Army testing new 6.5 rifle

[Artful]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23094/this-experimental-army-rifle-uses-telescoped-ammunition/

New Experimental Army Rifle Uses "Telescoped" AmmunitionNew ammo technology allows for more powerful, compact bullets.

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.


http://pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/39/1475091330-ctammo.jpg

[*=center] (http://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a23094/this-experimental-army-rifle-uses-telescoped-ammunition/&media=http://pop.h-cdn.co/assets/16/39/1475091330-ctammo.jpg&description=New%20Experimental%20Army%20Rifle%20Us es%20%22Telescoped%22%20Ammunition%20%20-%20PopularMechanics.com)





Examples of traditional vs. case telescoped ammunition. US Army photo.



The result is a cartridge that doesn't use brass, a considerable savings in weight. According the Kit Up! blog (http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/textron-shows-off-new-6-5mm-case-telescoped-carbine.html), 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 (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjayaSv4rLPAhUPxmMKHcbDDkgQFggeMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FM4_car bine&usg=AFQjCNHTpA42EQN5oG3KrqN9-8N-d-Ms6g&sig2=ZZfDsdWGYc8gptHsuHe0Mw) 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 (http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2016armament/18325_Phillips.pdf) 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 (http://www.advanced-armament.com/BLACKOUT-51T-Flash-Hider_p_447.html). The front and rear sights, pistol grip, and buttstock are all from firearm accessory manufacturer Magpul (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiW-f_d47LPAhVBymMKHUaqAHUQFggeMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.magpul.com%2F&usg=AFQjCNEurfAUBQ2IgJzwxZCtIG-MDEMZVg&sig2=MlHp8P75bxaKmz6zRN_9Wg).


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 (http://www.firearmstalk.com/The-Army-goes-for-a-lighter-machine-gun-and-you-wont-believe-what-it-shoots-Firearms-Talk.html) 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.
Source: Kit Up! (http://kitup.military.com/2016/09/textron-shows-off-new-6-5mm-case-telescoped-carbine.html)

[376Steyr]

Digging into the source document: "Currently, the empty weight of the mock-up carbine is 8.7 pounds" and "Textron officials hope to have a working prototype to begin testing early next year, Cole said."

[Adam Helmer]

Artful,

This NEW 6.5 Rifle seems like more "Military Intelligence" gone astray. How many Billions of dollars will be squandered on this "Project?"

Adam

[Earlwb]

Well, they will have to overcome a lot of old inertia with the military over this. The military already has a lot of guns and the current ones are being upgraded, so they don't have the budget for it. But maybe the military would get some to play with though. It likely won't go anywhere for a long time, many years. So they have to persevere with this. Only a company with deep pockets could pull it off. I do see one problem in that their prototypes do not have a groove for the extraction of the spent casing. I doubt you could make a blowback operated high powered rifle like that.

A modernized M14 or AR10 in .308 would work. It would be good out to a thousand meters no problem. They could use carbon fiber, etc to reduce the rifle's weight. Maybe even go with plastic cases for the 7.62 Nato rounds too.

[JeffinNZ]

A 6.5mm cartridge. Discovering what the Swedes knew 100 years ago.

[MUSTANG]

Every few years; someone in the Defense Department resurects the "Plastic Case" for ammunition. Looks like more of the same. As Obi-Wan Cenobi said in the 1st Star Wars movie many years ago "Nothing to see here, move along".

[Ken in Iowa]

A 6.5mm cartridge. Discovering what the Swedes knew 100 years ago.

Exactly. It was more like 120 years though. :)

[Scharfschuetze]

The French led the way with elongated projectiles (Mine Bullets) and smokeless powder (Poudre B) and the Germans made us go with the spitzer projectile after they adopted it. I guess the US Military would like to be first with something.

Looks to me like those rounds could easily get loaded backwards under stress or in the dark, even with the visible and tactile ID ring at the front.

[OptimusPanda]

The old West German G11 rifle would be easier to get working and fielded than this.

[Scharfschuetze]

The old West German G11 rifle would be easier to get working and fielded than this.

I was thinking of mentioning that, but decided not to so I'm glad that you did. The G11, even with the full backing of German technology and lots of Deutschmarks didn't get very far after the design was finalized. Perhaps the end of the Cold War brought about its demise in 1990, but I was always suspicious of the technology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_G11

[Wayne Smith]

The French led the way with elongated projectiles (Mine Bullets) and smokeless powder (Poudre B) and the Germans made us go with the spitzer projectile after they adopted it. I guess the US Military would like to be first with something.

Looks to me like those rounds could easily get loaded backwards under stress or in the dark, even with the visible and tactile ID ring at the front.

I believe it was the Swiss that introduced the boat tail spitzer to the military - Germans copied them and we copied the Germans.

[3006guns]

My first thought......."Looks like the old Dardick 'tround', except it's cylindrical". And yes, it also looks like a real fumble fest in the dark or heat of battle. Not all good ideas are all that good in real life.

I also realized that my reloading technique has been wrong for over fifty years.........I should have been seating my bullets "roughly halfway into the brass shell casing".

No wonder I'm such a lousy shot...................:)

[Tackleberry41]

One of the issues with the old G11 caseless ammo was, the brass case helps remove some of the heat, you dont get that in a caseless or plastic ammo. Not so much an issue for most of us, but cook off becomes an issue with lots of sustained fire.

And we all know how this will turn out, they will squander several million in this research and in the end.....keep the M4 rifle and 5.56 ammo it uses. They just spent millions developing the latest ammo. The same issues keep coming up, the expense of replacing all the rifles and magazines. 50 yrs from now they will have some death ray attached to the M16A12.

[muskeg13]

A 6.5mm cartridge. Discovering what the Swedes knew 100 years ago.

and the Norwegians, Japanese, Portugese, Italians, Romanians, Greeks, Dutch and French!

[I'll Make Mine]

I see a potential very large problem in the illustration: the 7.62 CT and 6.5 CT look physically interchangeable. If you load the wrong rounds into the right magazine, very bad things could happen (if both rounds were to be adopted). Presumably, the US Army wouldn't make a mistake like that, but they've done some things over the years that didn't look much better in retrospect.

[Earlwb]

Well unlike the G11 and having it cook off rounds when hot, I think that the plastic cased 6.5mm round will melt in the chamber and get stuck.

[Good Cheer]

Going to 5.56 opened up the path to cycling all the way back up in bore size, one improvement after another.
If I lived another hundred years maybe I'd get to read the reviews on the caseless recoiless 20mm's. :drinks:

[reivertom]

Why don't they just use one of the tried and true 6.5 or 6.8 rounds that are based on the 5.56, and save millions that they could use to convert the current rifles? What am I thinking...this is the Federal Government....that makes WAAAYYY too much sense.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

US smallarms procurement seems to work like British government, alternating to left and right of the decade-to-decade style we want. That works with progressive changes in society, but in this case there is going to be a week when every soldier in sight has something new in his hand.

They seem to have about caught up with the 1895 Navy Lee. It may be that the polymer case is self-consuming, which would limit it to gas operation. As to heating, it is the rounds which miss that heat up a barrel, or all engagements would be won and lost at once. It could even be that improved gas systems have permitted lightening the bolt to the extent that it can fire with an open bolt. Or perhaps most of the chamber is in the bolt, and that groove is for extraction. That might even permit changes of bolts to substitute for the changing of barrels.

It seems inconceivable that a rifle or machine-gun could work on the split-chamber principle of the Dardick system. Those rounds were of non-consumable plastic, probably nylon, and of rounded triangular outside cross-section. One side matched the inside of a large cylinder, and the other two the recesses in a rotor which was fed from a box-magazine. It was made in .38 ad .22, the latter with ordinary rimfire cartridges inserted in the Dardick triangular... er... thing. The system is such a natural for submachine-guns at the very least, that I think it must have been found unworkable at pressures equallying the 9mm. Luger round.

I think the cylindrical shape would lend itself to box-magazines which turn a corner from the horizontal, like the Krag, or something like the MG42 saddle drum. It may be that the intention is to supply the round only in magazines, or in disposable chargers which will only fit the magazine the right way around.

[17nut]

Noone stumbled upon the 300% increase in energy thing?
Well the 5.56 SS109 does 1300ftlbs according to Wiki.
So thats 3900ftlbs for a 6.5, going with the swedes 160gr that means a V0 of 3315fts.
Well theres a first for everything and even the good old Swedes didnt do better than 2560fts in their Mauser, and that from a looong barrel.

So its a 26 Nosler on steroids (more like a 6.5-378 Weatherby) in polymer cases from a carbine length barrel, that'll be the day!!!

[Scharfschuetze]

I believe it was the Swiss that introduced the boat tail spitzer to the military - Germans copied them and we copied the Germans.

I'm not sure about the exact order of the Spitzer, but I do know that the US Government had to pay a couple of hundred thousand dollars to the German firm of DWM for patent infringements on the Spitzer design. Those payments were made after the Great War so the US ended up paying the Germans for shooting German designed bullets at Germans. Go figure!

Those Spitzer payments were in addition to payments to Mauser for charger design patent problems.

[Scharfschuetze]

Dardick triangular... er... thing.

As I recall, the round or cartridge was called a "Tround." Most of the shooting magazines had articles about the weapon when it was introduced. Even at a young age, I was rather underwhelmed with the idea.

Another weapon that made a splash about the same time as the Dardick was the Gyroget. It was actually a small rocket fired from a handgun and if memory serves, a carbine too.

Both died fast and total deaths. Wonder if that's in store for the new army ammo.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I thought that was a round figure rounded for the general public. Higher than present velocities would also carry a heavy penalty in barrel life, the way military weapons are designed and used nowadays.

[Earlwb]

The Gyrojet gun failed because it had poor accuracy. it actually worked really well. But the little bullet rockets tended to go all over the place. There was no way to get the rocket thrust to be stable and keep the little bullets on course.

[Scharfschuetze]

The Gyrojet gun failed because it had poor accuracy. it actually worked really well. But the little bullet rockets tended to go all over the place. There was no way to get the rocket thrust to be stable and keep the little bullets on course.

Yes, they used angled rocket vents or ports to rotate the rocket. The rockets did not have enough thrust to force the projectile through conventional rifling. Unfortunately for the concept, acceleration was rather slow, so the little rockets were unstable until they hit their full velocity and rotational spin somewhere downrange.

[Idaho Sharpshooter]

50 years ago Popular Mechanics had us all flying around in personal VTOL aircraft that got 400 mpg in 5 years...

They do not deal with reality very often, or very well.

[fiberoptik]

50 years ago Popular Mechanics had us all flying around in personal VTOL aircraft that got 400 mpg in 5 years...

They do not deal with reality very often, or very well.

Neither does our Government or military....(from a disabled Marine)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ballistics in Scotland]

50 years ago Popular Mechanics had us all flying around in personal VTOL aircraft that got 400 mpg in 5 years...

They do not deal with reality very often, or very well.

The limited accuracy was something many would have considered acceptable for massive power in a light, flat pistol with minimal recoil. The other well documented snag was that like any other rocket it had to accelerate once it was in motion. It could be very powerful at medium range, but administer very little more than a sharp poke at the muzzle, which does happen sometimes in self-defence. I don't believe there is anything in international law against hitting someone with an unexpended rocket propellant, which with the Gyrojet was extremely momentary. But it might still have made surrender awkward.

"Popular Mechanics" gets it right quite a bit of the time. An eBay standing search, after blank years, got me Major Bagnold's desert exploration and sun compass in the 1930s. (He was the first commander of the WW2 Long Range Desert Groups, and lived to become a genuine scientist and consultant to NASA on the sands of Mars.)

In WW1 Churchill's Land Ships Committee were getting nowhere with ideas like Pedrail flapped wheels, and making their whole tank into one gigantic wheel. Then somebody went around the bookshops in Charing Cross Road (where the movie "84 Charing Cross Road" was set), and found an old copy with details of the American caterpillar tractors. Col. REB Crompton, who had been in trenches in the Crimea in 1854 and in 1878 founded the company whose name is on my lathe and milling machine motors, said "I know where we can get one. I've seen it working in the Rotherhithe marshes."

Science would discover a lot less if it had to be right all the time.

[Driver man]

I think that if the true exploits of Waverly and Bagnolds were fully known the history of the North African theatre of war would have to be rewritten

[Kevin Rohrer]

The Army definitely needs something more powerful than the anemic 5.56. Why not just go with a product-improved M1A?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I think that if the true exploits of Waverly and Bagnolds were fully known the history of the North African theatre of war would have to be rewritten

Well, up to a point... Bagnold's exploits as an explorer, certainly. But while he was superseded as commander of the Long Range Desert Groups for genuine health groups, I don't think he had quite the right piratical instincts for that job. Colonel Peniakoff did, despite originally having been rejected by all three British services for age, waistline, blood pressure and neutrality. There is a famous photograph of Popski driving his jeep around St. Mark's Square in Venice (you might have to think about that for a moment), with the split hook which had replaced his hand less than a year earlier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popski%27s_Private_Army

Popski considered the LRDG far superior to the SAS at that time and that style of warfare. The only known picture of the issue sun compass in use is on one of their trucks, and although very laid-back and macho they look, the compass is back to front.

In the late 70s I was stranded for a few hours in the old airport of Amman in Jordan, and went to buy some fruit in a corner shop outside. The shopkeeper started talking to me about the Scottish regiments of the British army, ending up with "The Buffs, English but not bad. Their march was written by Handel!" It emerged that he had been chosen for the Transjordanian Long Range Desert Group, but Rommel was out of the desert business before they completed training.

[Tackleberry41]

I wonder if the gyrojet round would work better now than it did back then? Back then it was probably at the edge of technology, could probably do way better today and actually make them work.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I wonder if the gyrojet round would work better now than it did back then? Back then it was probably at the edge of technology, could probably do way better today and actually make them work.

Accuracy, possibly. Fin-stabilized projectiles have been well tested since then in artillery, and I think they would be more consistent than angled jets. Also the Gyrojet missiles don't look unduly long, and there is no compelling reason why a rocket can't be stabilized by rifling. Base-bleed shells, to reduce drag, are part-way there already.

It is the lack of velocity at the muzzle that I think would be an irresoluble problem.

[runfiverun]

if the entire case was consumed when the round was fired they could get enough gas volume to blow a fireball about 8' in front of the barrel.
I seriously doubt the government wants another round they have the 6.8 spc and the 6.5 Grendel which were both developed for the upgrade in ammo the troops want.
they could also just go to the 300 BO with 120gr bullets.
it's not like they couldn't just do something right now and have what they want in field tested and proven rounds.

[Tackleberry41]

Accuracy, possibly. Fin-stabilized projectiles have been well tested since then in artillery, and I think they would be more consistent than angled jets. Also the Gyrojet missiles don't look unduly long, and there is no compelling reason why a rocket can't be stabilized by rifling. Base-bleed shells, to reduce drag, are part-way there already.

It is the lack of velocity at the muzzle that I think would be an irresoluble problem.

I would imagine technology has come along enough that most issues could be resolved. Carbon fiber was near magic when the gyrojet was being made. Cad and machine tech has changed alot. Some sort of pop out fins or even get the angled ports right. Muzzle velocity would generally remain an issue. With the angle jets, it requires a sustained burn to spin, so a slow steady acceleration would remain. A rocket launcher is basically blasted out of the tube, with no residual acceleration. But would have considerable recoil without a backblast.

Funny how it works, somebody tries an idea like the gyrojet, doesnt work at the time due to the limits of available technology, but is rarely ever tried again as 'it was tried and failed before'. Not sure about those old trounds, was it just lack of sales, didn't work good? I remember those plastic cased rounds at one time, but weren't around long.

[fiberoptik]

if the entire case was consumed when the round was fired they could get enough gas volume to blow a fireball about 8' in front of the barrel.
I seriously doubt the government wants another round they have the 6.8 spc and the 6.5 Grendel which were both developed for the upgrade in ammo the troops want.
they could also just go to the 300 BO with 120gr bullets.
it's not like they couldn't just do something right now and have what they want in field tested and proven rounds.

But why waste $$ when Marines are so cheap.....! Feel the ❤️ love!
Semper Fi!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fatnhappy]

A 6.5mm cartridge. Discovering what the Swedes knew 100 years ago.

Spot on. Military Intelligence in full display here. They're reinventing one of the best rifle cartridges ever developed, which withered on the vine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British

[fiberoptik]

"Military Intelligence" = Oxymoron! Seven years in the Corps I never saw any! It was, "There's the right way, the wrong way, & the Marine Corps way!" I always took the right way, to my detriment of course! Had a permanent bullseye on my back! Punished repeatedly for doing the right things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Scharfschuetze]

Spot on. Military Intelligence in full display here. They're reinventing one of the best rifle cartridges ever developed, which withered on the vine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British

An American 7mm round actually preceded the 280 British and would have had similar ballistics. In fact, the .276 Pedersen was John Garand's chosen round for the M1 rifle, but General of the Army MacArthur, due to millions of left over 30/06 rounds from WWI, nixed it and made Garand redesign the M1 for the Ought-Six. That's why the M1 uses an 8 shot clip and not the original 10 shot clip envisioned by John Garand using the .276.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.276_Pedersen

[bruce drake]

An American 7mm round actually preceded the 280 British and would have had similar ballistics. In fact, the .276 Pedersen was John Garand's chosen round for the M1 rifle, but General of the Army MacArthur, due to millions of left over 30/06 rounds from WWI, nixed it and made Garand redesign the M1 for the Ought-Six. That's why the M1 uses an 8 shot clip and not the original 10 shot clip envisioned by John Garand using the .276.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.276_Pedersen

And one of the main reasons I decided that converting my M1 Garand to 7x57 would be okay with the big guy upstairs as it was the original bullet size desired by the designer.

[fatnhappy]

An American 7mm round actually preceded the 280 British and would have had similar ballistics. In fact, the .276 Pedersen was John Garand's chosen round for the M1 rifle, but General of the Army MacArthur, due to millions of left over 30/06 rounds from WWI, nixed it and made Garand redesign the M1 for the Ought-Six. That's why the M1 uses an 8 shot clip and not the original 10 shot clip envisioned by John Garand using the .276.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.276_Pedersen

Yeah, I'm well aware of the .276 pedersen. To be fair, I think MacArthur made the correct decision based on the economic realities of his time as Chief of Staff. The wholesale change over of weapons and arsenal retooling simply weren't in the cards during the Great Depression.

The interesting thing about the .280 british and .270 british is the timing. Post WWII was the right time. The great pain felt by the arsenal of democracy producing, and logistics of delivering, munitions to multiple nations fighting alongside each other on the same lines left a distinct impression on Eisenhower about the value of creating a NATO standard. America was willing to rearsenal and the M1 Garand was so valuable it's few weaknesses were under intense scrutiny.

The British were far ahead of us in post war cartridge development but essentially we simply refused to seriously consider a non- 30 cal replacement. Since America was over half the world's manufacturing capacity the matter was settled before it even began