NGSW continues:

https://soldiersystems.net/2023/05/01/sig-sauer-delivers-next-generation-squad-weapons-to-us-army-for-production-qualification-test

Ammunition is GP, RRA & blank - no AP/SP. 

Whilst this is production qualification, it is somewhat concerning that AP won’t be available. Not because it might be necessary, but because it would allow discovery of issues before the production configuration for the weapons is locked in.

It strongly implies that GP will be the operational ammo nature for the foreseeable future, which then begs the question why pursue the SIG NGSW FOW, or NGSW at all?

The Army's budget document shows authorization to purchase test quantities of SP ammo in the near future. 

https://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages?msg=8085.179

https://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages?msg=8085.181

DavidPawley said:

Whilst this is production qualification, it is somewhat concerning that AP won’t be available. Not because it might be necessary, but because it would allow discovery of issues before the production configuration for the weapons is locked in

Very concerning given AP is its reason to exist.

Hopefully they actually test the SP against real ceramic Level IV and not just RHA.

And hopefully if it turns out 6.8 is not able to defeat IV @ 200m+ this is discovered before the Army buys 100k battle rifles.

...

On the flipside, while I question the 6.8 rifle, the 6.8 lightweight LMG I do think is a great addition. Although if its not AP it would have been much better as a .264 LICC EVOLYS as Emeric described given the ammo weigh reduction. 

gatnerd said:

       DavidPawley said: Whilst this is production qualification, it is somewhat concerning that AP won’t be available.

Very concerning given AP is its reason to exist.

Methinks you guys worry too much.  Personally, I see no cause for concern.  Instead, I view the decision to conduct the PQT without SP ammo as an opportunity to cancel NGSW and change course to 6.5x43 LICC (or similar).

stancrist said:

conduct the PQT without SP ammo as an opportunity to cancel NGSW and change course to 6.5x43 LICC (or similar)

From your lips to St. John Brownings ears 

I have to ask, what is SP?

Don't recall seeing this posted here-

https://youtu.be/9rbQTnV-g0Q

SP = Special Purpose

My guess is that one reason that the NGSW energy goals were set so high was to allow GP ammo to defeat as much body armor as possible.  The goal is to keep the use of tungsten to a minimum.  Based on Buffman's tests, fast EPR bullets do a good job of defeating body armor designed to stop 5.56x45 and 7.62x51.

Oh, I’m only worried that Army won’t cancel NGSW and change course, but also:

• won’t test SP in preproduction guns
• find later that it breaks them
• they need a redesign
• which will be too difficult
• so start a program for replacement weapons.

Regrettably this seems to be the trajectory of all small arms replacement programs.