Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

This is where you can talk about all equipment issues; firearms, ammunition, magazines, care & repair, holsters, gun cases, etc.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JU-87 » Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:53 pm

Don't they already have the FN made "SCAR" in 7.62 x 51mm? Maybe the General's forgot they bought it... :roll:

Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle

The U.S. Army's chief of staff revealed Thursday the M4 Carbine's 5.56mm round can't penetrate modern enemy body armor plates and plans to arm infantry units with rifles chambered for a more potent 7.62mm cartridge.

Responding to questions from Senate Armed Services Committee members, Gen. Mark Milley conceded that the service's current M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round will not defeat enemy body armor plates similar to the U.S. military-issue rifle plates such as the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert, or ESAPI...


http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017 ... rifle.html
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun... Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks." Thomas Jefferson, 1785.

Read "War is a Racket" by MG Smedly Butler,USMC. He knew war,and was awarded the Medal of Honor twice. http://warisaracket.org/

Henry Kissinger said, "Military Men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in Foreign Policy" and has not denied this quote to this day.
User avatar
JU-87
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1250
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 9:16 am
Location: N.E. Ohio

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JimE » Tue Aug 08, 2017 6:22 pm

It is amazing what silliness goes on in all parts of the government, especially within the upper echelon of the military.
The 5.56mm M855 was designed (IIRC) to penetrate a kevlar helmet at 600 yards, with a 20" barrel.
When they reduced the barrel length to 14.5" on the M4, the velocity dropped off, making the round less effective.
So how to fix it ? Go back to what worked 60 years ago.
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby Mr. Glock » Tue Aug 08, 2017 7:43 pm

Sixty years, huh? M-1 Garand it is then.
“Without dignity there is no liberty, without justice there is no dignity, and without independence there are no free men.”
- Patrice Lumumba
OFCC Patron, NRA Benefactor Life, NRA Golden Eagles, NRA-ILA, Appleseed & Hot Stove League Member
User avatar
Mr. Glock
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 8456
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby TJW815 » Tue Aug 08, 2017 8:31 pm

Mr. Glock wrote:Sixty years, huh? M-1 Garand it is then.


Well it would solve the armor penetration problem!
User avatar
TJW815
 
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 7:13 pm
Location: Warren County

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JimE » Tue Aug 08, 2017 9:41 pm

M14 was adopted in 1960 or 61.
Ammo was developed about 1954 (?) and the AR10 was released by Armalite in 1956.
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby carmen fovozzo » Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:05 am

M14..all it needs is a buffer system to make it a great rifle..and a polymer stock...20 round mag is enough....only draw back is the most ammo you can carry is about 240 rounds and not 360 with a AR....
Life is full of God given coincidences..
A MEMBER OF OFCC SINCE 2004...
carmen fovozzo
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 17964
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:08 am
Location: NEO

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JimE » Wed Aug 09, 2017 8:02 pm

It is going to be interesting as to what they do.
Needs to be effective out to 600 yards or so, lightweight ammo, short enough to maneuver in a vehicle, yet a barrel long enough so you don't blow out your own
eardrums out.
My bet is on a FN Scar variant with a case-less/ dis-integrating case 7.62 or even 6.5mm AP round
We might know in 10 years or so.
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JU-87 » Fri Aug 11, 2017 4:16 pm

carmen fovozzo wrote:M14..all it needs is a buffer system to make it a great rifle..and a polymer stock...20 round mag is enough....only draw back is the most ammo you can carry is about 240 rounds and not 360 with a AR....


The problem with the M14 is...it is an M14! :lol:

Go on to any gun forum, and it won’t take you long to find people willing to tell you how great the M14 is. How accurate,like a laser, tough as tool steel with no need to baby it or clean it. Powerful as a bolt of lightening, and how well loved it was by those early users who refused the M16 because they wanted a “real” weapon made of wood and steel…. .. But, is all that really true? Maybe it is a triumph of nostalgia over common sense and reality. One truth is, it was never really liked as much as people think they remember.

The M14 was having major problems even before ARPA’s Project AGILE and a Defense comptroller reported the AR15 superior to the M14. The famous Hitch Report stating the AR15 , the M1 and the AK47 superior...

http://looserounds.com/2015/01/30/the-m ... 14-legend/

The FN "SCAR" rifle outperforms the M14, with the same ammo. And the Army already has it.

Best regards.
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun... Let your gun, therefore, be the constant companion of your walks." Thomas Jefferson, 1785.

Read "War is a Racket" by MG Smedly Butler,USMC. He knew war,and was awarded the Medal of Honor twice. http://warisaracket.org/

Henry Kissinger said, "Military Men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in Foreign Policy" and has not denied this quote to this day.
User avatar
JU-87
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
 
Posts: 1250
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 9:16 am
Location: N.E. Ohio

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby techmike » Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:15 am

Well I am confused. (SN for me) I thought the new green wonder round, M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round was the best thing on the planet. How could it not penetrate armor as it was designed to?
The M855A1 has a copper-jacketed steel core, differing from the previous M855 round which has a lead core. The so-called “green ammo” not only has increased penetration of armor and hard targets, but allows the Army to be more environmentally friendly on its ranges and training environments.


http://www.military.com/equipment/m855a1-enhanced-performance-round
User avatar
techmike
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:42 pm
Location: Toledo

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby glocksmith » Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:21 am

techmike wrote:Well I am confused. (SN for me) I thought the new green wonder round, M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round was the best thing on the planet. How could it not penetrate armor as it was designed to?


I've always thought of the 5.56 as inadequate. In non-scientific terms: If it doesn't hurt my shoulder when I fire it from my rifle, then how the Hell is it going to "hurt" a steel plate, much less the guy wearing it?
Give em' Hell Pike!!!
glocksmith
 
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:04 am
Location: Cincinnati/SW Ohio

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby CCIman » Mon Aug 14, 2017 2:25 pm

glocksmith wrote:
techmike wrote:Well I am confused. (SN for me) I thought the new green wonder round, M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round was the best thing on the planet. How could it not penetrate armor as it was designed to?


I've always thought of the 5.56 as inadequate. In non-scientific terms: If it doesn't hurt my shoulder when I fire it from my rifle, then how the Hell is it going to "hurt" a steel plate, much less the guy wearing it?


A 22 or 9mm does not hurt your hand when it is holding the gun, but it will certainly hurt if your hand is in front of it. So your science concepts need to be improved, something is missing in that logic.
'CAN' does not equal "SHOULD'.
User avatar
CCIman
 
Posts: 1817
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby glocksmith » Mon Aug 14, 2017 3:52 pm

Yeah, I've been stabbed in the hand by a pencil and it hurt, but that's not the kind of ballistics we're talking about. We're talking about rifles used against targets wearing steel plate body armor. In that regard the 5.56 is woefully inadequate. You heard what the USAR Chief of Staff said.
Give em' Hell Pike!!!
glocksmith
 
Posts: 3918
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:04 am
Location: Cincinnati/SW Ohio

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JimE » Mon Aug 14, 2017 5:37 pm

Here are some articles by TFB on armor/ap ammo.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... enanigans/
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... o-systems/
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... rth-money/
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... -iv-plate/
There are really a lot of variables involved as to what level of plate & what caliber is being used.
The M855 was developed in the mid-80's not so much to penetrate hard armor, but kevlar and soft armor used at that time. It is still effective on certain plates as long as the velocity is there.
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby techmike » Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:26 pm

JimE wrote:The M855 was developed in the mid-80's not so much to penetrate hard armor, but kevlar and soft armor used at that time. It is still effective on certain plates as long as the velocity is there.

Very true, but during the previous administration a new "green bullet" was developed - the M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round. Supposedly to penetrate armor plate and save the planet by not using lead. According to Military.com, "The Army plans to replace its entire inventory of M855 rounds with the M855A1 round". The (few) comments indicate that it works. So why is a General saying it doesn't?
User avatar
techmike
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
 
Posts: 1275
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2007 10:42 pm
Location: Toledo

Re: Army Chief: Infantry Needs New 7.62mm Rifle (?)

Postby JimE » Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:52 pm

I think it has to do with the advances in personal armor being made.
There was an article a couple months back (I only skimmed it) about an Air Force cadet who came up with a prototype armor made of gel .
Even if that works out, you still have to deal with all the kinetic energy of the round striking the armor. If the plate (or gel) cannot absorb it, then it will be transferred to whatever is behind it....meaning broken bones, deep bruising, etc..
The more energy the round has, the more it delivers to the target.
It might not penetrate, but you might be able to overcome the person's ability to absorb the shock of impact.
( I hope that made sense)
Of course this will all be wasted once they have workable energy weapons....just microwave the target and watch the plates act like a oven.
JimE
OFCC Member
OFCC Member
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 7:50 pm
Location: Ashland,OH

Next

Return to Firearms & Gear

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests