Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: OT: Why the Army thinks it needs a bigger bullet
Date: 8 May 2017 18:26:25 -0700
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <oer5s10vo1@drn.newsguy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p1fcfde636029e5b2d06ebaa8307acfbc0dac21d083bd7836.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: Direct Read News 5.60
X-Received-Bytes: 2731
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2530254965
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:5920
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/why-the-army-thinks-it-needs-a-bigger-bullet/ar-BBATg9j?li=BBnbfcL
longer than three football fields -- the Army is looking at arming soldiers with
ammunition that is lethal at a longer distance.
That would mean replacing the M4/M16 assault rifle with a new carbine, according
to the Army Times website. The aim is to provide troops with a weapon and ammo
that would increase accuracy and firepower and provide the same number of rounds
without adding weight.
Related: The $3,000 Rifle That Could Make the US Marines Even More Lethal
The 5.56 mm round in wide use is outmatched by enemy combatants in many
instances, the Army Times said, citing a recent study. Under consideration is
adopting a caliber in the 6.5 mm to 7 mm range.
Most Army soldiers are equipped with the M4, a shorter, lighter variant of the
M16, which has been in service since the Vietnam War and is still issued to many
G.I.s. The Army Times quoted retired Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, an arms expert, as
citing three concerns that are pushing the military leadership to move beyond
the M4/M16 and 5.56 mm ammo:
- Upgraded enemy body armor, which is more difficult to penetrate with the 5.56
round.
- A recognition that ISIS, al-Qaida and other adversaries are firing more lethal
bullets.
- The problems with jamming that have plagued the M16/M4 for decades.
In an article in The Atlantic two years ago, Scales recounted a firefight in
wrote.
Scales said that the Army has estimated that a new rifle would cost more than $2
billion. But he proposed arming only the infantry with a replacement for the
wrote.
The Army has been studying the ammunition issue for several years but is
expected to reach some conclusions in the next few months.
*
|
|