The US Army has been mulling new rifles and ammunition since the 1980's. Only recently have those projects been approved with a projected date of adoption sometime in 2022.
More than a rifle: How a new 6.8mm round, advanced optics … - Military Times militarytimes.com › news
The Army says that this new round is to counter russian body armor advances. While this may be a factor I think its real reason lies in the wargaming and "red team secenarios" focused on an American Civil War.
Think about it. The American Civil war will be a conflict of long range suprise engagements conducted by American Rebels using a snipe and scoot arrangement that allows them to inflict the most casualties and suffer the least. The counter strategy is to return fire by the engaged party before the rebels move. Against a Rebel AR10 or .270 rifle the M4 is ineffective against cover at 500 yrds and much less accurate in the hands of the average American soldier.
A drone cannot be on station fast enough to engage before the rebels move. Nor will rebels engage if a drone is in the area.
Neither are surgical enough (or cost effective) to prevent civilian casualties on American soil. Only proving to drive more people to the rebel cause than they casualties inflicted on the rebels.
In closing the 6.8 cartridge and new rifles being adopted with it are a response to the threat posed by the American Rifleman to soldiers and rearline troops.
You're giving the military too much credit here. Everything they do is restricted to the confines of cost, the ZOG machine has too much 5.56 too abandon the caliber for something effective. They'd rather throw their soldiers into a meat grinder with ineffective low cost weapons than field something expensive but worthwhile, case in point: Any conflict in the last 20 years. No advantage is worth a loss in shekels to these parasites.
Jason Clark
Hello, and welcome to timeline 487651. Here we have (I shit you not) a trillion dollar fighter that explodes in its hangar if the air conditioner fails. Isn't that hilarious?
Anyhoo, here our kikes never miss a chance to overcharge the taxpayer or to contrive fallacious reasons to increase wasteful military spending. You say your kikes will screw over the grunts to save a shekel for the taxpayers? That seems so strange to us. Here, the fact that we have immense stores of 5.56 is *precisely* the reason the kikes (who convinced the military to buy that 5.56 ammo in the first place) will insist that it is terrible and should all be replaced with Goldensteinbergowicz's new meme round—"a steal at 4x the cost per round."
Don't forget to tell your fellow goyim that you stand with israel. You will be socially shoahed if you don't.
Eli Cox
Literally all those points are relevant against all armed forces in the world, from afghans insurgents to russians. Do you think that in recognized war people magically get the urge to jump out of cover and run towards each other, while in guerrilla warfare they don't?
In this timeline I wonder under what conditions would the MIC decide it's a good thing to provide your troops with quality gear and training, because having a strong military is good, right?
Easton Thomas
In the middle east only recently has the west batted an eye at civilian casualties to air strikes. I doubt many americans would care of artillery struck a small home in eastern Europe while fighting the russians. I think it will be a lot different when its you're neighbor's house or your cousins.
Also russian mechanized doctrine until recently was close to 500 yds of the enemy, dismount from bmps and move forward on foot with travelling bmp support. The thought being that anti armor fire will only get more accurate at 500 yds and closing (not to mention reluctance to use artillery at danger close ranges). Dismounted infantry can fire gpmgs and rpgs to cover the bmp's advance from enemy infantry weapons.
Jackson Turner
Reasons are literally meme wars.
Eli Scott
That meat grinder will be the raiding of supply convoys and starving of foward troops. I bet they did the cost analysis and decided more capable troops means less equipment stolen by rebels. Also its really not their money as said. I think the reality of army procurement lies in the balance of these two extremes albiet leaning in favor of 640534. Jewish procurement officers contracting jewish owned companies for as much as they can and gentile for things they can't get anywhere else that the troops demand. Remember when the marine corps threw a fit over people using magpul mags? I bet colt was pissed they weren't using their subcontracted garbage mags. Only because of reality on the ground did magpuls finally get accepted and then procured by the military. (do jews own magpul now?)
Cooper Myers
5.56 is fine, just because it's been shoehorned into a role it was never intended to fill doesn't mean it's ineffective.
William Edwards
Let's wait for them to adopt the caliber. Then we'll beat it with superior armor. :-) But we must wait until it's too expensive for them to do a total rollout. Elites will always have the koolest toys. In their case, they always underestimate natural/social/memetic. But that's all I can say on the matter. Well, I can say this: Consider how elite forces were never quite able to overcome the tactics of the viet kong. They never "got it".
Cameron Young
It's interesting to note that neither Russia nor China are considering taking similar measures despite facing the same body armor issues. I do lean towards sharing your view on the subject, OP.
Brandon Garcia
The problem with the 6.8mm SPC cartridge is the fact that the 7.62mm NATO exists. If you have any issues with the 5.56mm NATO, just use the 7.62mm, thereby completely bypassing the need for the 6.8mm.
Tyler Torres
They are not adopting the memePC, numbnut. The new 6.8 projectile will have speed of a 5.56 with almost double the weight. Effectively in the .300 winmag range. They also announced that they will raise the operating pressure limits of small arms to achieve this. 70k-90k PSI.
Hudson Wilson
7.62 nato is too heavy in a combat loadout for most soldiers. You'll see what I mean if you ever drive onto a military post. Most of these kids are scrawny and short. The 6.8 is supposed to be 60% the weight of 7.62 nato.
Michael Lee
...
Chase Rodriguez
Because Serbs and Russians threatened to adopt the 6.5mm Grendel as standard assault rifle, sniper and light machine gun ammunition.
It's literal brinkmanship, "we cannot allow a cartridge gap!!!" bullshit.
Marines and Army have been crying about the 5.56 since the FIRST gulf war in 1992, it is a pathetic round which can't effectively suppress snipers and means infantry literally just sits behind a rock and waits for 2 hours for a pair of B1B pilots to get untangled from their bed, wash their cocks of each others shit smears, shave, drink coffee, have breakfast, watch a rerun of The View, finally get into the bomber and fly their mach 1+ capable craft at 0.5 mach speeds to the urgent CAS call to drop 75,000lb of napalm on a single hut inhabited by a single durka sniper, managing to burn all the infantrys supplies and half their men in the process. Marines and Army have been crying, and no one was hearing them until the fucking clay farming slavs outpaced us not only in missiles, but in fucking infantry equipment as well!
Cooper Collins
Snd now they give them a magnum cartridge and a gun that physically cannot weight less than 8lbs empty lest it explodes from its own power. Kek.
Jackson Foster
The Russians never did this.
Gavin Lee
We must be increasingly on the alert to prevent them from taking over other superior cartridge, in order to shoot more prodigiously than we do, thus, knocking us out in inferior numbers when we invade! Mr. President, we must not allow a cartridge gap!
My brother didn't mind 5.56 due to him having a musket in Iraq, i.e A2 with the 20" barrel.
If I recall the Soviets played with the idea of a 6mm cartridge in the mid to late 80's.
Anthony Jones
5.56 is just a glorified submachine gun round for glorified submachine guns. It's fine for shorter ranges and street shootouts, but piss for ranged combat.
Owen Parker
Yes, the 6x49mm or 6mm Unified cartridge. It wasn't designed to be universal, but to replace 7.62x39 and 7.62x54r, while shedding weight. It was a very high velocity round with fairly extreme chamber pressures. Not like Grendel at all and probably closer in concept to this theoretical 6.8 round that the Army is working on.
They also believed in hip fireing into the enemy at a walking pace, I am not saying Soviets are totally retarded, but they were not totally there either.
Noah Edwards
You're both on the right track but off just a little. The military would like to have the most expensive bullshit gear out there and arm every MUHREEN with power armor, it's just a matter of (((contracts))) and logistics, so you end up with a mix of mass-produced cheap shit and expensive-ass under-performing shit.
If the military could, they would exclusively operate on a principle of each soldier having the best gear possible, but that would mean about 1/3rd to 1/2 of the (on-the-books) 600 billion would go towards outfitting and feeding the 2 million folks in the military (between active-duty and reserves), and you'd have to drastically reduce the size of the military to justify making each soldier cost over 100k to get them started. Consider it costs $70,000 to train one marine from the moment they walk into a recruiting office to the moment they actually start in an official capacity, and the US trains roughly 40,000 marines every year to keep up with/expand their current numbers, and that's a drop in the bucket compared to base management or anything else. Logistically it's not feasible so they have to go with the cheapest shit they can find. On the flip side you have (((military contractors))) who the military can't go around, and thus have to buy from, and these (((contractors))) will all promise to make things happen for a tenth of the actual budget it would cost while knowing the military will never deny them their budget so you end up with projects that cost 100x what they were supposed to due to "delays" and other kikery. In the end you end up with trillion-dollar trashcans in the air because the military can't stop giving them money (both due to the nature of their funding and the fact that they're under contract with other nations to produce that flaming pile of garbage).
Isaiah Miller
Short and weak 6.8SPC can't come even close to the soviet 6x49. Latter was in the .240 Weatherby Magnum power range and had longer bullets steel core with better BC.
Brandon Harris
Only 7.62x54r, failed 7.62x39 POS was already replaced by glorious 5.45x39 at this point.
Only vague similarities. Driving point of the Army 6.8 is penetration of ceramic refile plates. To archive this they plan 300 winmag power levels AND tungsten core bullets.
In 1980 ceramic level IV didnt exist so soviets didn't plan to counter them. Also tungsten is no no for soviets, only steel core. But steel core is hopeless against ceramics. Video related. Soviet 6x49 was made for first of all for increasing external ballistics with holding recoil in line so full auto guns ( GPMG firing from bipod) remain accurate. US Army doesoant care about recoil they don't know how automatic fire works and they don't use it. Only semi auto. Yeah Yankee choose MG with worst full auto dispersion during SAW trials. Hilarious.
Ethan Morris
The 6.8 cartridge that is referenced as a hypothetical/experimental service round is NOT 6.8 SPC. It is something closer to .270 WSM.
Brody Morris
I believe all 3 rounds were in the supply chain in Afghanistan, which was part of what spurred the experimentation. High pressure, high velocity rounds, as opposed to something like Grendel which is what was being referenced in comparison.
Juan Walker
6.5 Grendel 6.8 SPC were mentions as asltearties or threath need to be countered. Point is when all this cartridges have number 6 Amry's hypothetical/experimental service round is completaly different beast.
It is is more powerful than .270 WSM with 100 grain at 3500 fps objective and 100 grain at 3200 fps threshold requirements.
Benjamin Reed
Soviets had Mosin and PPSH till 1991 in supply chain.
Easton Peterson
6.5 Grendel 6.8 SPC were mentions as alternatives or threat need to be countered. Point is when all this cartridges have number 6 Army's hypothetical/experimental service round is completely different beast.
It is is more powerful than .270 WSM with 125 grains at 3500 fps objective and 125 grains at 3200 fps threshold requirements.
Kayden Lee
Oh yeah, shit on the 5.56, the bullet that since Vietnam has been defending YOUR rights and the rights of COUNTLESS PEOPLES across the world. You're just American-hating SJWs who are opposed to literally anything related to our Armed Forces. Did the thought of having to actually exercise scare you away from signing up? Or maybe it was the idea of hurting those poor innocent brown babies who were threatening to drop chemicals on American soil. There's a reason 5.56 has been in the hands of our boys in uniform for over 60 years, but you fags don't apply reason to anything that triggers you, like AMERICA. Go back to shooting your overpowered bullets that make you feel like a big boy, I'm sticking with what is TRIED and TRUE, and not some bigass ruskie bullet that was abandoned after double-u double-u two.
Are you fucking retarded? You type so much, but say so little. kys
Christopher Myers
Well it could defend rights better when it isn't getting knocked off course by jungle brush. Works great in wide open areas like dessert. I like 5.56 but it is not the universal cartridge for all situations. In fact in heavily forested areas it is probably one of the worst choices, any light bullet is. Even 9mm would be better in brush because it has some weight.
Leo Lee
Don't kid yourself, fag. All modern intermediate cartridges and rifles followed the design philosophy of just make them into glorified submachine guns. Regular submachine guns got phased out to make room. Battle rifles got phased out to have designated marksman rifles take their place. They are made for either closer range combat or to pin down an enemy long enough for artileery or air support to finish the job.
Eli Lopez
I cannot agree with this, SMG really cannot engage into the 300m golden range that selective fire intermediate caliber rifle is good.
Christian Sullivan
Select fire intermediate rifles are just upgraded SMGs with more range then. Still SMGs for the most part.
David Gomez
It depends on what you think the role of SMG is.
I do support adoption of 6.8mm or 6.5mm, if only to make them cheaper.
Landon Phillips
Bruh, tell me, is 30 carbine an intermediate or a pistol cartridge? Is M1 carbine an SMG?
Nolan Martinez
Oops, wrong post, meant to reply
Luis Garcia
That's pretty hard to answer, I'm pretty sure the M1 Carbine is meant to be carbine i.e. lighter, lesser effective range rifle.
Nolan Harris
Ok then, is .327 federal magnum a pistol cartridge?
I dunno about its ballistics but it does look like a pistol round, with a long fuck case.
What's with the resurgence of fake krauts?
Ayden Jenkins
If this doesnt prove this spamming sperg is a nogun autist, nothing will.
Jason Davis
I'm a vietnamese so of course I haven't seen a single .327 round in my life.
Watching your ass sperging about it is funny tho.
Oliver Ross
No gun subhuman autistic spammer? On my Zig Forums?
Gavin Kelly
Like the one in Syria today?
Bentley Ortiz
Aren't revolvers considered pistols?
Nathan Bennett
So how did I spam?
And I'm right, .327 fed magnum is a pistol cartridge.
Parker Morgan
People haven't called revolvers "pistol" for more than a century now. except for the anglos, but they also contradict themselves in many cases. Of course knowing this is a part of actually owning and shooting guns.
Mason Clark
Revolvers are still handgun/pistols. You mean the population with the most guns. Yeah, you regularly shoot guns much? I don't think so.
Quit the weasel word, I call a pistol round a pistol round, deal with it.
Carter Reyes
Technically revolvers also have their own revolver rounds, such as rimmed centrefire and/or significantly elongated, which automatic pistols don't use. So if you mean such round I suppose you should use "revolver round" terminology.
Owen Cooper
Did this nigger intentionally misread my reply and try to omit half of what the reply said?
What I wrote is a logical continuation of your words. All I want to point out is that it's a lot better if you define revolver cartridges as cartridges designed for revolvers.
