Lack of larger intermediate cartridges

[fiscally_irresponsible]

I don't understand the lack of intermediate cartridges above .22 or 5.45X39.
The biggest bore military cartridge I am aware of is the new .277 fury.

Why are intermediate cartridges chambered in such small calibers? Is this related to weight saving or just the modern idea of fragmenting and tumbling bullets in infantry weapons?


***Within a military context***

 

[Blackdog]

What military? The US military?
Wait till you find out about.... .30cal
I don't think .277 is an intermediate cartridge
Also 7.62x39 for most of the world
But also adopted cartridges are more based on money and contracts than what is or why

 

[fiscally_irresponsible]

More talking about any NATO adjacent or well funded military (in a standard issue infantry weapon).


Additionally wasn't 7.62X39 all but phased out of the Russian military by 5.45?

Hadn't realized that the .277 was about the size of a 308 either... interesting that they are moving back to full power cartridges again, I wonder if they will stick with it when each soldiers has an extra 2lbs to lug around

Note this is excluding any existing weapons in circulation, I know there are a lot of FAL's etc. in use still, not to mention the rusty AK's and Nagnat's being used in Ukraine


Long live the military industrial complex and arbitrary govt' requirements for military contracts, we love them 26lb m9 bayonets

 

[RETOKSQUID]

Will be intresting how long it last. From what I have been reading about the new rifle is its 12 pounds unloaded, with out the scope or suppressors. Plus the high operating pressure of the combat load is going to beat the hell out of small parts, and kill barrel life.
Still, issuing the rifle to smaller units at first could be a good way to go if it lives up to all the hype that is out there. Especially now that body armor is so much more prevalent among our potential adversaries., A DMR to every squad in the Army, Full issue to SF, Scouts, Snipers, Security Forces/MPs, QRF.

Logistical support will be a headache for a while. No surprise there, but the full power (80,000psi) ammo cost (@$4.00+ per round) is crazy due to the hybrid steel and brass cases being so new to the system, and only produced in limited facilities at the moment. So qualification of troops is going to be crazy expensive for a long time.

There civilian version of the round that uses traditional brass cases at 65,000 psi that run about $1.70 to $2.10 per round

Just hope we don't have a repeat of the whole 7.62 NATO and 5.56 event. I don't see the rest of NATO adopting this round in the foreseeable future for that reason alone.

 

[TedKennedy]

Need to go back to the trusty 8x33.

 

[fiscally_irresponsible]

$4 a round is insane, the lack of infrastructure for these rifles is going to be a problem too. Small scale issue like you were talking about seems like the way to go at least until they can accommodate the XM7 for infantry issue.

Additionally (according to Wikipedia so grain of salt) the XM7 bare is 8.38 LBs unloaded and 9.8 LBs loaded. With the bare M4 weighing 6.34 LBs unloaded and 7.4 LBs.

Going from 30 round to 20 rounds there is a 7.5%~ increase in weight (5.76 OZs) per loaded mag meaning a 45% increase in weight over 6 mags, which is a common load for 30 round m4 mags for real world infantry from what I have heard. This doesn't even account for the decrease in capacity with 9 mags (equal number of rounds) meaning a 67% increase in weight for loaded magazines.

Not sure on the 8X33, even though it is a .22 I think the .22 Eargesplitten Loudenboomer is definitely the way to go for the US military.

Frankly 4,600 FPS with a 50 grain projectile is the definition of practical.

 

[KurtM]

You mean like 458 SOCOM??

 

[RETOKSQUID]

Saw that the Army is also planning on replacing the M240 with a new lmg in 277, that suckers gonna eat barrels like crazy

 

[fiscally_irresponsible]

Saw that the Army is also planning on replacing the M240 with a new lmg in 277, that suckers gonna eat barrels like crazy

Yeah, giving it a few years till its good ol M4 and M249 again.


The M249 with a combat load of 600 rounds weighs about 21 LBs


the new XM250 with a combat load of 400 rounds weighs about 27 LBs, they've also moved the (non reciprocating) charging handle to just behind the belt pouch. charging handle is not too awful far behind the exposed rounds on links for some reason.

The XM250 has also lost the ability to feed from the magazines used by riflemen (m249 could feed from stanags) and THE QUICK CHANGE BARREL SYSTEM, great idea for a round that will be harder on the barrel...
The XM250 also loses 100 rounds per belt fed ammo box.


The US has once again managed to knock their replacement of the M4 and M249 weapon systems out of the park.

 

[fiscally_irresponsible]

You mean like 458 SOCOM??

Something in-between probably, 10 rounds in a 30 round 5.56 mag isn't ideal and may as well go to 50 beowulf if we are going down to 10 rounds per mag.


Would be badass for terrorists/oil possessors to get blasted by .458 or 50 beowulf though, so that definitely needs to be taken into account, lol