This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 6:32 by RovingPedant
Latest 5:45 by gatnerd
Latest 5:34 by gatnerd
Latest 24-Jan by roguetechie
Latest 22-Jan by Mr. T (MrT4)
Latest 21-Jan by mpopenker
Latest 19-Jan by Alpen25
Latest 19-Jan by gatnerd
Latest 16-Jan by gatnerd
Latest 16-Jan by smg762
Latest 16-Jan by BruhMomento
Latest 14-Jan by David Finkel(ish) (mahjong54)
Latest 11-Jan by gatnerd
Latest 10-Jan by mpopenker
Latest 5-Jan by stancrist
Latest 31-Dec by smg762
Latest 27-Dec by bradys555
Latest 26-Dec by smg762
Latest 25-Dec by poliorcetes
Latest 25-Dec by autogun
A "bullet hose" would certainly be most effective at close range. Operators would probably be taught to move the weapon in small circles while firing (not unlike the movement I was taught to use when fighting a fire with a firehose).
That does not seem like a viable option to me, if only because it violates the KISS principle. The needed diameter of the circular movement would vary according to the target distance. To attain proficiency with such a technique would require a far greater training ammo allotment and much more range time than infantry riflemen have ever had.
The difficulty in hitting an under-protected area is why I have expressed some doubts about infantry rifles being effective against opponents with good body armor. I just don't know how realistic it is to attempt to defeat modern (and future) chest armor with an infantry rifle that resembles what we use now. It would seem that relatively large explosive rounds with proximity fuses might be needed to assure enough shrapnel for disabling hits.
I like the idea of HE airburst, but it also has a serious flaw as a potential solution to the body armor problem: It is not a viable option for engagement ranges closer than the round's arming distance.
I know that there have been a number of discussions on this site about having a "golf bag" of different weapons available for different circumstances, but it seems that the weapons needed to fight well armored opponents are different that those needed for more traditional infantry battles.
The "golf bag" or "arms room" concept has been implemented by special forces, but SF operators are able to shoot thousands of rounds per year in training. That has never been the case with line infantry.
What would your thoughts be on an improved CBJ round in a p90 magazine. Obviously it's a bullet hose but what about accuracy. I think if they lowered the sabotage to 6mm with a larger .18 bullet....it keeps it totally concetric
And as for the 6.8, could it's energy be improved with a polymer plastic bearing surface...in terms of less friction
What would your thoughts be on an improved CBJ round in a p90 magazine.
I doubt that effective range would be anywhere near acceptable to the military.
And as for the 6.8, could it's energy be improved with a polymer plastic bearing surface...
I have no idea.
The performance would be far beyond the 6.5 it's a 4.5mm bullet with 6mm ceeedmore enedgy. 33grains at 5500fps.
Probably loud too
5500 fps from the 6.5 CBJ???
No its an enlarged version of the cbj.
basically a grendel case wjich easily does 5500 wih 31 grain bullet. Im wonderig about things like noise and just being unpleasant to shoot.
Seeing buffmans recent vid of the tungsten 338 failing to penetrate, im convinced that hyperspeed is a better approach
last video from xmszeon
Damn I cannot embed them here
How did you embed it?