|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It actually is a substantial improvement. WWII logistics included the necessity to provide the same cartridge in 3-4 types of packing (boxed/Springfield clipped, Garand clipped, and belted), as well as two others for large scale use, right down to the squad level. Once this program is successful, it should result in one cartridge in 2-3 types of packing (boxed/clipped, and belted), and then 9mm for pistol use at the infantry squad level. For POGs, 5.56 would be needed, but small arms expenditure wouldn't be as high. Even if non-Infantry guys in combat units like Medics will likely stick with their M4s, they aren't going to be the guys doing mag dumps, so we're still not the same level as WWII/Korea-era squads with M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, BARs, 1919s, Thompsons, and Grease Guns all down at the platoon all throwing lead.
So we would have the same number of calibers, but in a far more streamlined ratio with reduced packaging requirements.. That seems to me to be a substantial improvement, and not too dissimilar from what we have now/have had.
Last edited by Alpha-17; 04-26-24 at 08:10.
--British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
Not really useful for much data, as they aren't using the correct load or projectile, and there is a lot of "oh my gawd!" type reactions, but somewhat entertaining.
--British veteran of the Ukraine War, discussing the FN SCAR H.It's f*****g great, putting holes in people, all the time, and it just puts 'em down mate, they drop like sacks of s**t when they go down with this.
Unboxing their new rifles. Infantry privates, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division.
![]()
Last edited by ABNAK; 04-29-24 at 18:37.
11C2P '83-'87
Airborne Infantry
F**k China!
I don't think nary a one can shave yet.
The closest one has a wedding band.
I wish that YouTubers would give it a rest with posting click-baity videos which imply that they actually have MILSPEC 6.8x51 ammo when they just have the low pressure, brass cased, .277 Fury ammo that isn't even close to being in the same league, yet they seem to either be under the impression that the difference is the same as .223 Remington to 5.56x45 NATO, or at least they deally hope that the average viewer is.
Oh well, at least it isn't as asinine as when Military Arms Channel used a Bolt Action Rifle Chambered in 6.5 Creedmore and tested it against body armor as if it were a perfect analog to 6.8x51 out of a SIG MCX Spear.
I was thinking the same thing... It's funny but, you never really see yourself that way when you're the age, so only once you're older do you have that reaction to young men.
Bookmarks