MILITARY FINALLY GOES BACK TO .308

thedrive.com/the-war-zone/13270/us-army-seeks-a-new-battle-rifle-for-piercing-advanced-body-armor

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Lets just adopt FN FAL's with the super long barrel and wood furniture.

7x57 is better.

Not very suprising

just move on to 6.5mm already

>Military hosts another series of trials that will end up going nowhere or with them buying overpriced H&K crap that doesn't do anything better than the other competitors because they brought better cakes or something

>millimeter
>using the metric jew

FN is the best

we did it

>not .30-06

What are you gay?

Laws against war crimes

>2021
>The army annouces they have decided on a replacement rifle
>It's the m4a2
How much you wanna bet this will happen

Nice

Dumb, dumb, dumb. I can see the merits of a battle rifle in a place like Afghanistan, where you're engaging people who are shooting at you from another mountain, but once you have to start fighting in forests, jungles, urban areas, suburban areas, and farmland with hedgerows, 5.56 is clearly superior.

I'd say the SCAR-H (MK17) should be the obvious choice. It's already being used by some SOCOM forces.

It has to be metric, because of NATO.
I think we should dump the deadbeats, but...

Not very much difference between .308 caliber and .30-06. The case is about the same diameter. Just a tiny bit shorter, and use slightly less power. The primer is the exact same size.

I don't think there is anything like this. I know of restrictions to the type of bullet, but not the caliber.

Please be M14.

the scar h is basically a battle rifle

well the whole reason seems to be because of advancements in body armor, they don't think 5.56 is deadly enough apparently

.308 is a good choice. you can still fire 7.62 NATO ammo from .308 rifle. But .308 ammo will fuck up 7.62 rifles.

Just use an AR 10. This shit is so lame.

and this is on Sup Forums why?

False.

y not

bring back G3?

FUCK YES
CHEAP .308 WHEN?
Also, why hold new trials? Just use the AR-10.

EDD Mounted... let them come.

range toys are deprecated

New Zealand and the UK made the correct call and went LMT

We should as well and stop buying overpriced German weaponry.

M14s and FALs are the weapons of choice for the race war

No, that's not going to happen anytime soon.

I hear M80A1 (the new 7.62x51 NATO round) doesn't penetrate the supposed new body armor. I also have doubts how practical the new body armor is, i.e. how heavy it is.

They mean the 7.62x51 NATO cartridge, not the civilian .308 round. Additionally, rifles chambered in 7.62x51 can fire .308 rounds safely.

It is a battle rifle.

Russian new armor can withstand 7.62x54 from a sniper rifle, guessing Russia gave a bunch of these kits to Donbass fighters, and it surprised Ukraine and NATO.

from what i heard, it's not like body armor is better or anything, there are just more situations now where the enemy is wearing stuff that might prevent a kill.

You have any idea how thick and heavy it is?

stopping power is a myth,keep 5.56

7.5kg for the vest and 15kg for neck,arm, and leg protection as well.

I had always read it's because 5.56 was designed with tight urban fighting in mind and in the fuck huge desert environment that most fighting is currently in, muds with ancient large caliber rifles are out ranging US soldiers

Different powder is also used.

Backwards

Hmm... any idea how intermediate cartridges perform against it? People in the know say that we cannot get any more performance out of the 5.56 cartridge.

Muzzle velocity attainable with the 30.06 is a lot higher.

5.56 or 5.45 ain't going through. this is why NATO is pissing it's self right now.

0-400m = 5.56x45
400-800m = 7.62x51
800-1200m = .300 Win Mag
>1200m = .338 Lapua

FUCKING THIS

7,39 is much better in forests and urban areas

Deebly goncernig

Read about Project SALVO and the SPIW and OICW programs. It was meant for piercing and automatic weapons.

>military lowers standards because muh feminism
>we need a new .308! 5.56 isn't enough!

wew

200 feet/second isn't much when the muzzle is over 2600 ft/second in both cases. If you were shooting someone 200 yards away, it would make a difference, but for the majority of military applications, it really won't make much of a different.

You can use various different kinds of powders for both. There are several types of powder that could be used, each that burn differently. The powder that will depend on whatever everyone who deals with the contractors wants rather than depending on the caliber. You can find reloading manuals that describe the safe ranges for reloading bullets given bullet shape, caliber, powder types--factory powders are made within these safe ranges.

it's not that armor is necessarily getting better, it's that more people have access to it. back when we invaded Iraq in 2003 the sandniggers didn't have body armor at all, fast forward to today and now even the lowliest haji fuckhead has a full set of plates. US body armor (with ceramic plates) has been able to stop 7.62x54r from SVDs since around 2004-2006, so armor has been at about the same effectiveness since then.

I'll be surprised if they do anything at all. Talk of "lol goin back to 308 cause 223 aint no real bullet" happens a couple times a year. I'll believe it when I see it.

>just move on to 6.5mm already
Because we already have a shit ton of 7.62x51 NATO (.308)

Digits and finally someone here early who knows their shit.

Why aren't we using smooth-bore electronically triggered firearms with caseless, sabot-launched, fin-stabilized tungsten carbide penetrators?

The only reason 5.56 became popular is because it makes for easier logistics.

>be me watching Terrence Popp
>video discussing the use of pussy 5.56 ammo
>Popp recommends .308 or .30-06
>checks gun cabinet
>.308 check
>.30-06 check

.308 is more widely manufactured than 6.5 mm. There are already a variety rifles the military already uses that uses .308. It's just easier for them to switch to .308.

Why aren't we using tomahawks and gentlemen's rules for dueling?

Cause this ain't HALO nigga

Nothing is wrong with 5.56. It's good if you have an AR-15 or it's fully-automatic counterpart and can use a standard capacity (30 round) magazine and you're within 50 yards of your target. It's used in the military because it's easier to fire 5-10 shots into someone (and be able to keep a relatively tight group due to the low recoil) and switch to the next target (low recoil) than to fire one or two shots into someone with high recoil and have a harder time compensating for this. The AR-15 with 5.56 was introduced in order to replace the .308 M1A in order to compensate for the tendency of East Asians to do bonzai charges.

What is this magic armor that defeats green tipped 556?

6.5 Creedmoor feeds fine in an AR style platform.

Whatever round you go with, you're going to have to get one that uses a short action.
Shorter action = lower weight.

Options:
6.5 Creedmoor
7mm-08
.308

All have their pluses and minuses.

5.56 does the job fine.
They just need to lighten the load more and up the range and stopping power.

The Americans fucked this up by ignoring the German research on the subject of a lighter cartridge and the work done on one by the UK and the Belgians in the 50s and demanding everyone go 7.62.

Then they suddenly decided smaller/lighter cartridges were a good idea, and promptly took it too far in the opposite direction with 5.56.

Basically should have done this in the 50s- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British

Interesting.. Popp specifically mentioned that during his time in Iraq they would (often?) find enemy soldiers still alive and kicking with 5 - 6 rounds in them. Not good. His opinion was that one well placed .308 round would have ended them.

Ian did a nice vid on this

>CHEAP .308 WHEN?
Says the knob who thinks we can still buy 556 surplus

>implying jews aren't white

All it would take for 6.5mm to be manufactured on a wider scale is a military contract. Right now they're mostly civilian and special forces.

Also pls be rechambered Kel-Tec RDB.

God bless him, one Patreon channel I might actually donate to one day.

>up the range and stopping power.
Without changing the cartridge that is much more easily said than done. Barrel length can only do so much.

Different weapons for different jobs. They are tools and no one tool is perfect for every job.

>.308
>posts 12 gauge and 5.56

>tfw this is what NATO would've looked like going into the Korean War if it wasn't for bickering

milifags can't use hollow point
of course they gotta use .308 if they're forced to use FMJ

THIS

In addition, the 5.56 has powder quantity almost at the maximum allowance for safe use (not blowing up or damaging the firearm). Anything else you can do would be changing caliber.

>adopt FAL
>remove communists
please

Hmm what about the 220 swift?

IMPERIAL
M
P
E
R
I
A
L

All these faggot numbers.

Just say Tall, Grande, Venti, Trenta

>opts for 556 NATO
>says to use scar (((H E A V Y))) mark 1(((7)))
You have to be 18 and not a faggot anglo to argue on /k/ and /k/ related threads you fucking nogunz

There are so many factors that go into something like that. Armor, shot placement, drugs (on the hajji side), etc.

This guy gets it.

It's hard to kill people when your in combat even with .308. It does more damage, but it'll be a matter of less people still alive and kicking. Some would still be able to fight for a few minutes (there are many cases of this happening in all eras of warfare).

Why put out the effort and wait for the the producers to set up though? You can get the .308 more immediately since more is set up to produce .308, the specs are so close, and they virtually perform the same task for what they'd be used for.

Color me skeptical but wouldn't a change from 5.56×45mm to 7.62×51mm, besides being a change in bullet diameter and weight, also signal a change in doctrine or tactics?

I'm saying that the Mk17 would be the obvious choice for the contract. Way to get mad at someone because of your own reading comprehension learning disability.

Most of those guys were on drugs. And it doesn't really matter if they're dead or not as long as they can't fight anymore.

Why not just go to 6.5 or 6.8 and simply order conversion kits for the m16s we already have?

>took the photo in 2003

What did you do today, dude?

THIS

The only way I know that you can guarantee you'll stop someone in their tracks is if you hit them between the eyes head on so that you damage their hypothalamus.

Why don't we just use short barrel AR10s? I would cum buckets if we went back to the M14 though.

It's not going to happen. 7.62 NATO isn't that great of a round anyway. It can't really be accurate past 800m which is not much better than 5.56 and it shoots in a big stupid slow arc. Modern bullet designs have velocity and are flat shooting, and lighter such as 6,5 creed or even 2,80 British ffs.

this.

M14s are fucking garbage, there's a reason they only lasted a few years. Gov cronyism in the Army Ord. Dep is what resulted in that piece of shit being adopted in the first place. The m-16 by comparison is a stoner design.

>Interim Combat Service Rifle
>Interim

Army logistics would need years before they'd be to field a new cartridge.

never used an m-14 in combat, i take it?

>rechambered Kel-Tec RDB
never

Interesting. I'm a fan of 30 caliber. I'm glad to see our military finally express an interest in moving beyond that pimped out .22.