A Quantum Leap of Technology - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-01-2020, 10:34 AM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
A Quantum Leap of Technology

The Army has finally decided that the time is right to abandon the 5.56mm for its Infantry and other combat forces.

The new rifle will be one of three prototypes. The requirements are a 6.8mm bullet that will weigh between 135-40 grains. It must be “close” to 3,000 FPS. This is not the 6.8 SPC.

Each rifle prototype will introduce a new type “cartridge” albeit one is caseless (telescopic), one is a polymer case, and the last is closer to a traditional cartridge except with a steel base.

The new ammo will be the basis for the change, but other technologies will be introduced as well. Modularity, Brakes, suppressors, optics, and night vision will all help make the new rifle meet the requirements of the Army.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-01-2020, 10:40 AM
GTAW GTAW is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 289
Is it based on the TVCM 6.8?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-01-2020, 10:56 AM
wccountryboy wccountryboy is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,275
A new clambering isn't a "quantum leap" in technology.... nor is a new rifle.

They've been playing this game for a decade or more. They're looking at "protptypes" to be delivered God knows when. The cartridge hasn't even been developed or evaluated- approved.... the only spec is a 6.8 bullet.....

When a production contract is awarded, then maybe it'll be real.
__________________
I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain. ~ John Adams
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:07 AM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 71,206
The military has been screwing around with this for close to 20 years. I'll believe it when I see it.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1970 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:29 AM
Snapping Twig Snapping Twig is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 961
I've always wondered why they bypass the 6.5.

Seems like the 260 would be a good choice.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:33 AM
jtq jtq is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW Florida
Age: 62
Posts: 11,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapping Twig View Post
I've always wondered why they bypass the 6.5.

Seems like the 260 would be a good choice.
I always wonder the same. The ballistic coefficient of typical 6.8/.277 bullets always seems worse than the 6.5 or 7mm
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:35 AM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTAW View Post
Is it based on the TVCM 6.8?
Yes, it is one of the competitors in the award process. I believe it is the General Dynamics technology.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:38 AM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by wccountryboy View Post
A new clambering isn't a "quantum leap" in technology.... nor is a new rifle.
Yes it is... it will be a marked improvement. Whichever cartridge they select will be like no other cartridge use by any military force. Its capabilities will dwarf the 5.56 in every standard.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:40 AM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snapping Twig View Post
I've always wondered why they bypass the 6.5.

Seems like the 260 would be a good choice.
I think the .260 would have been a good choice in a conventional cartridge , but the Army is NOT going to stay with a brass cartridge. It will be all new.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:45 AM
The War Wagon The War Wagon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: da' 'BURGH
Age: 53
Posts: 2,880
TIME... for a COMEBACK!!!




I'm SURE they can make a carbine out of it!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:48 AM
wccountryboy wccountryboy is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 11,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryO45 View Post
Yes it is... it will be a marked improvement. Whichever cartridge they select will be like no other cartridge use by any military force. Its capabilities will dwarf the 5.56 in every standard.
Improved performance is NOT a quantum leap in technology...

What about this mystery cartridge is fundamentally different from about 150 years of self contained cartridge technology? Its still going to have a case, primer, propellant, and bullet....

There may be some minor evolution, but nothing revolutionary- not within the 18-24 month fielding timeline you alluded to in the other thread....
__________________
I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain. ~ John Adams
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:54 AM
TominMO's Avatar
TominMO TominMO is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: St. Louis, MO
Age: 70
Posts: 1,187
It better have GPS or a nose camera for joystick guidance. A 90 degree turn capability would also be a plus.
__________________
"It's not the arrow, it's the Indian." -- Elizabeth Warren
"An armed society is a polite society." -- R. Heinlein
All lives matter! :-) Take a knee only to God
Equal opportunity, not equal outcome.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:57 AM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by wccountryboy View Post
Improved performance is NOT a quantum leap in technology...

What about this mystery cartridge is fundamentally different from about 150 years of self contained cartridge technology? Its still going to have a case, primer, propellant, and bullet....

There may be some minor evolution, but nothing revolutionary- not within the 18-24 month fielding timeline you alluded to in the other thread....
You can argue with me about use of the phrase “Quantum Leap”, but you have a lot to learn if you believe that the Army is looking at traditional brass case, components and iron sights on the rifle. It will be much improved, a Quantum Leap for our Soldiers... who will likely in the future face level 4 body armor.

Last edited by HarryO45; 07-01-2020 at 12:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-01-2020, 11:59 AM
fnfalman fnfalman is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Bullhead City, AZ, USA
Posts: 877
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryO45 View Post
The Army has finally decided that the time is right to abandon the 5.56mm for its Infantry and other combat forces.

The new rifle will be one of three prototypes. The requirements are a 6.8mm bullet that will weigh between 135-40 grains. It must be “close” to 3,000 FPS. This is not the 6.8 SPC.

Each rifle prototype will introduce a new type “cartridge” albeit one is caseless (telescopic), one is a polymer case, and the last is closer to a traditional cartridge except with a steel base.

The new ammo will be the basis for the change, but other technologies will be introduced as well. Modularity, Brakes, suppressors, optics, and night vision will all help make the new rifle meet the requirements of the Army.
I’ll believe it when I see it.

The Army had gone through how many rifle programs the last 15-years now?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-01-2020, 12:12 PM
Kevin Rohrer's Avatar
Kevin Rohrer Kevin Rohrer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Medina, Ohio USA
Posts: 2,310
They are reinventing the Wheel, and it is way past time.

Interesting that they are going for a higher velocity, which means flatter trajectory but barrels that will burn-out faster.
__________________
Member: Orange Gunsite Family, NRA-Life, and the American Legion.

Don't trust Cavery Grips/American Gripz/Prestige Grips. He WILL rip you off.
All my 1911s are in .45acp. Why? Because size matters.--Me
Weapon capacity is important for those planning to miss a lot.--Bruce Nelson
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-01-2020, 12:25 PM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by fnfalman View Post
I’ll believe it when I see it.

The Army had gone through how many rifle programs the last 15-years now?
Yes the problem is that nothing they can cram into the “M16 platform” does everything better (.300BO, 6.8SPC and .458). Is has been a fool’s errand to expect something so much better that would justify a change for performance needed.

I am with you, I have been following the developments closely, much of it is close hold information. But I will tell you the last three years have been the most promising. I have the great fortune to have been in the audience of some of the public discussions, albeit they are very general (pun intended).

The requirements are not classified, so if you know them, then you can kinda reverse enginner some of this. Several manufacturers have already been cut. There are three competing manufacturers left. Some additional ammo manufactures are on board too. They all have different technologies for the “cartridge”. This is gonna happen. Most Combat Leaders have been disappointed in the 5.56mm in all of its variants.

Longer range
More penetration
And increased basic load (weight)
Advanced optic / night vision
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-01-2020, 12:35 PM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 5,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Rohrer View Post
They are reinventing the Wheel, and it is way past time.

Interesting that they are going for a higher velocity, which means flatter trajectory but barrels that will burn-out faster.
Yes, way past time... that is what is so frustrating, but the technology of ammo is developing to finally justify the changes.

Yes, they are looking at slower rates of fire, with the idea that the improved accuracy will negate the need for volume. They will still be fast, barrel issue will likely be expensive. But remember these weapons will not be issued to everyone in the military, just for fighters. The Army is not gonna to try to give everyone in the military the same equipment. Infantry will get the best rifles, weapons, optic, kit (LBE), helmet and armor... etc . In the past everyone was issued the same rifle... from Support to the Tip of the Spear...that ship has sailed.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-01-2020, 01:03 PM
Bullet Bob Bullet Bob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Piedmont NC
Posts: 262
A "Quantum Leap" in military speak, a .280 British to anyone who wasn't born yesterday, or doesn't ignore history.

Sure, it may have a partially polymer case so a soldier can carry more ammo, or even caseless, which has been in development a long time. But if you think the bullet is going to be more effective, or even funnier, if you think the military will save money, good luck to you.

Last edited by Bullet Bob; 07-01-2020 at 01:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-01-2020, 01:07 PM
Jim Watson Jim Watson is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Florence, Alabama, USA
Posts: 21,545
I expect the new Wundergewehr to be so expensive that only the "elite" units will get it and the COs will be duking it out to get them to show they are indeed elite.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-01-2020, 01:28 PM
John Joseph John Joseph is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,778
In honor of the upcoming 4th of July, lets remember General Washington's quantum leap in technology was implementing the Buck and Ball load
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-01-2020, 01:33 PM
GTAW GTAW is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northern California
Posts: 289
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the...o-warning/amp/

Polymer shell casings are....
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-01-2020, 01:35 PM
John Joseph John Joseph is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryO45 View Post
Yes, way past time... that is what is so frustrating, but the technology of ammo is developing to finally justify the changes.

Yes, they are looking at slower rates of fire, with the idea that the improved accuracy will negate the need for volume. They will still be fast, barrel issue will likely be expensive. But remember these weapons will not be issued to everyone in the military, just for fighters. The Army is not gonna to try to give everyone in the military the same equipment. Infantry will get the best rifles, weapons, optic, kit (LBE), helmet and armor... etc . In the past everyone was issued the same rifle... from Support to the Tip of the Spear...that ship has sailed.
So attacking Combat Support and Support units are going to be the "soft" targets, eh?
I wouldn't envy the Quartermasters trying to keep a supply line functioning with so many incompatible unit specific line items
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-01-2020, 01:47 PM
Snapping Twig Snapping Twig is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 961
I would think caseless or polymer would present issues during malfunctions.

IMO, these have been the issues all along, with no solid resolutions to date.

Our experiences with the M-16 in early deployment, whether by accident or design, have soured me personally on BOLD NEW STROKES. Our men died due to this and I can not see it changing in the future.

Perhaps sticking with the solid foundation of what works, upgrading the caliber and then in the fullness of time, developing this new super cartridge.

Rushing or forcing it can bode no good.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-01-2020, 02:42 PM
Autonomous Autonomous is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,528
I have a 30 year old box of polymer case .38 Special. The old plastic does not give me a lot of confidence.
The link below is not my ammo but just like it. I wonder what it is actually worth.
https://shop.ammo-one1.com/product.sc?productId=180
__________________
There is something to this 1911. I think it'll catch on.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-01-2020, 03:37 PM
Amos Iron Wolf Amos Iron Wolf is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Del Rio, Texas
Age: 63
Posts: 8,179
The Garand was going to be originally chambered in the .276 Pedersen. A 7x51MM round. It was not only shorter, but lighter and lower pressure. It would have been in 10 round en bloc clips. But MacArthur and others were still insisting on the .30-06.

So something in the 6.8-7mm caliber range isn't a new thing. It would have probably been a better choice back then. I'm like a lot of others though. The 6.5MM bullets just have too good of specs, BC, SD, etc., that make them flat shooting and accurate in any reasonable cartridge and firearm.

The issue of reliable and safe caseless or polymer ammo to handle the rough handling of military and combat requirements is something I am concerned about for a number of reasons.

A few of the past caseless ammo attempts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caseless_ammunition
__________________
"I wish I was stupid enough to be optimistic." Unknown

R.I.P. Miss Andi. It was a fine, long run old pup and I miss ya. AIW
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:51 PM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved