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.

  • 3361
    MEMBERS
  • 191247
    MESSAGES
  • 10
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

MGs   Small Arms <20mm

Started 9/5/22 by graylion; 10314 views.
EmericD

From: EmericD

10/5/22

graylion said:

I come back to 8.5x63 ... ;) as regards 12.7 SAPHEI. what about replacing with 30x113 as has been suggested? Them guns are pretty light.And there are gas powered ones available. So, if starting from nearly scratch, I'd go   4.6x30 6.8x51 8.5x63 30x113

That won't be my winning lottery numbers.

The 4.6 x 30 mm is a handgun-power round that can't be used in a handgun. The company RADAR1957 is making harness for the MP7, to be able to keep it close to the body, but this harness also accept... the MP5. The MP7 is a good replacement for a SMG like the UZI (or the MP5), but it's not the PDW as initially envisioned, that was supposed to be <1.5 kg and <30 cm.

The 6.8 x 51 mm is a "super 7.62 mm NATO", with the same limits as the 7.62 mm NATO (mainly ammo weight and recoil). A good round for a vehicle-mounted MMG, but probably not what I would want for dismounted infantry.

The 8.6 x 63 mm is a superb antipersonnel round for long-range use, but will lack the payload of the 12.7 mm for anti-material job, and will probably offer very little improvement over the 6.8 mm.

The 30 x 113 mm is burning much more powder than any current infantry support weapon, and except for the increased MV and reduced explosive efficiency I wonder if it's very superior to the 40 x 53 mm for infantry use.

My bet would be:

1- a handgun round (choose one),

2- something like the 224 Valkyrie or the 6 mm ARC (but with a truly lightweight case) for most dismounted infantry use (PDW, IW, LMG/SAW/AR),

3- a 8 x 63 mm (or a 30-06 with 190 gr bullets) for MMG/tripod/vehicle/RWS use,

4- a 13 mm HMG (because KE rounds are cheap) and a 40 x 53 mm GMG (or the very good Russian 30 x 29 mm).

  • Edited 10 May 2022 16:57  by  EmericD
nincomp

From: nincomp

10/5/22

EmericD said:

- something like the 224 Valkyrie or the 6 mm ARC (but with a truly lightweight case) for most dismounted infantry use (PDW, IW, LMG/SAW/AR),

Do you see any advantage to higher-pressure variants of these cartridges?  Not necessarily 80,000psi, but more than the 52,000 psi used by the ARC to protect an AR15's bolt.  BTW, Hornady publishes "bolt gun" loads at 62,000psi for the 6mm ARC, but it is difficult to gage the performance increase vs the "gas gun" loads since since they used a 24" (610mm) barrel for "bolt" data and 18" (457mm) for the "gas gun".

graylion

From: graylion

10/5/22

EmericD said:

graylion said: I come back to 8.5x63 ... ;) as regards 12.7 SAPHEI. what about replacing with 30x113 as has been suggested? Them guns are pretty light.And there are gas powered ones available. So, if starting from nearly scratch, I'd go   4.6x30 6.8x51 8.5x63 30x113 That won't be my winning lottery numbers. The 4.6 x 30 mm is a handgun-power round that can't be used in a handgun. The company RADAR1957 is making harness for the MP7, to be able to keep it close to the body, but this harness also accept... the MP5. The MP7 is a good replacement for a SMG like the UZI (or the MP5), but it's not the PDW as initially envisioned, that was supposed to be <1.5 kg and <30 cm. The 6.8 x 51 mm is a "super 7.62 mm NATO", with the same limits as the 7.62 mm NATO (mainly ammo weight and recoil). A good round for a vehicle-mounted MMG, but probably not what I would want for dismounted infantry. The 8.6 x 63 mm is a superb antipersonnel round for long-range use, but will lack the payload of the 12.7 mm for anti-material job, and will probably offer very little improvement over the 6.8 mm. The 30 x 113 mm is burning much more powder than any current infantry support weapon, and except for the increased MV and reduced explosive efficiency I wonder if it's very superior to the 40 x 53 mm for infantry use. My bet would be: 1- a handgun round (choose one), 2- something like the 224 Valkyrie or the 6 mm ARC (but with a truly lightweight case) for most dismounted infantry use (PDW, IW, LMG/SAW/AR), 3- a 8 x 63 mm (or a 30-06 with 190 gr bullets) for MMG/tripod/vehicle/RWS use, 4- a 13 mm HMG (because KE rounds are cheap) and a 40 x 53 mm GMG (or the very good Russian 30 x 29 mm).

Hmm,

  • 5.7x28
  • 6.5x47 (but the thing is that 6.8x51 is liable to become the new standard, no?)
  • 8.6x63 (or 8x64 maybe? ;) )
  • 14.5x113
  • 40x53
schnuersi

From: schnuersi

10/5/22

graylion said:

14.5x113

What do you want this legacy round for?
Its overpowered for anti personel use, large and heavy. While its outdated/not powerfull anymore for anti vehicle use.
The 14,5 is very close to a 20 mm AC round. The gun is also of similar size and weight. But it lacks the extra power of the KE round and the payload capacity.The

The 5.7x28 is virtually identical in performance to the 4,6x30. If one doesn't cut it the other won't as well.

To select the right cartidges for your mix you need to define what you want to do with them. Once you do that you get performance parameters that will narrow the selection down. This way the cartidges selected to the mix make sense and complement each other.

It 6,8x51 will become a new standard is currently completly uncertain. As EmericD said its basically a 7,62x51.

stancrist

From: stancrist

10/5/22

schnuersi said:

I tend to prefer technical descriptions.

Same here.  However, I don't know of anyone else who defines SAW = SCHV LMG.

I know of only two instances of an LMG being called a SAW, and one is not SCHV.

schnuersi said:

As far as I knwo the M240 is a GPMG and when its used from bipod its used in the LMG role and if its used from tripod its in the MMG role. MMG being defined by the use of a mount and being rifle caliber.

The US Army considers the M240 to be a MMG, regardless of what type mount is used.

PEO Soldier | Portfolio - PM SL - M240B/L/H 7.62mm Medium Machine Gun (army.mil)

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

10/5/22

schnuersi said:

That is the problem. They are but not in Germany. As far as I know Turkey and Pakistan do still manufacture the MG3 large scale. In Germany only replacement parts are manufactured on demand in small batches... if at all.

Thats a bummer. Shame to see such an iconic and effective design fade away; dont imagine many will go for buying more from Turkey, even if they are a NATO member with solid arms industry. 

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

10/5/22

graylion said:

Time to define what we mean by LMG?

Intended to primarily / exclusively be fire from a bipod is my general go to LMG litmus. Whereas if Tripod/Vehicle mounting is common / weapon is well designed/advertised for, then its  GPMG. 

Example being the MK48 vs M240. Both are 7.62 belt fed machineguns, but the MK48 really is intended for squad bipod use, whereas the M240 is true general purpose machinegun extensively employed on bipods/tripods/vehicles.

...However LMG is a generally 'squishy' definition with some debate (not like the distinction between assault rifles and submachine guns which is pretty settled terminology) 

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

10/5/22

stancrist said:

A "SAW" (Squad Automatic Weapon) can be a SCHV LMG; SCHV automatic rifle; full power, rifle caliber LMG; full power, rifle caliber MMG; or full power, rifle caliber automatic rifle. And not all machine guns fired from a bipod are LMGs

The BREN gun is the ultimate confusing one. It straddles the line across all categories:

-Automatic rifle

-SAW

-LMG

-GPMG

There are numerous pictures from WW2 of it being used in all categories.

graylion

From: graylion

11/5/22

So as an overreach replacement for .50, how about a long recoil 20mm? Which one? x82, x102 or x128?

  • Edited 11 May 2022 3:40  by  graylion
stancrist

From: stancrist

11/5/22

gatnerd said:

The BREN gun is the ultimate confusing one. It straddles the line across all categories...

The BREN is mag-fed, so I always thought it fit in the automatic rifle category, while a lot of other folks argue that it's a mag-fed LMG.

It clearly was widely used as a squad automatic weapon, but GPMG?  Was the BREN ever used as a coax machine gun in tanks or IFVs?

--------------------

An exception to the "fired from a bipod = LMG" rule is the tripod-mounted M1919A4 Browning, which the US Army considered an LMG.

TOP