Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "General Dynamics US Army Prototype M4 replacement NGSW 6.8mm" video.

  1. Looking at this again I think I just realized the critical mistake that Beretta made with this weapon: they basically made a room clearing weapon with battle rifle ammo. Which is fundamentally incompatible.
    1
  2. I'll be honest I can absolutely see the army taking the true velocity ammo and sticking it in the Sig Weapon system. Mainly because the two systems CAN work together even if they weren't made for each other. They said they wouldn't mix and match but I really can't see the army doing that when it's fairly evident how much the plastic cased ammo can do in terms of truly adding an advantage, and then on top of that the Spear very much being what an evolution of the M16 platform should be. They would have all of the manual of arms of the weapons (with all of the accuracy benefits) and then all of weight and heat savings of the ammo. The only downside of the ammo is logistics of creating it, but that can be changed. And it can absolutely increase their efficiency in ways they wouldn't have otherwise. Overall I really can't see the US military in good faith not using this cartridge when it's exactly the increase they were looking for with the ability to be even better with just a push of a button. Overall it'll probably be cheaper to produce as well using plastic over metal. It will also increase service life of the firearms. But since the only way you can accommodate the ammo size is with a new firearm, the best tool for the job seems to be the Spear. Being more mechanically accurate means that it'll benefit even more from the casing. And since big army doesn't like change they probably won't go for the bullpup. On top of that the Sig bid also has a .338 heavy machine gun option in their kit despite it not being really part of the contract. So those weapons seem like they would be very attractive to a Millitary that is very resistant to change. And with the 6.8 LMG I believe being lighter than their current machine guns, they would probably be convinced to go ahead and make the change in weapons. Lighter weapons, vastly lighter ammo, improved fuel costs, increased ammo capacities on soldiers, and the ability for the average infantryman to engage to their potential fullest extent. I can't see this going any other way.
    1
  3.  @neutronalchemist3241  To be fair, that's the current TV and I can't see them not getting their hands on the sig to get 3k out of the 13" barrel. It'll certainly take an extra bit of powder, but it'll almost certainly take less powder than the sig ammo since TV gets more velocity out of similar pressures. Thus I imagine them having basically an overpressure variant made for the Spear since I doubt the military wants more brass when they're looking to lower costs by being able to transport more ammo for less.
    1