OK. You did not hear this from me.
But the little birds inside the new Finnish/swedish joint infantry weapon program whisper that the 5.56mm rifles would be meant only for the vehicle operators/mechanized troops. The brunt force of the infantry would get bigger, heftier 7,62mm NATO caliber versions. That is, the lion share of nordic NATO forces would be rocking essentially DMR's.
This would be in line with previous Finnish Defense Forces doctrine that says that 5.56 is "an ok-ish round" but kinda non-ideal for thick, heavy woodlands of Northern Scandinavia. You need foliage penetration without losing accuracy or impact energy. Finns have always being autistic about "you don't spray and pray. You shoot aimed shots, so you don't need to shoot twice" mentality. Foliage penetration of 5.56mm in the Northern latitudes leaves something to be desired, or something.
But then again, this is just wild rumours around the watchtower. Some guy on the internet told you this.
K
Foliage causes deflection irrespective of bullet mass and velocity and "bush guns" are a boomer meme.
>Foliage causes deflection irrespective of bullet mass and velocity and "bush guns" are a boomer meme.
A roundnose will go straight trough, a barely stable 5.56 bullet with steel in the front and lead in the back will insta tumble, finally settling on flying bottom first after losing plenty of speed flying sideways.
> 62gr 5.56 from a 1:7 twist
> barely stable
Pick one. The main reason the US ditched ss109 for m885a1 was overstabalization of green tip when it was supposed to yaw inside people.
>Finns have always being autistic about "you don't spray and pray. You shoot aimed shots, so you don't need to shoot twice" mentality
Seeing all the recent trench footage in ukraine I'd say that is whishful thinking. Once a real war starts your soldiers are still going to spray and pray instead of exposing themselves to unnecessary danger.
>Foliage penetration of 5.56mm in the Northern latitudes leaves something to be desired, or something
Foliage penetration of all types of rounds leaves something to be desired. That's why God invented artillery.
And what does Finland have in abundance?
Modern highly accurate, mighly mobile artillery. Pretty much the best in Europe.
>so you don't need to shoot twice
armies keep saying that but war has never and will never be like this
I want to believe in 7.62 NATO but being Finnish, I know Finns love cheap shit and 7.62 is not cheap compared to 5.56. We will go with the cheaper option.
If the heavier caliber is the difference between neutralizing an armored target and saving a life or getting shot and killed, it is worth the cost.
There are all sorts of compromises when it comes to ammo, anon. Is it worth it if soldiers are running out of ammo and getting killed because of it?
>If the heavier caliber is the difference between neutralizing an armored target
7.62 NATO is worse at AP than 5.56.
But what 50m after going through dense brush?
t. other.
You mean 5.56 is better at short distance with a long barrel, because like all small rounds it loses a lot of velocity, unlike heavier rounds whose speed is much more stable. And then it would be better than 7.62 shot from a short barrel, I guess.
But hum, yeah things are a bit more complex than this.
Part of anon's argument was that 7.62 NATO is better at AP than 5.56. This is false under all circumstances, and if there is a scenario where 5.56 will not pen a plate than the 7.62 NATO will not either so arguments about barrel length or distances do not apply. Your most basic level III plates stop 7.62 NATO but *can* be penned by 5.56.
Yeah they stop your average M80 alright. That's it I guess.
Why not adopt the .277 Fury? Since were gonna end up using it, well just force the rest of NATO to use it anyways like we did with 5.56 lol.
I have known this for months anon, you are not spilling some super special awsome secret info.
t. Swede Infantry
Odds are he read it in one of the previous threads on the topic here.
Also, mech inf (Aka the grunts riding in the back of CV90s) will also get real fricking nato, but everyone not expected to do frontline combat will get 556, so tank/IFV crews, artillery, supply, AA, airforce, navy etc etc.
That's that 7.62x51 NATO round.
That's a serious round, serious kinetic energy for armor and long distance shooting.
It ain't no b***h round, it will rock your shit, but if you are physically strong with good form, you can hold a tight group. It was the standard Western round for a long time as well, so it's not untested. Mainly a result of fielding the M16 to replace the old wooden 7.62 NATO M14 in Vietnam. It is fun to shoot, but it can also chamber very potent AP rounds, so you can face armored threats with greater lethality and certainty.
It's more physical power than the common 7.62x39 round, which is already a step up from the 5.56. You can chamber 7.62x51 in 308 rifles, but not vice-versa. The two are very similar already. Not a bad choice, now that we have modern variable optics. This mirrors the American decision to upgrade to 6.8 with the XM7, and the infrastructure for the 7.62 NATO and its associated rifles are already in Europe.
>You can chamber 7.62x51 in 308 rifles, but not vice-versa.
Tell that to all the civilian spec .308 I have been slinging from my FAL
I read corporalfrisk too, Black person
Based reader of the old ass blogs. Also, in his latest post he references MG Frisell. That guy used to by my battalion CO back when I was in conscription, and I once ended up drunk as all hell with him at a bar in Finland.
fingolian still using 7.62x39 valmet ak right ?
For the time being, yes.
The plan is to switch to a) Nato standard and b) common caliber with swedish troops.
Which would mean both 5.56 and 7.62 Nato. I guess Shorter, lighter round for vehicle operators and mechanized troops as well as airborne guys and LMG's would make sense. But harder-hitting 7.62 Nato battle rifles in the hands of infantry, DMR, smaller snipers and medium MG's would be a real b***h to encounter if you are a russian vatnik trying to rush through a thick Finnish forest.
>be a real b***h to encounter if you are a russian vatnik trying to rush through a thick Finnish forest.
Combat distance in a finnish forest is perhaps 50 meter. That is why the finns were so much into SMGs during world war 2, and their assault rifle project was based on a 9x40 mm pistol bullet cartridge (IIRC), as a kind of super m1 carbine.
What is this ritual? Please enlighten me on nordic mythology, it's fascinating.
The idea is to buy a big 7.62 so the box (aka lower) is big enough to hold an upper for whatever next gen ammunition USA standardizes om when there is money available (that is, never). The 5.56s will be cut down carbinelets with 10-11 inch barrels. I fully expect this procurement to end in nothing but dust and bullshit.
5.56 tumbles when penetrating foliage so it turns concealment into semi cover. This is why the finns keep 7.62x39, a more stable bullet that will go trough walls and foliage and keep going nose first is desireable. The swedish army is pretty much a total clownshow at this stage, of the promised vehicle help to Ukraine there became nothing, because these handful of vehicles promised were the entire running stock of the army including all spares. Replacing the cv90s would have taken refurbishment of redlined vehicles and several months of mech work. The tanks (of which 40 are modernized, rest mothballed for spare parts, aka redlined) would have been totally irreplacable. To top it off, the army soldiers consists of homos, stronk femynist womyn, and jihadi durka durkas.
>The swedish army is pretty much a total clownshow at this stage, of the promised vehicle help to Ukraine there became nothing, because these handful of vehicles promised were the entire running stock of the army including all spares.
lol, we promised at most 50 of the 539 CV90s, and yes I was part of the crew loading some of them onto C-17 heading down
>Replacing the cv90s would have taken refurbishment of redlined vehicles and several months of mech work.
No, but please tell me what regiment/battalion you were in and at what time to get this info. I really wish to know.
>The tanks (of which 40 are modernized, rest mothballed for spare parts, aka redlined)
Perhaps back in 2011, but not now. Today even the few 121s kept as spares has a place in the wartime organisation and are up running, hell I saw one running a few weeks ago.
>To top it off, the army soldiers consists of homos, stronk femynist womyn, and jihadi durka durkas.
>
the swedish army are also switching back to G3s in the interim while these new rifles are being adopted.
It's fricking obvious they're going with a 7.62 rifle, considering Sweden still uses the AK-4 and, Finland the RK-62.