6.8 mm is .268 inches so caliber 268. They gonna use the 270 so beloved by jack o'connor?
The .270 uses a .277 bullet.
6.8 mm is .268 inches so caliber 268. They gonna use the 270 so beloved by jack o'connor?
The .270 uses a .277 bullet.
cook off.
6.8 doesn't really tell us much about bullet diameter. You have to carry that mm thing out to about 3 places to really know what the bore diameter for the cartridge really is. The cartridge naming convention isn't very reliable. The 270 Win. should have been named 277 Win. and the 300 Savage should have been a 308 Savage. Too late now.
Whatever cartridge they choose, count on it not to be in current civilian use.
Too many countries forbid civilian use of military caliber cartridges.
It would effectively make a swath of existing firearms illegal with the stroke of a pen.
That may be part of the reason for the existence of the .222 and the .223... .
Whatever cartridge they choose, count on it not to be in current civilian use.
Too many countries forbid civilian use of military caliber cartridges.
It would effectively make a swath of existing firearms illegal with the stroke of a pen.
That may be part of the reason for the existence of the .222 and the .223... .
Well, what do we *know* for positive, for certain about this article? It's that the author has absolutely no clue what the hell he or she is talking about, since it says that the military 556x45 is a demon buttstomper, totally different round from the "civilian" 556x45. There is thus ZERO credibility to any claim of any nature in this article.
Yes, it will eventually enter civilian use in the countries that allow civilians to use military cartridges.
My statement is that the military cannot adopt an existing civilian round without making existing civilian weapons and cartridges retroactively illegal in nations that ban civilians from using the same ammunition as any nation's military weapons.
I highly doubt that is even a consideration to countries that don't have the Second Amendment.
Those restrictive countries have made many legally owned civilian firearms illegal with the stroke of a pen.
The money would be better spent on a new unmanned stealth fighter.
Yeah, the countries may not care but the rifle and ammunition manufacturers certainly do!
That would be great except the military can't even afford to build the F-22, the most capable and advanced fighter in the world. They have already stopped production with only a few hundred built. Another new fighter just isn't coming. I have a relative who works with the AF as a civilian working with fighter contracts. He said the money is being spent upgrading F-16's. I guess he should know.
An unmanned plane doesn't require all of the heavy, and super expensive life support of the F22.
Nor is it as limited in G-forces and manueverability. It can also be set up as a Kamikaze in case it get's shot up.