The Washington Post: Why haven't marines been able to get a new sniper rifle in the last 14 years?

90
Any army needs regular updating of weapons and military equipment fleet. In addition, in addition to novelty, promising weapon must meet the requirements of at least the current time. Otherwise, the troops risk falling into a very unpleasant situation, when during battles they will have to bear unjustified losses directly related to the imperfection of the material part. As the foreign press reports, the United States Marine Corps, the elite of the US military, has been facing such problems for several years in a row.

Despite the great attention paid by the command, the USMC has serious weapons problems. As it turned out, over the past few years, snipers of this type of armed forces cannot perform certain combat missions due to insufficient weapon characteristics. 13 June in the influential American edition of The Washington Post appeared an article by Thomas Gibbons-Neff entitled “Why the marines didn’t get a new sniper rifle over the past 14 years”. From the title of the publication it is clear that the author decided to take on a serious topic directly related to the effectiveness of the combat work of the units of the ILC.


Snipers of the 2 Battalion of the 5 Regiment of the US KMP at the position in Romadi (Iraq), October 2004. Photo by Jim MacMillan / AP


The American journalist began his article with a story about one of the battles that took place several years ago in Afghanistan. In the summer of 2011, in the province of Helmand, north of the town of Musa-Kala, a sniper team of eight men under the command of Sergeant Ben McCullar came under fire. It is noted that these marines have repeatedly had to participate in battles. In some clashes, they were the first to open fire, in others they took up defenses and responded to the enemy’s shooting.

This time the Taliban began shooting, and, according to Sergeant McCullar, they immediately pressed the Americans to the ground with machine-gun fire. Unfortunately, the enemy used large-caliber weapons with a greater range of fire, which is why the Marines could not destroy the machine-gunners with their sniper rifles. The enemy fired from a sufficiently long distance, due to which the snipers had to wait for reinforcements in the form of artillery shelling or an air attack.

T. Gibbons-Neff recalls that this story sniper marines is not an isolated case. Both before and after the ambush in Helmand province, the KMP fighters had to face the problem of insufficient range of their sniper rifles. Similar problems plagued the US Marine Corps throughout 14 years of combat operations in Afghanistan.

An analysis of the current situation was conducted and certain conclusions were drawn. One of the reasons for the relatively low effectiveness of snipers in a number of situations was recognized as a method of staffing units and rotation of personnel. Snipers Marine Corps in most cases do not have time to get a lot of experience and relatively quickly replace each other.

In addition, there was a problem with existing weapons. The arsenal does not fully meet the requirements, and attempts to acquire a new one are confronted with an ossified bureaucracy in various management structures of the ILC.

A journalist for The Washington Post recalls that the US Marines are widely known for their "love" for outdated weapons and equipment. For example, during the Gulf War, ground forces tankers tested the latest M1A1 Abrams armored vehicles in battle. At the same time, the marines arrived in the combat area on the outdated tanks "Patton" who had a chance to travel through the streets of Saigon in the sixties. In 2003, the Marine Corps returned to Iraq. During this time, his snipers were armed with M40A1 rifles, which appeared shortly after the end of the Vietnam War.

Since then, M40 rifles underwent several upgrades, but the effective range of such weapons remained the same - up to 1000 yards (914 m). Thus, the firepower of the marine snipers has hardly changed in a few years.

T. Gibbons-Neff notes that the former and current snipers of the KMP agree on the available rifles. They believe that this weapon no longer meets the requirements of the time. In terms of their characteristics, the M40 rifles of the Marine Corps are inferior to those of snipers from other United States forces. Moreover, even the Taliban and the Islamic state already possess weapons with higher characteristics, above all with a greater range of fire.

The author of the publication cites the words of a sniper-spy who wished to remain anonymous in view of the instructions of his superiors. This fighter believes that in the current situation the training of the CMP sniper loses all meaning. “What is the use of being shot from a thousand yards before we can answer?”

Sergeant Ben McCullar, who until recently worked as an instructor in a sniper school based on Quantico (Virginia), expressed a similar opinion. In addition, he added that the average distance to the enemy in various collisions was 800 yards (731,5 m). At such distances, most of the weapons of the Marines were virtually useless.

The battle mentioned by Sergeant McCullar in the 14 year, mentioned in the beginning of the article Why the Marines have failed to adopt a new sniper rifle in the past 2011 years. At the same time, several other events were noted. For example, T. Gibbons-Neff recalls that it was the McCullar platoon that was implicated in the scandal with inappropriate actions against the bodies of Taliban militants.

Nevertheless, from the point of view of the question raised, the fact that it was in 2011 that the American soldiers had to start using improvisational tactics of combat was of the greatest interest. In addition, during such "improvised" battles, the CMP snipers repeatedly had to deal with the inadequate characteristics of their weapons. In some cases, snipers could not help their unit by quickly and accurately eliminating a specific enemy fighter.

B. McCullar said that sometimes American snipers noticed and saw the Taliban machine gunners, but could not do anything with them. In addition, he noted that in such a situation could be useful rifles, different from the standard and designed for other ammunition. The effectiveness of the snipers could enhance the weapon chambered for .300 Winchester Magnum or .338.

The author of The Washington Post reminds that such rearmament is not just possible, but is already being done by the US Army. Back in 2011, the .300 Winchester Magnum munition was adopted as the main sniper cartridge for arming the ground forces. Thanks to this, army snipers can now shoot 300 yards (roughly 182 meters) further than marines with a M40 family of rifles using an .308 cartridge with a light bullet.

The system command of the US Marine Corps, which is responsible for orders and purchases of new weapons and equipment, is aware of the problems with sniper rifles and takes some measures. According to official data, several options for replacing existing M40 rifles are currently being considered. However, the existing weapon, as noted, so far meets the requirements.

The M40 rifle was developed by the Precision Weapons Section (PWS) of the KMP System Command and was designed to arm the Marine sniper. At the moment, the main task of the PWS organization is the maintenance and upgrading of M40 family rifles. Due to the absence of other precision weapons, the specialists of this organization provide “support” for only one type of weapon.

In this regard, T. Gibbons-Neff quotes the words of the former head of the school of snipers in Quantico, Chris Sheron. This officer believes that the CMP command does not want to abandon the obsolete M40 rifle for objective reasons related to the separation of PWS. M40 rifles are the only factor by which this organization exists. The rejection of such weapons, in turn, will make the appropriate branch redundant.

K. Sharon argues that no one wants to be the "killer" of the Precision Weapons Section. The rejection of M40 rifles will lead to a serious reduction of one of the most important structural units of the Marine Corps. As a result, none of the commanders want to make such a complex and ambiguous decision.


Comparing the M40A5 rifle with other weapons of similar purpose


According to the former head of the snipers school, the solution to the existing problem could be the Precision Sniper Rifle or PSR program, implemented in conjunction with private weapon companies. K. Sharon believes that such a project would not be too expensive, so that the KMP could order two promising rifles for the price of one of the current M40. He also recalled that all the main armies of NATO had already switched to sniper weapons chambered for .338. Only US Marine Corps snipers are still forced to use outdated .308, which accordingly affects the effectiveness of the shooting.

Also in the junk Why the Marines have failed to adopt a new sniper rifle in the past 14 years, the words of the former instructor of one of the training units of the special operations forces of the USMC Sergeant J.D. Montefasco. This marines told about the joint exercises of US sniper rifles from the United States and Great Britain, which took place in the mountainous region of California. Sergeant Montefasco noted that the American shooters exceeded their British counterparts in terms of training. However, the Royal Marines showed better shooting results. The reasons for the loss of their colleagues J.D. Montefasco called the bad weather and the superiority of British rifles shooting a heavier bullet.

According to the sergeant instructor, the US Marines did not fulfill many of the tasks. British snipers, in turn, used other bullets with heavier bullets, which allowed them not to worry because of the difficult weather conditions at the shooting range. Snipers KMP US were supposed to get rifles chambered for .338 even during the war in Afghanistan, - summed up Sergeant Montefasco.

Despite all the wishes of the former and current sniper-marines, the command is not going to order a new weapon. Moreover, not long ago, the KMP command announced its intention to carry out another modernization of the M40 family rifles. The result of this project will be the replacement of rifles model M40A5 on products like M40A6. In this case, as noted by the journalist The Washington Post, the firing range will not change.

In connection with such plans of the command, C. Sharon suggests carefully reviewing the new programs and answering the question: who is driving the renewal of the weapons of the marines?

All snipers surveyed by T. Gibbons-Neff look to the future with concern. Due to the continued development of the M40 rifle without a serious change in firing range, the next possible armed conflict may lead to unjustified losses among personnel. The enemy may have an advantage in the firing range and thus seriously hamper the actions of the USMC.

At the end of the article the author of The Washington Post again quotes the current sniper, who wished to remain anonymous. This fighter says that the United States has the best snipers in the world, and the ILC serves the best officers in the country. Marine snipers are the most dangerous hunters in any terrain. But while maintaining the existing problems in the next armed conflict, the marines will have to learn, in their own skin, what it means to come to a gunfight with a knife.

As you can see, the snipers of the USMC hit a very difficult situation. A few years ago, their main opponents found advantageous tactics: the use of large-caliber machine guns. With the help of such weapons, Afghan or Iraqi armed forces could bombard US Marine troops from a safe distance without fear of return fire from high-precision weapons. The marines repeatedly talked about their needs, but those in charge are still not in a hurry to meet them, with the result that snipers still have to use weapons with insufficient range. Moreover, the command is going to once again upgrade the M40 rifle, clearly ignoring the existing requests.

The article Why the Marines have failed to adopt a new sniper rifle in the past 14 years curious infographics, which compares various samples of American and foreign-made sniper weapons. In connection with the context of the article, the comparison goes only for the maximum range of effective fire.

The sixth place in range was taken by the Russian SVD rifle, capable of hitting 875 yards (800 m). Just one step higher in this improvised ranking is the main US KMP sniper rifle - M40A5. Her firing range reaches only 1000 yards (914 m). The fourth place was left for the M2010 rifle, which for several years had the status of a sniper weapon of the US Army. Thanks to the .338 cartridge, its firing range reaches 1300 yards (1190 m).

The top three closes the sample US SOCOM Precision Sniper Rife, beating on 1600 yards (1460 m). This weapon is used by snipers of the US Special Operations Command. The honorable second place was taken by the standard sniper rifle of the British army L115A3 with a similar range - up to 1600 yards. In the first place, the authors of the rating put the Chinese large-caliber (12,7х108 mm) so-called. M99 anti-material rifle that can confidently hit targets at ranges over 1600-1700 yards.

It is necessary to recognize that the first place of such a rating raises certain questions, since the Chinese rifle is designed for a large-caliber rather than a rifle cartridge. In this way, it is seriously different from other samples presented in the list, which is why the correctness of its mention may be the subject of a separate dispute. However, even without the M99 product, the table below looks very sad for the US Marine Corps snipers. Their weapons are inferior to other sniper rifles, including those used by the American army. However, the Americans should be most worried about the fact that the existing M40A5, in terms of firing range, loses to various large-caliber machine guns, which for some time have begun to actively use various armed formations.

As follows from the title of the article in The Washington Post, the need to replace the M40 rifle and its modifications matured almost a decade and a half ago. However, in the intervening time and two wars, the command of the ILC did not take the necessary measures, continuing to hope for already outdated weapons and making it a priority to preserve the Precision Weapons Section. What will end this whole story - until the end is not clear. However, American marine snipers have good reasons for concern. In the event of an armed conflict, they really risk staying with a knife in the middle of a shootout.


Why did the Marines have failed to adopt a new sniper rifle in the past 14 years:
http://washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/why-the-marines-have-failed-to-adopt-a-new-sniper-rifle-in-the-past-14-years/2015/06/13/cb924d96-0eaf-11e5-a0dc-2b6f404ff5cf_story.html
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

90 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. +19
      17 June 2015 07: 56
      I’ll support some kind of dumb article. Forever, everyone compares driny from different tactical niches.
      1. +10
        17 June 2015 12: 55
        If you read the article, then its meaning is completely different. American Marines are unhappy with the insufficient firing range of their regular M40. It is inferior to many rifles of other armies and units, as well as rifles freely sold and absorbable around the world.

        The effective fire range of a sniper rifle is tied primarily to the capabilities of the cartridge: .308, .300WM, .338 LM ...

        And the Marines are asking for a .338LM instead of a .308, because others have and have heavy machine guns that are used against the American Marines by "anti-democratic regimes."

        Marines want to live, not die for "democratic values." And something tells me that they will receive such a rifle.

        The table in the article is rather informative. There is no hint of a direct comparison of "classmates" in it. The usual wishes of the authors of the article.
        1. +2
          17 June 2015 13: 27
          They need a "stealth drone" rifle so that a warrior is in a bar for a beer, and she will destroy the enemies of dermocracy in the "field"!
          1. 0
            17 June 2015 14: 23
            A drone needs homing bullets to learn how to shoot accurately. Delays in drone control cannot be ruled out. The drone itself is in motion, the target is in motion + the delay in transmitting the picture and the delay between the movements of the operator’s joystick and the UAV’s executing mechanisms make it difficult to carry out full-fledged aimed shooting.

            Otherwise, snipers would have long been re-qualified as operators of sniper UAVs.

            To conduct reconnaissance, to shoot homing missiles or fluently - this drone can.
        2. 0
          17 June 2015 16: 06
          I wonder what we can oppose in this situation, including the KMP snipers ...!? PC (OR "ROCK")!? (I have motorized troops in the army ...)
    2. +3
      17 June 2015 12: 46
      SVLK-14S Maximum effective firing range 2300 m.
      1. 0
        23 June 2015 01: 50
        Artillery should already be working on 2 kilometer. )))))
        During the Second World War, the vast majority of sniper contacts at a distance of 200 meters.
        High precision weapon for police 400 meters.
  2. +9
    17 June 2015 06: 39
    New analytics from Ryabov Cyril, makes you think. I honestly do not pity the American Marines. I am much more concerned about our units armed with SVD. Judging by the table, effective SVD fire in TWO !!!! less than American, English and Chinese rifles. And this is no longer a trifle that can be leveled by the ability to camouflage or endurance. Dear colleagues, who in the subject write how we are doing with long-range sniper rifles. As I understand it, we are talking about the use of the cartridge 7,62 × 54 mm or its NATO counterpart 7,62 × 51 mm NATO.
    1. +29
      17 June 2015 07: 39
      SVD is not a full sniper rifle. A SVD fighter is a means of tactically strengthening the infantry squad.

      An infantry sniper (born designated marksman) first appeared in the USSR in the 60s. Influenced by the Soviet concept, the infantry sniper specialty was introduced by Israel and the United States in the 1990s.
      An integral part of the rifle (motorized rifle, infantry) squad, like a machine gunner or grenade launcher; acts as part of the unit. Sometimes paired with a machine gunner or a couple of machine gunners (cover group).
      Tasks - increasing the radius of the infantry battle, the destruction of important targets (machine gunners, other snipers, grenade launchers, calculations ATGMs, signalmen).
      As a rule, he does not have time to choose a goal; shoots at everyone in sight.
      The combat distance rarely exceeds 400 m.
      Weapons: self-loading rifle, the main emphasis on light weight and reliability. Sometimes such snipers are equipped with serial automatic rifles (for example, H&K G3 or FN FAL), which are selected at the weapons factory according to the criterion of "accuracy of hit" and get an optical sight. Infantry sniper rifles are rarely equipped with silencers.
      Extremely mobile, often changes position.
      As a rule, it has the same means of disguise as the rest of the soldiers.
      1. +10
        17 June 2015 09: 53
        Quote: Malkor

        You are right and very accurately characterized the fighter with the SVD in the squad is not a sniper, but a shooter
        The sniper has a weapon sharpened for long-range and accurate shooting and most often with a longitudinally sliding shutter and the pros choose special samples like ORSIS. Korda or OSV 96 in the case in the Caucasus I saw only without folding stocks was 2000m in the light
      2. +2
        17 June 2015 10: 02
        Thank you so much for the clearly reasoned and detailed answer. Now everything is clear and understandable. Thanks again for the clarification.
      3. +9
        17 June 2015 14: 11
        for Malkor:
        You have listed weapons and tasks roughly correctly.
        In our infantry (25 years ago, when I served) there were
        Three types of snipers:
        1) attacking snipers with the usual long M-16 (5.56) on
        which mounted the optical sight, added legs
        and a nozzle on the butt. They went on the offensive with
        all, but could choose goals for themselves up to 400m
        (we usually opened fire from 150 m).
        2) snipers of fire support groups. They had the M-14
        (7,62 mm) with the same optical sight on the legs.
        They fired along with machine gunners at 400-700 m
        (machine gunners approximately, with a fan, snipers - aiming).
        3) "long-range" snipers. They had special "wound" guns
        (I do not remember the name). They worked separately (not as part of
        companies). They could be assigned to the battalion on special occasions.
        1. +5
          17 June 2015 21: 20
          Namely: for each task its own type of sniper, hence its own tactics and different weapons. Sniper saboteur is unlikely to take SVD. The article is unclear on a mass American.
      4. 0
        17 June 2015 16: 11
        I don’t care what it will be called ... whether it can hit a machine gun in the trench without being destroyed ...
    2. +1
      17 June 2015 13: 16
      Everything will be fine with our snipers. I read somewhere that the Orsis will be ordered. Yes and the 14.5 mm rifle we seem to have 12.7 in service for a long time the truth is not everywhere.
    3. +2
      18 June 2015 00: 07
      Quote: D-Master
      Judging by the table, effective SVD fire in TWO !!!! less than American, English and Chinese rifles. And this is not a trifle that can be leveled by the ability to mask or exposure

      SVD is not a sniper rifle, it is mostly a weapon for an ordinary shooter who knows how to shoot better than machine gunners. That is, an infantry rifle of increased accuracy, which is not a sniper weapon in its purest form.
      The fact that it is compared even with the m40 only speaks about the high characteristics of the SVD.
      --------------------
      For comparison: For shooting from the M40 rifle cartridges of 7,62 × 51 mm NATO are used. Technically, it is a rifle with a sliding bolt. The supply of ammunition during firing is made from a box magazine with a capacity of 5 rounds.

      The rifle is equipped with ten (10) multiple optical sight Unertl. Dispersion at a distance of 300 m - no more than 1 arc minute (5 shots fit into a circle with a diameter of 80 mm).
      -------------------
      For firing from SVD rifle cartridges of 7,62 × 54 mm R are used with ordinary, tracer and armor-piercing incendiary bullets, as well as sniper cartridges (7N1, 7N14),
      Until the early 1970s, SVD was produced with such trunks. The accuracy of the battle with a 7H1 sniper cartridge was 1,04 MOA (arcminute) [3]. This is better than even many store rifles (despite the fact that, ceteris paribus, a self-loading rifle shoots worse than a non-self-loading rifle). For example, the M1987 store sniper rifle adopted in the USA in 24 when using a sniper cartridge has an accuracy of 1,18 MOA. However, with a rifling pitch of 320 mm, it was almost impossible to shoot armor-piercing incendiary cartridges - their bullets very quickly began to somersault in flight. In the first half of the 1970s, the rifle decided to give greater versatility and made a pitch of 240 mm rifling. After that, the SVD was able to shoot all types of ammunition, but the accuracy immediately deteriorated: when firing a 7N1 cartridge, to 1,24 MOA, and when firing with an ordinary LPS cartridge (57-H-323C), to 2,21 MOA.
      -----------------
      but nevertheless SVD is in my opinion a sniper insofar as, at least, technically.
      I think it’s incorrect to compare a self-loading Kalash-based army with a bolted sniper, and if they compare, then everything means bad.
      1. 0
        18 June 2015 02: 03
        Quote: carbofo
        Compare Kalash-based self-loading army

        immediately obvious lol
        1. -1
          18 June 2015 10: 43

          Quote: 4-th Paradise
          immediately obvious

          I’m not a weapon designer, I’m on the drum who on what and how is done.
          Externally, it copies the look of the AK, but does it make sense to go into details, of course, you have to be precise, of course, I know that AK is Kalashnikov and SVD is Dragunov, and I know that the mechanics are different, I'm just used to rank SVD as self-loading automatic machines AK family.
    4. +1
      18 June 2015 01: 58
      Quote: D-Master
      As I understand it, we are talking about the use of a cartridge of 7,62 × 54 mm or its NATO counterpart 7,62 × 51 mm NATO.

      the article says that the Marines are not satisfied with the cartridge 7,62 × 51. Regarding 7,62 × 54- the article refers to the SVD in which, when adopted in service, the course of the rifling was changed so that it would be possible to shoot with a light bullet, and not just a heavy sniper. As a result of this, the accuracy of light shooting increased, but the accuracy of shooting with a sniper cartridge over long distances decreased. On modern SVDM, the original barrel was returned and accuracy at long distances was equal to the M40 from the article.
      The cartridges themselves are equivalent.
    5. 0
      13 June 2017 10: 35
      Good old mosinka to help you. Calmly shoots at 1.5 km .... wassat
  3. +16
    17 June 2015 08: 59
    SVD is a platoon level support weapon. Created for certain tasks performed at a certain distance. It can work for a kilometer, but more effective at a distance of 300-800 meters. Adequate rate of fire allows you to participate in a tight battle. One of the latest options - SVD-S received a new stock, a new muzzle, a shortened barrel and a new scope up to x10.
    For conducting accurate fire at a distance of over 1 km. need a rifle of caliber 8,6 - 12,7 with a longitudinally-sliding bolt, optics with a multiplicity of 8-20. This is already a weapon at the level of a brigade-division or special groups. However, there are limitations. At a distance of over 1,5 km. it is necessary to hit mainly on motionless targets, otherwise the chance of a miss increases many times.
    In the episode described in the article, the Taliban were beaten from heavy machine guns, but the marines remained intact. Although they were forced to lie down on the spot. Because at such distances an accurate shot at a target the size of a person is quite problematic. Here weapons and weapons of a different class come into play - mortars, automatic grenade launchers, artillery of various calibers and types, rockets, aircraft.
    The ability and knowledge of how and how to defeat the enemy is just part of the concept of tactical literacy. Otherwise, no weapon will help.
  4. +7
    17 June 2015 10: 28
    Hmm, with the logic of the Americans a little tight. can anyone explain how in one paragraph the American was able to issue
    American arrows on the level of training exceeded their British counterparts. However, the Royal Marines showed better shooting results. The reasons for the loss of their colleagues J.D. Montefasco called bad weather

    at the best level of training, does the weather bother them? something reminded of a dancer and primary sexual characteristics.
    and a comparison of the SVD (7,62) and 12,7 caliber rifles is of course pearl! It would be interesting to me to look at that Chinese who would take this rifle into a raid and drag 15 kilometers on himself
    1. +2
      17 June 2015 11: 09
      at the best level of training, does the weather bother them?

      This is just an attempt to make excuses, exactly what is "hindering the dancer." It should be noted that the British and Canadians are cooler anyway. They have been fighting for a long time already, Avon, who has a record-breaking record, I'm talking about Afghan shoots.
      Then, as far as I heard, the Americans study on the plains, and the Canadians in the mountains - it’s much harder there. Yes, and the British also like training in the mountains of Wales. And it should be noted that there is some difference in weapons.
    2. wanderer_032
      +1
      17 June 2015 12: 10
      Quote: utlyakov
      It would be interesting to me to look at that Chinese who would take this rifle into a raid and drag 15 kilometers on himself


      Protect if necessary.



      Cowley is a Chinese porter with a flyer for wearing things on his back.
      The Chinese coolies were mainly involved in carrying weights.
      1. wanderer_032
        +1
        17 June 2015 12: 16
        Some more pictures of the cowley (coolie):

      2. 0
        18 June 2015 02: 12
        Quote: wanderer_032
        Protect if necessary.

        Cowley is a Chinese porter with a flyer for wearing things on his back.
        The Chinese coolies were mainly involved in carrying weights.

        laughing the idea is certainly a good one - to attach two coolies to each sniper, one drags a rifle, and the second rounds, but not feasible even for amers.
  5. +2
    17 June 2015 11: 03
    Comparing a bolt with a semiautomatic device is complete nonsense. SVD - a massive support rifle at the platoon level, maximum 600 m. When comparing, it was necessary to take at least SV98 ...
  6. +7
    17 June 2015 11: 19
    "Sergeant Ben McCallar, who until recently worked as an instructor at a sniper school at Quantico, Virginia, expressed a similar opinion. In addition, he added that the average distance to the enemy in various encounters was 800 yards (731,5 m). most of the Marines' weapons were actually useless. "... but the M40 paradox works at 1000 yards ... which is the question.
    Those. conditionally, even the SVD is enough, with proper preparation ... or they just drift and are afraid to approach the enemy less than a kilometer.
  7. -1
    17 June 2015 11: 20
    Quote: Jackking
    Comparing a bolt with a semiautomatic device is complete nonsense. SVD - a massive support rifle at the platoon level, maximum 600 m. When comparing, it was necessary to take at least SV98 ...


    SV98 expensive, not comfortable, not accurate and useless rifle. Communicated with friends from special forces. They really do not like her. Prefer western rifles because of this.

    Therefore, we also need to leave CB98, we made the usual dough cut on it, it’s a shame just when army snipers use Western rifles because they were offered such rubbish as CB98
  8. +2
    17 June 2015 12: 03
    Quote: utlyakov
    at the best level of training, does the weather bother them? something reminded of a dancer and primary sexual characteristics.

    The answer is in the article itself. Designated Americans have M40 family rifles using a .308 light bullet cartridge. The British have more modern rifles chambered for .300 Winchester Magnum or .338, with a faster or heavier bullet, the trajectory of which is less dependent on weather conditions.
    Quote: utlyakov
    and a comparison of the SVD (7,62) and 12,7 caliber rifles is of course pearl!

    The correct comparison. If tactics require, you need to change 7,62 to 12,7. Who needs rifles that cannot solve the currently important tactical tasks? A typical example in the same article. A large-caliber machine gun fires from a distance exceeding the effective destruction range of a rifle in service. If the designated Marines were SVD, they would cry even louder, and they would not even try to compete with the British.
    1. +1
      17 June 2015 16: 29
      then what is the basis for the statement about the best preparation? correct me - but usually on the results. which (which is strange) in favor of the British.
      again - it reminds me of something from the series - "I would give him if he caught up with me"
      The correct comparison. If tactics require, you need to change 7,62 to 12,7.

      But can you read more about the reset? how do you imagine - a sniper (attached to a platoon) armed with at least two rifles? and the platoon smokes quietly on the sidelines and is not armed with a heavy machine gun or mortar. at worst, everything in the platoon, including the commander such that they can not give target designation of artillery? interaction has already been canceled?
  9. 0
    17 June 2015 13: 21
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    No, here The Washington Post still cheated. The accuracy of the M99 rifle - 2 MOA

    I already agree with this. Even in the case of a corrected value of 1,5 MOA, 1600 m is an overestimated distance.
  10. +1
    17 June 2015 14: 35
    DShK With 2,5 KM will cover the target, quite simply. Getting into is problematic. but the area will be peeling very confidently. And getting from a rifle from such a distance is very difficult, especially in conditions of intense shelling. And officially confirmed, the largest range of the enemy’s defeat, I remember more than 2 km. The Americans have someone who shot someone. Interestingly, the sergeant called the aircraft. With us, this can only be done through the division headquarters. Even the company commander is almost impossible.
    1. +2
      17 June 2015 15: 28
      About the possibility of calling aviation is well written. But when will we have such a coordinated infantry-air support of aviation and artillery.
  11. 0
    17 June 2015 16: 23
    Quote: wanderer_032
    Quote: utlyakov
    It would be interesting to me to look at that Chinese who would take this rifle into a raid and drag 15 kilometers on himself


    Protect if necessary.



    Cowley is a Chinese porter with a flyer for wearing things on his back.
    The Chinese coolies were mainly involved in carrying weights.

    funny laughing will be able to complete the task after fifteen kilometers with 20 kg behind him? Fifteen minutes after the stop will be able to shoot at a mile and a half? and who will cover him after he unmasks the whole group with a shot?
  12. +1
    17 June 2015 19: 46
    Quote: aviator1913
    About MO you can READ WEAPONS and SNARYAGU sso the Russian Federation. Glocks, MP5 and so on are in use the only way)

    something else something? are sunflowers running around with all of the above? FSO, perhaps A and B use imported, but MO - no
  13. 0
    17 June 2015 23: 39
    Not my words. Change in service, of course, and not on the battlefield a specific arrow.

    I apologize, I didn’t see - apologize

    You seem to have read the article inattentively. There it is about visually observable machine gunnerwhich shells this unit.

    excuse me - but if it is visually observable - are we just talking about people? I’ll explain the idea - a person, in principle, can see no further than 200-300 meters - this is if you need to distinguish a figure. then what impossibility to use a sniper rifle on it speaks of a respected American?

    In this situation, installing a mortar from a march is not the most popular idea. It is quite tall, and under fire I really want to lie behind cover, for some reason.

    and religion doesn’t allow soldiers to deploy mortars behind cover?
    Lying can do one of three things:

    add a couple more:
    4. give the coordinates of the artillery
    5. call for support in the form of infantry fighting vehicles or tanks


    I don’t know what to advise you. Try to read the article first. It says that the Americans fired from regular M40 rifles with .308 rounds, and the British L115A3 with .338 rounds. Competitions, of course, were conducted with regular weapons. It is very different in its capabilities. About this, in fact, the whole article.


    I read - and nowhere did I find a single reason that could confirm the thesis about the better preparedness of snipers of the ILC in comparison with the English colleagues
  14. 0
    18 June 2015 11: 03
    Regardless of his level of training, he is right: the L115A3 is a much more advanced thing than the M40.

    here I agree - but Mr. talked about preparation. although I agree - we will not discuss
    And wait a day until they arrive. And not everyone will come. There is no need to teach Americans here, I assure you.

    are Americans so bad with logistics in the war zone?
    It depends on what kind of shelter. It depends on the mortar. Watching how equipped - mortars are not always there. Do you really think that army snipers, having come under fire, should look for a mortar?

    correct me if I'm wrong, but from your phrase you can understand that snipers go whole units?
    A working heavy machine gun can be seen visually at substantially greater ranges. And after 10x, a sight to help.

    I won’t argue here - but then we need to talk about the fact that the soldiers allow the enemy to detect themselves at distances of more than 1000 meters, which in turn indicates low training
  15. 0
    18 June 2015 14: 01
    Quote: utlyakov
    But can you read more about the reset? how do you imagine - a sniper (attached to a platoon) armed with at least two rifles?

    If in this area the natives put nomadic groups with heavy machine guns, then the sniper should give out something adequate for this case. At least in order to keep the enemy away from such fire contacts (1,5 km or more), or bear losses. Still, it’s one thing when you are fired from large-caliber weapons from a distance of 1 km, another is from 1,5-2 km. And it’s a shame when they shot at you, damaged something, injured someone or killed someone. And then they dumped, not waiting for retribution.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Regardless of his level of training, he is right: the L115A3 is a much more advanced thing than the M40.

    But there is a nuance. Ammo is more expensive, rifle is more expensive. High pressure cartridges, barrels wear out quickly. At the same time, these trunks require higher quality, as a result of which they have to either be replaced almost every 150-200 shots, or put up with a reduced accuracy of fire. And a sniper already requires more talent than skill.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    As for tactics, the .50BMG rifle can weigh 7,7 kg (MD50), almost like a .308 rifle (GALATZ). There is a question of understanding the tasks of snipers in the unit.

    As far as I understand, the Marines in question are talking more about advanced Marxmen than about full-fledged sniper deuces. Those. it would be nice to have something like SVD, but over long distances. It is possible that you get something like the MD50. It is even possible to loosen the cartridge, reducing the pressure and thus cheapening the cartridge-rifle complex in production and operation. Marxman usually does not even need ultra-high accuracy. If the probability of hitting the target is 30-50%, it may well come down to it, then he and the store in a self-loading rifle.
    1. 0
      18 June 2015 21: 33
      I apologize, do you seriously believe that in every, well, for example, KMP company there is a sniper hitting targets at a distance of 1500 meters, well, at least in 8 cases out of 10? even with a rifle allowing the pool to have enough energy at that distance?
  16. 0
    18 June 2015 16: 43
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    But this is not what I would mean by army snipers. I confess, I thought about the Special Forces of the GRU. I was glad for them.

    Punch on Google the competition in memory of captain Berlin. Although they are now either stalled or classified, some information comes across, albeit outdated. For example, the command of military unit 92154 seems to be related to the Special Forces of the GRU. At competitions were spotted with Stayer Manlicher.

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    338, IMHO, it will be cheaper.

    If you count the training in long-distance shooting, the salary of the resulting specialist, the number of rounds that will have to be burned, the trunks that will have to be changed ... And the rocket to Javelin cost only 50 thousand, and the US Army was discounted :).
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The pathos of the article is the mismatch of the standard NATO patron of the modern situation.

    But non-standard cartridges also have their own specifics. What is good for an athlete is not always good for a military man. You can try to sacrifice a little ballistics, increasing the caliber to 9-10mm with the same cartridge power. The maximum pressure will decrease, it will be possible to use cheaper powder, a cheaper sleeve, the barrel will wear out less. The cartridges of the USSR just differ in this, their maximum pressure is less than that of NATO.
  17. 0
    19 June 2015 11: 51
    Quote: voyaka uh
    for Malkor:
    You have listed weapons and tasks roughly correctly.
    In our infantry (25 years ago, when I served) there were
    Three types of snipers:
    1) attacking snipers with the usual long M-16 (5.56) on
    which mounted the optical sight, added legs
    and a nozzle on the butt. They went on the offensive with
    all, but could choose goals for themselves up to 400m
    (we usually opened fire from 150 m).
    2) snipers of fire support groups. They had the M-14
    (7,62 mm) with the same optical sight on the legs.
    They fired along with machine gunners at 400-700 m
    (machine gunners approximately, with a fan, snipers - aiming).
    3) "long-range" snipers. They had special "wound" guns
    (I do not remember the name). They worked separately (not as part of
    companies). They could be assigned to the battalion on special occasions.

    minus 100% due to the fact that a Jew)))
  18. 0
    19 June 2015 12: 00
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    All other leaders are clerical, Ministry of Internal Affairs and, above all, the FSO.

    The competition was imprisoned for police tasks. Only not all participants knew what they would be in. Nevertheless, many were invited, including amateur teams. So leadership is not the main thing there. The main information. Perhaps that is why we have not seen a continuation since then.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Of course, it may be worth removing snipers in general, more fuss.

    If stable results are needed, the human factor has to be reduced. Everything depends on the cost, people are still relatively cheap and versatile.
    According to the Marxman-military snipers, the case was in the 90s, turret mounts were riveted, moreover, it seemed not very heavy, in the region of 20 kg. In the sense, he came, decomposed, clamped his AP-15 in the mounts, and he himself got into the nearest basement and opened the laptop there. And this is back in those days when the batteries were bad, unlike the current ones. But then something this business died out. And so a typical opportunity to turn a sniper into an operator, as required.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I would not say .338 is wildkat

    This is understandable for the military and developed. Well, what about the adoption? Solid bolts, like the L115A3, which they won’t give out to anyone. They are usually given out to specially trained sniper pairs, which are attracted as necessary. And it is clear that the designated US Marine flies in this situation. Sniper couples at all you will not stockpile. And to give the military sniper the indicated rifles - well, how much will he fight alone, under fire, without a second number, without time for corrections and sighting? Under these conditions, self-charging of the SVD type is clearly needed. What in service in none of the countries seems to be observed.
  19. +1
    19 June 2015 12: 08
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What for? Purely for originality?

    To get hold of a rifle with which you can act like an SVD. If necessary, without adjustments and amendments to conduct firing at long range targets, relying purely on statistics. Here stability comes to the fore. What about the cartridge, what about the rifle. And the fact that instead of 0,5 MOA, as in .338 Lapua Magnum, for 1 km you get 1 MOA, in this situation it is not so critical. 1MOA for a military sniper is already a good result, in many cases it will not physically pull out physically anymore. Talent is not enough. Those who have talent, they go in sniper pairs, and not jump with the marines under bullets. Next in caliber. With increasing pressure in the chamber, the complexity of manufacturing shells and barrels begins to grow exponentially. At .338 Lapua Magnum, the pressure in the chamber is 420 MPa. At .416 Rigby 325MPa - such low rates are not necessary for us. But 420 is almost too much for almost match trunks, if we want to use them often and for a long time, like the same SVD. So 9 mm, maybe even 9,5. At 12,7 NATO cartridge, the pressure in the chamber is 380MPa, at our 360MPa. That's about these values ​​and count. Another moment. 0,5 MOA is often achieved by the rigid construction of bullets, all-brass for example, enhancing barrel wear. So FIG with this 0,5 MOA. 1 MOA per 1,5 thousand yards is about 15 inches, about 40 cm. Not perfect, but bearable. You won’t get into the head, but a heavy bullet would fly through the carcass through a bulletproof vest, and the machine gun would have the strength to disassemble. On this and focus.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I would not say that a sniper cartridge.

    Hunting. He generally side tasks.
  20. Dam
    0
    21 June 2015 22: 50
    Sorry dear, but the article is stupid, and the argument is nothing. If we consider the marines as infantry, then to hell they do not need sniper weapons more powerful than 308 win, but if we consider them as a special unit, then it all depends on the combat mission and the terrain. Ordinary army sniper - Marxman no need for weapons working further than 800m. The motorized rifle company has other ways to accomplish this task. It is impossible to arm and train the sniper of each department to work with the expensive 300 win mag trunk and above. It is expensive and impractical even for partners, dogs. And as for the professionals of specialists, there is no limit to perfection. But in general, a comparison of such different trunks, this is a comparison of x with a finger, sorry for the French.
  21. 0
    22 June 2015 13: 03
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    ...

    In general, what I mean, in order. SVD has a weak cartridge. The armor-piercing is insufficient, the ballistics at distances of 800+ is bad. To increase armor-piercing performance, the rifle was modified at the time, impairing accuracy. I would like to get a new self-loading, which will be increased and range and accuracy. At the same time, it would not be much more expensive and more complicated than the SVD in operation. Weight within 6-6,5 kg - as far as I remember, the practical maximum for the average fighter. The energy of the bullet is 6-6,5 kJ. Snipers and hunters keep the return for the given parameters, while doing without DTK. So you can put a tactical silencer, which will more closely correspond to the purpose of the weapon. There is no need to suppress yourself and your neighbors, and at the same time stand out from the entire rifle group. And at distances of 500+, the tactical silencer will work almost like a full-fledged one, also good.
    At the same time, in the same NATO, cartridges of 8,6 × 70 mm, in the sense of .338 Lapua Magnum, have long been adopted. You can focus on this cartridge, but there are problems. Target cartridge, sniper. It's expensive. Weapons for him are also expensive. And does not live long, the trunks wear out for 200-1500-3000 shots, depending on the price and destination. And we need at least 6000 to be. Characteristics are excessive, 0,5 MOA per 1 km - the average shooter obviously does not pull that much. In general, for a combined arms rifle it turns out too specific and expensive. So it is not surprising that only bolts were adopted for this cartridge, there are no self-charges. Those. all this business is intended for high-grade snipers. But there are still average combined arms snipers. They also would not hurt to provide the opportunity to shoot at a distance of 1-1,2 km. At the same time, they absolutely do not need to hit the head target from the first shot - the rifle for them (the same SVD) is therefore made self-loading and with a capacious magazine. So you can invent such a cartridge-rifle complex that will have less but acceptable accuracy and cost, and the weapon for it will still be quite light, while it will have less wear and more reliability. The easiest way to solve this problem head on is to use larger caliber bullets.
  22. 0
    22 June 2015 13: 08
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    So you in vain equate accuracy to pressure. Pressure is a range.

    Pressure is energy. The pressure acts on an area proportional to the square of the caliber and does the job, passing the entire length of the barrel. Suppose we have a .338 LM cartridge emitting 6,5 kJ of energy at a pressure of 420. If, other things being equal, we want to lower the pressure, we will have to increase the caliber. The decrease is proportional to the square of the caliber. For a 9,3mm bullet, we get a pressure of 360. What will it give us? The accuracy will decrease, since the ballistics of the cartridge will be less sniper (the bullet is more pot-bellied or the initial speed is lower). But there will be a more tenacious pool entrance behind the chamber. And there is less general heating, precise trunks also do not like it - you can use up more cartridges in less time.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    If you pick up exactly 9,5 mm and 380 MPA, you will get 9.3x64 Brenneke, he is also a sniper 7N33.

    They took a cheap cartridge for hunting and shooting. And they tried without any changes to make him a sniper. Did not work out. The creators of .338 LM also did not work at one time. But if they rested on the horn, they would have received exactly the same junk.
    Well, if you don’t like the idea of ​​increasing the caliber, then propose a different way to make the .338 LM cartridge less expensive to manufacture and operate. I assume that its parameters for the combined arms sniper are excessive.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    If there were - it would be possible to solve something with 7,62x54, and 12.7x108, and with something in between.

    About that and speech. What should be this middle? Offer a lot. But I would be guided by the indicated ultimate mass of weapons 6kg and energy 6-6,5kJ. And that there was a full-fledged military caliber, so that not only rifles, but the same machine guns for it could be made. .338 LM is not one of those.
  23. 0
    23 June 2015 19: 50
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The article is about replacing the bolt M40 with another bolt rifle. Americans write that everyone already has fashionable rifles, but the ILC does not. In principle, everything is quite logical.

    Is logical. In the article, the porters want precisely a high-precision rifle for long distances. Not what I wrote about.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    But in your calculations you forget that the aerodynamic drag is also proportional to the square of the caliber, so in order to "catch up" with the .300 Win. You will need to increase the cartridge much more.

    1. with increasing caliber bullets become heavier. Their ability to store energy increases - you can give a lower initial speed, thus reducing resistance. At the same time, there are fewer problems with stabilization, because of the larger diameter, it is less necessary to peel the sides of these bullets against rifling to give the necessary rotation. This has a positive effect on accuracy. On the other hand, flatness is much worse.
    2. In the case of the transition from 5,56 to 7,62, no serious problems seem to arise. With an increase in the distance required for a confident defeat, we observe an increase in the caliber and power of rifles. There is of course the same .223 WSSM. Very sniper-friendly, flat. But at the same time it is unreliable and expensive to operate. Same with .50 and .408 CheyTac. The .50 is a normal cartridge, and the .408 CheyTac is a lightweight, high-speed cartridge with inherent problems and advantages. True, it was spoiled a little for commercial reasons, by increasing the resistance and adjusting the trajectory to .50. Here we come to the .338 Lapua Magnum. This cartridge is also "overclocked". For snipers with bolts just right, but for mass shooters, burning thousands of cartridges, it's not the same. This means that you can probably pick up a "normal" cartridge with similar characteristics, even if it becomes less sniper and larger caliber. Another thing is that there has been no demand for such cartridges yet. And now, over time, it may appear.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    as the caliber grows, the barrel (in calibers) becomes shorter.

    An ambiguous thing. Although the barrel length is a useful parameter (remember the same RPK74, which serves to manufacturers of cartridges in test shooting), it’s not critical. Otherwise, benchmarks in the case of .50 caliber would turn into the ultimate perverts with nothing like hefty aggregates. Although there may be some.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    You are talking about a distance of 1-1,2 km. These are indicators of a rifle chambered for .300 Win,

    Given the fact that systems with an accuracy of 0,5MOA are not needed. Those. no marginal costly parameters are required. Mass cartridge, mass rifle, average shooter. As snipers have done for the last 3/4 centuries, so can the Marxmanns upgrade. At a short distance bulletproof vests, walls and equipment will be perforated. On large ones - compete with snipers, hitting the target not from 1-2 shots, but say from the 5th or even from the 10th. You won’t get into the machine gunner, so you can hit the second number.
  24. 0
    23 June 2015 19: 50
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    As for the .300 Win rifles, they are also in the self-loading version, albeit in a small number

    But there are few of them, and they do not like to take them into service. Under the PSR program, Remington MSR won, not FN Ballista for example. The goals of the cartridges are specifically sniper. The rate of fire and multiple charges for these purposes are useless; simplicity and reliability are more important.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    For example, the .338 Norma Magnum is a more "bottle" case, longer and heavier Very-low-drag bullet. Perhaps the truth is out there somewhere.

    A very long bullet, which needs to be greatly unwound to stabilize, reducing the pitch of the rifling. I don’t know how good it is. SVD short step rifling for the benefit did not go. To return accuracy as it was, it took more new and sophisticated bullets. So, this bullet also surely has a lot of tricks. In the sense of such burn boxes, but not zinc, otherwise go broke. But I am interested in the mass cartridge.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    There is still a production side. And here - death, whatever one may say.

    This is clear. Which private shooter enthusiast needs bullets with poor ballistics? The military, too, has not yet been baked, they wanted to strengthen the sniper cartridge. And for hunters, other parameters are also more important. But still, I wonder if the massive large-caliber cartridge will be less than .50 in the next 25 years. The USSR is gone, but there are the same Chinese.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    And the last one. What are the options for Russia. I'm afraid, except for fine-tuning the mind of SVD (attempts to produce high-quality barrels and match cartridges) - none.

    Brought to mind, SVD is SVDM. But the cartridge is the same. And the distance from the declared has turned into an effective one. The trunk, by the way, got fatter. SVD is just an example; the task in its production and design was non-trivial, but it was solved.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Noreen "Bad news" ULR 338 - 5,9 kg. SVDK - 6,5 kg.

    walked through the structures. The same M40. Upgraded to М40А1 - got fat. М40А3 - they have become generally unbearable (for 7kg), but they can hit a distance of up to 1 km with a weak cartridge. Therefore, I am not talking about sniper rifles, but about "Marksman" rifles. Accuracy is useful, but not at the expense of mass. The shooter is dressed like everyone else, in a helmet and a bulletproof vest. Runs like everyone else. On occasion, it can dive into the mud with the rifle.
  25. 0
    24 June 2015 18: 35
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Is Ballista self-winding? Not heard before

    I'm sorry. I just rummaged around, looking for what was being adopted there on a massive scale from a self-loading under a powerful cartridge. Well, I dug up a domestic article. So yes, in the program all the participants of the bolt are, apparently the program itself is like that.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Does the .408 CheyTac artificially lower sun? Such statements did not come across.

    Too guilty. Then I already confused Barrett with a .416 side. Also a piece chiseled bronze bullet, expensive and quickly killing trunks. But only it was made for .50 lovers in order to continue to practice, despite the limitations of the law. Well, they made a notch in the bottom to fly as .50.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What does the Chinese have to do with it? Calm people, without too much ambition. Switch to STANAG - I won’t be surprised.

    Does STANAG have gauges intermediate between 7,62 and .50?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    It seems to me that Lapua and benchrests have some understanding of this.

    The military, unlike athletes and amateurs, periodically needs to either shoot a helmet or a body armor. Yes, so that the bullet does not start tumbling already along the way because of any nonsense, like a burned out tracer. In general, the longer the bullet, the more difficult it is to stabilize. And over a long distance, problems with penetration will begin, because the bullet is already sideways to the trajectory begins to go. A rabbit in an open field with 1000 yards will not hurt to ditch. But this is not enough for the military.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    .308 Win cartridge gives acceptable accuracy at distances of up to a kilometer

    Power is small.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The cartridge described by you, I repeat, .375 Win

    Not at all. Bullet gun, for underbarrel tubular stores. Power is 2 times less than necessary. Antiques in a new way, in general.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I’ll tell you more, shooting even a mile from .50BMG when there are .408 and .338 is a perversion in itself.

    But it’s quite a live cartridge, relatively cheap to manufacture and carefully related to the trunks. But at the same time there is too much energy, recoil and a mass of weapons.
  26. 0
    24 June 2015 18: 37
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I am constantly under the impression that we are talking about several different things.

    I think of a cartridge intermediate between 7,62 and .50. So that it was possible to charge with a machine gun, and fairly accurate self-loading based on it could be done. Energy in the region of 6kJ. He began to think because of a misunderstanding of the meaning of the article. It was not clear that it was precisely the sniper group that fell under the shelling, which in such circumstances is generally supposed to retire, and not to arrange a duel with a machine gunner.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Can you illustrate your thought with some other really existing model?

    In general, according to the logic, these are obtained: 9,3 × 64, .375 H&H Magnum. And .375 Dakota as an exclusive. Is there somewhere a table for them, by energy and scatter depending on the distance?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    to distant snipers - also .338 (that's why I say .408 is not far off

    .408 is too powerful, so it’s impossible to replace the DTK with a silencer. And the rifle is heavy.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Then a new intermediate cartridge with ballistics, for example, 6.5mm Grendel, will close all distances up to 1200-1300 m with one universal infantry-Marxman complex with interchangeable barrels.

    6.5 Grendel flies well, but the power of the cartridge is very small.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    In this situation, a single machine gun, in order to make any sense, should switch to ballistics .338 LM

    Yes, but the .338 LM is a special sniper cartridge for long-range shooting. For these purposes, the cost of cartridges and barrel wear are not so critical. And for a single machine gun are critical. If you take into service, then the ammunition will have to burn millions of pieces. And how to get out in a similar situation? I thought that instead of the exclusive .338 LM, you can pick up something larger in caliber, but cheaper in production and operation. But if you say that it’s impossible and it’s necessary to immediately switch to tank calibers, then okay.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. Then the thought stops.

    As usual, Cord on the machine.
  27. 0
    24 June 2015 18: 58
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    ...

    More foreign rifles, again Steyr Mannlicher again for the elite: http://spec-naz.org/forum/forum26/topic3005/. But I bought the MO, then in service :).
  28. 0
    25 June 2015 16: 20
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    This is not the case. And the fact that there will be no race. Nobody is going to prove anything to anyone.

    On the contrary. Everyone is constantly proving something. Ceramic plates, although outdated, but they already held armor-piercing from the SVD point-blank. A good helmet holds a pistol bullet. New designs and materials are being promoted all the time. So the race is already there. Take the same Chinese. Their 5,8x42 rumored to follow a path similar to 6,5 Grendel.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do not understand. Do you think that General Dynamics makes a fool of the Pentagon with its LWMMG under .338 Norma Magnum?

    There were many projects that were never taken into service. Is this machine gun accepted? They will shoot at the acceptance of the armor plate from 1 km (and what else, the replacement of large-caliber, which means it should be). And wrapped up for revision. And how to modify with such a cartridge? The pitch rifling and so small. To make it smaller - the wear of the barrel will increase and the heating will increase, they can again wrap it up. And in general, there are many examples of ammunition in service with a bullet of such relative length?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    And .338 LM is not from the Pentagon contest, is it?

    From the competition for sniper cartridge. Those. they didn’t count on machine guns.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What does it mean too small? A helmet will not break? I have not heard that.

    With 1000, a helmet can break through if it does not go to a rebound. But there are still modern helmets with body armor. And even just unloading with stores holding 5,45. As well as arrows that are unable to aim a rifle in the head with 1000 yards. Especially if the owner of the head is in motion - here seasoned snipers begin to aim at the carcass. With 6,5 Grendel - there is another moment. The parameters are adjusted so that the machine gunners turn into Marxmanns as well.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    You have specified caliber and pressure. I called you a cartridge.

    But this is a rifle cartridge for lever rifles. They are almost revolving, with pistol powder and bullets.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Only the caliber is not bigger, but smaller, + a long bullet grinds the chrome barrel for 6K shots even at low pressure.

    The 6,5 Grendel bullet has an elongation similar to a .338LM bullet, but not a .338NM bullet. And 6K is practically the norm for combined arms weapons. In extreme training, you can attribute two machines to a fighter. Worn - for short distances, fresh - for long. In general, an excellent cartridge. But not for the case when a reliable defeat at a long distance is required, there is not enough power.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What does the Benchresters care about all this?

    Someone must illustrate that a large caliber without long trunks in any way. How critical is this ratio, caliber / barrel length? It is clear that it is important, but there are tolerances, quantities, when some parameters are in the foreground, and some can already be neglected.
  29. 0
    25 June 2015 16: 21
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Ballistics is much worse, this is important.

    No, the main thing is when the cartridge can be riveted by millions and loaded into machine guns. In this regard, .408 is not a competitor to .50. And if so, then the .50 rifles will continue to rivet, and squeeze out everything that is possible from the caliber. And even a spoiled .408, fitted along the trajectory under .50, was launched. So mass has an advantage over specifics.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Pancake. This is, called .338 LM.

    7,62 has normal operating and wear parameters. And at .50 too. So between them, too, you can figure out such a cartridge, without frills. .338 - both with frills. 9,3 × 64 and .375 H&H Magnum - simpler, but hunting. What if you start customizing them under the 6,5 Grendel format? The sleeve is shorter and lighter, the gunpowder is different, the bullet is more correct? Stops one. The creators had a mountain of materials from the civilian market for experiments. For a larger caliber, the situation is worse.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    But what is this? Different cartridges, different bullets, different weapons. Of course not. But it is unlikely that you will find something like this under a hunting cartridge. Usually accuracy is reduced to a weapon, not a cartridge.

    Here I am about that. How to deal with the same 9,3 × 64? Tables such as "Dispersion characteristics for SVD" from here (http://zakongrif.ru/swat/prefire/view/78.htm) cannot be found on them. And ballistic calculators will help only indirectly, giving the speed at a distance.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    And what, 50-k is not in service?

    Yes, but too powerful and heavy. And without a compensator, almost nothing.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The energy is a quarter higher than that of 7,62x39, at a distance of 1000 meters the energy is like that of the .45 ACP at the muzzle end. If without a heavy armor - enough with a margin. And close and bronik will not save.

    It has been saving for a long time. Therefore, they start talking about lack of power, not even in the intermediate, but in sniper cartridges 7,62x54 and 7,62x51. In order to break through even if not a bulletproof vest, the spirit must be knocked out from the first hit. At the same time, to hit further and harder from machine guns. It turned out SVDK, but what is wrong with her is not clear. No cartridge data for example. And about how they tried to solve this problem.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Yes, for a machine gun, it is not necessary to grind bullets from a single piece of metal.

    Also, shells with capsules need to be cheaper, and gunpowder is simpler. And then suddenly it may turn out that the .408 cartridge will become completely none, worse than .50.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    On the other hand, lighten machine guns under .50 - LW50MG, 28 kg on a tripod machine.

    Did he seem to be abandoned? The prototype is all.
  30. 0
    25 June 2015 16: 21
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    How to approach. For rifles - not so important.

    If there are many rifles, it is also important. In general, I think we need to look at the Chinese. They are similar to the USSR in their time, are not tied to world markets, and have their own military doctrine. If such a cartridge appears, then they need it for something. And NATO without a serious enemy on the horizon will not flutter. They drive more than any partisans who have less money and opportunities.
  31. 0
    26 June 2015 16: 42
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Since the 80s in service and still "rumored"? Is this a "race"? It seems that the Chinese are not urgent.

    When did the USSR provide the world community with a cartridge of 7,62x39 and weapons for it? So it may be with China. They don’t shine their defense.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Yes. Again. Do you know a cartridge in which your ideas would be implemented?

    Mass for military needs - no. 8x63 does not count, of course.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    No. I said, "if they scare you a lot." While they are shooting back with what they are, not to say that it turns out badly.

    Well. And when needed, they are this .338 NM cartridge and weapons under it can easily be cut off due to too long a bullet.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I don’t get it. It seems like NM is an attempt to fit LM with a filperperson bullet into a standard chamber. Am I confusing something?

    And at the same time, he got a bullet with a ratio of length and diameter of about 6. And there’s no way to make a shorter bullet. Whereas the rest of the sniper cartridges have a ratio of about 5.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Not so often they are in Afghanistan and the like.

    Well, then the problem is really not worth it, since it’s not supposed to be at war with anyone serious. Those. it should be a headache in other countries than to break through NATO members and from what.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What for? This is not a Kalash. All modern devices have interchangeable trunks.

    Well, if it’s so serious that you can change the barrel on the fly without shooting, then okay.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Nevertheless, if such a cartridge with a long barrel will retain supersonic at 1100m, then neither .308, nor even .300 Win Mag will become relevant

    They will remain relevant if it is necessary not only to hit, but also to disable the target from the first shot. But this is more for police tasks.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Compare the energy of the bullet in the trunks of different lengths, at least for the same Grendel.

    Starting from a certain length, the growth becomes insignificant, as it should be. But I'm not talking about energy, but about accuracy. I understood the remark about the ratio of barrel length to caliber as an explanation of the inability to ensure high accuracy for large caliber cartridges.
  32. 0
    26 June 2015 16: 54
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The phrase you quote refers to artisanal cartridges. What does the machine gunners have to do with it?

    This is my answer to the following: "I'll tell you more, shooting even a mile from a .50BMG when there is a .408 and .338 is in itself a perversion." There are no gross .408 and .338. But .50 riveted a lot and without problems. As a result, many fans of accurate shooting from the .50. Another thing is that it is expensive and all sorts of prohibitions. And I brought this case as an illustration, under the need for a mass cartridge, from which then to make special, increased accuracy. And not vice versa, make machine-gun cartridges from sniper cartridges. Although I did not find anything at prices for combat .338 LM. Anyway, I don’t know how much 7,62x51 and .50 cost the same army. By the way, in order to visit the Lapua website, I had to hide the IP, the Russians are not allowed in, it seems - the constant "server not found".
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Are you talking about match cartridges for benchrest?

    No, I'm talking about a cartridge that can be adopted and burn with zinc without the risk of going broke. So for the same .338 LM and NM you need a cost comparison with other cartridges. Well, along the trunks, too - so as not to require too expensive or poorly machined steel.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Once again, the tables are given to the weapon, not the cartridge.

    There is such a characteristic as scattering from the machine. This is what they say when they indicate that a given batch of cartridges provides 1/4 MOA at 100 yards. Those. It's enough? Will there be 1/4 MOA until the bullet falls back behind the sound barrier?

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Will not pass. You will come to the same reason why you left.

    Surely the same .338 LM and NM. Either you have to give the pool too much kick, or lengthen. Or use specials. sights in order to be able to introduce too large corrections in height for heavy bullets, i.e. like shooters with extra long distances. Most likely the latter.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    But still there. And the return .408 CT is still much lower.

    Not so much as to refuse from the compensator. So it’s better to stay at 6 kJ.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Horseradish ammo quality, primitive bullet, outdated rifle design and outdated production standards. As a result, the range is not better than the usual SVD, and the accuracy is worse.

    But the question remains, what kind of cartridges are there, what accuracy and what effective distance could they provide. For example, forged bolt rifle.
  33. 0
    26 June 2015 16: 54
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do not understand. What do you miss?

    The same scattering when firing from the machine. There would be a good barrel, and the bolt for the machine can be riveted on the knee. The creators of the cartridge somehow evaluate its potential.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do not understand. Did I say somewhere about .408 machine guns? I'm only talking about .338.

    .408 has something to compare. Alternative .338 for comparison - only hunting cartridges. The .338 LM itself with a hunting bullet does not even reach 1000 m.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    How many Remington MSR are there? $ 79 million for 5 rifles and 150 million rounds?

    So here's the thing :). They ordered a few rifles, they were stolen, the marines got nothing.
    ...
    Well, in general, I agree. Taking something like a 6.5mm Grendel into service is more important and interesting than thinking about new cartridges between 7,62 and 12,7. Excavated old Amerov articles. There, 7,62x51 for a sniper was considered quite sufficient, since the Kalash in response would not be targeted.
  34. 0
    27 June 2015 15: 30
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    10 years later, in Hungary. Present-day China is not a Stalinist USSR. Everyone knows who is so interested.

    They know that there are cartridges, weapons. And that’s it. And who can test, except for the Chinese themselves?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The present China is not a Stalinist USSR

    But there is an intersection of interests with the United States. Not to mention the neighbors. So surely their general staff is developing a whole range of different strategic plans. And if so, then a weapon with ammunition for this business should be designed.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    By a strange coincidence, all countries with a developed industrial base do not pose such a task.

    OCD "Burglar" what was it, interesting? And then everywhere they write that it was that the competition, that SVDK won. And what is the essence of the task - no. Only individual notes that they wanted to get something like SVD, for the same ranges, only more powerful and armor-piercing.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    On the fly is not necessary. In any case, more convenient than 2 machines

    Tasks are easier to combine with two machines. In one day, you can work out in short bursts in both bursts and singles. And with disassembling weapons it is better to poke around later and somewhere separately.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    More energy - speed - flatness - accuracy. Smaller rifling angle. We have already been to this place.

    I'm generally talking about logic. For example, to make .50 cartridges for barrels with a length of 1,5 m instead of 1,1 m, with the same energy a bullet will fly more precisely?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    With 7.62 - 5-10 times, with 50 bmg - the same.

    And the trunks for wear and price, how? Although there the information is even more of a market nature than in the situation with cartridges.
  35. 0
    27 June 2015 15: 30
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The best result achieved. You can usually find out which weapon.

    Right? I have information that in this way separate stable batches of cartridges are marked. Made at the same time from components of the same parties. Selective firing from this batch showed a stable result of at least 1/4 MOA. As a result, a fan-shooter can buy a batch, shoot a rifle under this cartridge and be sure that nothing will change until he shoots the whole batch. The military seems to be unable to afford it.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    No. The more time it takes to fly 100 meters, the stronger the deviation in the segment increases, but smoothly. Then - a leap. View your table on svd.

    Approximately 500-600 m, depending on the cartridge, scattering in angular units begins to grow noticeably. Before the loss of a decrease in speed below the sound, the matter still does not reach it later. And up to 500m in the table everything is linear.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Sight is not a problem. What will you make of? Tungsten? Uranus? Very uncomfortable.

    The usual replacement for steel is lead. In the combined arms bullets became a lot. Sniper based on them - often with voids, or a filler lighter than lead. Those. if the cartridge with the core was originally designed, then there should be no problems with mass buildup. Another thing is that an accurate determination of the distance is required, the influence of the difference in wind speed at different heights due to a less gentle trajectory is amplified. So okay, figs with him, with weight for sniper purposes. It's just about a military cartridge, like .50, but a smaller caliber. It is interesting why they jumped from rifle cartridges to 12,7.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Lobaev did not stop. Wait and see.

    Lobaev is like everyone else. There would be a cartridge and demand, and riveting a rifle-bolt is a problem of a much smaller scale.
  36. 0
    29 June 2015 19: 09
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Any. $ 3K for the QBU-5,56 variant converted to 88.

    So they write that the Chinese are boasting that their original cartridge has better characteristics than 5.56 and especially 5,45. They even draw the effective range of 300m in the 5,56 variant and 500m in the 5,8 variant to the same machine. And still in RuNet no refutations. Well, what can I think, but how did the Chinese rivet their 6,5 Grendel version? They also have an interesting layout, an easy bullet for machine guns, a heavy one for machine guns and sniper rifles. Those. distance seems to have prevailed over perseverance.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do you think small arms will help?

    The only known way to take control of the territory is to drive in large quantities of infantry. Therefore, small arms should always keep up with the times.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do you think that there is not enough?

    Watching for what purpose. If you really need to cut your territory from your neighbors, then it would be nice to get an advantage in the same shooter. According to them, they have already gained an advantage over the main world 5,45 / 7,62 / 5,56, if that.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Shooting from a specific rifle, very good, of course.

    There is no special difference, anyway from the machine. There would be a good trunk.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The gas pressure will act on the bullet longer as it leaves the barrel. Accordingly, accelerate more, energy is higher. + rifling can be made more gentle, as the bullet twists longer in the barrel.

    That's why I mentioned that a cartridge of similar power. In one, gunpowder burns out quickly, in the second, gradually. So there is only less load on the bullet. And the speed increase starting from a certain barrel length becomes too small. Here, depending on what barrel length the cartridge is designed for.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Yes. At such distances, the bullet flies very quickly, its braking is not yet noticeable

    Just the faster the bullet, the greater the air resistance. The vast majority of energy is lost in the first hundred meters. At 500m there is already a third left. With a speed a little better, but it drops significantly faster precisely in the first hundred meters. You must compensate by raising the lateral load and the mass of the bullet. The bullet will receive less speed, but it will lose it more slowly. But with farewell goodbye.
  37. 0
    29 June 2015 19: 12
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    By the way, what is this trunk svd for?

    In theory, they should be on a relatively fresh SVD, in which ballistics is spoiled. Although the Internet is still, anything can be.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Bad idea. 40 percent weight increase for a non-shell bullet

    Why shellless? We replace the steel core with lead. By the way, the Chinese left a 5,8 core, but still had to lengthen the bullet in order to raise the mass. It seemed that they considered a soft bullet in the shell not corresponding to the spirit of the time and practical tasks, therefore they left the core for armor-piercing. For SVD, again, not so long ago they made a sniper (by our standards) armor-piercing bullet.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Because there was already a machine gun cartridge. I did not understand the question

    That's about it and why the machine-gun cartridge made such a leap, up to 12,7? Not up to 9,3 and not up to 14,5?
  38. 0
    30 June 2015 15: 13
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I do not remember the interest in this cartridge in sports.

    Was there an opportunity to evaluate it, or are the Chinese only exporting 5,56 for export? Such an option is quite possible.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    5,8 - conventional low-pulse cartridge

    According to Grendel, one doesn’t immediately say that something is a remarkable cartridge.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    USA to China? China to the USA? Are you serious?

    If the States make mistakes, then China in the United States is easy. The United States has good territories, no worse than our Far Eastern ones. And a bunch of islands. The Chinese infantry is enough to set curfews, concentration camps and everything attached to a full occupation at every corner by platoon. This is still not the Russian Federation, where conscripts have to scoop up gophers.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What for? Sold inexpensively.

    How much is Taiwan? Or our Far East?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I did not understand what you called similar power.

    Gunpowder charge. Or rather muzzle energy, since gunpowder - it is every and every.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Deviation depends not only on distance, but also on time in flight.

    And from the density of the bullet material, too.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Hence the idea of ​​high-speed cartridges with high accuracy, from 5,56 to WSSM.

    A gentle trajectory that minimizes the amendments introduced plays an important role there.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Both kinetic energy and resistance are proportional to the square of the speed.

    Resistance does not have such an unambiguous formula. The same bullet format sometimes affects so that the coefficients in the formula also begin to depend on speed.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    With the same energy of a bullet, recoil from a heavier one is stronger

    Not with the same bullet energy. With the same cartridge - a sleeve with mounted gunpowder. A heavy bullet will be able to draw more energy out of the same powder mount with the same barrel. The return will increase in proportion to the energy received, if you look at the school formula: work / energy is equal to the force times the path.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    In this case, the growth of the caliber will again quadratically increase the resistance

    Well, it turns out. The stored energy grows in a cubic dependence, the resistance - in a quadratic. Those. the larger the caliber and length, the less air affects the bullet. This means that a caliber intermediate between 7,62 and 12,7 has a right to exist; its effective range will automatically increase compared to 7,62. Is the gain in effective range with a caliber linear?
  39. 0
    30 June 2015 15: 13
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    amers in general, and Browning in particular, had better production facilities, so the market took its option.

    But the USSR also took 12,7. Is Browning to blame?
    But still interesting. Take someone grendel into service. Expensive of course, the cost of weapons will rise, optics will be required. But this will cause problems with the effective range of conventional rifle cartridges. Which, in addition to accuracy, also requires power. And what, it is necessary to switch to magnums or extra-long bullets?
  40. 0
    1 July 2015 14: 41
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Are you really so low on American intelligence + enthusiasts?

    No one is safe from civil war. Some kind of calamity, then an economic crisis, revealed and developed internal contradictions ... And that’s all, come, mess. And since the power was nuclear, peacekeepers will catch up, if only to ensure that nothing flies over them.
    And again, let's take VO as an example http://topwar.ru/77866-oblako-dronov.html: "In March of this year, the United States issued a report by the Naval Forces" Joint strategy for the sea power of the 21st century (A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower) "In addition to the fact that it clearly shows the main potential enemy of the" democratic "world - China ..."
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    This is serious? What mistakes will drown 10 aug?

    If the top is divided, whose orders will the AUG listen to?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Since the 98th year - in fact, one economy.

    It would be so, there would be no cheese-boring about the control of territories, bulk islands and other nonsense.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    450rub / ha, if not confused.

    To buy land, a plant or some other property - all the same, the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation remains. Taxes, laws and all the rest is attached.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    It's funny to say, but it depends on the length of the barrel.

    But we must start from some kind of constant that characterizes the cartridge. Manufacturers shot a cartridge from some barrel and announced the characteristics. You can of course push the pistol cartridge into the gun barrel, and there will be an increase. And the point, a penny?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    This is less significant.

    Almost the main parameter. If it weren’t for technical limitations, they would have used cartridges with a speed of 1300 m / s and higher. Everyone wants a railgun. The same ballistics for small-caliber intermediate cartridges in practice - the use of a linear section of the trajectory.
  41. 0
    1 July 2015 14: 41
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Specify the law of distribution of momentum.

    There's no such thing. Something similar comes across only in thermodynamics. So what remains is Newton’s third law and the physical meaning of work in mechanics. So it turns out that with the same muzzle energy, the longer the barrel, the softer the recoil. If we take into account the nature of the combustion of gunpowder, then you just need to proportionally distribute the pressure curve along the length of the barrel, selecting the appropriate gunpowder and sleeve.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    No. Since the relationship is cubic, the "average" in mass will be very close to 12,7.

    And yet. For gross cartridges, not magnums, with a normal proportion of bullets: 1,5 kJ - 5,56 mm, 3 kJ - 7,62 mm. 16kJ - 12,7mm. And the increase in range goes in parallel. 6kJ - why again 12,7?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Later. Answer.

    I rummaged in the internet on this issue. So far, only thought came across that on the Tula cartridge in the late 20s there was such equipment that a half-inch caliber was more convenient to manufacture than say 12,5 or 13.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    As such, the problem will not arise, just their tactical niche will be closed by an intermediate cartridge.

    The intermediate cartridge will not be able to fully close this niche. For a low-pulse bullet, the problem is even to unload with stores under the same cartridge to break through. While full-fledged rifle cartridges need both accuracy and power.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Accordingly, all light weapons of the compartment level are shifted upward in power, or will disappear.

    Power is needed not at the expense of armor-piercing and normal barrel wear.
  42. 0
    3 July 2015 12: 15
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I said that the Americans allegedly did not try 5,8 at the shooting range.

    Tried - would have written. And some Popenker would not miss the opportunity to fire this business on his website.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Seriously? Scotland, Catalonia, Lombardy, Quebec. What kind of civil war?

    There are not serious contradictions there. You need something like that to half of the people come to describe property from banks, and to the other half, no.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    President versus Texas Governor? The President. Is the president against congress? Congress Everything is thought out, do not worry. 150 years without failures.

    President of the North States v. Head of Government of the South States. As the question arises, who should pay for everything, not only Texas will run from the ship.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Great Britain is a nuclear country. And what, someone tensed up?

    They strained about the USSR, although we had almost no war. The Russian Federation has become the legal successor, all weapons to it. And if you started a serious showdown, the troops would be introduced as soon as possible.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The Americans never write the word "enemy", only "threats."

    Well, the Chinese threat still exists. As well as the American one. There is nothing to be done, China is not Canada, the Chinese are able to independently defend their interests, including by force. They have an army and they have a real economy (not just finances, namely agricultural and industry). So the Chinese are able to set and solve large-scale tasks.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What is it about? About Taiwan?

    No, I'm talking about an active foreign policy. Not only diplomacy.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Straight to tears. You see, Russian jurisdiction allows you to do things for which people are shot in China.

    And this is not a topic at all. I’m talking about countries, their politics and their armies. The topic is that ownership is quite formal. Even if you buy land in another country, you will be forced to pay taxes and obey other people's rules and laws. At the same time, in order to even come to this country, a visa will be required each time. Earth is not a territory. You won’t introduce the same army there. You can’t just build a military base there. Resources from there alone will not be allowed to be used in one snout.
  43. 0
    3 July 2015 12: 23
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    2-3 times. I won’t say about 9mm, I don’t remember such experiments, but the .22 LR and .22 WMR pistols and rifles are something like this. TT and PPSh - about 1.5 times.

    .22 LR - Long Rifle. No matter how it fits. In a smoothbore, there is usually no growth at all. TT-PPSh and 1911-Thompson - yes, about 1,5 times. Those. increase the barrel length by 2-2,5 times, we get an increase in energy of 1,5. It’s not thick, because in the consideration of rifles and machine guns, at best, we are talking about changing the barrel length by 10-25%. Those. if we want to fire a bullet a little more steadily, it’s better to strengthen the powder charge than to bring the barrel length to extraordinary values. Therefore .338 are magnums.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I would not be so categorical. Sniper bullets are heavier, not faster.

    There is one. Nevertheless, the heaviest bullets from the line are far from always used. For example, why does a 6,5 Grendel cartridge have a bullet of 7 grams when there are longer 8- and 9-grams? Well, the army option: all bullets, including sniper bullets, are fitted to one standard and one trajectory, as with 7,62x54 cartridges - the weight of the bullets differs slightly from each other.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Here http://www.shooting-ua.com/force_shooting/practice_book_59.htm

    There, the author admits a number of stocks. For example, the question of the perception of bestowal and pressing the butt to the shoulder. Or with the dependence of the return on the presence of a gas vent mechanism. Regarding the mass of the bullet and the recoil there is the following statement - the larger the mass of the bullet, the greater the perceived recoil.
    Well, as it seems, it’s clear that for a complete illustration you need to draw an F (t) graph. The wider, the more efficiently the recoil energy is dissipated. A lighter bullet with the same energy will have a peak exceeding that of a heavy bullet, which means it is possible to exceed the tensile strength of the structure, which accounts for recoil. In the preparation of the equation will have to take into account many parameters that go beyond the capabilities of school physics. Surely somewhere there are ready-made graphs for different occasions.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Then, that 6 kJ for this range needs a long bullet with high ballistics.

    I wrote a number: from 5,56 to 12,7 in energy. Defective row, 5,56 - a much larger magnum than 12,7. But still. Why suddenly such a jump to 6kJ? If we are not talking about theory, but about the actual situation, then everything is simple - technology and finances allowed us to hit sniper specifics. The gross cartridge, not magnum, will have worse parameters than .338 magnums, but better than 7,62.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The range of .50 and .338 rifles declare the same.

    Not just .338, but .338 magnum. Special cartridges, special weapons. And I'm talking about gross cartridge and cheap trunks.
  44. 0
    3 July 2015 12: 23
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    12,7x108 appeared as a development of English 12,7x81

    Those. at the Tula cartridge plant riveted 12,7x81, and then it was strengthened? Or did you buy equipment for the new cartridge designed for the production of 12,7x81? Then we could talk about development. But otherwise than calibers such as 12,3 and 13,5 are worse?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I did not find data on the speed and energy of the bullet 7,62 per 1000 m. It is unlikely to be much better than a grendel.

    300 m / s, 440 J. The transverse load of 7,62x54 is approximately the same as that of 7 Grenadel bullets. In proportions, 7,62 is slightly shorter than 7g Grendel. If you derive purely in proportion, scaling the bullets, the transverse load should also increase. Those. 7,62x54 bullets are too light on Grendelian parameters.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Armor piercing of the paw and sheyteik is definitely no worse than 7,62.

    Thanks to the power and flooring. And so the bullet at a distance starts slightly sideways to the path to go, if stabilized by rotation. Here the additional length begins to play a negative role, increasing the length of the shoulder to the center of mass.
  45. 0
    4 July 2015 15: 55
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Your ideas about public finances and international relations seem to be taken from the same site. If you want, I can explain why they are in no way connected with reality.

    It will not be at all in the subject. I lived in the USSR, I was surprised at the time, how fragile and unstable the state structures once seemed to be unshakable showed themselves. What sucks slid the army in just a couple of years. Well, if you think that the international situation is not conducive to strengthening infantry weapons, then all right.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I did not understand the thought as a whole.

    The dependence of the pressure of gunpowder on the portion of the barrel along which the bullet goes is a gentle curve. It has its own format for a specific cartridge case and a specific powder sample. In rifled weapons on this curve, it is preferable to use a section on which the curve still has decent curvature, and the gunpowder is still burning. If the gunpowder almost burned out, the growth is not the same. The trunk is lengthening, dimensions and mass are growing. In this situation, it is better to take larger gunpowder so that it burns longer and more evenly, and acceleration is more even.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Too short a trunk will give a big overbust and flash.

    There is an optimal length depending on the cartridge. Those. if there is a rifle cartridge, shorten it under it - wasting resources and characteristics. The same thing - to load the intermediate cartridge into the rifle barrel.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    There are no pistol-barreled sniper rifles. All rifles are long, 20 "and up.

    The barrel of the bolts and shorten to 40cm. According to the developers, for 7,62x51 to 500m the scattering of hits is the same.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    You do not agree with this, did I get it right?

    I already wrote at the beginning - not with the same bullet energy. The author considers the same cartridge with different bullets. Those. in my case, from the cartridge with a heavier bullet, part of the powder will have to be dumped. And for a cartridge with a lighter bullet take the gunpowder bigger and smaller. Perceived returns will be stronger, because the graph of force versus time F (t) for the same area (which mainly depends on the energy of the bullet) will have to be shoved into a narrower period of time. Accordingly, he will have no choice but to bulge out. Of course, the redistribution of the impulse also has a certain effect, but the author already messed up there, leveling the factor of tightly pressing the butt to the shoulder. Yes, even if I took it into account, I would be tormented to take into account factors and illustrate it with school physics. This is still not a trivial task of elastic collision of bodies, but something more complicated.
  46. 0
    4 July 2015 15: 55
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    So, I lost the thread. Why do you need this cartridge? Against 12,7 machine guns (the situation from the article), he will not pull.

    But it will force you to stay at a greater distance and reduce the effectiveness of the fire. It will be easier to drill light armored vehicles. And body armor for the company. And buildings. In addition, as it turned out, 7,62 sags in accuracy in front of the low-pulse Hrendel - this also needs to be countered so that the shooter from the machine gun still had an advantage. And with all this, the weapon will be lighter than under the large-caliber cartridge 12,7. Moreover, due to the relatively low energy, it will remain possible to use tactical silencers, which is quite relevant against a high-tech enemy. A tactical silencer from a distance of 500m works almost like a full one.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    If you insist on a short pool and 360 MPa, you will get, at best, the characteristics of .300 Win Mag in 10mm caliber. It is quite feasible ...

    About that and speech. And the bullet is not quite short, the ratio of length to diameter is about 5, and not like the .338 NM, which has 6.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Grendel with 9,3 g bullet 370 m / s, 636 J. So it’s not better, but much worse.

    I indicated the problem. With the growth of the caliber, the transverse load should also increase. But 7,62x54 is about the same as 7g. Grendel. Apparently a slightly smaller elongation of the bullet and a lack of lead in the filling affects. At 9g. Grendel's lateral load is almost 1,5 times greater. Equip a scaled Grendel bullet in 7,62x54 and then we'll see. I suspect that the aiming angles will go beyond the standard. The initial speed is already low, and with a heavy bullet it will decrease even more.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    At such a speed in large calibers, energy will be enough a priori, well, unless there will be a heavy armor + big fart.

    Enough for the sniper, suppose. A military may not be enough. The parsing began with a .338 NM and a machine gun for it. But the cartridge has a long bullet, in another way the creators of the cartridge could not provide suitable ballistics in combination with a large lateral load. A logical question arises, why have I not yet observed the mass production of military cartridges with a long bullet? I suggested that this is due to armor-piercing, which at a distance is highly dependent on the elongation of the bullet and its stabilization. Although the FIG will take it apart. In one artillery textbook, a shell from a rifled howitzer hit the ground with his nose, the expansion of fragments was indicated and painted. And the jumping VOG-25P has a knockout charge on its face. Maybe I don’t know what, but bullets, grenades and shells, stabilized by rotation, manage to unfold along the trajectory contrary to school physics? In this case, there are almost no complaints about the .338 NM pool, and I'm in a stupor :).
  47. 0
    7 July 2015 16: 20
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do not understand. Short barrels for rifle cartridges exist in small caliber.

    Under rifle 7,62 shortcuts are already quite difficult to find. On the fly, only trilinear cuts come to mind.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Options for the intermediate cartridge are available with very different trunks, take the same shteyr.

    With the intermediate easier, up to 30 cm can cut the trunk. Since the ammunition for assault weapons was designed for relatively short barrels. AKSU is already quite a perversion. In terms of length, compared to AKs with 30 cm highs, almost nothing wins, but I had to be smart with automatic control and flash suppression.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I don’t remember. What sample is it about?

    I did not find it right away either. Advertising though. But at that moment she was new to me, that’s what I remembered. For example, it puzzled me that I didn’t need to pull the shutter; normal extraction was already ensured. And the bolt was, based on some popular model. Those. not this one for example: http://topwar.ru/30077-snayperskaya-vintovka-rapid-engagement-precision-rifle.ht
    ml.
    But I admit, under rifle cartridges, sniper rifle trunks shorter than 50cm are usually not made.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Do not understand. Why do you have different jobs with the same weight?

    The process of burning gunpowder and the pressure in the barrel depend on pressure and time. And then, as they taught at school, we analyze the extreme values ​​of the parameters. 1. If you use an extra-heavy bullet, then the powder will practically explode immediately. Immediately we get the maximum value of pressure, and hence the force acting on the bullet. More power will do more work. 2. An ultralight bullet will fly away from the barrel literally from the operation of the capsule. Gunpowder will burn for nothing, the bullet has already flown away. Weighing the bullet, we move to the first option.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    If we switch to a new rifle and machine gun caliber, I don’t believe it, in Russia there is no production base.

    There is a base, no orders. The doctrine does not yet imply the shooting of NATO troops in droves. Yes, and the NATO troops themselves are not yet armed with anything similar to the 6,5 Grendel and AP-15 with a forged barrel under it.
  48. 0
    7 July 2015 16: 20
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    You didn’t go there.

    I'm talking about a massive cartridge. For which one of the important properties is armor-piercing, going side by side with bullet stabilization.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    That would be okay. I suspect that it will not fit into the chamber.

    For the sake of such a thing, you can also grind the chamber. Another thing is whether there are suitable bullets on sale. Well, and another problem, why would a rifle with such a small initial bullet speed be needed? As a result, a change of caliber, so that the sleeve and powder canopy 7,62x54 cope with the work and accelerate the bullet to the required 870-930m / s. Just have to take an exotic caliber? In the story with 6,5, it’s interesting that there were ready-made bullets, there were shells, there were weapons. All factory and excellent quality. And then it all united, only run-in sleeves up to 6,5 mm.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Because they are not needed? So far, no one sees any reason to move away from unification.

    Unification, too, did not fall from the moon. They took the best samples, among which there are no too long bullets.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Oops Did you really think that they were flying right sideways? Overwhelming in the atmosphere?

    And where do they go? They are stabilized by rotation, trying to turn them requires effort and causes a precession instead of the desired result. This is the meaning of stabilization by rotation. And then suddenly a shell, fired at an angle to the horizon, falls with its nose into the ground. What turned around? Where does such a powerful turning effort come from, and even without any precession?
    A grenade does not even fly at supersonic. And almost always at an angle to the horizon. But the blow-out charge they have seems to be on the nose. Moreover, in slow motion, it can be seen that even undermining this charge does not make the grenade tumble, it only receives a precession. Those. very well stabilized. Well, and what power did this grenade manage to deploy with its nose to the ground, and even so neatly?
  49. 0
    9 July 2015 13: 59
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    But I generally meant .22 pistols.

    As for the .22LR, it makes no sense to worry. The price of cartridges is nowhere lower, the return is even lower, and with a flash similarly.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Amers relatively often have short-barreled rifles ("carbines"). I don't really understand their meaning - in IPSC, it seems, they run around with them. This has nothing to do with sniping.

    This one had a forged thick trunk. Due to this, the manufacturer promised the same accuracy at a distance of half a kilometer, like a rifle, on the basis of which this 40-cm sawn-off shotgun was created. Perhaps in this way the damaged trunks that did not pass control were promoted. I cut off the problem area, machined a new greenhouse and you're done.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    That is a different overbust? There, it seems, a rather complicated mechanics, you can not reduce it purely to the weight of the bullet.

    Yes, that too. On the same Wikipedia, with an increase in mass, a decrease in the initial energy is often observed. Running around the sites, however, showed that these were different cartridges with different weights and different bullet shapes. Here, for example, http://www.gunza.ru/faq/svd.html in the table at the end are two HummerHead hunting bullets. Heavier and less energy gaining, and holds it worse.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    It seems that you underestimate the cost of moving the entire army to a new caliber.

    Why transition? Addition to the existing one. You can, of course, and Kord with him to carry on a hump, but something heavy. And he doesn’t beat from the bumps, so the machine is also needed.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    What does it have to do with it? What is the way to reduce all the tasks of the army to a conflict with NATO?

    A rather heavy, well-provided potential adversary who encircled the borders of the Russian Federation around the perimeter with his bases and continues to increase their density. At the same time, always ready to bring democracy in warheads, it is worth giving a slack. And what to do with strategic planning? Close your eyes and turn away?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    There was no conflict with NATO yet

    At first, there was no conflict with Hitler either. They exchanged experiences, traded, settled borders. But they were getting ready. If not for this, the USSR would share the fate of Poland.
    So the army should always be up to standard.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    In a modern army, infantry should not collide with armored vehicles.

    In a modern army, infantry must be able to do everything. And beat armored vehicles, and aviation, and even just carry police functions. Therefore, they need weapons and full combat, and not hunting. So that with accuracy, and with armor-piercing, and with slaughter, everything was in order.
  50. 0
    9 July 2015 13: 59
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    There is. .300 WinMag

    The actual caliber is 7,82, with our cartridges 7,92. Hunters say too much difference. True, there are imported cartridges of the required caliber.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Only 6,5 is an intermediate cartridge, but there is already something super-screw.

    Why do we need magnum? Scale the bullet of Grendal at 7,62. Those. increase sizes by 18%. The mass will grow by about 60%. The initial speed should be left as for 6,5 Grendel. What will change? The cartridge from the intermediate will become a rifle, and more powerful than 7,62x54. The barrel will need rifle length. How about aerodynamics? It is she who interests us. Or is Grendel flying well precisely because of the high quality of bullet and barrel production?
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    up to 220 gran.

    7,62x54 from 15g. we also made a bullet. What is characteristic, with significantly reduced pressure in the trunk. From the tables on the link already given, there is a suspicion that this condition is possible in order to get good accuracy for a heavy bullet.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    projectile alignment along parabolic occurs due to aerodynamic forces.

    This is for bullets with air stabilization. Which have a lot of problems because of this. There are of course bullets that use both types of stabilization. Hunting arrow-turbine. For ranges of 50 and even 80m. In addition, if you read the explanation of the derivation mechanism, all bullets, without exception, are bullets with a displaced center, so they try to turn their nose back in flight. At the same time, for some reason, they precisely lift up the nose so that the derivation carries the bullet in the correct direction relative to the rotation. In general, as for me, some nonsense. I’ll look better for modern textbooks for universities on this issue.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    And how he should fly, I do not understand. Sideways?

    Sideways. Especially when shooting on hinged trajectories. The same grenade should bottom down. A bullet from a rifle when firing at maximum range (elevation of 35 degrees) in the final section will also go sideways, unless it manages to draw all the rotation energy into derivation.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Gravity + aerodynamics? Or didn’t I understand something?

    Then it should be forces superior to those of bullets with air stabilization. The VOG25P jumping grenade was not even mastered to turn over the expelling charge, only the precession began.
  51. 0
    11 July 2015 14: 11
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I'm confused. Are we looking for something existing or inventing something new?

    Increasing the effective range and armor-piercing power of existing models is also an option. But I think that even here we cannot do without replacing the sleeve. A heavier bullet would need more gunpowder.

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Haven't heard of it before. Where is this from?

    As I wrote, from the same link http://www.gunza.ru/faq/svd.html. It appears in other sources, but without specifics about the same pressure.

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Something's wrong. Are you talking about shotgun bullets?

    Yes, the only case known to me when a parallel rotating bullet is also stabilized by the oncoming flow. Moreover, for this she requires very specific plumage.

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    It feels kind of messed up.

    And I have no problem, since I also have empirical experience. If an object is thrown straight, without twisting at an angle to the horizon, nothing will turn it around. If the object is also stabilized by rotation, then turning its nose to the ground will be even more difficult. But the derivation is explained quite logically - to create the conditions for it, the bullet must be slightly turned with its lower side towards the oncoming flow.
    About armor-piercing, I agree that there is another point that is much more important. Throwing and impact angles are usually within 1-2 degrees, so they have almost no effect on armor-piercing. Surface bevels at the target are another matter. This is where the shortcomings of a long bullet appear; they need a core that is stronger and exposed in the nose, otherwise the bullet will ricochet. A particularly striking illustration is the 5,45 of the old design, in which the center of mass was noticeably shifted back. The ricochets of such bullets indoors towards the shooter himself are the talk of the town (by the way, I don’t even understand how this can happen, are the walls rubber or something?). For long bullets, the distance from the nose to the center of mass is also large, which means they are also easy to deploy.
  52. 0
    11 July 2015 14: 12
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Based on your estimates, a heavier bullet creates a greater maximum pressure during acceleration, and therefore requires a reduction in the load to maintain this parameter within the specified limits.

    In theory, you can try to fend off this matter with gunpowder, which burns more slowly. According to hunting layouts - gunpowder with a larger grain. Although it’s not so simple there either.

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Have you ever been to a country occupied by NATO? Not in Iraq, I mean, but, say, in Belgium?

    What I don’t like about VO is too much emphasis on politics. I’d rather not develop the topic of NATO-occupied Belgium. And in general, about first- and second-class countries. I will also not refer to history. There is a fact, there are aggressive comrades armed according to NATO standards. And they are here, close by. So it wouldn’t hurt to have something that exceeds NATO standards.

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    Nonsense, sorry. For a meeting between infantry and aviation (if they are not partisans), commanders (from the division and above) should be appointed, liberally speaking, sent to retirement

    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    It’s the same with armored vehicles - there are aviation and NILS systems for them

    That's great. So, if for one reason or another a player is left without a queen, then he should be deprived of the title of grandmaster and the game should be declared lost? We have different ideas about war. As for me, while the infantry is trampling the ground, the army has not yet been defeated. No more ATGMs? It doesn’t matter, because RPGs and even simple explosives remain. Also, portable air defense systems can perform well if used near the airfield.
  53. 0
    15 July 2015 18: 25
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    I stop understanding the idea. In the example you gave, airflow is used to spin the bullet.

    An idea for what? There are hunting bullets that spin and have a tail attached to them. There are simply non-spinning bullets with a tail attached to them. Their design also implies stabilization by the oncoming air flow. But a rifle bullet (for a rifled barrel) does not. There is stabilization by rotation.
    Debriefing in search of what physics is at work here showed that it turns out that there are unstabilized bullets that tumble despite rotation. There are re-stabilized ones that rotate so that they actually maintain the angle at which the shot was fired. By the way, this is the very moment that snipers don’t like. And there is an intermediate option, in which the bullet roughly follows its nose along the trajectory right up to the point of impact. This intermediate option is used. There is no physical explanation. Everywhere I go, there is some kind of empiricism.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    The fact that the bullet moves against the air flow with a cross section that has more favorable aerodynamic resistance seems obvious to me

    A bullet that can move like this does not need rotation.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    No, not rubber. But metal exhibits some elasticity during collisions.

    The bullet turns back without being destroyed. In principle, one can imagine a triple ricochet from concrete walls. But it's still impressive because it doesn't seem like a bullet should withstand such a test.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    As far as I know, this approach is not used in sniper cartridges. Difficulties with uniform combustion from cartridge to cartridge.

    May be. One of the most important characteristics of sniper cartridges is stability.
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    VO is a patriotic propaganda resource with a rudimentary technical branch. I had the opportunity to find out the moderator's opinion on this topic.

    Useful junk is also found. Periodically. Who cares, has given up on politics a long time ago. Although it is sometimes useful to leave a comment. For example, this is how I learned that in the Russian Army the bayonet-knife is made blunt for a reason, but for the convenience of performing police functions. For standing on duty and escorting. So that you can threaten with a bayonet, point at the chest or back, but only wound with a blow. Original, you can't say anything :).
    Quote: Zero Nil Seventh
    In missiles, air force and air defense. And the rest will not help much.

    Those. We take automatic machines, change them to three-line ones, nothing changes?
  54. 0
    25 July 2015 17: 43
    In general, on the issue of bullet stabilization. Here is an approximate explanation http://handguns.g00net.org/ballistic/giroskop.htm I couldn’t find a better one. Only this explanation must be supplemented with data on the precession itself https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%81% D0%B8%D
    1%8F where the property of precession is indicated - inertialessness: as soon as the force causing the precession of an object disappears, the precession will stop.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"