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.

  • 3271
    MEMBERS
  • 185620
    MESSAGES
  • 0
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW evaluation update   Small Arms <20mm

Started 31/7/20 by autogun; 16834 views.
autogun

From: autogun

17/1/21

gatnerd said:

-SIG guy claims to have already received Gov't orders for the rifle / LMG 

Since the Army will be thoroughly testing the guns and ammunition, they must indeed have placed orders for trial quantities.

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

17/1/21

https://youtu.be/vlrBEEG__1E?t=622 about growth potential on internal pressure

I would assume that true velocity design is already dead if evaluators stress that metric. They explicitly admit that they chose a bullpup design in order to avoid pressure growth, and indeed case base points towards a lack of meaningful reinforcement in order to cope with pressure growth

The more pressure and thus Vo, the less tungsten need?

autogun

From: autogun

17/1/21

poliorcetes said:

https://youtu.be/vlrBEEG__1E?t=622 about growth potential on internal pressure

I would assume that true velocity design is already dead if evaluators stress that metric. They explicitly admit that they chose a bullpup design in order to avoid pressure growth, and indeed case base points towards a lack of meaningful reinforcement in order to cope with pressure growth

I don't see the logic there. The longer barrel of the bullpup means that it can match the performance of the other contenders at lower pressure. That will always be true: if the military want to ramp up the pressure to achieve even higher performance, the pressure required will always be higher for the short-barrelled guns. So unless the TV round has a maximum pressure limit so much lower than the others that it can't match their performance even with a longer barrel, the advantage still lies with the bullpup.

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

17/1/21

Knowing that US military branches are not bullpup-friendly, I count with beretta's design as a compromise, mainly driven by pressure limits of tv design. Possibly the design was created well before NGSW program and thus the energy requisites cannot be achieved otherwise

Now look at SIG design: expensive, complex, but with pressure growth margin because of steel base. Textron's, on the other hand, is going to be extracted forward and thus without extraction groove for extraction nail.

TV design seems to be conventional AND not reinforced for pressure growth

taschoene

From: taschoene

17/1/21

True Velocity has said their 6.8mm case can handle 80,000 psi.  That's in the same ballpark as the SIG hybrid metallic case.  

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

18/1/21

But they said that they chose bullpup design in order to avoid higher pressure than nowadays' usual. And I don't understand how their plastic base could be as resistant as a steel one, giving that cartridge extraction groove can be rendered unusable 

nincomp

From: nincomp

18/1/21

Although it is difficult to tell from the pictures that I have seen, it appears that the base is a metal insert that extends a certain distance into the case.  I see no reason that this metal section cannot be make more substantial if the chamber pressure is increased.  Some of the weight reduction would be lost, however.  We do not know at this point if this design will be as tolerant of action types as a brass case, however.  In particular, we do not know at what chamber pressure the extraction may begin without damaging the case.  This might become an issue with delayed blowback designs or even with "overgassed" gas-operated systems.

taschoene

From: taschoene

18/1/21

From what I can see, True Velocity uses a steel base with the extraction groove and primer cup, which is inserted into the polymer case. How is this more susceptible to extraction problems than steel cases, for example?

I can think of a few reasons why they might  be designing for lower pressure anyway:

  1. Case weight -- if they design for less pressure, the case can be lighter.  They say they're getting a 30% weight savings over brass, while SIG is only claiming 20%.
  2. Barrel life -- really high pressure rounds have a reputation for being "barrel burners," although modern metallurgy seems to be solving that for the most part.
  3. Improved customer acceptance -- the Army would probably ask a lot more questions about an 80 kpsi neckless composite than they will of the stainless SIG round (which just "logically" sounds stronger) or the Textron polymer CT round (which has a lot of LSAT testing/experience behind it).  
autogun

From: autogun

18/1/21

taschoene said:

They say they're getting a 30% weight savings over brass, while SIG is only claiming 20%.

The TV weight saving of 30% is credible, but I am suspicious of the SIG 20%. After all, the most massive part of the case - the base - is still of brass, only the case walls are steel. I suspect that the 20% figure is the saving in case weight - with the overall weight saving being more like 10%. The CT round probably saves around 33% overall.

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

18/1/21

With the known information in mind, what cartridge architecture do you people think it could accept more pressure? textron, tv or sig?

BTW I would accept what you and nincomp say about steel base insert on tv's case. It's just that since American military branches are quite against bullpup, and that beretta's SAW design is bullpup too and not belt-feed, that I understand beretta's election as a quite strong trade-off

TOP