Perhaps I am a bit dim, but I don't really see the advantage of a case telescoped round for an infantry weapon when compared to TV's polymer cased one.  It would seem:

1)  that more polymer would be needed to enclose the bullet, increasing the rounds volume

2)  the case would be larger diameter (although shorter), making the magazines wider and the increased volume adds bulk

3)  the moving chamber brings additional complications like proper alignment 

I can understand why a CT cartridge would be useful for handling for larger diameter autocannons where the overall length of a cartridge affects loading speed, I just am not sure that the same advantage holds for smaller infantry weapons.

4chan speculation via reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LessCredibleDefence/comments/qrn2jh/ngsw_ammo_mfg_true_velocity_acquires_recently/

Someone on /k/ worked out the timeline and found how this chain of events is tied into the testing cycle, and indicates TV's confidence in victory.

Ok, well this is interesting. True Velocity made the purchase for $84,000,000. Prior to this year TV doesn't have any records of funding rounds, but this year it did two rounds of $6m and $30m in Sep and Oct. The timeline for the GD-LS-TV novations and sales is:

Mid Apr: TV and LS announce strategic partnership.

30 Jun: Army grants approval for GD novation of patents to LS.

Sep-late Oct: TV does fundraising rounds.

Nov: TV announces acquisition of LS.

Overlay this with test scheduling. Q3fy20 was initial test commencement, Q2fy21 was trials commencemdnt.

At the time we assumed GD were washing their hands of NGSW. It now looks more like LS and TV realised that Textron had shat the bed at prototype/soldier touch point test in 2020 and had a decision point at Q2fy21 where they'd see what Textron submitted for the trials; if they didn't see a certain thing or if they saw Textron do some other certain thing then they were confidence that they'd win and were in a position to capitalise on the information advantage to consolidate get the excess profit instead of it all going to GD as prime. LS was able to novate the patents almost immediately once they had govt approval but TV had to do a fundraising round to get the capital.

I think they're certain they've won and they're setting up for a system monopoly by consolidating the system elements (ammo, weapon, can't get sights right now) in a single horizontally and vertically integrated prime. I think they reached this conclusion as soon as the second trials started.

I would be completely fine with a GD/TV Win, their entry+ammo is good, and if they can get that lightweight medium machine gun they're working on later than even better, However at this point all we have to go off is speculation about Textron, so I'll wait until they put out a press release or get back to SSD about whether they're in or not.

If the GD bullpup is a sure win, why would GD give up control, and the lion's share of profits?

stancrist said:

If the GD bullpup is a sure win, why would GD give up control, and the lion's share of profits?

They seem not very interested in Small Arms these days; the .338 LWMMG -  a concept they invented and popularized - is no longer on their website. 

As for why, no idea. Maybe small arms are just small fry given their pretty huge defense portfolio of other projects? 

More SSD speculation from the comments:

 Vet:

"Textron is out. It was leaked by accident by LMT (which partnered with them on suppressors for NGSW) on a live Q&A a month ago, which was since removed from YouTube. The reference to “one of two teams remaining in the NGSW program” in the PR release above further confirms it.."

SSD:

"I spoke with Karl Lewis about it. He explained that he couldn’t discuss the matter. When I asked him about the video he said, “that video has been deleted and the person who uploaded it reprimanded.” I took that as a clue."

Yeah I actually saw the video that he's talking about back then, I didn't think that much of it then, either way this is really not looking too good for Textron, I just have no idea why they or the army haven't put out a statement, we should have heard it from them first if indeed this is the case

gatnerd said:

They seem not very interested in Small Arms these days; the .338 LWMMG -  a concept they invented and popularized - is no longer on their website.  As for why, no idea. Maybe small arms are just small fry given their pretty huge defense portfolio of other projects? 

Maybe.  I could understand dropping the .338 LWMMG, as they're not selling.  But, a winning horse?  I mean, money is money.

Anyway, I don't know if it's seen by anyone else, but your quote of my post in Msg 1943 appears redacted.  Totally blacked out.

The same thing happened to your quote of Emeric's post in https://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages?msg=7952.6

They haven't actually dropped it, they novated it, which means they've given up the rights temporarily, it will come back to them at some point in the future

nincomp said:

I don't really see the advantage of a case telescoped round for an infantry weapon when compared to TV's polymer cased one.  It would seem:

1)  that more polymer would be needed to enclose the bullet, increasing the rounds volume

2)  the case would be larger diameter (although shorter), making the magazines wider and the increased volume adds bulk

The dimensional difference between the two are not that great.

The 6.8 TVCM has the same diameter and length as 7.62 NATO.

The 6.8 CT has insignificant difference in diameter and length.

There's little difference in cartridge volume, magazine size/bulk.