Saturday, July 12, 2014

A Case For The .243 Service Round

Now I'm not gonna lie I did originally get this idea from Chuck Hawks, however I feel like it's the perfect answer to a question people have been asking since it's inception. That is what to replace the 5.56x45 NATO with, now I look at this like I look at the service handgun debate the 5.56 is the 9mm and the 7.62 is the .45 one is small, fast, you can carry a lot of them, but they are less lethal than the alternative which kills well but are heavy and you can't carry too many on patrol. Now were just gonna talk rifles here today because I will do another post on the handgun calibers but most folks want to look at one or the other I don't understand. I don't understand why people think that its one or the other, I say that the answer is a 3rd party. Now most folks will say that hands down the 7.62 is the right answer, if it hits you your going down period. Well most, not all but most of those folks have never been in a gunfight cause honestly you don't think of terminal ballistics when your getting shot at you only think "man I really wish I had more bullets.". That being said in the m4 platform with 14.5 inch barrels the 5.56 performance is unacceptable. In the 20 inch m16 it does the job (that's why you don't hear the brits bitching about caliber.) So there has to be an alternative, a stop gap between the existing rounds. Enter the .243 or the 7mm-08 either would suffice but we will use the .243 for now. The round has negligibly more recoil than what were using now, also to swap to the .243 would retain the ability to carry the same amount of ammo and have 30 round mags but increase the lethality of the round also you could tailor the load for a 14 inch or whatever you wanted. Also if you do a short mag you could keep the same lowers and just re barrel the uppers. And as we all know the government isn't going to adopt something unless they can do it for cheap which is why they are just throwing full auto trigger groups in m4s and not adopting a piston gun which I think we should do but that also is for a different day. Not only is the .243 going to increase lethality due to larger bullet size (and not thanks to the Geneva convention because we all know that something that would kill better is less humane .) But it also has the ability to be tailored for a new weapon if the army were to do something in conjunction . Also it would also diminish the need for a DMR the .243 can be pushed out to 600-700 yards and still retain some of its energy. The Army says that the 5.56 is effective out to 600 yards but any look at ballistics chart will show you that's a lie, especially out of a shortened barrel. The fact that we have to take one man out of the squad to become the DMR diminishes squad firepower, yes the rifles are .308 but they are issued with 20 round mags and cannot employ fire with the frequency as an m4. Now the DMR was dragged out of the armory because of the need to engage at longer ranges in Afghanistan, the .243 would give every man in the squad the ability to reach out and engage the enemy at longer ranges and once it gets there it retains the energy to kill someone. As I've stated I think that would be the perfect round for our soldiers however as we all know the global military system is bigger than the US and getting NATO to adopt the .243 would be a task especially considering the last round the US brought and was adopted is the reason I'm writing this article.

No comments:

Post a Comment