• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Shooting farther with more punch: The Army finally found an M4 and SAW replacement

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,910
Points
1,360
1652625108040.gif
Waiting to see how long those chambers last…
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,176
Points
1,060
U.S. infantry squads carrying 5.56 mm rifles and light machine guns currently face an overmatch. If those squads went into a firefight with Russian, Chinese or most Kalishnokov-wielding militants, they’d be outgunned in both distance and lethality.

And? This isn't man bites dog or even dog bites man. Dog bit man 59 years ago (article says 65 and apparently can't spell Kalashnikov)
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,653
Points
1,140
The fact is 5.56mm NATO is significantly better in terms of range, accuracy and lethality than 7.62x39 Russian (or 5.45x39 Russian). Overmatch only exists in the minds of the brain dead who buy in the whole load of crap that 7.62x54R is a reasonable individual weapon Round. - it’s used in the Dragunov and PKM (and modernized versions) which are a semi auto sniper rifle and a GPMG.

It further missed the point that Artillery are wars biggest killers, and most small arms fighting Occurs under 300m. Totally glossing over that the M4 is absolutely fine and any issues with it are the fact most soldiers can’t shoot.

Stupid program.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,372
Points
1,040
I don't really understand why there is so much focus on 'round lethality'. Maybe I'm being simple but having less rounds and more to carry is generally not an improvement, and you'd be better off hitting your target with a smaller round than missing them with a big honking round, and having more rounds to put down range.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
10,417
Points
1,160
Absolutely correct - marksmanship is an afterthought in todays armies. Everyone loves those gadgets but forget the ordinary soldier needs to be confident in their ability to shoot.

And shooting is only something you do to suppress the enemy while someone else is moving to get a grenade into his hole.

You can't rely on staying still to win wars, even if your bullets are bigger ;)
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,433
Points
1,190
"One shot, one kill" is awesome if you're a sniper or on the range.

For anyone fighting as infantry, "a lot to the everywhere" seems to be of a lot more value. If you can carry more 5.56 because it's lighter than 6.7 or 7.62, you get more opportunities to keep the other guy's head down while you get other toys into the fight.
 

medicineman

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
581
Points
1,010
And shooting is only something you do to suppress the enemy while someone else is moving to get a grenade into his hole.

You can't rely on staying still to win wars, even if your bullets are bigger ;)
And moving swiftly, repeatedly over distance/rough terrain gets more difficult the more weight you're carrying, making breathing control and shooting position more important to keep rounds going at least in the general direction of the baddies and not into your fire team buddy's back.
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,858
Points
1,110
And moving swiftly, repeatedly over distance/rough terrain gets more difficult the more weight you're carrying, making breathing control and shooting position more important to keep rounds going at least in the general direction of the baddies and not into your fire team buddy's back.
Yep when the good idea fairies want soldiers to carry more casualties occur cause they can’t move
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,267
Points
1,060

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
4,410
Points
1,110
"One shot, one kill" is awesome if you're a sniper or on the range.

For anyone fighting as infantry, "a lot to the everywhere" seems to be of a lot more value. If you can carry more 5.56 because it's lighter than 6.7 or 7.62, you get more opportunities to keep the other guy's head down while you get other toys into the fight.
"Good enough / fast enough". Yup. Try to dump as much kinetic energy as possible (e.g., bullets that expend most of their joules) into the enemy's torso in order to achieve maximum loss of blood pressure one way or another. Whether you get the psychological stop (freeze/flee), the blood pressure loss stop, or the nervous system stop, it all works. But odds are on the guy who puts the most rounds into the thoracic cavity first and fastest. Nobody should be shooting for bullseyes.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,653
Points
1,140
Decent video overview by Garand Thumb who is active duty Army SF

He sums up most of my negatives, though he’s more overly positive about it than I.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,394
Points
1,060
He politely ensures that he gets access to other Sig products in the future, because they would not be vindictive now would they?
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,040
Points
1,090
And? This isn't man bites dog or even dog bites man. Dog bit man 59 years ago (article says 65 and apparently can't spell Kalashnikov)
Not to mention, have we not been in just a few decent sized engagements with enemy forces wielding just the types of weapons the article is warning us about?

If we have to get into it against Russian or Chinese forces, we’re facing a situation of being overmatched…

- Enemy forces in both Iraq & Afghanistan used primarily 7.62 weapons. Ours seemed just fine.

Artillery & air strikes did most of the killing. C6/M240 had most of the killing power from 250m-300m+


We also thought, until very recently, that Russian artillery had us at an overmatch disadvantage.

Turns out, their kit isn’t as formidable as we once thought. They aren’t 10ft tall.

And NATO won’t have to fight them anytime soon, because as long as we provide generous support to countries like Ukraine, they’ll have their hands full. (After several years of rebuilding their armed forces, ofcourse.)


Any conflict with China will be primarily an air & sea campaign as far as I can predict, so more of a moot point.


I agree with KevinB. Stupid program.

(overlooks a lot of relevant technical facts, and the point of which is to keep the industrial machine chugging along & improvising.)



0.02
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,910
Points
1,360
It’s as though some GOBI* thought it was a great idea, despite what their SMEs were telling them…you know, like the bubbas that have easy access to .338+ when they need it. 😉

*General Officer, ‘Bright’ Idea
 

OldSolduer

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,858
Points
1,110
It’s as though some GOBI* thought it was a great idea, despite what their SMEs were telling them…you know, like the bubbas that have easy access to .338+ when they need it. 😉

*General Officer, ‘Bright’ Idea
Good Idea Fairys

They never bear the brunt and consequences of their good ideas
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
7,653
Points
1,140
It’s as though some GOBI* thought it was a great idea, despite what their SMEs were telling them…you know, like the bubbas that have easy access to .338+ when they need it. 😉

*General Officer, ‘Bright’ Idea
Silly Miley….
Then the idiot Robert Scales (I refuse to call him BGen) who was a Vietnam era Artilery officer who was recalled after 911 and worked a staff desk at JSOC

Mattis also fell for the lethality push.

It annoys the crap out of me at 6.5 Creedmore offers 95%+ of what 6.8 BSA (Big Stupid Army) does without the need to push the bullet at exceptionally high pressures.

All current 7.62x51 weapons could be converted to 6.5 CM with only a barrel change, the a section/squad DMR could be acquired and issued as appropriate for certain theaters/missions.
 
Last edited:
Top