gatnerd

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.

  • 3360
    MEMBERS
  • 191212
    MESSAGES
  • 3
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW Phase 2 Consolidation and info   Small Arms <20mm

Started 30/8/19 by gatnerd; 553150 views.
stancrist

From: stancrist

22/4/22

TV makes 7.62x51, so making 6.8x51 should be no problem.  Whether it could be safely loaded to the pressure of SIG hybrid ammo is another question.

If the conventional TV case can handle the pressure, that certainly seems a better way to go than trying to adapt the SIG guns to the neckless TV ammo.

BruhMomento

From: BruhMomento

23/4/22

It'll probably end up like the xm8. they sign contracts, never field it, find issues, scrap the entire thing, go back to m4. 

as you pointed out, cost might bring the downfall of sig.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

23/4/22

roguetechie said:

or this year in the ammunition development category it's been noticed that both aeroshell research and the 50 bmg advanced tactical cartridge funding have been zeroed out.

That makes me a sad panda. I was excited for that one.

...

In terms of SIGs commercial .277 Fury price of $80 per 20:

https://www.sigsauer.com/accubond-277-sig-fury-hybrid.html

TV is selling their .308 for $70 per 20:

https://tvammostore.com/product/true-velocity-308-win-nosler-accubond/

So in fairness if we're going by commercial prices, both are quite expensive.

That said, I have little doubt that TV would be cheaper to produce in the long haul due to being polymer. 

VPMudde

From: VPMudde

23/4/22

roguetechie said:

11. Going over funding priorities for this year in the ammunition development category it's been noticed that both aeroshell research and the 50 bmg advanced tactical cartridge funding have been zeroed out. Someone in army procurement has an irrational fear of polymer.

But my sabots? They're going to be okay, right? They wouldn't defund what is basically a real-life cheat code, right?

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

23/4/22

They appear to have done just that sadly.

Im gonna be honest and say I'm not pleased at all with what we're seeing right now.

It looks to me like some extremely schizophrenic suboptimal and irrational decisions are being made.

One could argue that I somehow don't have all the information the army does, but considering the fact that usasoc is on the path right now to running as many as 6 calibers at the squad level...

Well, like I said you could argue that but I could reject it out of hand and point at some shit we all see isn't optimal, fiscally responsible, or anything else in the way of good.

nincomp

From: nincomp

23/4/22

 TV has claimed that their tech can be used for an 80K or 85K psi cartridge (I forget which).  If indeed that is the case, it would be logical for them to demonstrate it.  Since many countries are taking a "wait and see" approach to the NGSW program, there is no reason for THEM to be locked into Sig's Hybrid case.   

roguetechie said:

We know from existing documentation that the sig belt fed is a 10 moa gun too, giving us another strong indication that what we're dealing with is a bad projectile design for some reason since it's not producing the kind of accuracy we really want in anything.

As Emeric noted, at this point we know few of the details of the testing.   This, of course, will not stop me from speculating.   I suspect that the combination of the XM1186 bullet and the weapon's unusual chamber design combine to produce poor bullet alignment.   I have spent several hours pouring over various chamber, cartridge and bullet designs and these are my current thoughts:

1) I suspect that the bullet is a large part of the problem.  Below is a rendering from a SIG video.   It is very likely that a high-BC EPR-style bullet (one with a steel or tungsten penetrator at the tip) has characteristics that will make it difficult to align in a barrel bore without centering and yaw problems.  A long ogive with a heavy weight at its tip and a long boat tail ends up with a relatively short full-diameter bearing surface (shank).  This shape and weight distribution is difficult to keep aligned with the bore as it encounters the rifling and begins to spin rapidly.  When compared to a HPBT match bullet like the 135 grain SMK, the forces from a slightly misaligned bullet are greater and when those forces are distributed over the smaller bearing surface cause deeper deformation of that surface, allowing more mis-alignment in the bore.

     a) Best accuracy would be achieved if a significant length of the full-diameter shank is exposed from the case mouth and chambered into a long freebore with minimal clearance.  You end up with a cartridge like the 6.5 Creedmoor, 338 Norma or 6.5 PRC.

     b) With a long section of exposed bullet, the case gets shorter and loses capacity for a cartridge of a given OAL.  To gain back velocity, the case diameter must get larger, chamber pressure must increase, or both.   This is the "no free lunch" problem with wanting a powerful, short, small diameter cartridge that also needs to be very accurate.

     c) Conversely, the accuracy of a high-BC EPR bullets would be expected to become more erratic if shot from a chamber with a short freebore.  A small increase in the diameter of the short freebore will cause significantly more alignment, yaw and balloting issues.

2). If the SIG Hybrid uses the chamber seen in the SAAMI drawings for the 277 SIG Fury:

     a)  The chamber has an unusually short freebore to assure initial bullet alignment

     b)  Very little of the full-diameter bullet shank extends beyond the case mouth

     c)  If the Automatic Rifle/LMG version uses a looser chamber to reduce malfunctions, accuracy with a high-BC EPR bullet would be expected to be poor.  This would explain the "10 MOA gun" issue.

...[Message truncated]
View Full Message
  • Edited 23 April 2022 16:19  by  nincomp
stancrist

From: stancrist

23/4/22

nincomp said:

I suspect that the bullet is a large part of the problem.  Below is a rendering from a SIG video.   It is very likely that a high-BC EPR-style bullet (one with a steel or tungsten penetrator at the tip) has characteristics that will make it difficult to align in a barrel bore without centering and yaw problems.  A long ogive with a heavy weight at its tip and a long boat tail ends up with a relatively short full-diameter bearing surface (shank).  This shape and weight distribution is difficult to keep aligned with the bore as it encounters the rifling and begins to spin rapidly.  When compared to a HPBT match bullet like the 135 grain SMK, the forces from a slightly misaligned bullet are greater and when those forces are distributed over the smaller bearing surface...

The drawing from the SIG video is inaccurate. 

The artist's illustration shows a bullet with substantially different proportions than the actual 6.8 GP.

The bearing surface, ogive and boattail lengths of the 6.8 GP look to be the same as on the 135 SMK.

Also, lead and copper are denser than steel. 

Even with the small air space in the SMK nose, there may be little or no difference in tip weights.

Below, right:  6.5mm 150gr SMK sectioned.  (I couldn't find a photo of a sectioned 6.8mm SMK.)

EmericD

From: EmericD

24/4/22

stancrist said:

The drawing from the SIG video is inaccurate.  The artist's illustration shows a bullet with substantially different proportions than the actual 6.8 GP. The bearing surface, ogive and boattail lengths of the 6.8 GP look to be the same as on the 135 SMK.

While I agree that the illustration is simply an "illustration", the 6.8 mm GP is really different from the 135 SMK, which is a pretty old design.

The ogive of the 6.8 mm GP is much longer than the SMK (in both actual dimensions, and proportionally to the bullet length) and the CoG is located at the junction between the ogive and the shank, while the CoG of the SMG is nearly in the middle of the shank.

The boat-tail is also significantly longer.

TOP