looks like sig will be building the next army rifle

[C-grunt]

I think some of this drive for both the new 6.8mm cartridge and new optics of the NGSW program is for giving the common solder greater effective range but everything I have read this cartridge it is MORE about defeating top line body armor (whether Russian and Chine have it in numbers is arguable) than making snipers out of the common grunt.

It's launching a 130 grain bullet .277 bullet at 2850 FPS. Cheap widely available ceramic plates will stop a 270 shooting a 130 grain bullet at 3000 FPS without issue.

They havent released any information yet about this new awesome bullet that will make it through these ceramic plates. Let alone shown how this bullet is going to do it at range when the velocity starts dropping significantly.

 

[mcb]

I found some more data and testing I though I would share. To clarify I am talking about Point Blank - Interceptor Body Armor with ESAPI plates installed.

The current field versions of ESAPI are Rev G and Rev J I believe. Both of these are rated for 3 hits from either M855 or M995 (Tungsten Core AP)

Good Summary of US military body armor standards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_body_armor_performance_standards#US_military_armor_standards

In this video the person shoots an older ESAPI Rev E plate with M855, M855A1 and M995 and none of them pass through.

 

[CapnMac]

Looks like a serious caliber vs the pathetic .22 caliber poodle shooter round.

I pity the poor SAW gunner (and his AGs) when his 300 round loadout weighs as much as 650 5.56nato rounds.

There is a lot of talk--here and elsewhere--of replacing the 240. Which is a logical assumption to make, why keep a 7.62x51 if you are now fielding a 6.8x51? But, the only "announced" (possible) replacement is for the 249, the 5.56 SAW (aka FN MINIMI). There are just too many coax 240s to ditch them all.

 

[mcb]

It's launching a 130 grain bullet .277 bullet at 2850 FPS. Cheap widely available ceramic plates will stop a 270 shooting a 130 grain bullet at 3000 FPS without issue.

They havent released any information yet about this new awesome bullet that will make it through these ceramic plates. Let alone shown how this bullet is going to do it at range when the velocity starts dropping significantly.

The Army's requirement for the NGSW ammo was at least 3000 fps with higher velocities desired. Don't make the mistake of mixing up the current commercial 277 Fury load specs with what this military ammo will be. That said one of the commercial 277 Fury loads will push a 150gr bullet to 2850 fps from a 16-inch barrel.

The Army has kept the details of this new bullet close to the vest. I believe all we know about the bullet the Army developed internally is it is 135gr and has no lead in it. The Army claims that at a 3000+ fps muzzle velocity it will defeat the armor they want defeated, they have not shared any data or testing so all we can do is speculate.

 

[C-grunt]

The Army's requirement for the NGSW ammo was at least 3000 fps with higher velocities desired. Don't make the mistake of mixing up the current commercial 277 Fury load specs with what this military ammo will be. That said one of the commercial 277 Fury loads will push a 150gr bullet to 2850 fps from a 16-inch barrel.

The Army has kept the details of this new bullet close to the vest. I believe all we know about the bullet the Army developed internally is it is 135gr and has no lead in it. The Army claims that at a 3000+ fps muzzle velocity it will defeat the armor they want defeated, they have not shared any data or testing so all we can do is speculate.

The military load is a 130 grain bullet at 3000 FPS out of a 16 inch barrel and 2850 out of the 13 inch barrel of the XM5.

 

[mcb]

The military load is a 130 grain bullet at 3000 FPS out of a 16 inch barrel and 2850 out of the 13 inch barrel of the XM5.

I have read articles quoting it at 130 and 135, so I take everything about this whole program with a big-old grain of salt. But 3000 fps or faster from the 16-inch gun has been fairly consistent in the documents I have read.

 

[David Hoback]

Yes, I agree with above. Anyone who thinks Sig managed to crack the code so to speak, in launching a 130gr bullet at 3000fps, through a 13” barrel(which is what the M5 infantry rifle is using), well, best of luck on that.

I for one, don’t believe Sig has figured out how break the laws of physics. It’s well known that only the 6.5 Creedmoor can do that!

 

[Crosshair]

yep., bout how I see it too. Again, the old quote "You can sell the government anything"...

Another little story...off topic and I apologize for this..its a once and done...
Back in 2018 I took the family on a tour of Cape Canaveral. We visited the Saturn 5 center. After seeing and hearing the tour guides trump up and promote their shiny new fanatic Space launch system and how it will do this that and the other thing....I ask a dude with an engineering dept something or other badge on, nASA employee no doubt,, who was walking around the Sat V center, why we, the tax payers, where spending so much money and effort to reinvent the wheel in the form if the SLS, which dispite claims otherwise, WILL NOT have near the thrust of the final version of the Sat V rocket...and wouldn't it just be better to break out the plans for it (on display in a room in the center) and put it back into production...since it had a perfect operational record?

His response...."Yep, I agree. Lots of us here in NASA agree too, but the bureaucracy must be fed!"....

That little statement summed up ALL government spending for me.

This new rifle, round, SAW...is just more of this....a waste.

For the Saturn 5, there are many reasons.

1. Metallurgy and production methods have improved substantially since the 1960s.
2. The tacit knowledge is gone. Just because you have the plans doesn't mean you can just waltz in and build it. There's a lot of information that wasn't or couldn't be written down.

Could it be done? Yes. Would it be worthwhile vs building new? Not really.

 

[eyeshot]

I get it for special teams, if they have the need and that's where it should stay. All for giving tools to people that have the ability to use them.

I remember Basics in the early seventies. The "all volunteer army" couldn't hit squat whether it was in their face much less 300 meters. I doubt the candidates of today are any better based on what I see walking around in public.

From some of the posts I read, it seems like re-barreling what we have, in 6.8 (or 6.5) would be a less costly solution if somebody just has to have this particular caliber. $20+ million for trials???

 

[conan32120]

steel base with brass body. And 80,000PSI?? Holy Moses! To push a 135gr .277” pill(So we’re not talking the best BC here.), 3000fps+. Like was said above, 270 Win ballistics. Oh, but at 80,000psi! barrel life would have to be horrible