GNU social JP
  • FAQ
  • Login
GNU social JPは日本のGNU socialサーバーです。
Usage/ToS/admin/test/Pleroma FE
  • Public

    • Public
    • Network
    • Groups
    • Featured
    • Popular
    • People

Conversation

Notices

  1. Embed this notice
    DeezMistaReez :verified: (deezmistareez@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:13 JST DeezMistaReez :verified: DeezMistaReez :verified:
    in reply to
    • WilhelmIII
    • thefinn
    • heytomjones
    Nice. Might buy one tomorrow.
    In conversation about 23 days ago from eveningzoo.club permalink
    • Embed this notice
      ?? Humpleupagus ?? (humpleupagus@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:13 JST ?? Humpleupagus ?? ?? Humpleupagus ??
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • thefinn
      • heytomjones
      Don't forget to CBD your OPP before the DMZ CPTs the GRT. 😏
      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:14 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • thefinn
      • heytomjones

      The 6.8 SPC upper will fit on a standard 5.56 lower.

      You need a new BCG too.

      Same with 300 BLK

      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:15 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • thefinn
      • heytomjones

      The original 55gr 5.56 is very meh. It came out of the "more rounds sent downrange is better" school of thought in the 1960s.

      The 62gr green tip is perfectly acceptable as a man stopper and does a decent job against armored troops. That's the current .mil issue for the M4 platform.

      Some of the contractors went to 77gr for a bit more terminal performance. It's an interesting compromise and was chosen because 62gr doesn't penetrate vehicles as well.

      6.8SPC has been used by the Army for the Marksmanship Unit. It's just a barrel swap in an existing M4. It's almost as fast as 5.56, it hits harder and we have tons of performance data on it out of the M4.

      That would have been a no-brainer upgrade, but that's not how the logistics pipeline thinks.

      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      DeezMistaReez :verified: (deezmistareez@eveningzoo.club)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:15 JST DeezMistaReez :verified: DeezMistaReez :verified:
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • thefinn
      • heytomjones
      >6.8 SPC
      So, I can use my existing 5.56 lower and just order the full 6.8 (2.77 Fury) upper? Or do I need to go up to the .308 lower?
      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      thefinn (thefinn@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:16 JST thefinn thefinn
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • heytomjones
      @WilhelmIII @heytomjones Yeah I thought this was done and dusted years ago.
      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:16 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • thefinn
      • heytomjones

      The M4 as a platform, with the current Army logistic infrastructure, is fine for the foreseeable future.

      The 5.56 has been kinda a meh cartridge since it was introduced, so replacing it isn't a terrible idea.

      Moving to a 6.5mm or 6.8mm doesn't require an all new rifle, just a new barrel and maybe magazines.

      But generals don't get promoted by not changing things.

      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      thefinn (thefinn@poa.st)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:16 JST thefinn thefinn
      in reply to
      • WilhelmIII
      • heytomjones
      @WilhelmIII @heytomjones I know they are not too impressed with the m4 - it does well for everything except killing people.

      I think this is a perception problem since the various wars in the ME, due to coming up against the Kalashnikov's, and so they wanted to change it. I thought the plan was a 6.5, the XM7 was simply not meeting standards.
      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink
    • Embed this notice
      WilhelmIII (wilhelmiii@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:17 JST WilhelmIII WilhelmIII
      in reply to
      • heytomjones

      We said this after the first trials.

      it's too complicated, the high pressure will wear out barrels and you've fucked your supply line by making overly proprietary ammo.

      It made money for the defense industry, though, so of course the Army bought it.

      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink

      Attachments


      1. No result found on File_thumbnail lookup.
        http://ammo.It/
    • Embed this notice
      heytomjones (heytomjones@nicecrew.digital)'s status on Friday, 09-May-2025 11:59:18 JST heytomjones heytomjones
      young Army officer calls out what many know.

      it'd be neat if he did a follow-up paper on the peanut butter P320 that Sig swears is so safe even a ukrainian could handle it.

      https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army-sig-sauer-xm7/
      In conversation about 23 days ago permalink

      Attachments

      1. Domain not in remote thumbnail source whitelist: taskandpurpose.com
        Army infantry officer calls new XM7 'unfit for use as a modern service rifle'
        from @JSchogol73030
        The officer interviewed more than 150 soldiers as part of his research, which was presented at an annual Marine Corps exhibition in April.

Feeds

  • Activity Streams
  • RSS 2.0
  • Atom
  • Help
  • About
  • FAQ
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • Source
  • Version
  • Contact

GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.

Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.