collapse

Advertisement


Author Topic: Search for a new military caliber article  (Read 5738 times)

Offline WoodlandShooter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Sourdough
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 1024
  • Location: neither here nor there
  • Groups: P.H.U.
Re: Search for a new military caliber article
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2015, 02:44:25 PM »
also, dont forget that a 45ACP basicly has 500 foot pounds at the muzzle...and Type II body armor will shield from that...yes, it will hurt, but they will "eventually" walk away.

this is a case where you dont want the guy getting up and getting back in the fight. Taliwackers dont care if their buddy gets hit, so sucking up resources by wounding his buddy is not a strategy to use. Bring a BIG STICK!!



Offline Special T

  • Truth the new Hate Speech.
  • Business Sponsor
  • Trade Count: (+13)
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2009
  • Posts: 25034
  • Location: Skagit Valley
  • Make it Rain!
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
    • Silver Arrow Bowmen
Re: Search for a new military caliber article
« Reply #16 on: November 07, 2015, 10:02:19 AM »
Thought Id revive this thread. I had a good visit with a buddy of mine that was once a supply guy for the army and brought up this topic. He had read many of the reports on this discussion (on the military side) and really like the 6.5. He said no matter how good a round it is it wont change, and if it did it would take a really long time. He said when he went to Sand Land they were shooting ammo that was made in the 80's. Tank/APC ammo was made in early 90's. As he saw the issue there are 2 problems that are EXTREMELY costly both having NOTHING to do with the round itself of how good/bad easily convertible it is.
    1 The US military is deeply financially invested in the division ammo in the 3 categories. Light 556 Med7.62 heavy 50cal. There are BILLIONS of dollars invested in ammo stocks staged all across the world. If you were to change up the standard the cost would be dramatic because of the depth of supply holdings the US has. The supply is a buffer against production problems and is available in a NEED ASAP situation... Just think Gulf war.
     2 Besides the cost supply distribution would be a nightmare. All NATO participants have interchangeable ammo for a reason. Ammo is the first priority for warfare so taking away this standard exchange away does away with most of the benefit of a caliber change. Joint operations with other NATO members become much more complex with out standard ammo and other nato countries likely have low interest in changing calibers. It would likely be more expensive for them because it may be more expensive for the conversion of arms than our M4/M16.
In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself. 

Confucius

 


* Advertisement

* Recent Topics

Boat registration by Pnwrider
[Today at 09:45:59 PM]


Bear behavior by jamesjett
[Today at 09:44:15 PM]


Norway Pass Archery Elk 2025 by Boss .300 winmag
[Today at 09:14:45 PM]


Entiat Quality tag by WAcoueshunter
[Today at 09:05:06 PM]


Idaho 2025 Controlled Hunts by JDArms1240
[Today at 09:03:40 PM]


Palouse/Mica (GMU 127) Access for Trades Work by dr.derek
[Today at 08:29:53 PM]


Pearygin Quality by MADMAX
[Today at 07:55:09 PM]


Teanaway bull elk by Caveman123
[Today at 07:43:44 PM]


Oregon results posted. by Caveman123
[Today at 07:40:47 PM]


2025 Draw Results by Yeti419
[Today at 07:27:32 PM]


Mudflow Archery by Yeti419
[Today at 07:26:25 PM]


Cowiche Quality Buck by dilleytech
[Today at 07:14:35 PM]


Rehome for GWP by Feathernfurr
[Today at 06:43:07 PM]


Vashon Island deer tag by bowhunter_1
[Today at 04:32:43 PM]

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal