autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons, particularly in larger calibres (12.7+mm).

  • 3177
    MEMBERS
  • 180491
    MESSAGES
  • 0
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Chinese Level IV vs Tungsten .338   Small Arms <20mm

Started 29-Sep by gatnerd; 1883 views.
Red7272

From: Red7272

30-Sep

gatnerd said:

Yes, without a serious gain in AP ability, there's little to recommend the .338 over a lighter, 'super 7.62' like .300 PRC with its 3.65-3.7" COL if the goal is simply anti personnel against unarmored adversaries out to 1500yds. 

Here I see the same case can be made for a 50 BMG marksman rifle as with the use of a 50 BMG machine gun. There are always going to bunkers and vehicles that need to be engaged as well as equipment that needs to be destroyed. Small groups can be as easily suppressed with a marksman rifle as a LMG when the ammunition explodes and vaporises rocks. Adding another round to the logistics train is to be avoided, but adding some match 50 BMG should not be impractical. 

autogun

From: autogun

30-Sep

gatnerd said:

Unless there's some unknown, serious improvement in Tungsten AP tech, its looking like NGSW will be obsolete for AP by the time its introduced.  At which point we'd be stuck with a bunch of magnum battle rifles that can't penetrate armor. 

Exactly the point that I and others made several months ago.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

30-Sep

I tend to agree. 

Given the dispersal of a machine gun at 1500 meters, I think something like the a .50 DMR could actually be as suppressive or more. Especially if equipped with something like a 'smart scope' that compensates for drop at that range. 

I think the Raufuss round is considered match accurate, as well as being a pretty knarly API. 

Conceivable even something like a tripod equipped .50 Barret with smart scope:

Added advantage here being that a rifle tripod is only ~5lbs. 

Or of course, any number of HE launchers, from AGL's to 60mm's like Imortar to an ATGM like Spike SR could be used for targets beyond the range of 7.62. 

In reply toRe: msg 7
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

1-Oct

So I found the G7 for the 248gr AP load:

https://www.fiocchi.com/en/product/338-lapua-mag-fmjap-2

And here's the impact results, using Buffman's velocity:

So at 200yd, it was still impacting with both good velocity and tremendous energy.

Yet was stopped by a $119 chinese plate. 

Whats interesting is Lapua advertises this round as 906 m/s (2970fps) from a 26" barrel. Assuming thats the real velocity, and Buffman got a slower handload to test, we would see a further AP.

Re-running the #'s based on this 2970fps velocity, we would hit the 'Penetrate' velocity of 2560fps out to 250yds. 

But we'd still hit the 'not penetrate' velocity of 2421fps @ 310yd. 

While this would certainly be better, it still bodes very poorly for the 6.8 NGSW, and would also relegate the .338 LWMMG to AP at 5.56 SAW distances.

  • Edited 01 October 2020 3:12  by  gatnerd
In reply toRe: msg 8
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

1-Oct

One potential variable for future AP - and perhaps the last hope for 6.8 NGSW - is Tungsten Hardness. 

Nammo lists their HV at 1200-1500:

However Lehigh lists their 300gr Tungsten at 1800HV:

So perhaps increases in tungsten hardness will offer improvement in AP ability?

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

1-Oct

I've been warning about this for five years, not that anyone listens to me. 

Wessels3

From: Wessels3

4-Oct

I wonder what the impact effect will be on the individual wearing the plate?, even if the plate is not pierced?

Wessels3

From: Wessels3

4-Oct

nless there's some unknown, serious improvement in Tungsten AP tech, its looking like NGSW will be obsolete for AP by the time its introduced.  At which point we'd be stuck with a bunch of magnum battle rifles that can't penetrate armor. 

For "ordinary" infantry combat, it means going for hits outside of the plates, i.e. highly controllable, rapid semi-auto or burst fire. Back to 5.56x45.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

4-Oct

Wessels3 said:

I wonder what the impact effect will be on the individual wearing the plate?, even if the plate is not pierced?

Buffman said it was around 25-30mm backface deformation @ 200yd, which is well within safe limits. It would hurt like hell, certainly, and theres possibility of cracking a rib, but not lethal by any means. 

Here's a soldier in Iraq getting tagged in the armor from fairly close range with what I assume to be 7.62x54. Dude pops right back up and is calling for fire support in a matter of seconds:

https://youtu.be/tMMSA3opBk4?t=52

And of course, any widescale deployment of .338 and or Tunsgten (either 6.8 or .338) would prompt armor manufacturers to design for that in mind. 

Which would both reduce armor penetration risk, as well as likely mitigate backface deformation. 

EmericD

From: EmericD

4-Oct

Buffman said it was around 25-30mm backface deformation @ 200yd, which is well within safe limits. 

If the plate shows a permanent deformation of 25-30 mm, then the backface deformation in plastilina is guaranteed to be much more than that, and absolutely not "within safe limits" !

TOP