royal marines test the new KS-1 Assault Rifle

[paulus 26]

https://www.forces.net/technology/weapons-and-kit/ks-1-royal-marines-practice-cqb-and-shooting-their-new-rifle?utm_source=Forces+Newsletter&utm_campaign=9b22033679-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2023_10_27_03_56&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-9b22033679-[LIST_EMAIL_ID]

[tilimangro 1,013]

Ally as f**k

It’ll never replace the l1a1

[paulus 26]

10 minutes ago, tilimangro said:

Ally as f**k

It’ll never replace the l1a1

The old SLR or better known as the Elephant gun. 

[Born Hunter 17,832]

Rangers too I believe. Interesting that the MoD is sticking with 556 when the yanks are going up in calibre.

[chartpolski 24,859]

1 minute ago, Born Hunter said:

Rangers too I believe. Interesting that the MoD is sticking with 556 when the yanks are going up in calibre.

Everything is bigger in America ! LOL !

Cheers.

[paulus 26]

9 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Rangers too I believe. Interesting that the MoD is sticking with 556 when the yanks are going up in calibre.

556 or the sporting 223 equivalent is not even rated for red deer, min is 240 calibre, the beauty of the 7.62 or sporting 308 is that the shock facture was just as effective as the round it self. 

[eastcoast 4,223]

Was it not the USA that introduced the smaller calibre round when developing the M16 and we eventually all followed suit with the NATO round, but our "enemies" cracked on with the 7.62? 

[THE STIFFMEISTER 16,350]

Find it quite interesting as I didn’t think they would go with the knights variant . 

[Wolfdog91 7,375]

So upgrade M4 variant with a LPVO and off set red dot, yeah seem to be about how everyone is going , the suppressor design is interesting. Wonder if they will start looking at either the .224 Valkyrie, 6mm ARC or .22ARC for mil spec cartridges 

[Wolfdog91 7,375]

8 hours ago, paulus said:

556 or the sporting 223 equivalent is not even rated for red deer, min is 240 calibre, the beauty of the 7.62 or sporting 308 is that the shock facture was just as effective as the round it self. 

Which I have to say I kinda find as a bullshit thing.  Especially when I've had a few stakes on here tell me about how much they like a .22 hornet for culling work. Then again head shots vs traditional vitals

[paulus 26]

4 hours ago, Wolfdog91 said:

Which I have to say I kinda find as a bullshit thing.  Especially when I've had a few stakes on here tell me about how much they like a .22 hornet for culling work. Then again head shots vs traditional vitals

In a combat situation, nobody but a snipper would take a shot at anything other than the main body mass, Small high velocity calibres are more accurate due there trajectory curve being flatter, But they lack the weight to cause significant damage upon impact ,but instead rely on shot placement, The 7.62 for example. if hit in the arm then its highly likely your arm is coming off upon impact, I once witnessed someone shoot themselves in the foot on a range whilst trying to clear a gas blockage. Most of his foot including his boot just disappeared. I personally believe that a bigger calibre is better when used by a large group of people as some will always be less accurate than others, Plus the more injuries the opposition sustain, then the more people are tied up taking care of them.  We went to the 5.56 to align our weapon's platforms with those of the rest of Europe. 

[Wolfdog91 7,375]

26 minutes ago, paulus said:

In a combat situation, nobody but a snipper would take a shot at anything other than the main body mass, Small high velocity calibres are more accurate due there trajectory curve being flatter, But they lack the weight to cause significant damage upon impact ,but instead rely on shot placement, The 7.62 for example. if hit in the arm then its highly likely your arm is coming off upon impact, I once witnessed someone shoot themselves in the foot on a range whilst trying to clear a gas blockage. Most of his foot including his boot just disappeared. I personally believe that a bigger calibre is better when used by a large group of people as some will always be less accurate than others, Plus the more injuries the opposition sustain, then the more people are tied up taking care of them.  We went to the 5.56 to align our weapon's platforms with those of the rest of Europe. 

Well I was talking about hunting not combat, as far as combat like I said in another post , there a few new cartridges right now that would be great, they really really should have just went with 6.5 Grendel imo .

As far as head shots well,that's an interesting thing. I know the sniper we had just laughed at the subject. Many others I've talked to did similar . At the same time the marine corps had been investigated multiple times to to the amount of head shots that where being recorded by regular troops. They though they where executing people but in the combat areas they where they where usually only getting that target .

And I have to say a human head ize target  out to 200yd with m16 and a acog hell even a cco , isnt that hard . For the most part , combat will definitely change things but when that all you go to aim at .

Honestly with the way the M4/AR platform is I'm not sure why they haven't went the multiple upper per lower route . 

O going to Afghanistan where Intel shows average range is gonna be 400-800m ? Slap on the 6.5 Grendel / 6mm ARC uppers with LPVO 

Urban combat short distance? CQB 5.56 

Honestly the whole having to be stuck with FMJ is a big problem. Know SOCOM I think got cleared to use Sierra HPBT in their 5.56  SPR rifles and they said it's was much more ....well effective 

Also when it comes to larger caliber for more people..... egh depends on the tactics and environment imo. A saw gunner running a full auto 5.56 plays a different job then a the 240 guy pumping out 7.62 . No to mention you still have to actually HIT the target and if someone isn't very accurate a larger more heavy recoiling gun isn't going to help with that. It's like putting the 109lbs female on the 50cal since she can barely run her M4 like yeah if she actually hits something that good but umm ..... You ever seen someone who can do good with a smaller weapon system try and run a larger one with the same level of incompetence? Now at that being said the deal of a designated marksmen is a better thing imo , the guy in the squad who is the best shot an has a bit of an above average knowledge of shooting, give him something bigger and better because he's not gonna be wasting rounds.

Then we have the subject of the need / use of suppressive fire and yeah 

You can again go back and look at things as a case bay case scenario instead of a one size for all deal. MACVSOG guys from Vietnam show case this very well. Many times they prefer the CAR -15 mainly due to its size and like the smaller 5.56 just because they could pack more and when you had 10 man hatchet teams LITTERLY fighting of division level engagements and your parking all this in with no re supply ( look I to John Stryker Myers) well that's important however if your not like the seals working along the Mekong at the smae time they preferred the larger stuff for a few reason but you get the point 

But again I stand on the point of bumping up to a more EFFICIENT cartridge and bullet combo instead of just staying small with the 5.56 or go back a century and eveyone carry a 30cal

[Born Hunter 17,832]

It was only a couple years ago a few commandos ditched the L85 in favour of the AR platform C8. By 2025 they’ll probably have another!

[WILF 47,975]

1 hour ago, paulus said:

In a combat situation, nobody but a snipper would take a shot at anything other than the main body mass, Small high velocity calibres are more accurate due there trajectory curve being flatter, But they lack the weight to cause significant damage upon impact ,but instead rely on shot placement, The 7.62 for example. if hit in the arm then its highly likely your arm is coming off upon impact, I once witnessed someone shoot themselves in the foot on a range whilst trying to clear a gas blockage. Most of his foot including his boot just disappeared. I personally believe that a bigger calibre is better when used by a large group of people as some will always be less accurate than others, Plus the more injuries the opposition sustain, then the more people are tied up taking care of them.  We went to the 5.56 to align our weapon's platforms with those of the rest of Europe. 

In war, wounding is better would be my guess.

It would be a resource multiplier wouldn’t it ?

[Born Hunter 17,832]

I’m sure I read something about the early field trials in Vietnam with the 556/M16 were impressive. The lethality of the cartridge they used was great and the wound channels were devastating. Something to do with the bullet tumbling on impact.

Since then the bullets terminal performance was stabilised and that led to much reduced lethality.