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.

  • 3258
    MEMBERS
  • 184834
    MESSAGES
  • 2
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

338 MG   General Military Discussion

Started 26-Sep by smg762; 2875 views.
smg762

From: smg762

26-Sep

What are the forums thoughts on the need or relevance of 338 MGs?

if the NGSW or a similar 'HI' round was adopted, then logistically your SAW and M240 would use this 6.8 / 6mm / 762.

This still leaves a gap between the .50 cal and the NGSW, so are 338 guns likely to become commonplace or standard among squads?

or would it be better to try and update the 762 M60 with a 'compromise'

...for example an 8.2mm with VLDs and a polymer case.  

-Easily 40% lighter than 338 ammo

In reply toRe: msg 1
roguetechie

From: roguetechie

26-Sep

338 machine guns are a bad joke. They're too heavy to be portable and too light to fill in for the 50.

Red7272

From: Red7272

26-Sep

roguetechie said:

338 machine guns are a bad joke. They're too heavy to be portable and too light to fill in for the 50.

Quite. The only problem with the .50 BMG is the 100 year old gun. Both china and USSR/Russia have been producing guns half that weight for nearly 50 years. 

https://modernfirearms.net/en/machineguns/russia-machineguns/kord-12-7-eng/

There were a few 8 mm heavy MGs around a century ago for the countries with 6.5 mm battle rifles but in the end the distinction was not considered worthwhile. 

smg762

From: smg762

26-Sep

Yes but if you had NGSW ammo in all your GPMGs, it would start to make more sense as a halfway idea between 50cal.  Even 6.8 isnt useful at 1000m so...well.

anyway i cant see a 338 seeing widespread use for the reasons you mentioned

Is it any good against cover or walls..?

For such roles are you better off with tungsten or simply a heavy 338 FMJ

  • Edited 26 September 2021 16:13  by  smg762
In reply toRe: msg 4
Red7272

From: Red7272

26-Sep

All other things being equal, penetration is linear with sectional density. And sectional density - again with all other things being equal - is linear with calibre. 

6.8 (7 mm) 7.62 (7.8 mm) .338 (8.56 mm) and .50 (13 mm) 

Basically the .50 BMG will shit all over the other 3 in regards to penetration and the difference between the three is trivial.  6.8 and 338 are not short, fat projectiles with short ogives which is what is wrong with the 7.62x51. A particularly fine 7.62 EPR out of a neckless polymer 7.62x51 case would do everything the 6.8 could do except it would drop to subsonic 50 metres closer. 

In reply toRe: msg 1
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

26-Sep

smg762 said:

What are the forums thoughts on the need or relevance of 338 MGs?

I initially thought they were pretty cool, but have subsequently come to find the concept lacking in a number of ways:

-.338 Norma overall length designed around 300gr lead core; a VLD AP steel core projectile would be substantially larger.

-Cartridge is being introduced right around NGSW pioneering a new type of cartridge case design, which would likely rapidly make .338 need to be replaced. For example if 6.8 CT from Textron is fielded, then it would make much more sense to wait a few years for Textron to develop a .338 CT thats lighter and more efficient, rather then introducing a new brass cased cartridge into inventory. 

-.338 has 2x the weight of 6.5/6.8/7.62, but would still not approach the penetration and destructive power of .50 BMG. And the incredible ballistics of 6.8 NGSW makes the case for .338 as long range MG round more tenuous if its role is strictly anti personnel. 

smg762

From: smg762

26-Sep

Well my suggestion was for a polymer 8mm or 338.

To save even more 338 weight why not make the top and bottom of the case totally hollow....bullet is held in place only by a solid propellant.

I do think your overselling the 50's penetration. Many vids show it beig stopped by thick AR500 or similar...with faster rounds making more of an impact.

If tungsten is so expensive surely a tungsten-steel alloy would allow for less tungsten....eg. 20 grains.

In reply toRe: msg 7
smg762

From: smg762

26-Sep

Oh very quickly, does anyone know the weight of a typical m249 or 6.8 belt pouch? 

In reply toRe: msg 7
Red7272

From: Red7272

26-Sep

smg762 said:

I do think your overselling the 50's penetration. Many vids show it beig stopped by thick AR500 or similar...with faster rounds making more of an impact.

Designing a modern 50 BMG loading with modern propellants and the latest tech AP it will shit all over 338. Look at the Chinese 12.7x108 and 14.5x114 ammo to see what modern heavy MG ammo behaves like. 

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

27-Sep

Using polymer in the case and belt and using compressed propellant, a 12.7 round would be substantially lighter than today

OTOH if 6.8 is finally adopted, an 8.6 norma is not enough more energetic in order to be justifiable. But it would not be mandatory to respect the metrics of a century plus old cartridge.

Maybe a lightener 10mm -ish with an Eo of 10000-12000J would be a balanced alternative, much lighter than the lightest .50 gun and with lighter ammunition (specially with CT cartridge), more viable as a dismounted alternative and using a round which uses less volume

TOP