Why did the US Army adopt a 6.8mm round for defeating armor instead of just using 5.56mm with Tugsten penetrators?

Why did the US Army adopt a 6.8mm round for defeating armor instead of just using 5.56mm with Tugsten penetrators?

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know. Why did the US decide not to have an empire?
    Some things are beyond reason.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Are you retarded are do you think an Empire is paint on a map?

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    cheaper

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I believe Tungsten is not in great supply natively in America, its why they used DU instead of it, because there's a lot more DU than there is Tungsten around to make into shells.
    So when they decided that they wanted a round capable blowing a hole through Body Armor, the guy wearing the body armor, the back of the body armor, and probably a chunk of whatever they were in front of, they went with a 6.8mm.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I believe Tungsten is not in great supply natively in America
      Correct. Actually we don't mine any right now.

      >So when they decided that they wanted a round capable blowing a hole through Body Armor, the guy wearing the body armor, the back of the body armor, and probably a chunk of whatever they were in front of, they went with a 6.8mm.
      The preponderance of evidence does not support this, not against level 4 armor anyway. The standard issue bullet appears to be just a steel core EPR round and there is nothing to particularly suggest that it is substantially superior to the NIJ spec M2 AP round, whereas several plates will stop that same M2 AP round traveling over 400 FPS faster than the official testing velocity.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I think Canada has it, they're the largest mining nation after Russia

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >I think Canada has it
          I think you meant to say "I think China has it"

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Canada isn't mining any either right now. Like the US, they have some deposits, but they are much smaller than China's and there is no currently active infrastructure set up to make use of any significant amount of it.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The standard issue bullet appears to be just a steel core EPR roun
        Is that the training round or the real one they only break out when going into combat?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          A document describing the upcoming NGSW rounds make note of a "General Purpose" and "Special Purpose" round both boasting 'enhanced penetrative capabilities' or whatever the hell, & making use of elements related to the design of the XM1158 ADVAP round (tungsten cored M80A1, essentially). Tungsten is highly unlikely to be viable as a general issue bullet material for reasons of cost and supply as described, plus the special round obviously must do something better than the general purpose round.

          For training, there's no particular reason to exclusively use the EPR design if you're not going to actually use that bullet in any other role, as it confers no major benefits for practice alone. You could just use a conventional FMJ with a similar ballistic trajectory without having to go through the trouble of increased expense and design complexity. The only real reason to use an EPR-style round for training is if you were using the same bullet in combat and just wanted to simplify logistics, bullet behavior, etc.

          There are also pictures of a conceptual 6.8x51 military round which was an EPR design, and then a photo recently released of the current ammo showed pretty much exactly the same thing.

          So everything so far would suggest the standard issue combat round is a steel core EPR design.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Tungsten is more useful when added to HIMARS fragmentation warheads.
    Really expensive to just sling them into dirt backstops.

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Future proofing. 5.56mm has reached about the limits of both capability and versatility. Sure, you *can* put extra money in developing an even more beefier 5.56 with more potent penetrators, but then that's it. Realistically, other than using very expensive penetrators and a hotter load, you've reached the limit of what 5.56 can do. Which means you are one technological breakthrough away from getting countered.

    6.8mm not only has vastly superior ballistics to just about anything not ran in a DMR or sniper, but it also has a lot of potential to go with. In its current state, it will pretty much delete all man-portable armor on the market. Another technological innovation is made? Improve the penetrators, problem solved.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >In its current state, it will pretty much delete all man-portable armor on the market.
      Doubt.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Taking level IV, even the civilian version can fully compromise the plate in a single shot. And again, this is the civilian version which, to my knowledge, flies about 80m/s slower and ends up with 20% less energy on target. Based on the demonstration of the civilian elite ball FMJ that i've seen, a faster version carrying even a steel penetrator would punch through it.

        Going up from there, we are looking at the very much theoretical type V infantry mobile armor of which all current versions are considered far to heavy to be practical

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          maybe the 6.8mm was designed to also punch through bmps?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            With the insane amount of recoil the Sig is putting out they should've just issued every soldier a fucking .338 Lapua Magnum which has some anti material properties.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              That gif is in no way representative of the actually adopted weapon system.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The gif is the actually adopted weapon system. Go look up any video of it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The gif is of the MCX Raptor, an 8" prototype "what if" kind of a gun. And it's shot by one of the worst shooters in all of guntube.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >And it's shot by one of the worst shooters in all of guntube.
                So thrice as good as the average infantryman, then.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Don't know if this is a joke or not, as the guy in the gif is the "average infantryman" of Task & Purpose.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Show me one video of the Sig having an acceptable recoil impulse, even if it's a big dude shooting it.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >inb4 someone posts Karl or Garand Thumb shooting the watered down full brass ammo lawl

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It doesn't, but if you're going to criticize the MCX Spear at least post a gif/webm of it being shot, not some shorty prototype. You're misrepresenting your own point by doing that.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                >shortening the barrel somehow makes recoil worse

                Lmao.

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                To be fair, it can. The rifle is lighter and sometimes shorter barrels come with harsher gas systems. A 20" rifle length AR15 is generally smoother than a 10.5" carbine.

                It also doesn't have the suppressor, which likely reduces recoil somewhat.

                In spite of all that, though, everything shows the full size NGSW still has ridiculous recoil in spite of all the shills who say it's "not that bad".

              • 1 week ago
                Anonymous

                I've shot ak-74, cz bren 2 and scar L one after another at a range and was unpleasantly surprised how much 5.56 kicks compared to AK. Considering the adrenaline rush in a combat scenario I can't believe most of the potential 6.8 users will be able to do anything but suppressive fire

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >even the civilian version can fully compromise the plate in a single shot.
          Which civilian version are you speaking of? The all-brass case FMJ? That loading runs weaker than NIJ spec M80 and almost all Level 4 plates can stop multiple rounds of M80, in fact that is an explicit requirement for NIJ Level 3 classification (which level 4 plates are not technically required to meet, but almost always exceed in practice). Most Level 4 plates in fact will prevent penetration from multiple M2 AP rounds as well unless you stack them on top of each other.

          >Based on the demonstration of the civilian elite ball FMJ that i've seen, a faster version carrying even a steel penetrator would punch through it.
          No, it almost certainly wouldn't. That's a 135 gr bullet traveling at about 2600 FPS out of a 13" barrel. The NIJ Spec M2 AP round is a steel core bullet weighing 163 gr traveling at 2880 FPS.

          We have seen some level 4 plates stop 130 gr M80A1 at ~3500 FPS, and M2 AP at over 3300 FPS, so safe to say that several armors offer protection far in excess of what all-brass 6.8x51 would be capable of.

          >Going up from there, we are looking at the very much theoretical type V infantry mobile armor of which all current versions are considered far to heavy to be practical
          They aren't. There are already several plates that are explicitly rated for protection beyond NIJ Spec M2 AP. The XSAPI, Adept Armor Colossus, Stealth Armor Systems Hexar, LTC 28601 and Tencate CX-950 IC are all examples of this.

          The lightest of those is only 6.5 lb (or maybe even a little lighter, if you include the VTP XSAPI). The most durable one that we have seen so far (which is also, coincidentally, the lightest - again, not including the VTP XSAPI) can stop M993 rounds traveling at over 3400 FPS.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think the first part of your post is too shallow, you could say the same about 6.8. It *is* just a bullet after all, not new tech.
      Any new penetrator design/material could be applied to both, same with velocities and other factors, and in the end, they're going along the same "tech tree", if it were.
      Outside of flechettes or chemical energy rounds (most energy weapons like lasers and such are dubious even if they were available now), I don't think projectile technology/theory has advanced much as it relates to common knowledge/learned traits such as the whole point of SCHV.
      I feel it's more logical to put the extra money into making 5.56 (or 6mm ARC, .224 Valkyrie, .224 FABRL, whatever, really) able to stand a chance at penetrating armors at various ranges AND be lighter, than it is trying to tame an ultramagnum that weighs so much more, and so on and so on like that, etc.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The issue with everything you just said, while well-intentioned, is that it's coming from a place of ignorance. There are a lot more factors that go into "just a bullet" than you are communicating with your post. 5.56 cases do not have the volume to get enough conventional propellants inside to accelerate a 'more advanced' projectile to 'adequate speed' out of conventional barrels. The whole point of the 6.8 cartridge is that you can get 3k fps out of a 13" barrel with a relatively high BC projectile with good penetration characteristics. Velocity and sectional density are the big factors in determining penetration characteristics against the vast majority of potential targets. .22 caliber bullets, by the beautiful nature of being smaller do not have the potential to perform as well at distance as a larger bullet. That's physics. BC matters, velocity matters, and balancing the platform to be man-portable and supply-able using existing supply chains is what matters. That's why they went with 6.8. It can propel a much more efficient projectile faster with a shorter barrel while also being suppressed and working well with modern, non-fantasy manufacturing techniques. Until you can defeat physics or decide to re-work chemistry to make a much smaller case with suboptimal pressure characteristics work to do the same thing, you're SOL.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I appreciate it, though I take issue with parts of your response:
          >5.56 cases do not have the volume to get enough conventional propellants inside to accelerate a 'more advanced' projectile to 'adequate speed' out of conventional barrels.
          The dimensions of the SIG FURY cartridge are not dissimilar to 6.5 Creedmoor and 7.62 NATO, it's the change in case design/materials, along with the firearm itself, to allow much higher pressures, to enable the faster velocities from the shorter barrels you mention. I do not see why this cannot be done with 5.56, .224 Valkyrie, 6mm ARC, 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, or so on.
          >That's physics. BC matters, velocity matters, and balancing the platform to be man-portable and supply-able using existing supply chains is what matters.
          I wasn't talking about dumpy 55 grain rounds, I was more talking about low-form-factor TMK or similar rounds, if not going to something like the aforementioned 6ARC, for competitive, if not better BC figures compared to the FURY cartridge.
          The existing supply chain would be better served with as similar a cartridge/weapon as already exists, hence my insistence on an AR-15-compatible workaround as much as possible. Ditto with "man-portability". The AR is almost always going to be lighter and less bulky than SIG's behemoth.
          I'm not even THAT opposed to SIG's round, I get the benefits of increasing the caliber for better energy/SD/etc., I just feel the apparent (to me) "tradeoffs" we see, don't really "justify" it as much.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I don't disgaree with your premise, yes you can potentially make the changes and improvements to a given cartridge to have it reach certain standards. But if you can start from scratch without the constraings of an existing cartridge's specifications and limitations, shouldn't you? It's all about the government spec and contract, not what we want to see as shooters and enthusiasts. It's a rotten situation for us. .308 was the feds making 30-06 'better'. 5.56 was .223 improved.

            [...]
            M995 is already a relatively out-of-date AP round compared to some of the higher-performance 5.56 AP rounds like RUAG's Swiss P stuff or similar for example, and it appears even M995 is capable of defeating various "Level 4" armors out to around 150 yards, though I will admit it struggles against VPAM/XSAPI threats, however I haven't seen any testing of more "advanced" rounds against those threats, nor have I seen small-caliber hybrid-cased ammunition developed that may be able to introduce heavier and sleeker into small arms that, again, would greatly save on weight factoring compared to the .277 option. So I really wonder how "dead-ended" the 5.56 cartridge is without being in a vacuum of x round vs x armor.
            And, failing 500 yard+ penetration goals, servicemen might be better served with more access to explosive weapons and other heavier items.
            More CG's/MGL's, SUAV's, small vehicles/UGV's/etc carrying .338/.50 MG's, and so on.
            That, or really work to focus on reducing the load and bulk of the SIG proposals. I find them much to bulky and heavy to adequately supplement or even replace the M4.
            The XM250 is a great option though and I'd gladly replace the M249 and M240 with it.

            To this point, if we play the position of a government agency trying to do what they always do (produce something that solves all problems and can be used anywhere' you'd probably come up with a 5.56 again. But after 20 years in the desert, 5.56 stopped making as much sense. We're going to see a lot of scratched heads as Ukraine unwinds. Do soldiers ACTUALLY need to precisely and individually engage targets past 300m? Does volume of fire theory still apply? Do small arms matter in the age of suicide drones? Should we re-open the PDW discussion, and issue P90's and the like? I dont think our government really has the best idea of what they NEED to make for the NGSW program. I don't think it will last. But to do what it needs to given a requirement set, I am interested to see what happens with 6.8. 7mm magnums do really cool stuff, 6.5PRC is really nice too. Maybe in the middle with a good targeting system we can see good results. But I do wonder if we're seeing a krag-jorgensen coming on. Good in theory given technology at the time, but room for growth amidst a changing ruleset.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >But if you can start from scratch without the constraings of an existing cartridge's specifications and limitations, shouldn't you?
              That's fair enough. I guess my biggest "gripe" is the weight penalty, not to mention the round count and recoil.
              To the recoil thing, shame the current SPEAR got rid of it's buffer in the lower seen in the original patents.
              25/30 round PMAGs/Lancers are neat for gaming, but kind of a bitch to carry around too. Maybe a quad-stack, like Desert Tech? It'd be FAT, but at least it wouldn't be fucklong.
              To your second point, I definitely agree. I suppose the most we can do right now is wait and see unfortunately.
              If it happens before lots of .277 guns and ammo get out into the public, or after it starts gaining popularity will cause lots of interesting discussion.
              I did ask Robinson Arms if they'd sell me a barrel extension so I could make a .277 Fury barrel for an XCR and they basically told me not to do it, kek

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >That's fair enough. I guess my biggest "gripe" is the weight penalty, not to mention the round count and recoil.
                Totally agree, it irritates me too. I want lighter and better ammo, and more of it. But good caseless isn't gonna happen in our lifetimes, which is super gay. The DT lower/mags are awesome, I agree. Though if they occupy the same space as 2x 30rd mags, is it worthwhile? Big picture, yeah sure. More ammo better, but better ammo good too. More, better ammo? best. I think we will see improved operating systems. I wish the Textron gun would have been given more time.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I'm not an apologist for the feds btw, I'm just working around the predicament they've made for themselves. I want a better system for everyone, because knowing the trends we're going to have to get used to 6.8. It's been adopted, we're going to see civilian market adoption and growth - whether it takes a long time or a little. But 5.56 with a heavy bullet, even out of a long barrel is suboptimal. If we had a longer COAL to work with or a much fatter case we'd get better results, but then we don't have a cartridge that works with existing rifle designs. Either we do more with what we have and get 'somewhere' or we do something new and get much further faster.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I appreciate it, though I take issue with parts of your response:
          >5.56 cases do not have the volume to get enough conventional propellants inside to accelerate a 'more advanced' projectile to 'adequate speed' out of conventional barrels.
          The dimensions of the SIG FURY cartridge are not dissimilar to 6.5 Creedmoor and 7.62 NATO, it's the change in case design/materials, along with the firearm itself, to allow much higher pressures, to enable the faster velocities from the shorter barrels you mention. I do not see why this cannot be done with 5.56, .224 Valkyrie, 6mm ARC, 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, or so on.
          >That's physics. BC matters, velocity matters, and balancing the platform to be man-portable and supply-able using existing supply chains is what matters.
          I wasn't talking about dumpy 55 grain rounds, I was more talking about low-form-factor TMK or similar rounds, if not going to something like the aforementioned 6ARC, for competitive, if not better BC figures compared to the FURY cartridge.
          The existing supply chain would be better served with as similar a cartridge/weapon as already exists, hence my insistence on an AR-15-compatible workaround as much as possible. Ditto with "man-portability". The AR is almost always going to be lighter and less bulky than SIG's behemoth.
          I'm not even THAT opposed to SIG's round, I get the benefits of increasing the caliber for better energy/SD/etc., I just feel the apparent (to me) "tradeoffs" we see, don't really "justify" it as much.

          M995 is already a relatively out-of-date AP round compared to some of the higher-performance 5.56 AP rounds like RUAG's Swiss P stuff or similar for example, and it appears even M995 is capable of defeating various "Level 4" armors out to around 150 yards, though I will admit it struggles against VPAM/XSAPI threats, however I haven't seen any testing of more "advanced" rounds against those threats, nor have I seen small-caliber hybrid-cased ammunition developed that may be able to introduce heavier and sleeker into small arms that, again, would greatly save on weight factoring compared to the .277 option. So I really wonder how "dead-ended" the 5.56 cartridge is without being in a vacuum of x round vs x armor.
          And, failing 500 yard+ penetration goals, servicemen might be better served with more access to explosive weapons and other heavier items.
          More CG's/MGL's, SUAV's, small vehicles/UGV's/etc carrying .338/.50 MG's, and so on.
          That, or really work to focus on reducing the load and bulk of the SIG proposals. I find them much to bulky and heavy to adequately supplement or even replace the M4.
          The XM250 is a great option though and I'd gladly replace the M249 and M240 with it.

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >instead of just using 5.56mm with Tugsten penetrators?
    They tried that decades ago with project SLAP. It worked fine in .50 cal. In .30 cal and below they had problems with the penetrators exiting the sides of the barrel.

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because when you are in a shootout across a corn field in rural missouri, 5.56 won't have the range or capability to defeat the farmer's level 4 plates

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > gets drone striked

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Gets shot in the head/arms/legs/other
      >Gets gibbed by Cletus' improvised 240mm mortar
      >Also gets gibbed by Bobbi-Jo's suicide wish.com drone
      >Bubba's pissin' hot DIY AP TIG-rod-core .30-06 zooms through the farmer's armored John Deere and his VPAM13 plates
      Have you ever even been to the country?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The civil war is going to be kino as fuck.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Be me
          >Live in (906)
          >Civil War starts
          >Doesn't even notice
          >Life as normal
          Can't tell if good or bad

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            >doesn't even notice
            I feel like we'd notice the lack of FIB plates after a while

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              >Noticing them in the first place
              I physically cannot acknowledge lower lifeforms than myself

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Have you? I can't even find a reliable mechanic or plumber, let alone someone who could build their own artillery.

        There is the mythical self sufficient country that exists only in the minds of suburban /ppl/cels, full of young bearded men out in their wheat fields with their trad wives saying "yes." Then there is the real country where everyone is old and everyone moves away for work and because you can't get a gf if the dating pool is all 50+.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I've never had a problem and I'm in Michigan, not even one of the good ol' states. Our family's smallest property is 112 acres, to give an idea of spacing.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Don't forget all the durr hunters turned into snipers, as if deer stands and 300 yard shots are the pinnacle of marksmanship.

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    False premise, the US didn't adopt 6.8mm primarily for body armor. It adopted it in the context of large changes in doctrine and available technologies, primarily for its significantly better ballistics.

    There are some arguments to be made against the switch, although it's really hard to argue that 6.8mm isn't the better cartridge for indirect fire/suppression.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Thinking the US military is changing its ammunition because of a retard in Missouri making 40k a year is so fucking insane, they’ll convince themselves of anything as long as it means they matter.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Direct fire.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >waste weight capacity on 6.8mm when you could achieve the same with the based Chink 5.8×42mm

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because all the state side sources of tungsten are too expensive to extract. It's cheaper to use steel going uber fast.

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    6.8 wasn't originally adopted to pen armor. It was designed by and for boomers, shepherded through the procurment system by them (check out general Milley) and intended to be the ideal boomer battle rifle. The excuses shifted over time from muh stopping power (Iraq) to muh range (Afghanistan) to muh near-peer armor (pre-Ukraine) but the defining requirement was a certain amount of joules at a certain range, based on a deliberately stunted BC and velocity (modeled on a TSX bullet iiirc) so that only a big bore was allowed.

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because .277 is just the best.
    I know many of you out there don't want to hear this, I'm sorry, but it's true.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because you gotta spend money to embezzle money.

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    And will it still match the QBZ-95 in performance?

  15. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Why the fuck you fag still care about small arms? War in ukraine show us that whoever have more artillery win the war. In war between china and america change in rifle calibre wont matter!

  16. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Because they are too proud to admit 5.56 should never have been adopted.

  17. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Because the chinks have the world largest production of Tungsten

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *