Since the USs NGSW is heating up: are there any rumors about polymer cased telescoped or caseless ammunition in china ?
Well there was that 40mm Cannon that they have been showing off on there armored vehicles.
In the case of NGSW there are five things that have to be considered.
- polymer cased Teliscoped and caseless are not backward compatible.
If you choose that route you cannot use conventional weapons. You cannot take a CTA 5.56 round and fire it from a M4 carbine. You need a new rifle for that new type of cartridge. there are other factors that lead to NGSW than new ammo tech.Although Cases Teliscoped and Caseless have the press. Those are infact carry overs from LSAT and other programs. Caseless infact seems to have been dropped.Cased Teliscoped is being pushed... no wait let me rephrase that. Polymer cased semi Teliscoped ammo is being pushed for it by Textron land systems. But at this point that type of round is not the only possible outcome.
- The big driver is Armor Penetration.
Let me show you a video here.
The Ammo they are shooting is the NATO standard M855 aka SS109. When this ammo was introduced by the Belgian army it's was meant to AP a Russian body armor used in the late cold war era. This consisted of equivilant to a 1.6mm Titanium plate with 20 layers of Kevlar. And an "Improved" version the M855A1. The problem in the video speaks for itself. The modern Russian Body armor stands up to it that is Level IV equipment. The PRC also has this armor level as does the US and NATO and more and more the lesser state armies and beyond that going forward it will proliferate.
What does that mean? It means that rounds like the 5.56x45mm have to be farther modified to match and that modification? Tungsten carbide cores and very high pressure ammo.
That's not a good recipe. Prototype XM855A1 ammo was operating at proof cartridge specs with out AP cores. In the Individual carbine and improved carbine trials very very nice brand new 5.56x45mm rifles were fed this new ammo the XM855A1 and breaking bolts, this was why that was canceled and the production batches was reduced to make it more suited to longevity of the weapon.
A proof cartridge is a ammo type you use to certify that the weapon' s manufacturing was done properly and there were no microfractures or poor tolerance in the steel. To do that they fire a excessively hot loaded ammo at the very edge of pressure limits and then inspect it. It's only done to certify the weapon and fired after building or rebuilding once. They were talking about that hot a load in magazine after magazine. On top of that the AP cores are harder materials than the chamber's and feed ramps of most rifles. So it could damage the rifle if not feeding properly and all of which well being more expensive.
For the ammo and rifles.
Not a practical response.
This by the way is not unique to the U.S. 5.56x45mm
the Russians and PRC will eventually have to deal with level IV body armor. That means again hot loads and hard cores or moving up to a new cartridge.
Ironically the 7.62x51mm is not a bad move to start with. (Meaning India and Pakistan might not have made a bad choice to stick with that caliber)
But the trade offs of the ammo leave something to be desired. And again you would need a harder core. In fact all of these still need a Tungsten carbide cores to AP. Larger ammo is generally better suited to generating better pressure curves. IE the rifle doesn't destroy itself.Since no matter what happened it looked like a new rifle and ammo would be part of the response to proliferation of level 4 Armor the U.S. Army created the Next Generation Squad weapons centered around a new round, 6.8 General Purpose(Absolutely no relationship to 6.8SPC)Now.
- That said weight is a big deal.
6.8 GP however is a pressure and bullet head type with no dictates on cartridge case. Leaving it to the bidders to offer a ammo with the same head and pressures but open ended on what they case it with as long as it is at minimum 20%lighter than a Brass cased version. From the Birth of the Self contained cartridge the first form and the US military form has been Brass cased. The Russians and a few others transitioned from Brass which is expensive to steel which is cheap and a little lighter. Some weapons don't like steel classes ammo. The PRC used steel cased lacquer coated until they moved to Copper coated Steel cased. Alluminum cases have been trailed and generally always failed. Caseless has long been a dream but never a reality it's just not practical.When the NGSW came about asking for lightweight bullets.
- on the list was of course LSAT derived Casted Teliscoped ammo. This offers excellent weight reduction and has been in the works for a while. 40% weight reduction vs brass ammo.
- conventional ammo in a polymer metallic composite ammo. Which is backward compatible with a conventional rifle. IE you can take a 7.62x51mm battle rifle like say the FN SCAR H and rechamber it for 6.8GP and fire this ammo. 30% weight reduction
- aluminum-plated nickel cartridges. Again backwards comparable. 20% weight reduction
- Sig showed this year three piece metal ammo 20% ammo reduction. Totally backwards compatible. SiG's NGSW prototype is infact a rebuilt 7.62x51mm rifle prototype.
But this is just the ammo, any NGSW cannot weight more than the existing system. You cannot issue a new rifle that weighs more than M4A1. You cannot issue a new LMG that weights the same as M249.
There are likely others two. 6 bidders were awarded all with there own weapons and ammo types.
- It's not just the rifle it's the LMG and more.
The Ammo has the press and that's the heart of it. But the U.S. Army is in this for more than just the rifle. They intend eventually to try and replace their LMG, GPMG, Carbines and rifles.
The M4A1 is an improved M4 It's self a shortened M16A2 a modified M16A1 this is the longest service rifle in American history, the LMG the M249 was trailed in the late 1970s it's heavier than it should be the DOD has a love hate relationship with it. They love what it does but not its weight and with level IV armor they hate the weight even more. The USMC dropped the SAW from their squads for the M27 not because it couldn't suppress but because they were more worried about room clearing and accurate fire.
The M240 replaced the M60 both weapons are over 60 years old. M240 was pressed as an infantry weapon because of issues with M60. But both are pigs. Heavy heavy weapons. We know that these can be made lighter today it's just a question of the right package.
- More than the bang is the Aim. Sighting is part of it.
Everyone is so up about the ammo that few consider that repeatedly it has been said that these weapons will be more that just a new rifle and ammo it's going to include a new optical sights. The statements even make it sound like smart sights. The first military red dot optics date back to the late 60s, magnified optics have been around since the 1800s but really became more than a curio by the late 50s they didn't make it big until the 1970s they came to European vogue by the late 1980s. They really became popular in the late 90s and fell into the standard by 00s. We are starting to see the next big thing. Smart scopes, but they are expensive and not quite mil spec yet. But it is part of it, as I can't see any other way to reliably get 800m hits even with the new ammo.
To summarize if you are looking for the PLA NGSW equivalent it has to cover this huge gulf of needs.
It needs more than CT or CTLS infact impact this can be totally forgot, it needs AP, it needs to be across the rifle squad, it needs to improve the range of fire.
