royal marines test the new KS-1 Assault Rifle

[paulus 26]

6 hours ago, WILF said:

In war, wounding is better would be my guess.

It would be a resource multiplier wouldn’t it ?

In my opinion yes, 

 

6 hours ago, Wolfdog91 said:

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

In an urban setting then the best round would be in my opinion the humble ,22LR you can carry literally thousands and thousands of rounds. Best choice in a Zombie apocalypse Lol.  

[DIDO.1 21,089]

10 hours ago, Wolfdog91 said:

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

 

[Wolfdog91 6,331]

57 minutes ago, DIDO.1 said:

 

Bigger gun no make up for no being able to shoot many times

Once size fit all solution no work many times

Different circumstances call for different things

[neil82 1,009]

22 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

your not comparing like for like there, milspec ammo is fully jacketed, hunting ammo will be expanding, think one of the reason given for choosing 5.56 was the round could tumble causing wounds rather than outright kills, dead man is just that, a dead man, a wounded man absorbs other men to look after them (and more ammo could be carried due to the lighter weight)

[WILF 44,464]

10 hours ago, neil82 said:

your not comparing like for like there, milspec ammo is fully jacketed, hunting ammo will be expanding, think one of the reason given for choosing 5.56 was the round could tumble causing wounds rather than outright kills, dead man is just that, a dead man, a wounded man absorbs other men to look after them (and more ammo could be carried due to the lighter weight)

Surely from a non technical point of view it just makes good sense to all be using the same round as our allies ?……it wouldn’t be much good being with a load of Americans and saying “well, we have run out of 7.62 so that’s us, we are off home”………much more logical for it to all be interchangeable surely ?

[neil82 1,009]

4 hours ago, WILF said:

Surely from a non technical point of view it just makes good sense to all be using the same round as our allies ?……it wouldn’t be much good being with a load of Americans and saying “well, we have run out of 7.62 so that’s us, we are off home”………much more logical for it to all be interchangeable surely ?

Seem to remember it was the US who were instrumental in NATO adopting 5.56 as a standard infantry weapon round, changing to another calibre rather than improving weapons in use now to put rounds on target will only benefit ammunition suppliers

[eastcoast 3,745]

On 28/10/2023 at 05:38, 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

As teenagers we used to shoot roe deer with .22 rimfire. We knew that it was against the law simply because we did not have FAC's or permission but had no idea on minimum calibre stuff, at the time. Head shot = clean kill, no different to a rabbit with a sub 12ft lb air rifle. Just need to get close enough. Easier to stalk a roe than a rabbit though.

[paulus 26]

21 minutes ago, eastcoast said:

As teenagers we used to shoot roe deer with .22 rimfire. We knew that it was against the law simply because we did not have FAC's or permission but had no idea on minimum calibre stuff, at the time. Head shot = clean kill, no different to a rabbit with a sub 12ft lb air rifle. Just need to get close enough. Easier to stalk a roe than a rabbit though.

I was once told of a couple of lads who were dropping good numbers of fallow using a 17hmr and night vision again head shots, How ever i could not confirm that this was true. 

[neil82 1,009]

On 28/10/2023 at 10:47, Wolfdog91 said:

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

I would have thought that the only reason to investigate higher numbers of head shots by any American unit would be to try and figure out why they were using aimed shots rather than the usual tactic of spray and pray!

[forest of dean redneck 11,214]

Now I’m no expert an only skimmed the thread  so don’t shoot me down , but could it be to do with costs smaller rounds cheaper to manufacture ?