• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Evolution of warfare and bullet calibers

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Faneca

Faneca

Grizzled Veteran
Sep 16, 2010
1,150
778
Portugal
#1
This has started troubling me and is quite puzzling to me actually.

We all know NATO (but most specificly the US) have basicly given a large push for all NATO members to adopt modern assault rifles/carbines firing the 5,56mm NATO round.
We all know that both the 5,56mm and 7,62mm NATO rounds kill and since most wars are now fought against guerrillas and insurgents that don't have proper body protection (not that it would help significatly) so the use of a more powerfull is not necessary.

BUT since the tides of war are turning more and more into the urban enviroment the question of actually hitting the enemy is becoming a worring one, in my opinion.
The 5,56mm NATO rounds does not have enough force to penetrate concrete like butter (unlike some "realistic" games ...*cough cough*BF3*cough cough*).
The use of the heavier, more powerfull 7,62 round, imho, is now more than justified because in many ocassions a soldier will be faced with a bunch of enemies behind thick objects. Because every corner and cranny in an urban enviroment can hide an enemy that can instantly turn your heart into jelly the best option is to just shoot trough the said objects, thing I believe is hard now due to lol5,56.

I write this since Portugal as allways used 7,62mm NATO battle rifles (namely the Portuguese G3 models, Galil AR and ARM and formerly the FAL and AR10) wich have a reputation among current/previous Armed Forces members of packing one hell of a punch.

Spoiler!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Major Liability, NoxNoctum and theta123
#3
Weapons also have to serve pretty much all possible scenarios for the armed forces - and in CT scenarios, you don't actually want rounds punching through 2 people and 3 walls - too much potential for "collateral damage". Smaller rounds are easier to put on target accurately in close-quarters combat (less recoil, weapon more controllable). Discuss :)
 
Upvote 0
#4
[TW]Wilsonam said:
Weapons also have to serve pretty much all possible scenarios for the armed forces - and in CT scenarios, you don't actually want rounds punching through 2 people and 3 walls - too much potential for "collateral damage". Smaller rounds are easier to put on target accurately in close-quarters combat (less recoil, weapon more controllable). Discuss :)
Click to expand...

True that Alan, even tough I wasn't actually refering to that scenario that is extremely common now.
The last thing you want happening in a hostage rescue, bomb desfuing/retrieval or another CT scenario envolving civilians is rounds flying around.
In that case the best thing you can use is use small arms with amor penetrating rounds (basicly anything with the 5.7 round) when dealing with hostiles with body armor. An MP5 is allmost allways the perfect choice when dealing with people without Kevlar vests.


What I was ACTUALLY refering to is a full on collision between Armies in an urban area. With the all the crisis between Iran and Israel flarring up again another Six-Day War is bound to happen sooner or later. We all know the IDF is one the best armed forces in the world at causing severe numbers of casuelties and blowing everything up.
Basicly imagine the Battle of Stalingrad but in the XXI's century.
Rubble and debry everywhere wich soldiers use as cover. The goal of Battles is to defeat the opponent and the best way to do it is by killing every single enemy soldier.
 
Upvote 0
#5
Soldiers in the field of many nations have been complaining about the 5.56x45 for a long time for a reason. Its a nice round the 5.56x45, but the round has lately not been putted in good daylight.

might be copied from wikipedia, but has very good sources

Spoiler!
 
Upvote 0
#8
[TW]Wilsonam said:
Weapons also have to serve pretty much all possible scenarios for the armed forces - and in CT scenarios, you don't actually want rounds punching through 2 people and 3 walls - too much potential for "collateral damage". Smaller rounds are easier to put on target accurately in close-quarters combat (less recoil, weapon more controllable). Discuss :)
Click to expand...

This. There is also the fact that your enemy wants to stay hidden. Often times this means you'll shoot multiple shots at an area you *think* your enemy is in. In which case, more ammo are less frequent reloads might be better.

Both have their advantages, however it seems that when you have to shoot something past 300 meters or need to punch through a wall, mortars, 40mm, rockets, or CAS seems to be the preferred method.

Faneca said:
I mean seriously, is there a BETTER battle rifle in service these days?
Click to expand...

SCAR H. The control layout is far better, optics mounting is better, and less recoil (according to those that shot both), less weight.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#10
Lt_Kettch said:
I would like to add the HK417 to that list
Click to expand...

Might as well include the ACR too. I find them to be a bit heavy but they are bad ***.

9e8d24bd.jpg
 
Upvote 0
#14
Dr. Peter Venkman said:
You guys have to understand that those problems might only exist for the M85 round and is not indicative of other 5.56/.223 variations that the military doesn't use.
Click to expand...

... or for other 5.56 variations that the military does use, either. M193 does just fine in the anti-personnel area.

M855 has certain advantages over M193, and certain disadvantages as well. It's designed to penetrate and still fly straight afterwards, so that you can still cause damage on the other side of obstacles. Windshields, in particular. They may be made of glass, but they're notoriously hard to penetrate without causing massive deflection of a round.
 
Upvote 0
#15
I'd like to put in 6.8mm SPC and 6.5mm Grendel for use in the future.

6.8x43mm SPC seems to work a bit better than 5.56x45mm out of the same weapon, and is a good compromise between battle rifles and assault rifles in general.

6.8mm is related to 7mm NATO (.280 British) and was the original calibre and chambering for the EM-2 and FN FAL; it was even called 7mm FN Short.

However due to the US not being able to come to a decision the greatness of 6.8-7mm calibre weapons was not realised until recently.

If it wasn't for the US we'd only have a 7x43mm round for all rifles, improving logistics.
 
Upvote 0
#18
Oldih said:
"RK62 the greatest assault rifle ever made" (c) MPKK shooting range experts.

(By the way if you don't get it consider yourself lucky.)
Click to expand...

Seriously? A Kalashnikova design rifle is the best assault rifle ever made?
I don't even ... Anyways, the best AK-ish design rifle is the Galil ARM.
And I say rifle because, at least, the it's the Portuguese Paratroopers standart infantry weapon.

(Yeah, we have a tradition to use some serious low-tech firepower)
 
Upvote 0
#19
Faneca said:
Seriously? A Kalashnikova design rifle is the best assault rifle ever made?
Click to expand...

The funny thing is even some western experts say it's one of the "best" Kalasnikov based weapons because of its accuracy (lol), and Galil is based on RK62. Now personally I wouldn't give a crap if I had RK, Galil, FAL or AK around here in hypothetical conflict because considering at least 85% of combat enviroments here would be forests, and you're struggling to find anything that isn't closer to average 60 to 120m of distance practically unless it's a lake from one end to another (and only then in good light conditions if you want to actually see your target) or highway, or some other major infastructure-related road connection that's not just some random dirtroad where you can *gasp* reach perhaps ~250m at best. Unnecessary emphasis on accuracy is quite frankly lost in such enviroment as even SMGs would still be very lethal weapons under such conditions, even in a bit more modern warfare-context. It's another story in deserts and other places where you can see virtually everywhere instead of forest after forest after forest after forest after trees after trees, bears and more forests. Oh a dirt road that zigzags in such way even rally drivers would go le ffffuuu- about it.

The joke is that a lot of FDF officers are honestly saying it's the best AR in the world, which for the aforementioned reason is bit amusing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu