All of them.

Still wouldn't solve the problem that 6.8mm full power ammo weighs almost as much as 7.62 NATO. So you cut each soldier's basic ammo load by at least a third (20 rd mags vs 30) and increased weight.

A basic load of 7x20rd NGSW mags weighs 9.8 lbs; 7x30rd M16 mags weighs 7.4 lbs, so 25% more weight for 33% fewer rounds. The SAW gunner's load is even worse: +30% weight for -33% rounds.
 
The rollout of soldier exoskeletons might alleviate that situation, but their rollout is years behind expectations.
 
Hi,

Cutting the barrel down even further than the already short 13" one seems stupid; it reduces the extended range and performance that was the entire selling point of the program. I'd wager if someone fires this without the suppressor they're going to get a concussion.

You're right of course, but there might be another implication: With a shorter barrel and a smaller, lighter suppressor, it wouldn't be too far fetched to assume that the carbine might be implicitly intended to fire the normal-pressure ammunition anyway, not the high-pressure rifle ammunition.

Not that it would dispel any of the criticisms raised against the fitness of the 6.8 mm ammunition for future infantry combat, but if I'd have to come up with a scheme to make the best out of an irreversible decision ... ;-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
 
Hi,

The rollout of soldier exoskeletons might alleviate that situation, but their rollout is years behind expectations.

Maybe the ammunition actually doesn't need to be carried around all the time anyway, if we consider just-in-time delivery by logistics drone possible. Still, this would be a work-around for a self-inflicted quandary.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom