There's not a ton written about this that I can find, but cracks are appearing in the US military's plan to replace the M4 with a heavier battle rifle designed to defeat body armor. Sig Sauer, which also holds contracts for the current generation pistol and LMG, won a contract last year to also provide the US military with a new rifle. This rifle is to be called the XM7. The civilian equivalent is the Sig Spear. Calling this thing an assault rifle is a bit of a stretch, as it is very heavy and uses heavy ammunition. It turns out that the rifle is failing to penetrate modern body armor without the use of tungsten bullets. Also its reliability is questionable.
What exactly is needed from a next gen weapon?
It's a tool that shoots a piece of metal in a direction. It needs to be light-weight, accurate, good for logistics and durable while also having few annoyances for the soldier using it.
At a certain point you meet enough of these factors for it to be good enough and differences between rifles become moot.
lmao
The thing is there is already a gun (the SCAR-H) that does what the yanks want in terms of firing a heavier round for armour penetration, is already combat proven in yank special forces and is almost 2lbs lighter than the XM7. But because it uses already existing ammunition, and because it's not made by Sig (the company with all the contracts) the government rejected it lol.
Is that what happened? Always wondered why that big neat-looking rifle I used to see in all the media just suddenly fell off
Yeah it got rejected from the program. See my other comments in the thread for the whole story
Seriously the new rifle is clowshoes overdesigned when your average grunt wants basically what you described. This fucking elephant gun the yanks are trying to push is so goddam humongous lol.
The irony is that after WWII, all the western countries were trying to move towards smaller, faster, high pressure bullets, while the US insisted on 7.62.
Then UK, West Germany, France all issue battle rifles while the US gets its ass kicked in Korea and realizes they were right, and adopt the 5.56.
From what I've read, it seems that high velocity 5.56x45 tungsten core rounds will also penetrate modern body armor. So why the bigger gun? Shouldn't the US just start mining tungsten?
In 2022, China had by far the world's largest tungsten reserves, at some 1.9 million metric tons. China was followed by Russia and Vietnam, at 400,000 and 100,000 metric tons, respectively that year..
Whoopsie, it sure would have been nice if we weren't ramping up tensions with China and Russia, so that they could sell us the resources that we need to fight them. Here's a map showing the sheer scale of how much more tungsten China has. Bolivia is apparently pretty high up in the rankings too:evo:
deleted by creator
which dumbass approved this contract lol
Well the point of the gun/contact was to be able to go though the armour without needing the tungsten bullets, but it failed at that. It still needs them.
They basically spent billions of dollars to travel in a massive circle lol. Just US DOD things
I can’t help but notice that the United States isn’t even on the map lmao
Even North Korea has some :kim-drip:
Canada is though and I'm sure they'd be fine sharing (because otherwise Canada would just become the US Northern Territories).
I think the threat of invasion gets a lot less threatening if it hinges on you supplying the actual bullets needed to do it. Just say no, what are they gonna do, shoot you? They cant
True for infantry bullets but not artillery and plane ammo.
not hard to defend against the plane that crashes anyways. Just let'er go
:sit-back-and-enjoy:
I think the green tip 5.56 rounds only penetrate up to level 3+ armour. The army wanted to penetrate level four with this new 6.8 ammunition in base form, which is designed to stop a black tip 30.06. So more penetration than armour piercing 5.56. They have failed at this.
Level four armour, in terms of ammunition fired by assault/battle rifles, can only be defeated by the modern 308/7.62x51 black tip with a tungsten carbide core. Not the old black tips, which it is rated to stop. The whole point of making the 6.8x51 round was to be able to defeat level four armour without needing this core by increasing efficiency, and it's failed at that.
Ah. I am likely mistaken. Either way it seems that an extremely dense penetrator is necessary. When the contract was announced I do remember reading that the new 6.8 military rounds were to be constructed with a steel head to allow higher chamber pressures. Even this innovation was insufficient to produce the desired results.
I think the core of the idea was exactly the higher pressures - instead of making the bullet itself more capable of penetration, you just shoot it out with a lot more energy by having really overpressurized rounds. But greater pressure is harsher on the internal components, and they needed to increase the pressure to such a high level that conventional brass cases couldn't actually handle it, hence the steel.
There's also some other things brought about by the overpressure - all the NGSW entries had these fancy suppressors to help with the ridiculous recoil & muzzle flash that the guns produced, and the wear on the barrels was so high that the US actually adopted a normal, non-overpressurized variant of the ammo for training, since otherwise you'd end up having to constantly change barrels even during peacetime. Of course, this normal ammo doesn't actually have the recoil or ballistic properties of the fancy type that's supposed to actually be used in combat, meaning that US soldiers would spend most of their time training on a gun that shoots much softer than what they'd be using in real conditions.
And in the end, as aaaaaaadjsf said, this didn't actually even work - so now they have a round that's heavier, recoils really hard, destroys barrels, and it can't even meet the penetration goal.
One thing that I still don't understand is why they went with a steel head on a brass case rather than just a full steel case. Steel and brass have similar density, so steel case of the same thickness would have roughly the same weight. Are they able to make brass cases thinner? Or maybe the superior recyclability of brass cases was a concern?
Brass is used in a lot of mechanisms where friction needs to be reduced. It is kind of like the Teflon of metals. As a relatively soft metal, if you have a mechanism where brass interfaces with a harder metal, the brass will incur the majority of the wear, without gumming up the works nearly as much as aluminum (another relatively soft metal).
cant they just make the barrel out of a harder metal? chromium/titanium/tungsten alloyed with steel?
Then the gun gets even heavier, it's already almost 10lbs to try deal with all the extra forces.
This was just one incredible grift. Right back at where they started essentially.
there have to be parts that can be replaced by plastic. even if those parts are subject to heat, some thermoplastics are stable upwards of 300C. parts like magazines, the handrail, the stock (that one is probably already plastic). how is it this hard to design a gun thats better than one designed in the 80s? hell, maybe just have a barrel with an inner shell of titanium-steel alloy and an outer shell of any old steel
Yeah that was the point of the 6.8. But as you said, it wasn't enough. And now they are back at square one, needing tungsten core ammunition to defeat level four body armour.
Seems like the most pointless exercise. Unless you're a military contractor, of course. You get a nice new car and house lol
America does everything bigger.
Imagine taking the global supply of Tungsten and exclusively processing it into bullets.