So this is the new military cartridge. Case looks fairly small so it looks like it would be similar power to the 6.8 SPC.

Company is in Garland, TX so that is cool.


https://www.truevelocityinc.com/media-center/us-army-selection-for-ngsw/

I don't understand the odd shape at the shoulder. Their other cartridges appear to have normal contours. Anyone know why? Is this the actual shape of the chamber?

Article on TFB suggested the weak link in polymer cases is the neck on traditional cartridges.

Why am I reading that Sig won the contract. Articles dated 9/3/19. Am I missing something ?

Sig won the ammo contract?

https://www.militarytimes.com/test-...ted-by-army-for-next-generation-weapons/

You tube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTtKblRY1qs

Says Sig has own ammo as part of it. Some type of hybrid brass/steel

I have no idea. Just what I read

That is crazy. I guess everything is fake news nowadays.

As I understand it , the competition has been down selected to 3 contractors: Sig, General Dynamics and another. True velocity is part of the GD team. Each of the three have been awarded a contract to create the prototypes of the weapons systems and ammunition, they proposed, for testing and evaluation. Once all 3 "solutions" are evaluated a selection will occur. A lot of minor details and possibilities have been left out but based on what I've been reading that is where it is at.

^^ Correct. I've been talking to the guys at TV who are working on it. I have also been supplying them powders to test with in their various rounds they are using. TV is part of the General Dynamics team/group. TV also supplies the 308 ammo for the Dillon Aero gun, aka Mini gun. Their facility is freakin' cool, too! They are fully redesigning the weapon platform. It's no longer an AR-15 or an AR-10. It's a full new platform geared around this new 6.8 round. The science behind the polymer case and the velocity and pressures you get from it are much better than any brass cased ammo can offer. When you fire a round with a brass case, heat is transferred to the brass and to the chamber (about 30% of the powder's energy). The newer polymer cases do not transfer heat, therefore more of the powder is being used to propel the bullet. The velocities are much higher.

Good info Chad.

I saw a pic of Sig's 6.8 Hybrid. Looks like a 308 with a blown out shoulder. Should be much closer to the 270 Win than the 6.8 spc in performance.

That will be too much recoil for the average soldier to endure.

I was thinking the same thing. They call it 6.8x51. The article on the Sig ammunition didn't mention bullet weight but they said 2800 FPS from a 13" barrel and 3000 fps from a 16" barrel. I'm a little shocked they didn't submit more of a gap caliber closer to the 6.8 SPC in power.

The whole point of changing everything is to find a weapon system that could defeat body armor of a near peer with ammo light enough that a regular grunt private can hump a full combat load. 6.8 SPC won't cut it. Something like a .270 shooting some form of a SLAP round will get er done.

Thats why the 6.8 beat the 6.5. It's not a dniper rifle nor a machine gun. It's a standard infantry battle rifle.

I think they are in the right track. This is very exciting!

It should only take one round to put someone down with 270 like performance.

You might be surprized with the ceramic plates combined with soft body armor, just how much it takes to literally do anything to a human. But with a SLAP round or etc, it will surely perforate the first layer of armor and the torso out to a pretty good distance. Or for the long range TICs in AFG with standard ball a game changer for sure.

If it is the one I read about on another site the bullets for the velocity sec are 110 gr

Doesn't the Geneva convention prevent us from using anything other than ball ammo on soft targets?

Geneva convention does but with the countries that signed up to the convention. On deployments against non convention foes, I know some of our forces alternate hollow point and ball ammo in the mags.

Depends on the rifle design. The military is trending towards wider use of suppressors and/or muzzle brakes. The SCAR 17 comes with a very effective brake. Some suppressor designs are effective at recoil dampening. Different rifle designs can dampen recoil very effectively. Sounds like they are on track to build a very good rifle. Hopefully the politicians stay away and do not mess it up.

The SCAR 17 has unbelievably mild recoil. My Galil ACE 7.62x51 is pretty mild as well, it has a big brake on it.

The M1 Rifle doesn’t recoil that bad, but some would have you believe it will dislocate shoulders.

Weight is a different issue, and I can see the merit in a lighter rifle with lighter ammo.

I am familiar with that but it is not that simple.

For starters, we repelled ISIS attackers with M2's shooting .50 cal SLAP and API. Used white and red phos mortars too.

So technically all five of those are against geneva convention.

Most long tab dudes I have seen In the rear carry gold dots in their sidearms. Out in the valley they usually have ball. They are not engaging in combat per se in the rear, that sidearm is there pretty much to stop green on blue threat. I believe it can be justified as purely a defensive round.

I believe it also has to do with repelling an attacker in a counterinsurgency, where you are working WITH the government instead of fighting them on their ground. I think ISIS doesn't get protection under geneva convention.

I don't know I might be shooting my mouth off and sharing more than I should. I am guilty of that much already without discussing anything military related hehe

But if we fought a near peer, i.e. Russia or China or even North Korea, the ammo is gonna change.

Technically the M855A1 round is a lead free "ballistic tip" type of round even though we call it ball. The eay it is designed it comes apart in soft targets. The jacket shreds andthe core and penetrator go in different dorections. It is not much like the standard M855

Here is a screenshot of an image i found to illustrate the difference between M855 and M855A1. We have been issued the A1 round downrange since 2015 at least that I know of and probably before that. Near the end of my time in the Army we had mostly depleted stores of the standard M855 and were even training exlusively with the A1 when live ammo was used.

The two bullets both weigh 62 grains and shoot about the same velocity, similar trajectory, etc. If you zero with one, you will have to re zero with the other. But if you can't, it will still be "close enough for combat".

Anyway as you can see, the A1 round has a larger hardened steel penetrator and it is exposed much like a polymer tip. Also the jacket is reverse drawn, and the core is copper. The jacket is actually gilding metal not copper. The penetrator is twice as heavy as the A1 roundd but in my own experience standard M855 ball round penetrates hard targets better. The A1 round comes apart readily and relies more on the mass of the penetrator alone to do it's job.

I believe the deal with the .50 cal and the different rounds also has to do with preparing for the worst.

If they have any type of motorised vehicle the obvious answer is to load the guns with API. That could disable a VBIED or a technical truck with one well placed shot, maybe not stop it outright though. But a couple of bursts will rip the engine compartment apart inside.

So if some dudes want to monkey around with you in the valley do you think grunts in the turret be like "oh wait let me reload this entire ammo can with standard ball ammo and then I can return fire".