Posted on 09/30/2016 10:12:02 AM PDT by Rio
Defense contractor Textron just unveiled a new rifle at the Modern Day Marine conference. Designed to use so-called "telescoped" ammunition, the new rifle promises a harder-hitting, lighter bullet for America's ground troops to fire. Whether the U.S. military is ready to embrace all the change a new rifle and ammunition would bring remains to be seen.
Traditional bullet cartridges have a bullet seated roughly halfway inside a brass shell casing, with gunpowder inside the casing. By contrast, the new rifle uses a 6.5-millimeter polymer-cased telescoped bullet. Telescoped rounds feature a bullet completely encased in a polymer shell, like a shotgun, with gunpowder surrounding the bullet in the shell. View photos
The result is a cartridge that doesn't use brass, a considerable savings in weight. According the Kit Up! blog, telescoped ammunition is about 40 percent lighter than traditional ammunition. Textron could have channeled this weight savings into making lighter ammunition, but instead it chose to make new ammunition that packs a bigger punch. The rifle-and 20 rounds of ammunition-weighs a total of 9.7 pounds. By contrast, the standard M4A1 (pictured above) and 30 rounds of ammunition weigh 8.74 pounds.
Textron claims the new 6.5-millimeter round has 300 percent more energy than the standard U.S. Army bullet, the M855A1. That translates into greater knockdown power against human targets, more armor penetration, and longer range. A heavier bullet and more energy would solve a persistent complaint about the U.S. Army's M4A1 carbine-that the smaller 5.56-millimeter bullet often requires multiple hits to incapacitate a target and it lacks the range to make accurate long-range shots. The latter has been a particular complaint in Afghanistan, where long-range engagements are common.
Textron's rifle is a gas-operated, piston-driven rifle that has many familiar features drawn from the M4A1, including a charging handle and gas block. It features military-standard rails for the attachment of devices such as flashlights and lasers, and what appears to be Advanced Armament Corporation flash hider. The front and rear sights, pistol grip, and buttstock are all from firearm accessory manufacturer Magpul.
Tellingly, the 20-round magazine is at least as long as a standard M4A1 30 round magazine. While a 30-round magazine may be possible, too long a magazine blocks the user from shooting while prone. In fact, it appears polymer-encased telescoped rounds are actually wider than brass rounds. While each round is lighter, it takes up more volume than its brass-encased peers.
If that's the case, then Textron's design choice is understandable-if you must carry fewer bullets anyway, you might as well make them hit harder. There are always compromises in small arms design, and the new rifle is no exception. Is losing a third of available ammo and adding three quarters of a pound to the rifle worth a 300 percent increase in bullet energy? Decisions, decisions.
Will the Army adopt the new rifle and ammunition? The U.S. Army is notoriously cheap when it comes to small arms, and institutional inertia is strong. The -A1 upgrade to standard M4 rifles is only a few years old and conversions are still taking place. We also don't know the cost of the rifle and-more importantly-the ammunition, which will be purchased and stockpiled in the billions.
Still, if Textron can build a rifle that is reliable and inexpensive, and if the Army accepts the design tradeoffs inherent in the telescoped design, it could be the first all-new rifle design fielded by the Army in 51 years.
My dad mentioned that Daisy way back developed a caseless BB round where the propellant was like the brass of a regular round and was consumed when fired. He forgot the reason it was discontinued.
I want.
Gyrojet reduex
Daisy VL .22 rifle case-less
KYCAD? (keep your caseless ammunition dry)
Patent document shows how it works...
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4691638.pdf
What keeps the round from flopping around in the barrel if it’s not engaged before the charge is ignited?
If so, that would be so cool!
We’d be better off just adopting the 6.5 Grendel round, which was purposely designed to fit into standard AR15/M16/M4 magazines, and uses the same bolt. All that would need to change is the barrel (and they wear out ANYWAY, so the change-out wouldn’t really necessitate any kind of big expenditure).
It hits WAY harder than the 5.56mm, retains more energy past 500 yards than the 7.62x51 (i.e. .308), and will be far more of a penetrator than either of the others (because it is a long, thin bullet). The Swedes have used a 6.5 mm bullet since before 1900...and ballistics hasn’t changed since then.
http://www.shootingtimes.com/ammo/6-5mm-grendel-the-round-the-military-ought-to-have/
http://www.alexanderarms.com/products/65-grendel
DAYUM.... They’ve got it in 40 watt now? Mine is a 25 watt, the bulb may be small but it can get hot after a while. Only problem is that bulbs are hard to come by, and I often have to borrow the one in my Daughter’s Easy Bake oven.
It’s a trade off. I can have delicious but extremely small pies, or send a phased plasma blast down range and evaporate targets. The pies are good.
Can I load that in my M1A and shoot safely?
Looks like it won’t properly seat the breach.
A BATF regulation is outlawing incandescent bulbs for energy efficient fluorescent, so better upgrade now.
You’ll need the XZ-3928 transformer too.
It’s great for family BBQs: one blast with mine and I can fry every chicken in the coop!
Dunno, not into shootery that much.
We’d be better off just adopting the 6.5 Grendel round, which was purposely designed to fit into standard AR15/M16/M4 magazines, and uses the same bolt. All that would need to change is the barrel (and they wear out ANYWAY, so the change-out wouldn’t really necessitate any kind of big expenditure).
...
Your post makes too much sense. Gotta keep the donors and cronies happy.
The Tiger Tanaka Ordnance Company has decades of experience with such technology.
Thought is sounded like what was old is new again.
“We’d be better off just adopting the 6.5 Grendel round, which was purposely designed to fit into standard AR15/M16/M4 magazines, and uses the same bolt. All that would need to change is the barrel (and they wear out ANYWAY, so the change-out wouldn’t really necessitate any kind of big expenditure).”
As a Grendel fan, I should point out a few things.
First, the Grendel’s muzzle velocity with a 123 gr bullet is around 2500 FPS. This round pushes it out the barrel at 3000 FPS. This should be good for 1200-1500 yard sniper use depending on conditions and bullet used.
Second, the Grendel’s short case body is problematic for belt feeding, where this looks like it’d be a slam dunk.
Finally, if the jump is going to be made to a piston system rifle, there’s no need for backwards compatibility with AR mag wells. Grendel mags are already different from 5.56 mags.
More info at:
https://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1913543
I have read the 6.5 Grendel chews up barrels, like about in 1000 rds. Don’t own one so I can’t say for sure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
