Sig secures contract for next gen US military rifle

I do not think you will ever see a improved 30-06

Not sure if the steel base of the new round will make it reloadable ...... 1 shot = scrap metal bin

you might Get one of the ammo makers to make a all brass case as a low pressure round

you will get some of the wildcatters making low pressure brass out of some other case ..... but what is the point

the only thing the 227 fury round does is go very fast (with a short case ) and the bullet has a low BC

Sort of 30-06 vs 308 debate ..... they switched to 308 for less weight

they switched from 308 to 5.56 for less weight ..... now going back to a bigger round .....

... and does the 277 Fury Have a ring to it ....... should cost lots of $$$$ for the taxpayer
 
It is reloadable.

277 is intended to deal with body armour in near peer engagements. The US is taking a break from a 2 decade counter insurgency grind and is back to getting ready for actual war.
 
Watching the slow-mo, it’s easy to see the piston working. If I can see it, dirt, mud and crap is going to get in there. DI wouldn’t have an issue because it’s sealed. Not sure how reliable it will be in adverse conditions with all the holes in the hand guard.
 
I think at first look one would think that. I have some experience with the MCX Platform operationally and this is not the case. The MCX is more reliable than a DI system, especially when suppressed. Just because you can see it does not mean that junk will jam it. The piston is firm fitting inside and gas pressure moves it very rapidly blowing any debris away during function.

Rich
 
It needs a major conflict (and maybe a diet plan) before it can truly be accessed and accepted. All new adoptions have some glitches that will only be revealed in theatre. There will be at some point an A1 and A2 version to correct deficiencies.

That being said - this is quite a departure from the intermediate cartridge philosophy back to the full power cartridge philosophy. One can imagine that small unit engagements will have to change tactics from fire suppression and maneuver to a more direct style of engagement.

Mag pouches will have to change, barrel life will be an issue, quantity of ammo carried will change, new maintenance plan will be needed, physical fitness will need to be accessed with regards to recoil management and rifle/ammo weight, what about our NATO allies - will they accept/adopt it, what do you do with all the current M16/M4 rifles and ammo, will accuracy standards change, how will it do against Gen 4 body armor and the big mother of all questions - How much will it cost to change over and is it really worth it.

This isn't just a modification to the existing M16/M4/5.56 NATO system. This is a whole brand new development.
 
The rest of the NATO most likely stick with 5.56, maybe the Brits will think of something else when they need to think of SA80 replacement in 2025.

We are supposedly getting some sorta suppressed 11" starting in 2025/26ish, and green ammo aka C77A1

But yes to 6.8 GPMG.
 
greentips said:
The rest of the NATO most likely stick with 5.56, maybe the Brits will think of something else when they need to think of SA80 replacement in 2025.

We are supposedly getting some sorta suppressed 11" starting in 2025/26ish, and green ammo aka C77A1

But yes to 6.8 GPMG.
Click to expand...


There was a tender for a suppressor?
 
It's a shame the Army went back to a full power cartridge for the squad weapon. I understand the desire to use similar ammo in the LMG and infantry rifles but with this new bi-metal case technology it's completely overkill. Soldiers will also be carrying a lot less ammo. 7 mags full of 6.8x51 is not going to be light.

Ideally this technology should have been used on a cartridge such as the 6.5 Grendel. Could have got a 120gr bullet going 3000fps out of a 16-18" barrel with a full load out of nearly 200 rounds. The round would also be pretty formidable in a SAW 249 replacement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom