U.S. Military's 'New' 6.8 Caliber Round ?

[Marine Corporal]

No one is addressing the weight/bulk issue.

Any combination that is better on paper but decreases rounds carried for the same weight loadout is a non-starter.

Or increased weight for the same loadout.

Until a breakthru happens this is a non-starter. Caseless, new powder, etc.

I think it's a good idea to keep pushing the state of the possible, I just don't see this particular implementation as a practical solution yet. But interesting idea.

They have to address, weight, recoil, and bulk. Otherwise as mentioned they could just pick 270 WSM now, that's not what they're trying to do.

The weight issue is real thing. Me personally, I’d rather keep the lighter rounds. I am a Desert Storm vet. My load out was already heavy and that was wearing a flak vest instead of armor. The guys today have an extra 20 somewhat pounds on what we carried with the armor they have to wear. As the wars go on, the more crap we have to carry. So no. I wouldn’t want a heavier round. In Vietnam, they didn’t carry all this extra stuff we have to carry today. It adds up. We are already burdened as it is. Optics, batteries, armor, a hydration bladder and canteens. Radios, etc. Everything is heavier. The M240 Golf or Bravo is heavier than the M60. The M16A4 with an Acog, flashlight,30 round magazine, and PEQ is heavier than the M16 which had no optic, no flashlight, no PEQ, and 20 rounders instead of 30’s. Now add an M203 on top of that too. Everything just weighs more now. We carry extra medical gear too than they did in previous wars. NVG’s eye pro. What else do they want us to carry?

Check out this video below. It’s ridiculous. Lots of us are claiming VA disabilities due to shot knees and back issues. We don’t need a heavier round. As a 170 pound guy when I was in, I almost carried another me. I don’t think the old timers get it when they say that we should go back to the 7.62. Maybe I’m bitching too much. I don’t know.

[pinzgauer]

The problems faced by actual 4GW against near-peer will include EW and SAM/AAA threats that will render our current reality of air dominance far more anemic than most people are comfortable admitting.

Why does everyone think we are gonna have this epic, anime World War 3 showdown with the Russians and the Chinese?

"Near peer" is a type of fighting, a mil term of art, not a set of countries.

People hear it and think Russia or China.

Probably a better way to think of it as other than the asymetric warfare we've been dealing with for decades.

An enemy with conventional forces and similar tools (EW, drones, fires, etc) as you do.

For example, it is correct to call Iran as a "neer-peer" advisary. That hurt my head a bit until the current usage of the term was explained to me. No where even close to being peers. But they would be fighting with similar tools and tactics as we would.

Distributing anti-drone capability down to an organic level in forward deployed units would be a better start, but there's no reason to believe that such capability is not currently being worked on, if on a much quieter level.

Was chatting with my Infantry Captain son and the 6.8 thing came up. His exact comment was he wish they'd spend time (instead) developing squad or company-level anti-drone technology. Drone killers. Not to take out predator type uavs, but the small ones.

Indicated that's the thorn in his side, you can hear them but can't see them. Really starting to impact tactics. Very hard to move now without the other guy knowing it even when behind cover.

Without getting into specific capabilities, drones are now a huge part of modern infantry down to the lowest levels. We have to assume our enemy will have similar its off-the-shelf technology.

[Wake27]

Without getting into specific capabilities, drones are now a huge part of modern infantry down to the lowest levels. We have to assume our enemy will have similar its off-the-shelf technology.

It’s far more available to them than us. It should absolutely be more of a concern to us than the next caliber.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RHINOWSO]

I'm not poopooing anything 6.8 and we all know that some day, the 5.56 will be phased out. Maybe even for something in 6.8. But it's interesting how headlines of "amazing new 6.X caliber round is about to take over" headlines are on such a cycle that it's almost predictable. What would it be, like every 30 months or so?

Probably the retirement cycle of some Generals in Big Army; they need a spot on a BOD or high paying B/D job with a company.

[ssimo]

I Think it would be way more useful being able to carry more rounds than having fewer rounds but being able to penetrate a body armour at 600 m. At 600 m there are much more deadlier weapons to deal with hostiles.

[JediGuy]

I Think it would be way more useful being able to carry more rounds than having fewer rounds but being able to penetrate a body armour at 600 m. At 600 m there are much more deadlier weapons to deal with hostiles.

I think earlier in the thread the idea of lessened air superiority was raised. Though artillery might still be available, what if it weren’t? I believe part of the concern is penetrating Russian body armor at much closer distances than 600m.

[jpmuscle]

The weight issue is real thing. Me personally, I’d rather keep the lighter rounds. I am a Desert Storm vet. My load out was already heavy and that was wearing a flak vest instead of armor. The guys today have an extra 20 somewhat pounds on what we carried with the armor they have to wear. As the wars go on, the more crap we have to carry. So no. I wouldn’t want a heavier round. In Vietnam, they didn’t carry all this extra stuff we have to carry today. It adds up. We are already burdened as it is. Optics, batteries, armor, a hydration bladder and canteens. Radios, etc. Everything is heavier. The M240 Golf or Bravo is heavier than the M60. The M16A4 with an Acog, flashlight,30 round magazine, and PEQ is heavier than the M16 which had no optic, no flashlight, no PEQ, and 20 rounders instead of 30’s. Now add an M203 on top of that too. Everything just weighs more now. We carry extra medical gear too than they did in previous wars. NVG’s eye pro. What else do they want us to carry?

Check out this video below. It’s ridiculous. Lots of us are claiming VA disabilities due to shot knees and back issues. We don’t need a heavier round. As a 170 pound guy when I was in, I almost carried another me. I don’t think the old timers get it when they say that we should go back to the 7.62. Maybe I’m bitching too much. I don’t know.

Maybe they should carry PCCs?




On a serious note new calibers and their derivatives are cool and all but how much further can 5.56 be evolved? Or have we already exceeded the apex of its potential?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ssimo]

I think earlier in the thread the idea of lessened air superiority was raised. Though artillery might still be available, what if it weren’t? I believe part of the concern is penetrating Russian body armor at much closer distances than 600m.

The idea of a major conflict between modern countries without the air superiority being the crucial point is not realistic. In order not to have artillery you should go back to medieval technology, there wouldn't be rifles, too. you are basically talking about a post apocaliptic world war, which i don't Think was the topic being discussed here. The caliber for the single Soldier or the single infantry unit can make a big difference (and I still think That is better to have more round and Carry less weight) but, unless we are talking about A completely different kind of Bullet with a New Technology Behind it, I don't see many caliber options to really improve a Western country armed force performances at the moment.

[vicious_cb]

The idea of a major conflict between modern countries without the air superiority being the crucial point is not realistic. In order not to have artillery you should go back to medieval technology, there wouldn't be rifles, too. you are basically talking about a post apocaliptic world war, which i don't Think was the topic being discussed here. The caliber for the single Soldier or the single infantry unit can make a big difference (and I still think That is better to have more round and Carry less weight) but, unless we are talking about A completely different kind of Bullet with a New Technology Behind it, I don't see many caliber options to really improve a Western country armed force performances at the moment.

You completely misunderstood his point. There were times even in Iraq where CAS and Arty support were unavailable to due to being tied up elsewhere or bad weather conditions or any number of factors despite having complete air dominance. Now combine those factors against someone with actual air defense capability, counter battery radar and a wider theater of war and suddenly having on demand TAC air and arty for every engagement isnt so viable anymore.

[ssimo]

You completely misunderstood his point. There were times even in Iraq where CAS and Arty support were unavailable to due to being tied up elsewhere or bad weather conditions or any number of factors despite having complete air dominance. Now combine those factors against someone with actual air defense capability, counter battery radar and a wider theater of war and suddenly having on demand TAC air and arty for every engagement isnt so viable anymore.

No my friend, it's you that completely misunderstood mine. The caliber of small arms, unless based on a totally different technology, is not a major factor in deciding the results of a conflict between modern nations. Industrial capacity, natural resources, airforce (number of Aircraft and technology adopted), tactical ballistic missles, nuclear weapons and General strategy are way more important factors. As i already wrote (not sure you actually read my post), there are specifical situations when an infantry unit has to face a threat without external support, and there the small Arms became very important to the units involved, but not for the outcome of a conflict. If you have to invest in modernizing the armed forces, switching from a small Arms caliber to a similar one with different ballistic isn't so important.
EDIT: Try to imagine to be in the situation you described, would you prefer to have aorsupport or to have a more efficient (arguably) caliber.