Army’s Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, told Task & Purpose in February 2019.

 

AP ammo? When was the last time we fought an army that had body-armor? Rice farmers and goat herders don't have no body-armor! Unless we are planning to tangle with a 1st World / 1st Rate Military that is hardly a major concern.