Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by gatnerd

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3346
  • 190042
  • 1


NGSW Phase 2 Consolidation and info   Small Arms <20mm

Started 30/8/19 by gatnerd; 520693 views.

From: roguetechie


Being honest, it's not super important anyway.

Magic box is close enough. 

I'd love to play with one to see how well they work and what their limits are though.


From: roguetechie


You'd actually want the fancy sighting system more with an extremely high velocity round if for no other reason than to make hits out even further.

I think one thing some people tend to miss here is that a lot of the stuff integrated Into the ngsw optic are things the military feels it's going to need In order to handle their most likely projected threats.

To a large degree we've given up the ability to be numerically superior against many potential foes making qualitative superiority a necessity.

That and I think that the army etc are justifiably concerned about how to make infantry at least semi survivable in the next fights.

Since we can't really add any more armor or etc because of weight and other restrictions we more of less have to make them faster and "smarter".


From: stancrist


I agree completely.  It doesn't really matter if I don't comprehend how it works.

I'd like to try it, too.  As badly as my hands shake, I would be the ultimate tester.  grin


From: RovingPedant


nincomp said...

Not necessarily.  A very fast round just allows you to miss at a higher velocity if your aim is not perfect when you pull the trigger.

It does reduce the impact of errors in ranging, windage and target movement.


From: smg762


Looking at the final version of textrons round, im sure it could take a SLAP, but this would be a telescoped SLAP....still using a booster charge to push the sabot in the bore. Never been done before

If textrons layout was applied to the .50 do you think it would reduce size, enough to allow more ammo...or does the increased width ruin things

  • Edited 23 October 2021 8:50  by  smg762
Mr. T (MrT4)

From: Mr. T (MrT4)


40y later it seems we are not much further.


From: EmericD


Mr. T (MrT4) said:

40y later it seems we are not much further.

I would say quite the contrary... we are very far from "we need a rifle for engaging targets at close range... let's say 100-150 m... there are sights on the gun but they will not be used".


From: Guardsman26


Anyone else heard rumours that only the SIG 6.8x51 mm rifle and automatic rifle are left in the US Army's NGSW competition? Separately, I've heard that US SOCOM is resuming its testing of 6.5x49 mm Creedmoor in both AR and LMG platforms.  


From: smg762


I dont understand sigs logic with the 13 inch barrel. The objective was to give a 600-700m range, and those barrels cant be very intuitive or 'pointable' and long range


From: poliorcetes


If you think that a crazy fast round would preclude the needing of "fancy optics" is because you haven't read or either understand the role of present and near future FCS of NGWS program