View Full Version : Composite-cased ammo selected for NGSW
It'll be interesting to see if this makes it all the way to fielding:
GARLAND, TX – True Velocity composite-cased ammunition has been selected for the U.S. Army’s Next Generation Squad Weapon (NGSW) modernization program. True Velocity’s 6.8mm composite-cased cartridge was submitted as part of an overall NGSW weapon system in partnership with General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems and firearm manufacturer Beretta Defense Technologies.
http://soldiersystems.net/2019/09/06/us-army-selects-true-velocity-composite-cased-ammunition-next-generation-squad-weapon/
Outlander Systems
09-07-19, 11:54
The fork is officially in 5.56’s ass. And the M4’s.
Looks like a modified Ackley Improved case shape. I’m not well versed in polymers but I’m interested in knowing how one is capable of withstanding higher pressures than brass and preventing the primer from backing out in said high pressures.
Metal case head insert, looks to me like it goes up about 20% into the polymer case. This is interesting, I suppose the other competitors will have to adapt their weapons to this cartridge? I was hoping cased telescoped would work out but if this works great. I wonder how the polymer case will stand up to mg links.
Presumably they can manufacture the case in a less obtrusive color than white?
Upon further research, this may be only part of the story. SIG and Textron were apparently also awarded contracts, and appear to be developing their own flavors of ammunition:
https://www.sigsauer.com/press-releases/sig-sauer-selected-by-u-s-army-for-next-generation-weapons-with-new-ammunition-technology-lightweight-machine-gun-rifle-and-suppressors/
https://www.textronsystems.com/newsroom/press-release?ReleaseID=0428fdc4-b376-4b9e-bb04-c3373be82d75
Belmont31R
09-07-19, 17:49
The mil runs all kinds of programs to develop new equipment. Doesn't mean it'll ever get adopted service wide. Odds are actually pretty against it. They spend billions every year on programs that will never see the light of day outside the development phase.
Besides that it would take Lake City YEARS to retool the lines to mass produce this stuff, and then run for YEARS to get stockpiles up to mandated amounts.
I don't think LC will be involved in making the ammo, at first anyway. IIRC the winner has to be sole source on the ammo at least for a while. I believe they set it up this way so that if something like this round is selected the developer has to commit to supply it until others can be spun up.
Textron may be stepping out the furthest with their "Case Telescoped" ammo concept. The big advantage to that is supposedly the weight savings.
BoringGuy45
09-07-19, 20:36
Textron may be stepping out the furthest with their "Case Telescoped" ammo concept. The big advantage to that is supposedly the weight savings.
Yes, but at the cost of bulk. The telescoped ammo appear to be about the size of 20 gauge shotgun rounds.
Honestly, the most viable option of all these being offered here appears to be the polymer case rounds. If they can find a way to create a polymer that can be comparable to brass in most respects, they can use current chamberings and save weight. Or, they could upgrade to something like 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel with only a slight increase in bulk and a reduction in the current weight of 5.56.
I'm not opposed to things like telescoping ammo, and I do think it's the future. but I think at this point, it's still years away from being ready.
Also, I don't know why they're insisting on 6.8 when 6.5 is shown to have better external ballistics and very comparable terminal ballistics.
It will be interesting to see if the weapon that fires a larger, heavier bullet faster at higher pressure than 5.56 with recoil reduction mechanism is still the same or lighter weight than the m4/5.56 platform; or if the weapon increases in weight to where typical ammo load weight savings are negated.
Polymers are magical sort of but able to sustain a higher pressure with less weight and not significantly greater size case than brass? I will believe it when I see it perform.
It better be green biodegradable polymer.
Anything less is unacceptable. Can you imagine war zones littered with non degradable ammo plastic?
[emoji849]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SIG seems to be the odd man out with a hybrid brass/steel case. If the Army feels uncomfortable making the leap to polymer then SIG may have an advantage (on the ammo side, anyway).
SIG seems to be the odd man out with a hybrid brass/steel case. If the Army feels uncomfortable making the leap to polymer then SIG may have an advantage (on the ammo side, anyway).
I can’t believe that if there was anyway a manufacturer could develop polymer ammo that was lighter and better performing that same caliber metal cases ammo that they would not have done so already. Polymer case that can shoot a 6.8mm 135gr bullet at 3400fps from a 16” bbl lighter rifle?! They would sell a boat load to antelope and mt goat hunters and many, many interested hobbyists.
If it were feasible the commercial market would have delivered on something as widely used as “medium game” and long range target ammo. Only the govt will spends millions to discover after 5 years their objective was either contorted beyond recognition or fantasy from the start.
BoringGuy45
09-07-19, 23:45
I can’t believe that if there was anyway a manufacturer could develop polymer ammo that was lighter and better performing that same caliber metal cases ammo that they would not have done so already. Polymer case that can shoot a 6.8mm 135gr bullet at 3400fps from a 16” bbl lighter rifle?! They would sell a boat load to antelope and mt goat hunters and many, many interested hobbyists.
If it were feasible the commercial market would have delivered on something as widely used as “medium game” and long range target ammo. Only the govt will spends millions to discover after 5 years their objective was either contorted beyond recognition or fantasy from the start.
Again, as I've said before, this is the Advanced Combat Rifle, the G11, the Land Warrior, and the OICW all over again.
It seems like these trials of new technology almost never lead anywhere. Anytime there is an adoption of new guns, it's an existing design rather than something specifically invented for a potential contract.
Dear US Military,
You have less than 9 years to make ray guns that shoot neon purplish pink lazer beams or you are calling James Cameron a goddamn liar.
Thank you
Seems like a white polymer case made the news about 10 years ago then ended up not working well.
Won't using white ammo to shoot people of color be racist?
Won't using white ammo to shoot people of color be racist?
https://i.imgflip.com/3a059l.jpg (https://imgflip.com/i/3a059l)via Imgflip Meme Generator (https://imgflip.com/memegenerator)
Won't using white ammo to shoot people of color be racist?
We need rainbow ammo so it looks like we are shooting them with Skittles.
The Dumb Gun Collector
09-08-19, 10:49
30 percent lighter and shorter is worth the extra width IMO. I would, however, like to see how reliable and accurate this stuff is. I really, really want to see the US soldier's capability to improve so I hope this is it.
30 percent lighter and shorter is worth the extra width IMO. I would, however, like to see how reliable and accurate this stuff is. I really, really want to see the US soldier's capability to improve so I hope this is it.
To bad that means nothing if training standards and overall proficiency is not improved upon first.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I really, really want to see the US soldier's capability to improve so I hope this is it.
We could do this for a lot cheaper if we put more time in on the range.
There are Soldiers who literally shoot less than a basic load worth of ammo in a year.
There are Infantry units that never shoot on a KD range, and simply "zero" optics at 25m and call it good. Some even shoot Alt-C for their rifle quals. This happens more than people will admit.
We could do this for a lot cheaper if we put more time in on the range.
There are Soldiers who literally shoot less than a basic load worth of ammo in a year.
There are Infantry units that never shoot on a KD range, and simply "zero" optics at 25m and call it good. Some even shoot Alt-C for their rifle quals. This happens more than people will admit.
Yup, happens all the time (as you know). To that point, I shot less than 200 rounds in all of infantry OSUT many years ago. And they really didn’t teach us anything. I’m at about six years in and I’m pretty sure the only time I’ve ever shot more than 210 rounds in one year is when I went to my divisions marksmanship course. Granted, I’m a non-combat arms officer so it’s expected that I shoot less than an 11B10 or 20, but I also actively pursue opportunities to shoot so I’m on the high end for just about every non combat MOS I know of.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BoringGuy45
09-08-19, 14:01
We could do this for a lot cheaper if we put more time in on the range.
There are Soldiers who literally shoot less than a basic load worth of ammo in a year.
There are Infantry units that never shoot on a KD range, and simply "zero" optics at 25m and call it good. Some even shoot Alt-C for their rifle quals. This happens more than people will admit.
Yeah, but does one thing have anything to do with the other? Unless they are diverting money from the training budget to fund R&D, I don't see what the issue is.
Yeah, but does one thing have anything to do with the other? Unless they are diverting money from the training budget to fund R&D, I don't see what the issue is.
Somewhat related, when you consider what level of proficiency we already have on the M4 and how long it’ll take to relearn all of that with anything new, much less a whole new gun and caliber.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Serious question:
If a new bullet is just the big new answer to everyone’s problems....
Why not just rebarrel existing rifles and make the round conform to STANAG magazines?
Otherwise this is right up there with XM8s. A new toy nobody really needed that has a new manual of arms
I think the Army wants a complete break from Eugene Stoner.
BoringGuy45
09-08-19, 18:51
Somewhat related, when you consider what level of proficiency we already have on the M4 and how long it’ll take to relearn all of that with anything new, much less a whole new gun and caliber.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But this has been the stock objection to every proposal for new small arms since we switched from muzzleloaders to repeaters. Don't get a lighter gun; up the PT standards so your soldiers are stronger and able to handle the heavy rifle they currently have. Don't get a rifle with a larger magazine; have the soldiers spend more time on the range and make their shots count. Don't get a more reliable weapon; train your guys to clean and lube their current weapon better.
I'm not saying that we can neglect training, but we've had a long history of not adopting anything new until we start getting our asses kicked by somebody who does.
We could do this for a lot cheaper if we put more time in on the range.
There are Soldiers who literally shoot less than a basic load worth of ammo in a year.
There are Infantry units that never shoot on a KD range, and simply "zero" optics at 25m and call it good. Some even shoot Alt-C for their rifle quals. This happens more than people will admit.
Winner winner chicken dinner.
You don’t buy a teenager a Ferrari just because he’s always late to work.
The M16/M4 has peaked, as far as the rifle itself it's about as good as it's ever going to be. As near as I can tell one of the goals of the Next Gen is to be able to defeat Level 4 plates, necessary goal or not nothing you can fit into a M4 mag is going to be able to do this. Even if the rifle doesn't pan out if a viable MG using a cartridge that is lighter and greatly outperforms the 7.62 comes out of this it will be worthwhile.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.