• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Army's new machine gun will blast like battle tanks

American

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,099
Reaction score
33,416
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Army's new machine gun will blast like battle tanks | Fox News

The Army’s new weapon will look like a light machine gun, but will put M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank-style blasting power literally at the fingertips of U.S. soldiers.


The new light machine gun will weigh less — and yet shoot farther. It should make U.S. soldiers even more lethal and enhance their speed and mobility while improving their safety in future combat.
The Next Generation Squad Automatic Rifle (NGSAR) may replace about 80,000 SAWs (the M249 squad automatic weapon). The well-known and loved M249 SAWs were already beasts — now the Army’s light machine gun is going to get even more powerful.

Armed with the NGSARs, soldiers will have the confidence of knowing the new weapon can be relied on for stopping power against sophisticated adversaries who arrive to fight in advanced body armor.
Click to expand...
Penetration of body armor would be a good reason to upgrade.
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't know if they really understood the pressure issue they were talking about and comparing a centerfire rifle cartridge to the shell from a MBT gun seemed rather specious to me
Click to expand...

I don't think they were talking about the main gun of a MBT, but rather the standard MBT's APW. I would hope. Putting that type firepower in a lighter weight unmounted SAW.
 
I hadn't even heard of this new development before and it seems like a ****ing pipe dream, to be honest. The military has tried to replace the M4 and the SAW so many times that I'll only believe it when I see it.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the penetration ability of the 5.56 is not at question nowadays because the new EPR rounds can actually defeat our own ESAPI plates. What would make sense would be fore the Army to follow in the Marine Corps' footsteps and adopt the IAR as a SAW replacement.

Idk what do I know though I'm just a dumb grunt.
 
I'll take 3...floor model is fine.
 
StillBallin75 said:
I hadn't even heard of this new development before and it seems like a ****ing pipe dream, to be honest. The military has tried to replace the M4 and the SAW so many times that I'll only believe it when I see it.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the penetration ability of the 5.56 is not at question nowadays because the new EPR rounds can actually defeat our own ESAPI plates. What would make sense would be fore the Army to follow in the Marine Corps' footsteps and adopt the IAR as a SAW replacement.

Idk what do I know though I'm just a dumb grunt.
Click to expand...

I agree. Bigger is not necessarily better for the infantry. They are going to experiment using a 7.62 round at first. How is this better than the M60 in terms of penetrating body armor?
 
I'm a little confused about the caliber, etc. Of the round. They're looking for something between the 5.56 and 7.62?
 
Not so many years ago it was all about caseless ammunition, and then about having larger calibers than the opposition with big ol'.408 machine guns (maybe even .458?) and then it was modular designs like the SCAR, and now it's apparently rifle caliber discarding sabots (I don't think for the first time).

If if they are claiming lighter ammo, they're probably working some caseless or plastic cased angle again.

I'm all for R&D, and I want our guys armed better than the opposition, but they've been tinkering with new designs for a couple decades now. Philosophies are evolving faster than the threats!

Aren't machineguns less useful than they used to be anyhow? I'm sure they have their place, but with all the other weapons in the arsenal and our focus on standoff firepower, it seems like their battlefield utility has peaked.
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't know if they really understood the pressure issue they were talking about and comparing a centerfire rifle cartridge to the shell from a MBT gun seemed rather specious to me
Click to expand...

From the sound of things they're looking to push something in the vicinity of a 180gr round out of a 28" barrel in front of 50,000 psi or thereabouts. I'm not sure what kind of muzzle velocity that would generate but, crunching some quick numbers, if you could get that round to something like 4500fps you'd be, by my calculation, generating over 8k foot pounds at the muzzle. That should go through a watermelon at 100 yards no problem.:lol:
 
vegas giants said:
I agree. Bigger is not necessarily better for the infantry. They are going to experiment using a 7.62 round at first. How is this better than the M60 in terms of penetrating body armor?
Click to expand...

We use the 240 nowadays, not the pig, but you're right. In my view the issue with the SAW is not penetration ability or range, so this project appears to me to be another attempt by the DoD to throw money at a contractor in order to solve a nonexistent problem and the project will probably never even be fielded.
 
Lutherf said:
From the sound of things they're looking to push something in the vicinity of a 180gr round out of a 28" barrel in front of 50,000 psi or thereabouts. I'm not sure what kind of muzzle velocity that would generate but, crunching some quick numbers, if you could get that round to something like 4500fps you'd be, by my calculation, generating over 8k foot pounds at the muzzle. That should go through a watermelon at 100 yards no problem.:lol:
Click to expand...

Actually, I just looked some stuff up (I'm not a reloader) and current .308 Winchester seems to push over 60k psi as it is. If that's the case then I really don't know what they're trying to do.
 
e
vegas giants said:
I agree. Bigger is not necessarily better for the infantry. They are going to experiment using a 7.62 round at first. How is this better than the M60 in terms of penetrating body armor?
Click to expand...

I believe it would have to be in the design of the ammo.

Discarding sabot, some exotic design like those bullets that are supposed to behave differently depending on what they hit. Maybe some sort of some crazy HEAT-type round, though I wouldn't want to be the one testing that with high chamber pressure. Expensive.


humbolt said:
I'm a little confused about the caliber, etc. Of the round. They're looking for something between the 5.56 and 7.62?
Click to expand...

They've had that for a while now in the 6.8 SPC. It's supposed to be the best of both world's in terms of range\effect, though I don't think it caught on.
 
WillyPete said:
e

I believe it would have to be in the design of the ammo.

Discarding sabot, some exotic design like those bullets that are supposed to behave differently depending on what they hit. Maybe some sort of some crazy HEAT-type round, though I wouldn't want to be the one testing that with high chamber pressure. Expensive.




They've had that for a while now in the 6.8 SPC. It's supposed to be the best of both world's in terms of range\effect, though I don't think it caught on.
Click to expand...

I'm happy to let the ballistic wizards figure it out. I'm not smart enough. There are practical physical limits to conventional ammunition, so it should be interesting to see what they come up with.
 
humbolt said:
I'm happy to let the ballistic wizards figure it out. I'm not smart enough. There are practical physical limits to conventional ammunition, so it should be interesting to see what they come up with.
Click to expand...

Can't argue. That stuff's over my head, too. I get the sense that there's a lot of waste involved in all these effort though, and it seems like a handful of really excellent weapons that never really get out of the workshop.

I recall they had an air bursting 25mm grenade launcher that you could control pretty much exactly where it would explode in mid-air, so you could kill guys behind cover or consistently clear a whole room with one shot, and I guess they just left it on the shelf after the assault rifle they wanted to pair it with fizzled.

Metalstorm also had promise, and it just vanished, seems like.

Thread's triggered my weapon obsession for the first time in a while!
 
WillyPete said:
Can't argue. That stuff's over my head, too. I get the sense that there's a lot of waste involved in all these effort though, and it seems like a handful of really excellent weapons that never really get out of the workshop.

I recall they had an air bursting 25mm grenade launcher that you could control pretty much exactly where it would explode in mid-air, so you could kill guys behind cover or consistently clear a whole room with one shot, and I guess they just left it on the shelf after the assault rifle they wanted to pair it with fizzled.

Metalstorm also had promise, and it just vanished, seems like.

Thread's triggered my weapon obsession for the first time in a while!
Click to expand...

Yeah. I get a hankering for a Fn 5.7 every once in a while. I surely don't need one. It's information like this that makes me think of it. Truthfully, I have way more than any three people would need already.
 
TurtleDude said:
I don't know if they really understood the pressure issue they were talking about and comparing a centerfire rifle cartridge to the shell from a MBT gun seemed rather specious to me
Click to expand...

Well, let them have a little fun with their "fishin'" story. :lol:
 
main-qimg-edbed89dc39ba2af0dfb17792b9ded86


Army's new machine gun will blast like battle tanks
Click to expand...

Wait a minute....say what? A machine gun that packs the power of an M1 tank? Oh, BS!

From the article:
The Army’s new weapon will look like a light machine gun, but will put M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank-style blasting power literally at the fingertips of U.S. soldiers.
Click to expand...

What? Ah, no. Just no! Neither it nor any other handheld gun will put the blasting power a tank at anyone's fingertips and one'd have to be a complete idiot to think it will.

​


What's my idea of M1/"main battle tank-style blasting?" Um....among other things:
  • It blows up or blows "really big holes" in stuff like other tanks, buildings and bunkers anywhere from 2.5 to 5 miles away.
  • Body armor is not a factor in whether a direct hit will destroy the target one hits.
That woman is talking about how this new weapon, the NGSAR, will "hit hard at 600 meters" and penetrate the new body armor that is expected to be worn by units of armies we almost certainly won't be fighting.
(I mean, really. The narrator said that Russia and China will equip its units with the new body armor. Well, I'm quite sure that whatever contretemps in which we engage with either nation, nobody -- not them and not us -- is of a mind to let it escalate to actual war with bombs and bullets.)
​

There's a new weapon coming to replace the SAW. Great. It's more powerful than the SAW. Great. Tout the thing and make folks feel good about the fact that our guys will have it. That's fine too. But come the "F" on; describe it as what it is -- a "badass" machine gun -- but don't describe it as or allude to it being what it is not -- a machine gun having the blasting power of an M1 battle tank (or any other battle tank, for that matter).


Why does Fox have to oversell the damn thing like they do?

And let me be clear. Fox's (and the OP-er's) gratuitously doing so doesn't take away from the coolness of the gun; the thing is plenty cool all by itself. It doesn't need a sensationalized headline. Fox's gratuitously histrionic and hyperbolic headline diminishes Fox's credibility as serious reporter of news and information.
 
WillyPete said:
e

I believe it would have to be in the design of the ammo.

Discarding sabot, some exotic design like those bullets that are supposed to behave differently depending on what they hit. Maybe some sort of some crazy HEAT-type round, though I wouldn't want to be the one testing that with high chamber pressure. Expensive.




They've had that for a while now in the 6.8 SPC. It's supposed to be the best of both world's in terms of range\effect, though I don't think it caught on.
Click to expand...

6.5 Creedmoor also seems to be hyped these days as the next intermediate cartridge.
 
humbolt said:
Yeah. I get a hankering for a Fn 5.7 every once in a while. I surely don't need one. It's information like this that makes me think of it. Truthfully, I have way more than any three people would need already.
Click to expand...
Ive shot the 5x7...I like it...but I went with the Keltec PMR30 instead. And as much as I love the PMR30 (I have 3 of them and I also have the companion CMR30), I still keep finding myself looking at the FNs....
 
humbolt said:
Yeah. I get a hankering for a Fn 5.7 every once in a while. I surely don't need one. It's information like this that makes me think of it. Truthfully, I have way more than any three people would need already.
Click to expand...

Love the P90! I'd heard that it was originally meant as a compact defensive weapon, but that the special forces guys snapped them right up.

Supposedly a lighter recoil than a 9mm pistol and yet better penetration. Talk about a ballistic puzzle!
 
StillBallin75 said:
I hadn't even heard of this new development before and it seems like a ****ing pipe dream, to be honest. The military has tried to replace the M4 and the SAW so many times that I'll only believe it when I see it.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, the penetration ability of the 5.56 is not at question nowadays because the new EPR rounds can actually defeat our own ESAPI plates. (B)What would make sense would be fore the Army to follow in the Marine Corps' footsteps and adopt the IAR as a SAW replacement.(/B)

Idk what do I know though I'm just a dumb grunt.
Click to expand...
Can't say I agree with this. Giving up the ability to put down sustained fire like you have with the 249 and it's 200 round drum and changeable barrel for what is little more then a more accurate M4 is just not an idea I can agree with. Also worth the out an improved marksmanship program the extra range of the IAR is wasted.
 
Lutherf said:
From the sound of things they're looking to push something in the vicinity of a 180gr round out of a 28" barrel in front of 50,000 psi or thereabouts. I'm not sure what kind of muzzle velocity that would generate but, crunching some quick numbers, if you could get that round to something like 4500fps you'd be, by my calculation, generating over 8k foot pounds at the muzzle. That should go through a watermelon at 100 yards no problem.:lol:
Click to expand...

There is a decent amount of talk of a machine gun chambered in 6.5 Creedmore. SOCOM is going with that round for our new sniper rifle so it makes some sense

We shall see
 
Xelor said:
main-qimg-edbed89dc39ba2af0dfb17792b9ded86




Wait a minute....say what? A machine gun that packs the power of an M1 tank? Oh, BS!

From the article:
​

What? Ah, no. Just no! Neither it nor any other handheld gun will put the blasting power a tank at anyone's fingertips and one'd have to be a complete idiot to think it will.

​


What's my idea of M1/"main battle tank-style blasting?" Um....among other things:
  • It blows up or blows "really big holes" in stuff like other tanks, buildings and bunkers anywhere from 2.5 to 5 miles away.
  • Body armor is not a factor in whether a direct hit will destroy the target one hits.
That woman is talking about how this new weapon, the NGSAR, will "hit hard at 600 meters" and penetrate the new body armor that is expected to be worn by units of armies we almost certainly won't be fighting.
(I mean, really. The narrator said that Russia and China will equip its units with the new body armor. Well, I'm quite sure that whatever contretemps in which we engage with either nation, nobody -- not them and not us -- is of a mind to let it escalate to actual war with bombs and bullets.)
​

There's a new weapon coming to replace the SAW. Great. It's more powerful than the SAW. Great. Tout the thing and make folks feel good about the fact that our guys will have it. That's fine too. But come the "F" on; describe it as what it is -- a "badass" machine gun -- but don't describe it as or allude to it being what it is not -- a machine gun having the blasting power of an M1 battle tank (or any other battle tank, for that matter).


Why does Fox have to oversell the damn thing like they do?

And let me be clear. Fox's (and the OP-er's) gratuitously doing so doesn't take away from the coolness of the gun; the thing is plenty cool all by itself. It doesn't need a sensationalized headline. Fox's gratuitously histrionic and hyperbolic headline diminishes Fox's credibility as serious reporter of news and information.
Click to expand...


The Fox article was poorly worded and a bit overblown; I think this is more about comparable chamber pressure than effecting the same actual end state damage on the receiving end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom