Gun companies balk at US Army's new requirement

Its these ridiculous requests that actually get folks thinking outside the traditional ways of doing things, and creates much needed innovation, someone will come up with something that achieves the desired goal but most likely in a completely different configuration (like a twin charged cartrige) then originally envisioned. I bet most who have read and posted hear have all ready thought of different ways on how to achieve the objective. Heck, let a CGN'er be the one who makes the discovery. Gun makes are not the most innovative.
 
Are they asking for a fast, 2-shot burst mode ?

I think if this feature is available, it will be used almost exclusively within its effective range, because everything else being equal, why would you hit someone with only 1 bullet when you can hit him with 2 ? Nice feature, but the cost is ammo usage will go up, gun weight will go up, and reliability will go down.
 
drache said:
I would think of looking along the same lines as why FMJ isn't allowed for hunting. An FMJ .308 would go cleanly through the target would it not, where a .223 FMJ might ricochet off a bone and cause more massive internal damage?
Click to expand...

Hmmm... Good point :owned:

I'm beginning to think that superposed caseless ammunition (i.e. Metal Storm) is the easiest way to make this work without utilizing complicated and generally unreliable mechanism like that of the AN-94 and dual cycle rifles. A magazine-fed rifle could be made to achieve the goal set by the USM, although I'm not entirely sure they'd be willing to make the move towards electronic propellant ignition... It would be bad enough to run out of ammunition in a fire fight, but having ammunition and not being able to use it because the energizer bunny crapped out on you would be... the worst ha ha ha.
 
Ill take 1 shot with a 50 or 338 over 2 from any auto anyday.

In close quartes is penetration really an issue?

I thought the complaints were about overpenetration with lack of expansion/stopping power with the 556.

A better recoil system in a .308 would be a great option. Something like the Kriss system redesigned maybe?

I just don't see the reasoning.
 
next requirement on the list :

Make a carbine that can shoot the first bullet with the second bullet, as they are both travelling.
 
Maybe they should worry about training their soldiers to hit with a single bullet first...
 
The reliable way to destroy ceramic armour is to put multiple shots on the plate in close proxmity to destroy its integrity. Ceramic armour stops bullets by dissipating the bullet energy by fracturing itself during the process.
 
eva-01.jpg


There ya go Army dreamers! LOL
 
Apparently, it's completely unreasonable to ask firearms manufacturers to innovate instead of rehashing the same 60-year-old designs.
 
"...the simplest..." There's nothing simple about a double barrel. Getting one to shoot to the same POI is extremely difficult. That's one reason why double rifles are so pricey. Double barreled shotguns aren't a whole lot different either.
Military's everywhere have lot of senior officers with little to do but dream up silly ideas.
 
The Army should heed the experts. The idea is silly. You can:
A) Get a bigger bullet.
B) Stop being lazy and train your troops.
C) Many previous and current tech have already approached this requirement much more reliably.

Remember, the G11 could shoot as fast as it could was because of the round it fired. 4.7x33mm. Very small. Almost like shooting a bunch of .17hmr. Now, if they could make the G11 simpler, smaller, and fire a 6 something mm bullet, then it's good to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom