Comments by "LRRPFco52" (@LRRPFco52) on "Brandon Herrera" channel.

@jaynecobb7964 How did you like the XM250 belt-fed? That seems to be the most promising weapon for NGSW due to weight, although the ammo weight is heavier and bulkier than the SAW. (11B here, did every duty position in the line and Recon units)
1
@jaynecobb7964 Recoiling barrel. That will be a welcome replacement for the SAW. M249 is 7-10lbs heavier that it ever should have been, wrong cartridge. M250 has far superior ballistics than the M240, until M240 gets 6.8x51 barrels, which is the plan. Weapons Squads and key leaders will ask, "The M250 does more than the M240 can. Why do we even need 240s anymore?" As long as the barrel can quick-change, there isn't much of a reason.
1
@jaynecobb7964 Uktimax100, KAC LMG, and Israeli Negev are much lighter. Ultimax and KAC use constant recoil principle, so it kicks less than an M4.
1
@maxplaysgamesmore8552 When was the last time you did a 12-mile forced march with stress shoots along the way, including extensive CQM stages with a G3? I've been doing this type of training and deployments since 1993. A G3 is a non-starter in this conversation. I'll get it done with one because I'm above average height/strength, but I'll get it done so much better with a lighter weapon and small cartridge-based basic load. None of the battle rifles are good fits in that context, only a few DMRs in select duty positions in the overall mix. Brits, Norwegians, Swedes, Dutch, Germans, Canadians, Belgians, and Italians all ditched their battle rifles in favor of 5.56 NATO long ago.
1
@jaynecobb7964 Some of our guys stripped their SAWs down in 2002 and rigged the KAC VFG under the front of the receiver with the handguard removed. I agree and had the same feelings about Mk.46 vs M249 PIP. The magwell on the SAW is retarded. Original SAW had a different skeleton stock and no top handguard on the barrel. Army made it heavier with the E2 improvements. It's an AK operating system inverted if you break both down. AK beats itself up, as does the SAW. I always took care of mine though and they ran for me. When I was a Rifle Squad Leader, they were the majority of my problems with maintenance.
1
@blockades1559 No problem. I've been tracking the program since before it officially started. I don't claim to know everything about it, but I do know about the nomenclature change and why.
1
@maxplaysgamesmore8552 We always knew 5.56 was underpowered once you start pushing past 200-300m. That’s why US Infantry Platoons have always had a mix of 7.62 NATO weapons in them, mainly the M60 and M240, augmented by 7.62 NATO Sniper Systems in the hands of either DMs or Battalion Snipers attached to the line Companies.
1
@NourishyourBeauty2027 My brother used a US-made version of the BM-59 folding stock in his M21/M14 on his 2nd deployment to Iraq. There was a US company that made them in the 80s & 90s. He had his gun dealer in Pennsylvania glass bed it so his issue M21 would be really tight in it. But I've been aware of the BM-59 since the 1980s. They're heavy and the mags are large and heavy as well. Cool rifle, but carrying a basic load for it, especially in the mountains, is not fun. I have some of that True Velocity ammo and it is very light, but they have problems with separation and inconsistent performance. It would have been great to get that military-standardized, but it just didn't work out.
1
@NourishyourBeauty2027 The entire logistics system converted to 5.56 in NATO for individual soldiers, while keeping 7.62x51 GPMGs and introducing some 5.56 LMGs. UK went to the SA80 while their Special Forces had already been using AR-15s since the 1960s and never adopted the SA80. Germany went to Hk G36s. French went to the FAMAS. Italy went with the Beretta AR70. Belgium went with the FNC. Denmark went with Deimaco AR-15s. Canada went with Deimaco C7s/C8s. A soldier can request all he wants, but the only thing for him in the arms room will be what his country bought, issues, and supports logistically.
1
@mkultraification I’ve been shooting and hand-loading for .308 Winchester over the past 30 years, have owned 4 different .308 AR-10s and 2x .260 Rem AR-10s. There isn’t a 135gr .30 cal bullet anywhere close to the BC of the 135gr .277”, so even if you hot-rodded it, you will never achieve the downrange performance they wanted with NGSW. 7.62 NATO operates at much less pressure than NGSW, more like 19,000-22,000psi less. That’s one reason why the ICSR was cancelled. I’m only a fan of this in a DMR role, but even then, 13” barrel with the folded stock in the vehicle is fine, with the can in a pouch.
1
@mkultraification The BC absolutely does mean a lot of difference even within 100yds if you look at them. We see this all the time with 6.5 Grendel vs 7.62x39. An 11.5” Grendel starting 100fps slower will surpass a 16.3” AK before they hit 100yds. The BC difference between a 135gr 6.8mm EPR is just as dramatic compared to a 130gr 7.62 flat-based bullet. You bleed energy really fast with the short 7.62 projectiles. Agreed on long range TGT detection. While Riflemen or DMs will not be able to see anyone at 800m most of the time, their practical effective ranges will at least double over the 5.56 and give them very solid 600m performance, provided they’re shooting large enough targets. People tend to hide and duck behind things when bullets zip by, which is why I see this only as a DM-appropriate weapon at best.
1
@heithheithinson2495 Bullets deform into the rifling, not in the air. Wherever you got that idea from, toss it out and don’t mention it again.
1
It gets issued with Lancers, not PMAGs.
1