Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2268
    Points : 2359
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  higurashihougi on Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:11 pm

    GarryB wrote:Would love a VS-121 in 6 x 49mm calibre.

    Would love a day that Vietnam has enough money to buy the technology for that catridge... cry cry cry

    For a long period of time I suspect that the old 7.62 x ABC catridge will still be the standard for user of Russian weaponry (outside of Russia), because more advanced ones is damn complicated.

    I tends to have a bad image of conservativeness, but, well...

    Off Topic
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5251
    Points : 5454
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:24 pm

    It is forum, someone made not a bad comment about the 6x49mm, few other comments are also worth to read.

    I only quote since, i don't like google translator and it is to long to translate.

    В конце 1980-х годов в Ижевске на производственном объединении «Ижмаш» была разработана снайперская винтовка под 6-мм винтовочный патрон с начальной скоростью пули 1150 м/с
    Стрелковое оружие явля¬ется одним из наиболее массовых образцов воен¬ной техники. При этом, отдельные конструкции в силу исторических, экономичес¬ких, политических и ряда других причин длительное время остаются на вооружении армий, ожидая каче¬ственного скачка в развитии науки и техники. Примерами могут слу¬жить магазинная винтовка Маузера 1898 г., магазинная винтовка Мо-сина обр. 1891 г., пистолет Colt М1911А1, крупнокалиберный пуле¬мёт Браунинга, автомат Калашни¬кова и др.
    Если же говорить о патронах для огнестрельного оружия, то здесь среди «долгожителей» особое место занимает русский 7,62-мм винто¬вочный патрон, который начал свой долгий путь вместе с винтовкой Мо-сина в 1891 г. Патрон прошёл все большие и малые войны XX века, и нет никаких сомнений, что и в сле¬дующем столетии он не сдаст свои позиции. Можно долго рассуждать о недостатках и достоинствах патро¬на 7,62x53, но 108 лет производства красноречивее всего говорят о его репутации. Здесь следует отметить заслуги русских конструкторов, ко¬торые сумели создать надёжные и эффективные образцы оружия под этот неудобный для конструи¬рования боеприпас.
    Принятие на снабжение армии 7,62-мм винтовочного патрона сим¬волизировало смену эпох. Оружие, стреляющее патронами крупного ка¬либра (калибр винтовки Бердана обр. 1870 г., которая стояла на воору¬жении русской армии в конце XIX века, составлял 10,67 мм), снаряжён¬ными дымным порохом, заменялось на образцы, спроектированные под патрон меньшего калибра, с новым для того времени бездымным поро¬хом. Преимущества нового патрона были неоспоримы: резко возросла начальная скорость пули; траекто¬рия полёта пули стала более на¬стильной; уменьшился вес носимого запаса патронов; устранён демаски¬рующий стрелка дым выстрела.
    Конечно, патрон имеет свои недо¬статки, доставляющие немало забот конструкторам-оружейникам. Осо¬бенно это касается выступающего фланца гильзы, большого диаметр которого приводит к увеличению размеров основных деталей стрелко¬вого оружия: ствольной коробки,
    КАЛАШНИКОВ. ОРУЖИЕ, БОЕПРИПАСЫ, СНАРЯЖЕНИЕ 5/2001
    Олин из создателей СВК - Азарий Иванович Нестеров со своим детищем
    затвора и ствола. Это, в свою оче¬редь, приводит к росту массы и габа¬ритных размеров проектируемого оружия.
    Такие патроны создают большие проблемы при отработке магазинов, так как необходимо решать задачу по устранению сцепления фланцев гильз при размещении патронов в магазине и при подаче их на ли¬нию досылания. Характерным при¬мером влияния такого патрона на конкретную конструкцию может служить магазин 8-мм француз¬ского ручного пулемёта Шоша обр. 1915 г. имеющий очень сильно изогнутый корпус, обоими концами присоединяемый к телу пулемёта.
    В 1911 г. известный русский кон¬структор-оружейник В. Г. Федоров занимался исследованием патронов калибра 6, 6,5 и 7 мм. В результате был разработан 6,5-мм винтовоч¬ный патрон длиной 81 мм, снаря¬жавшийся пулей весом 8,5 г, имев¬шей начальную скорость 860 м/с. Продолжению работ над новым па¬троном помешала начавшаяся пер¬вая мировая война.
    Гораздо позже, во второй полови¬не XX века, после войн в Корее и во Вьетнаме, в армиях ведущих стран
    Конструкция СВК обеспечивает, так называемую, «вывешенность» ствола. В илеальном случае ствол вообше не должен касаться лета^хей винтовки нигле, кроме места соединения со ствольной коробкой. В случае с газоотволом это невозможно, но конструкторам удалось исключить контакт ствола с иевьём, что положительно сказалось
    на результатах стрельбы
    мира нашли широкое применение средства индивидуальной защиты. Поэтому большое внимание стали уделять повышению пробивного действия пули, а также повышению кучности стрельбы.
    Кроме характеристик комплекса «патрон-оружие», на величину рас¬сеивания пуль большое влияние оказывают ошибки стрельбы. Среди них наиболее значимыми являются ошибки в определении дальности до цели и скорости бокового ветра. Влияние этих ошибок на точность стрельбы зависит от внешнебаллис-тических характеристик боеприпа-са — дальности прямого выстрела и времени полета пули.
    Исходя из этих соображений был разработан винтовочный патрон калибра 6 мм, начальная скорость полёта пули которого составляла 1150 м/с. Благодаря увеличению начальной скорости улучшились внешнебаллистические характеристики патрона, увеличилась вероятность поражения цели за счет более настильной траектории и уменьшения времени полёта пули.
    В рамках программы разработки снайперской винтовки под 6-мм винтовочный патрон были выдви¬нуты жесткие требования, ограни¬чивающие габариты оружия по длине. Это связывалось с необходи¬мостью оптимального размещения винтовки в отсеках боевых машин пехоты и обеспечением возможнос¬ти десантирования с оружием лич¬ного снайперов ВДВ.
    На ПО 'Ижмаш' разработкой 6-мм снайперских винтовок СВК и СВК-С (модификация винтовки со складывающимся прикладом) занималась конструкторская группа в составе А. И. Нестерова, В. Ю. Симо-ненко, А. С. Ломаева, О. Н. Кивамова.
    Согласно требованиям технического задания длина ствола винтовки (исходя из заданной начальной скорости 1150 м/с) должна была составлять 720 мм, при этом общая длина оружия ограничивалась 1225 мм.
    Первоначально под новый патрон предполагалось доработать винтовку СВД. Однако общая длина СВД (при длине ствола 620 мм) составляет 1220 мм, и при увеличении длины ствола до 720 мм она возросла бы до 1320 мм. Кроме того, компоновка механизмов автоматики, принятая в винтовке СВД, при которой за-творная рама базируется и направляется в длинной ствольной коробке, не позволяет добиться сокращения общей длины оружия за счёт уменьшения длины ствольной коробки.
    Длина оружия классической компоновки складывается из размеров приклада, ствольной коробки, ствола и пламегасителя. При компоновке оружия по схеме bull-pup ствольная коробка оказывается функ-ционально объединённой с прикладом, что даёт возможность максимально сократить его общую длину. Вместе с тем она имеет свои недостатки, среди которых можно выделить следующие:
    1) истечение части пороховых газов после выстрела из ствольной коробки в гильзоотводное окно и раздражение слизистой оболочки глаз, вызывающее слезотечение;
    2) высокое расположение прицельной линии над стволом приводит к тому, что при стрельбе лёжа и из-за укрытия противнику открывается большая часть тела стрелка.
    Существует ещё один, промежуточный вариант применения укороченной ствольной коробки. В не-мецкой самозарядной винтовке FG-42, которая была разработана во время второй мировой войны для пара-шютистов, ствол, ствольная коробка и приклад выполнены на одной линии, а магазин размещён с правой стороны ствольной коробки над рукояткой перезаряжания. Помимо увеличения ширины оружия за счёт вы-ступающего в сторону магазина, такая схема компоновки оружия, имеет ещё один, существенный для высо-коточного снайперского оружия, недостаток: изменение положения центра масс оружия в горизонтальной плоскости по мере израсходования патронов в магазине и, как следствие, ухудшение кучности стрельбы.
    Поэтому при проектировании 6-мм снайперской винтовки за основу взята классическая компоновка оружия. При этом стояла задача максимально сократить длину ствольной коробки, тем более что параметры технического задания позволяли это сделать.
    После предварительной проработки конструкции было решено остановиться на схеме автоматики с от-водом части пороховых газов из канала ствола. Варианты этой схемы наилучшим образом воплощены в проверенных временем снайперской винтовке СВД и автоматах семейства АК.
    Был выбран поворотный затвор с двумя боевыми упорами. Это позволило максимально приблизить магазин к патроннику и тем самым сократить длину ствольной коробки.
    Расположение ведущего выступа поворотного затвора в криволинейном пазе затворной рамы предпо-лагает три схемы базирования затворной рамы в оружии:
    1) в задней части затворная рама базируется в пазах, которые выполнены снаружи ствольной коробки, а в передней части под стволом, в газовой трубке (американская самозарядная винтовка Гаранда М1);
    2) в передней и задней частях затворная рама базируется на направляющих выступах внутри стволь-ной коробки (снайперская винтовка СВД);
    3) в задней части затворная рама базируется на направляющих выступах, расположенных внутри ствольной коробки, а в передней части - в газовой трубке над стволом (автомат АК).
    С точки зрения уменьшения длины ствольной коробки, из всех вышеперечисленных схем базирование затворной рамы, наиболее оптимальной является компоновка, принятая в автоматах Калашникова. Однако большая масса подвижных частей, их воздействие через газоотводную трубку на ствол в момент выстрела и некоторая неопределённость нахождения подвижных частей в переднем положении не позволяет в полной реализовать схему в высокоточном снайперском оружии.
    Поэтому была изобретена новая схема базирования затворной рамы и направления её движения. За-творная рама базируется в задней части на направляющих выступах, выполненных внутри ствольной короб-ки, а в передней части, через отверстие в ней - на направляющем стержне возвратной пружины. При этом удалось значительно сократить длину ствольной коробки.
    С целью сокращения общей длины оружия был разработан короткий щелевой пламегаситель в форме раструба, длина рабочей зоны которого составляет 29 мм (по сравнению с 78 мм на СВД).
    Для вооружения десантных войск был разработан вариант винтовки СВК-С со складывающимся при-кладом, выполненным из стальных труб. На верхней трубке приклада размещена поворотная пластмассовая опора для щеки стрелка, которая используется при стрельбе с оптическим прицелом. Приклад складывается на левую сторону ствольной коробки.
    В конструкции снайперской винтовки применены технические решения, исключающие отрицательные воздействия цевья, приклада и крышки ствольной коробки на оружие в момент выстрела и, тем самым, по-вышающие кучность стрельбы.
    Снайперская 6-мм винтовка прошла полный цикл заводских испытаний в затруднённых условиях экс-плуатации, что и подтвердило работоспособность выбранной схемы автоматики.
    В целом техническое задание на разработку 6-мм снайперской винтовки было выполнено успешно. Были достигнуты хорошие результаты по кучности стрельбы. При стрельбе на дистанцию 100 м лёжа с упо-ра с использованием оптического прицела тремя сериями по 10 выстрелов кучность стрельбы составила R100 - 5,5 см, R50 - 2,3 см (где R100 и R50 - радиусы круга, вмещающего, соответственно, 100 и 50% пробоин).
    Превосходство винтовки СВК над винтовкой СВД по частости поражения составило:
    Дальность
    стрельбы, м Превосходство по
    частости поражения
    630 1,33
    770 1,73
    970 3,89
    1030 3,89
    В среднем по всем рубежам. 2,32

    После проведения полигонных испытаний были отмечены некоторые недостатки патрона. 6-мм винто-вочный патрон нуждался в доработке, однако страна вступила в полосу затяжного экономического кризиса, резко сократилось финансирование оборонного комплекса и все работы над патроном и винтовкой были прекращены.
    Изображение
    А вот еще общеизвестный материал - выкладываем его для "разминки" и общей информации:
    6-мм «УНИФИЦИРОВАННЫЕ» АВТОМАТ И ПУЛЕМЕТ
    Изображение
    Эти две системы оружия описываются вместе, поскольку они никогда не появлялись по отдельности в российской лите¬ратуре и на выставках вооружений. Обе системы были разрабо¬таны в ЦНИИТочмаше и стали появляться на международных выставках вооружений с 1994 года, однако в 1997 году они уже нигде не были представлены, хотя информация о них до сих пор распространяется, очевидно, в попытке заинтересовать ка¬кого-либо западного производителя открыть совместное пред¬приятие по выпуску этого оружия (что крайне маловероятно). Учитывая характеристики этих двух систем, весьма схожие с ха¬рактеристиками автомата АН-94, можно предположить, что они, по всей видимости, в соревновании по программе «Аба¬кан» потерпели неудачу. До сих пор российские источники это не подтверждали; представители ЦНИИТочмаша отказались обсуждать с автором этой книги данную тему, из чего можно сделать вывод, что они больше не заинтересованы в продвиже¬нии своего оружия на рынок. Так или иначе, мы включим эти системы в книгу, поскольку они интересны для анализа путей развития российского стрелкового оружия на пороге нового ты¬сячелетия.
    Если эти системы действительно участвовали в конкурсе в Абакане, возникает вопрос, почему они были отвергнуты. Обе являются дальнейшими модификациями почтенной конструк¬ции Калашникова, что значительно упростило бы внедрение их в Российскую армию, поскольку практически не требовалось бы дополнительно переучивать солдат на новую модель. Одна¬ко эти системы добились повышения эффективности за счет использования нового, более мощного патрона. Они бы еще смогли соперничать с АН-94, если бы уменьшение отдачи бы¬ло достигнуто за счет новых системы буфера отдачи и дульного тормоза, но новый патрон к стрелковому оружию российским военным в настоящий момент совершенно не нужен. Переход от одной системы оружия к другой занимает много лет, и, если бы русские приняли на вооружение новый автомат, это еще больше запутало бы и без того сложную систему снабжения. В то же время АН-94 сделан под стандартный патрон 5,45x39 мм.
    Согласно российским рекламным проспектам, «унифициро¬ванное» оружие по своей точности превосходит оружие под бо-еприпас 7.62x59 мм по следующим пунктам:
    С руки (из положения стоя) в 5,1 раза Из положения лежа без упора в 1,5 раза Из положения лежа с упором в 2,2 раза
    Эти показатели не лучше, чем у АН-94, использующего стан¬дартный российский боеприпас. По всей видимости, термин «унифицированное» оружие означает, что автомат и пулемет сделаны под один патрон, однако это только предположение.
    Несмотря на то что конструкции и автомата, и пулемета раз¬работаны на основании уже имеющегося оружия, достоверной информации имеется очень немного. Автомат, несомненно, сделан на основе АК, и, судя по всему, в нем чувствуется вли¬яние экспериментального автомата Калашникова АЛ-7, разра¬ботанного в конце 60-х годов с целью снизить силу отдачи и увод ствола вверх при автоматической стрельбе. Конструкция оказалась удачной и даже прошла квалификационные испыта¬ния, однако так и не была запущена в серию. Сравнение АЛ-7 и «унифицированного» автомата показывает значительное внешнее сходство обоих автоматов, особенно газовой системы и компенсатора. Как это ни странно, новое оружие ЦНИИТоч¬маша выглядит более грубым, чем опытный образец АЛ-7 заво¬да «Ижмаш».
    «Унифицированный» пулемет, судя по всему, создан на ос¬нове пулемета ПК/ПКМ. Он обладает более длинным и мас¬сивным стволом. Снижение веса по сравнению с исходной мо¬делью ПК или ПКМ незначительно: опытный образец «унифи¬цированного» пулемета при весе 14,3 кг всего на 2,5 кг легче 9-килограммового ПК. В рекламных проспектах утверждается, что новый пулемет позволяет снизить на 30 процентов вес бое¬припасов, уменьшить силу отдачи, при этом боеприпасы имеют меньшие размеры. Эффективность стрельбы повышается в 2— 2,5 раза. Эти данные весьма туманны; не указывается эталон, с которым сравнивалось новое оружие, и не объясняется, как бы¬ли получены такие оценки. Так или иначе, какими бы ни были преимущества, их, похоже, оказалось недостаточно для того, чтобы принять новые системы на вооружение Российской ар-6-мм «унифицированный» пулемет.
    нв, и после того, как в 1994 году предпочтение было оконча-тельно отдано АН-94, ЦНИИТочмаш начал предлагать зару¬бежным партнерам поставки этого оружия или создание совме¬стного производства. Судя по проспектам, которые я получил от ЦНИИТочмаша в конце 1997 года, обе системы предлагают¬ся до сих пор, но теперь уже под патроны 5,45x39 мм и 5.56x45 мм. Никаких упоминаний о патроне 6x49 мм нет. На начало 1998 года заказчиков на новое оружие в модификации под. любой из трех калибров не было, и, судя по всему, оно так ? не будет запущено в серийное производство, поскольку не¬значительное повышение эффективности по сравнению с име-юшимися образцами не стоит затрат на развертывание произ-?мктвенных мощностей по его выпуску.
    ХАРАКТЕРИСТИКИ «УНИФИЦИРОВАННЫХ» АВТОМАТА И ПУЛЕМЕТА
    Ьаабр
    Принцип действия Длина
    Длина ствола Прицельная дальность Темп стрельбы
    Емкость магазина
    Прицельное устройство
    «Унифицированный» автомат
    6x49 мм отвод газов, выбор режима 940 мм « 508 мм 600 м
    в 700 выстрелов в минуту 30 патронов
    мушка; гривка с прорезью
    «Унифицированный» пулемет
    6x49 мм
    отвод газов, только автоматический огонь 1150 мм = 711 мм 1500 м
    = 700 выстрелов в минуту боепитание из ленты мушка; гривка с прорезью
    И -еще:
    Изображение
    ТКБ-0145К
    Калибр, мм 6х49
    Длина, мм 1060
    Длина ствола, мм 720
    Вес, кг 4.0
    Магазин, кол. патронов 10
    Начальная скорость пули, м/с 1150
    Эффективная дальность стрельбы, м 600

    В конце 1990-х годов конструктором Тульского ЦКИБ СОО А.Б. Адовым была разработана экспериментальная самозарядная снайперская винтовка ТКБ-0145К под патрон 6х49 мм.Винтовка ТКБ-0145К (ТКБ – Тульское Конструкторское Бюро) предназначена для уничтожения одиночных целей, в том числе защищенных бронежилетами на больших, средних и малых дальностях. Для стрельбы из винтовки применяются патроны повышенной мощности 6х49 мм, разработанные в ЦНИИТОЧМАШ под руководством старшего научного сотрудника, кандидата технических наук В.Н. Дворянинова, ранее создавшего 7,62-мм снайперский патрон к винтовке СВД. Вес 6-мм пули патрона 6х49 мм - 5 гр, начальная скорость -1150 м/с.С целью уменьшения длины оружия снайперская винтовка ТКБ-0145К выполнена по схеме «буллпап».Автоматика винтовки ТКБ-0145К основана на газоотводном принципе. Газоотводное устройство винтовки, в отличие от многих образцов автоматического оружия подобного типа, не имеет газового регулятора.В новой винтовке был применен ряд конструктивных особенностей снижающих рассеивание пуль. К ним относятся жесткое запирание канала ствола поворотным затвором с тремя боевыми упорами и отбор пороховых газов для приведения в действие автоматики от дульного среза ствола после того, как пуля покинет ствол. Последнее обосновано тем, что в обычном газоотводном оружии (например, в СВД) после прохождения пулей бокового газоотводного отверстия на оружие действует значительный импульс сил от взаимодействия пороховых газов с газоотводным устройством. Это приводит к тому, что в момент выхода пули из канала ствола оружие отклоняется от первоначального направления. Такой конструктивный недостаток устраняет дульное газоотводное устройство.За счет некоторого увеличения массы подвижных частей в ТКБ-0145К удалось добиться надежного функционирования винтовки в различных условиях.

    Коробка автоматики винтовки защищена от попадания посторонних частиц.
    Кроме открытых прицельных приспособлений винтовка оснащается оптическими прицелами ПОСП 8x42, ПСО-1 и аналогичными. Также возможна установка ночного прицела.
    Питание оружия боеприпасами осуществляется из коробчатого магазина емкостью на 10 патронов.региона, где заслужила высокие отзывы работавших с ней бойцов спецподразделений, как эффективное оружие в условиях городского боя, горной местности и противоснайперской борьбе.
    При этом используемый патрон 6х49 мм с весом пули 5 гр и начальной скоростью 1150 м/с зарекомендовал себя как боеприпас, значительно превосходящий 7,62-мм снайперский патрон. Баллистический импульс 6-мм патрона составляет 1 кгс, что примерно на 25 % меньше баллистического импульса патрона 7,62x54R винтовки СВД, соответственно и отдача винтовки ТКБ-0145К меньше, чем у СВД. Большая начальная скорость и, следовательно, малое полетное время пули до цели, меньший ветровой снос пули, а также большая настильность траектории делают винтовку ТКБ-0145К особенно эффективной (по сравнению с СВД) на больших дальностях (свыше 500 м). Дальность прямого выстрела винтовки составляет около 600 м.
    Однако, не смотря на проявленные положительные качества, самозарядная снайперская винтовка ТКБ-0145К осталась экспериментальным образцом снайперского стрелкового оружия и в производство не поступила.
    Еще более подробно об этом оружии можно почитать в статье А.Райгородецкого ( в твоей статье, Алекс!) на Сайте.
    Статья лежит тут:
    http://www.dogswar.ru/oryjeinaia-ekzotika/strelkovoe-oryjie/1523-opytnaia-snaiperskai.html
    Вот и получается, что разработали наши оружейники такой замечательный боеприпас, создали под него такие замечательные системы, а тупые военные эти системы на вооружение не приняли.
    Давайте вместе попробуем разобраться - ПОЧЕМУ?
    Так ли уж нужен был вообще пресловутый 6х49? Или это действительно, как считает Евгенич, "наш ответ Керзону", т.е. "вражескому" 6х45SAW для ручного пулемета, разрабатывавшегося в конце 70х - начале 80х. В одном из Женькиных комментариев говорится:
    "...Вообще, об унитаре 6х49 и о системах, разработанных под него много говорено, наломано копий - от жалостных воплей о тупости и костности военспецов СССР, не принявших его на вооружение, до категорических заявлений о ненужности и никчемности самой идеи о создании "усиленного промежуточного боеприпаса" взамен 5.45х39 и 7.62х54R. в противовес НАТОвскому 5.56х45 с пулями SS102 и SS109.
    Позволю себе высказать ЛИЧНОЕ мнение, и начать его с вопроса "А зачем???"
    Для винтовки, а тем более снайперской, 6мм мал категорически, для штурмового общеармейского оружия/автомата - излишне могущественнен. 5.45х39, что бы не говорили, для линейных стрелковых частей призывного типа вполне достаточен ( и сам по себе очень удачен).
    А для специальных подразделений есть старый добрых Сёмин-Елизаров 7.62х39, новые разработки, Федоровский 6.5мм унитар с проточкой и рантом.
    Да и вообще для элиты никогда особо ограничения в выборе вооружения не выставлялись, особенно для "литерных" групп..."
    "...Патрон 6Х49 мм и подобные ему - это откат к самозарядным винтовкам с возможностью автоматического огня от которого никакого толку. Если уж из АК-74 и М16 огонь ведут короткими очередями максимум на 100 м, а дальше только одиночными то, что говорить об автомате под 6Х49 отдача которого будет побольше, чем у АКМ?"
    "...Все уставы рекомендуют стрелять частыми одиночными выстрелами. И не только потому, что при автоматической стрельбе с рук даже патроном 5,45х39 отдача неприемлимо увеличивает рассеяние, но и потому, что если лупить длинными очередями, как пулеметчик, но боеприпасов не напасешься. У пулеметчика часть боекомплекта несет второй номер, и то он нагружен как китайский кули, намного тяжелее обычного пехотинца.
    Стрельба из автомата длинными очередми - это в реальном бою редкое исключение."
    "...В будущем думаю эту проблему решат за счет доведения до ума безгильзовых боеприпасов, что позволит увеличить носимый боекомплект, и реализации лафетной компоновки оружия с гашением отдачи.
    Но даже в этом случае высокую баллистику патрона я считаю необходимой - для пробивания СИБ, которые наверняка получат ещё более широкое распространение. "

    He says the 1150 m/s Velocity of the 6x49 comes from 720mm barrel shot from TKB-0145K.
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2641
    Points : 2677
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Mike E on Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:57 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    short-range sniper rifle (not many great examples, but you get the idea)

    Selected assault rifles are often fitted with scopes and given accurate ammo and a specially trained soldier for medium range sniping... in the 200-300m range.

    True, it could be necked down without much trouble involved.  Not saying that they should buy and use the .338, but rather that they should build an equivalent. This "necked down Brenneke" could be just that.

    They have already adopted the 338 LM, in one of its later more powerful forms that is effective to 1.5km.


    I'd personally like to see sniper troops being issued a standard round, and getting to choose their own rifle/built one themselves. IMHO, a sniper must be "one with the gun" for him to be the as effective as possible. Modular designs like the MSR allow snipers to be 100% fitted to their rifle.

    There was talking of the larger calibre large AK12 (ie 7.62 x 51mm) also being available in another secret calibre. If that calibre was 6 x 49mm it could be used as a DMR.
    That is basically the definition of a DMR.... 

    The problem with the .338 LM is that it has to be imported, besides that it is one of the best long-distance rounds available. Producing an indigenous round would be much cheaper. 

    That would be interesting... 

    Thank you Werewolf for the added info.

    Good title!
    avatar
    im42

    Posts : 20
    Points : 26
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  im42 on Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:27 pm

    if 338 is so goood can't it be domestically made ?
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2641
    Points : 2677
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Mike E on Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:40 pm

    im42 wrote:if 338 is so goood can't it be domestically made ?
    Technically yes, but I believe that it would have to be made without license. - Not "legal".
    avatar
    im42

    Posts : 20
    Points : 26
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  im42 on Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:56 pm

    Still much cheaper then new cartridge development and intiation of new production line with no potential buyers aside Russian Federation Armed Forces ;]
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 21, 2014 11:24 am

    The problem with the .338 LM is that it has to be imported, besides that it is one of the best long-distance rounds available. Producing an indigenous round would be much cheaper.

    No it doesn't have to be imported... they can either buy the rights, or make their own wild cat version of it and either way produce it themselves.

    if 338 is so goood can't it be domestically made ?

    It isn't just one round... the early models were designed for 1,200m, but later rounds were effective to 1,500m. It is the latter the Russians are looking at.

    I have a photo of a cartridge board from a special company in Russia that makes exotic and specialised ammo... like underwater 5.45 x 39mm rounds and underwater 9 x 19mm rounds.

    Here is the photo:

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Dsc11410

    From left to right top to bottom... the first 4 rounds are 12.7 x 55mm rounds that are for the new quiet sniper rounds for use up to 600m against targets with protective vests on. The next two rounds are 9 x 19mm and 9 x 18mm armour piercing rounds. Top middle centre is a 12.7 x 108mm round (probably sniper), while the next 3 are supersonic 12.7 x 55mm rounds including armour piercing. Then the bottom two in the centre are 8.6 x 69mm which is the metric designation for the 338 LM round. The top three cartridges on the far right are 7.62 x 69mm which makes them 300 LM rounds, while the fourth round is the underwater 9 x 19mm round firing a small calibre supercavitating flechette, and the bottom two rounds are 5.45mm, but with a sabot and one being a practise under water round and the other being the standard service underwater round.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 21, 2014 11:27 am

    Check out this:

    In place of the usual "Kalashnikov" come a new generation of machines and new ammunition caliber.

    In preparation for combat equipment soldier of the future - "Warrior-2" creates a qualitatively new small arms under a brand new cartridge of a larger caliber.

    It promises a revolution in small arms. The new equipment will provide comprehensive protection for soldiers, increase their combat effectiveness. Just a set of new "Warriors" will include about 50 different elements. In addition to small arms, the soldier will be at the disposal of the targeting system, protection, electronic means of communication, navigation and targeting systems. A previous generation of equipment - "Warrior-1" is already being supplied to the troops.

    On the latest developments Russian gunsmiths said General Director of the Fund for Advanced Studies Andrei Grigoryev during the forum "Open Innovation".

    The Fund for Policy Studies was established at the initiative of Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin. Its task: finding and accumulation of the most advanced ideas that can already be realized in the near future in the metal. And significantly increase its national defense.

    Grigoriev refuted reports that Russia is developing weapons based on new physical principles. On weapons, the effect of which would be if based on new physical principles, even when talking Serdyukov. But leading experts of the defense immediately offered not to engage in profanity terms. All "principles" on which the design of the arms have a classical basis.

    But in the making, so to speak, of conventional weapons has been a breakthrough. In particular, Grigoryev told sensational news: scientists have started work on the sixth-generation fighter, which will be made of composite materials.

    We are currently testing a fifth generation fighter T-50. A Foundation for Advanced Studies has already created a foundation for the design of the sixth-generation fighter. The works are primarily concerned with materials and motors. There is an interesting project to create a gas turbine engine with unique characteristics. Proposals on a wide use of composite materials. So that a new generation of fighter aircraft may be almost entirely plastic. Corresponding composites we have. The problem is the establishment of effective and reliable methods to control their condition. "This is a key moment for composite materials," - said Grigoriev.

    The point is that with all the obvious advantages of the composites have a significant disadvantage. With the accumulation of internal fatigue and composite structures can just explode. And we need to have time to catch a critical phase of this accumulation. If the problem can be solved, the composites in aircraft significantly will press the metal.

    Sixth-generation fighter, according to experts, may well be an unmanned aircraft, which will manage the operator in the ground or in a special plane control type known today AWACS.

    Various unmanned and unmanned combat systems, as well as a variety of robots are already in the arsenals of the army. And in the future, they will dominate. Look at the future combat robotics could be at the recent military-industrial conference specifically devoted to this topic. There have been shown and boats, robots and robotic underwater vehicles, and a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles, and tracked robots capable of conducting their own investigation and destroy enemy firing points.

    Attention is given and space issues. In particular, looking for ways to reduce the cost of the spacecraft into orbit. Fund promising research leads to the Joint Rocket-Space Corporation joint work on the formation of the list of new projects. They will focus on launching into orbit a payload on the creation of small spacecraft, which will significantly reduce the requirements for media. The key problem, according to Grigorieva, is to dramatically reduce the cost of launch spacecraft into orbit.

    Research in the field of advanced weapons systems for the period 2015-2016 years, 4.5 billion rubles laid. This year will be spent 3.3 billion.

    On average, work on projects at the Foundation for Advanced Studies lasts from two to five years. According to Grigoriev, the total cost of the projects to be launched by the end of the year - about nine billion rubles. By year end, the Fund should be in the 45 projects. A lot of money and prospects are promising.

    Source:http://www.rg.ru/2014/10/16/avtomat.html
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5251
    Points : 5454
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Oct 21, 2014 11:54 am

    I hope for 6x49mm, sounds like a very nice calibre.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:28 am

    The only problem is that they are talking about Ratnik 2... Ratnik one is being deployed now for field testing, so it might be a couple of years before we see Ratnik 2.
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2268
    Points : 2359
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  higurashihougi on Wed Oct 22, 2014 1:32 pm

    Various unmanned and unmanned combat systems, as well as a variety of robots are already in the arsenals of the army. And in the future, they will dominate. Look at the future combat robotics could be at the recent military-industrial conference specifically devoted to this topic. There have been shown and boats, robots and robotic underwater vehicles, and a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles, and tracked robots capable of conducting their own investigation and destroy enemy firing points.

    Future military hospital Very Happy

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 JuxtapozDollHospital002-750x508
    avatar
    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 282
    Points : 290
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Russian 6x49mm

    Post  Cyrus the great on Sat Aug 01, 2015 2:09 pm


    I have been reading on this incredible round which is apparently 2x as accurate as the 7.62x54 and 1.5 times better at maintaining its velocity... and so I want to devote a thread discussing this round.


    Is it more accurate than the 5.45 round? Does it produce less or more recoil than the 7.62x39? How effective would it be in a 14 inch barrel? How does it compare to the 6.5 Creedmoor?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:30 pm

    I can't tell you much about it... it uses a long aerodynamic projectile that retains velocity better than the 7.62 x 54mm round so it gets to the target faster, which means flatter trajectory and more energy on target at longer range.

    Here is info about the unified MG:

    http://world.guns.ru/machine/rus/unified-caliber-machine-gun-6-mm-e.html

    Including a photo of the round between a 5.45mm round and the 7.62 x 54mm round.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3990
    Points : 4007
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:15 pm

    Here's what you need to know:

    It. Costs. Too. Much.

    That's the issue with all the evolutions...It would probably have punched a meteor sized hole in the Soviet budget. And even today would have to be exported in biblical amounts with the ad hoc "tools" to make the change worthy. The round was axed because of its cost, and since then only ONE nation has gone out of the current 5.56/5.45 dichotomy and that's China with it's 5.8x42 DAP/DBP which is just another ".22x round".

    Changing calibre needs a phenomenal amount of time and cost, something the Soviets did not want (couldn't?) disburse.

    It's not what you wanted to hear and I apologize for the tone, but that's exactly how these things are going to look like for while with all the ammunition talks.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5251
    Points : 5454
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Aug 02, 2015 2:40 pm

    KoTeMoRe wrote:Here's what you need to know:

    It. Costs. Too. Much.

    That's the issue with all the evolutions...It would probably have punched a meteor sized hole in the Soviet budget. And even today would have to be exported in biblical amounts with the ad hoc "tools" to make the change worthy. The round was axed because of its cost, and since then only ONE nation has gone out of the current 5.56/5.45 dichotomy and that's China with it's 5.8x42 DAP/DBP which is just another ".22x round".

    Changing calibre needs a phenomenal amount of time and cost, something the Soviets did not want (couldn't?) disburse.

    It's not what you wanted to hear and I apologize for the tone, but that's exactly how these things are going to look like for while with all the ammunition talks.

    The problem with the costs is that they could not bear it for export, since no other country would be willing to scrap all their 7.62x39/45mm calibres to change to that, that would ruine them and SU had already hundreds of millions of rifles that had those calibres and physically it would not had any impact in performance high enough to justify such a tremendous budget. We are talking here about a budget that would be higher than several new tank divisions and a long term decapitation of forces being capable and combat ready due the costs to re-establish a supply chain and manufactoring for this new round, but i admit seems like a great calibre.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5689
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:30 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:Here's what you need to know:

    It. Costs. Too. Much.

    That's the issue with all the evolutions...It would probably have punched a meteor sized hole in the Soviet budget. And even today would have to be exported in biblical amounts with the ad hoc "tools" to make the change worthy. The round was axed because of its cost, and since then only ONE nation has gone out of the current 5.56/5.45 dichotomy and that's China with it's 5.8x42 DAP/DBP which is just another ".22x round".

    Changing calibre needs a phenomenal amount of time and cost, something the Soviets did not want (couldn't?) disburse.

    It's not what you wanted to hear and I apologize for the tone, but that's exactly how these things are going to look like for while with all the ammunition talks.

    The problem with the costs is that they could not bear it for export, since no other country would be willing to scrap all their 7.62x39/45mm calibres to change to that, that would ruine them and SU had already hundreds of millions of rifles that had those calibres and physically it would not had any impact in performance high enough to justify such a tremendous budget. We are talking here about a budget that would be higher than several new tank divisions and a long term decapitation of forces being capable and combat ready due the costs to re-establish a supply chain and manufactoring for this new round, but i admit seems like a great calibre.

    Theoretically speaking, the 7.62 x 54R has more propellant for energy , couldn't they just take the new projectile and place it in the 7.62 x 54R propellant case?...Wouldn't that just be a better solution than introducing a new round? I know, it's more complicated than that but still...
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5251
    Points : 5454
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Aug 02, 2015 8:46 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:Here's what you need to know:

    It. Costs. Too. Much.

    That's the issue with all the evolutions...It would probably have punched a meteor sized hole in the Soviet budget. And even today would have to be exported in biblical amounts with the ad hoc "tools" to make the change worthy. The round was axed because of its cost, and since then only ONE nation has gone out of the current 5.56/5.45 dichotomy and that's China with it's 5.8x42 DAP/DBP which is just another ".22x round".

    Changing calibre needs a phenomenal amount of time and cost, something the Soviets did not want (couldn't?) disburse.

    It's not what you wanted to hear and I apologize for the tone, but that's exactly how these things are going to look like for while with all the ammunition talks.

    The problem with the costs is that they could not bear it for export, since no other country would be willing to scrap all their 7.62x39/45mm calibres to change to that, that would ruine them and SU had already hundreds of millions of rifles that had those calibres and physically it would not had any impact in performance high enough to justify such a tremendous budget. We are talking here about a budget that would be higher than several new tank divisions and a long term decapitation of forces being capable and combat ready due the costs to re-establish a supply chain and manufactoring for this new round, but i admit seems like a great calibre.

    Theoretically speaking, the 7.62 x 54R has more propellant for energy , couldn't they just take the new projectile and place it in the 7.62 x 54R propellant case?...Wouldn't that just be a better solution than introducing a new round? I know, it's more complicated than that but still...

    What is important for projectiles is the ratio between propellant and calibre,length of projectile and the velocity it reaches. The 6x49mm already reached over 1100 m/s that is tremendous, any higher speed would have an effect on trajectory and maybe even disfavorable. Most high velocity rounds tend to be made very narrow or even close to Sabot like shaped projectiles. The propellant of a 54mm would be probably far to much and wasteful of resources, not just propellant and extra bress for casings, but the barrel would suffer and lower its durability if not even tend to have overpressure for that calibre. They would of course not use the same barrel as 7.62x54mmR PKM, but had to adjust it to 6mm meaning less material and thickness of the barrel which would have an effect on durability and making extra thick or making any other kind of measures to assure the barrel survives for an acceptable quantity of fired rounds will increase costs and would need modernisation of such weapons, further you would only make problems. The 6x49mm was designed to replace both 7.62x39 and 7.62x54mmR not just one. There was realistically speaking no future for this round in an already established MIC that has already issued so many rifles in existing cartridges and further majority of the world used either 7.62x39mm or 7.62x54mm R cartridges and they had no chances to adopt to it, that would leave Russia to rely domestically on 6x49mm while exporting 7.62x36/54mm R rounds. It was just unfeasible, unfortunatley... I have grown a fan of this calibre from what i could read.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3990
    Points : 4007
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sun Aug 02, 2015 9:08 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    KoTeMoRe wrote:Here's what you need to know:

    It. Costs. Too. Much.

    That's the issue with all the evolutions...It would probably have punched a meteor sized hole in the Soviet budget. And even today would have to be exported in biblical amounts with the ad hoc "tools" to make the change worthy. The round was axed because of its cost, and since then only ONE nation has gone out of the current 5.56/5.45 dichotomy and that's China with it's 5.8x42 DAP/DBP which is just another ".22x round".

    Changing calibre needs a phenomenal amount of time and cost, something the Soviets did not want (couldn't?) disburse.

    It's not what you wanted to hear and I apologize for the tone, but that's exactly how these things are going to look like for while with all the ammunition talks.

    The problem with the costs is that they could not bear it for export, since no other country would be willing to scrap all their 7.62x39/45mm calibres to change to that, that would ruine them and SU had already hundreds of millions of rifles that had those calibres and physically it would not had any impact in performance high enough to justify such a tremendous budget. We are talking here about a budget that would be higher than several new tank divisions and a long term decapitation of forces being capable and combat ready due the costs to re-establish a supply chain and manufactoring for this new round, but i admit seems like a great calibre.

    Exactly the point... the AK on its 7.62 format was a killer sale (pun intended). The rifle was cheap, the round cheap and powerful, every thing was nice. With another round you'd have to retool your forces, then start pushing it for export. In a cold war setup when the USSR was litterally giving away thousands of rifles that was self defeating. Now however it could be very interesting to have that round for export until it pays for the Russian armed forces (at least as a validating test).
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5689
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Aug 03, 2015 7:31 am

    So I'm guessing that the 6x49mm will remain a Special Forces/Black Ops ammo type, but not a conscript's daily bread?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:39 pm

    Errmm Bollocks.

    There is a cost associated with introducing a new calibre, but when you are buying armata based tank divisions where every vehicle is a tank based vehicle the fuel bill alone... and a fifth gen fighter is not cheap either.

    The fact is that the 6 x 49mm would be cheaper to produce than the 7.62 x 54mm in time... they have already introduced a range of new calibres into their armoury... they introduced teh 338 Lapua Magnum round, they are introducing a new 12.7 x 55mm catridge, and they are developing and producing new sniper ammo in a range of calibres including 12.7 x 108mm.

    They are already looking at replacing their AKs with either the AK12 or AEK or both... so now is actually the perfect time to introduce a new calibre that will stack better in magazines and can be pushed through a metal link belt instead of having to be withdrawn and then pushed into the chamber like on the PK and PKP.

    The purpose behind the new round is all about retaining energy rather than just blowing it out the muzzle of the rifle faster.

    You would get much better velocities and retention of velocity with flechettes but you lose lethality and effect on target.

    They have already been down that path:

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 12773810

    From what I have read the 6 x 49mm was never intended as a replacement for the 5.45mm round, which is intended as a long range SMG cartridge. The 6x49mm round is specifically to replace the old 7.62 x 54mm round with a modern rimless cartridge that has a longer effective range, is lighter and more compact, and more accurate.

    All they have to do is produce the SVD, VS-121, PKP, PKM, and SV-98 in the new cartridge and start producing it.

    If they can't afford to produce it, how can they afford to produce the 6.5mm grendel they are planning to make civilian rifles in?

    there was talk of their next generation weapon family being multi calibre... so it would just be a case of the right chamber, the right barrel and the right mag feed/mag design.

    The West germans couldn't afford to produce a new caseless round for their G11, but that was a rather different situation all together.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3990
    Points : 4007
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Mon Aug 03, 2015 6:14 pm

    [quote="GarryB"]Errmm Bollocks.

    There is a cost associated with introducing a new calibre, but when you are buying armata based tank divisions where every vehicle is a tank based vehicle the fuel bill alone... and a fifth gen fighter is not cheap either.

    The fact is that the 6 x 49mm would be cheaper to produce than the 7.62 x 54mm in time... they have already introduced a range of new calibres into their armoury... they introduced teh 338 Lapua Magnum round, they are introducing a new 12.7 x 55mm catridge, and they are developing and producing new sniper ammo in a range of calibres including 12.7 x 108mm.

    They are already looking at replacing their AKs with either the AK12 or AEK or both... so now is actually the perfect time to introduce a new calibre that will stack better in magazines and can be pushed through a metal link belt instead of having to be withdrawn and then pushed into the chamber like on the PK and PKP.

    The purpose behind the new round is all about retaining energy rather than just blowing it out the muzzle of the rifle faster.

    The Armata tank divisions have a totally different use than an Individual firearm. Producing a fully new round would impact all the tools around it. Be those the Fixed capital for its production or the tools of the trade (sighting devices, magazines) down to very tactics allowed by the new round which would require a far more deep approach than simply your rifle now hits up to 600m- success.

    Chances are that the round is indeed very good, but no one wants to deal with the logistics and economics of it, since the Armed Forces of Russia are also a big cash cow. Some expenses are budgetized and the said change would simply make that spending post explode. It's not something that the USSR wouldn't do, they already did when the scaled the AK mechanism to 5.45. But the 6x49 is a different beast.

    The AK's replaced are not going to suddenly become some exotic chambered boom sticks. The 6.5x39 was already in the cards since forever. What was the 5.6x39 was already a proven shooter's round. Scaling it a little bit proved very interesting hence the copy from the Murricans.Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 ComparaG 7.62x39 and the famous 5.6x39...The Unified round was something different.



    You would get much better velocities and retention of velocity with flechettes but you lose lethality and effect on target.

    They have already been down that path:

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 12773810

    From what I have read the 6 x 49mm was never intended as a replacement for the 5.45mm round, which is intended as a long range SMG cartridge. The 6x49mm round is specifically to replace the old 7.62 x 54mm round with a modern rimless cartridge that has a longer effective range, is lighter and more compact, and more accurate.

    All they have to do is produce the SVD, VS-121, PKP, PKM, and SV-98 in the new cartridge and start producing it.

    If they can't afford to produce it, how can they afford to produce the 6.5mm grendel they are planning to make civilian rifles in?

    Civillians rifles are paid for in a totally different scheme. It's like saying why don't the Italian armed forces roll in Ferraris, since Fiat can afford to build them and the Italian's LMV.

    there was talk of their next generation weapon family being multi calibre... so it would just be a case of the right chamber, the right barrel and the right mag feed/mag design.

    The West germans couldn't afford to produce a new caseless round for their G11, but that was a rather different situation all together.

    The H&K couldn't afford to further develop the caseless round, because the Germans wouldn't want to pay on G11 the price of a surplus M151 or G-wagen rolling train. That's how budget rolls.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5251
    Points : 5454
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Aug 03, 2015 7:36 pm

    Like said by KoteMore, that is not just some simple introduction of one further calibre but a REPLACEMENT of one new calibre of replacing two other calibres that are not just among the most used calibres in Russia/Soviet Union but in the entire world. That would mean all existing rifles AK-47/AK-103, SKS, PKM,PKT, SVD and any rifles in that calibres. Russia/Soviet Union itself had hundred millions of such Assault Rifles along with MG's, not to mention when Soviet Union/Russia would decommission and stop producing their 7.62x39mm and 7.62x54mm R they would lose an entire market which would than be completley over taken by Romania, Czech, Poland and China for production of such ammunition, while no one would take the burden and pain of dealing of introduction of new calibre and with it new rifles for that calibre, they never had the budget nor could feasible afford it in decades.

    The talks but did not just remain of unifiying ammunition for AK and PK guns of 7.62mm but also unifying over long term for higher lethality and performance of Assault Rifles with 5.45x39mm, which maybe or maybe was not considered, however such an replacement of a totaly new ammunition in a world with already established rifles in hundreds of millions in entire world which were praised and constantly used, would not give any realistic chances of making money on export, while AK/PKM's till this date are used and purchased like hot cakes. An introduction of a new calibre for an isolated or specialized weapons for one or some branches of military would be no problem since that is what happened several times just like your example with Lapua .338, but the Lapua was never intented to replace all sniper rifle calibres to unify it, that would bring to much costs and logistics and would hinder the forces full combat capability untill all units and logistics have been unified that is a rather gigantic job to do, not just some simply introduction of an additional calibre for choice for soldiers or specs.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Aug 04, 2015 12:30 pm

    The purpose behind the new round is all about retaining energy rather than just blowing it out the muzzle of the rifle faster.

    The Russian government has made it clear that they intend to completely reequip the Russian military... they can't do that with a 120 year old rifle cartridge.

    this is not an attempt to find some super bullet that can replace all other ammo... it is merely updating the rifle/MG cartridge of the Russian military.

    The Armata tank divisions have a totally different use than an Individual firearm. Producing a fully new round would impact all the tools around it.

    The new cartridge is not super new technology... it is not a laser, it is not a flechette, it is not even a caseless round or a plastic round.

    Of course there are costs involved in setting up production, but we are not talking trillions and it does not need to happen over night.

    the new round which would require a far more deep approach than simply your rifle now hits up to 600m- success.

    Most of the weapons that currently fire 7.62 x 54mm cartridges could easily be altered to use the newer smaller calibre ammo... in fact for the PK and PKP a new barrel, slightly modified belt feed and a new bolt face would probably do it.

    They are planning to introduce several new weapons into service... now would be the ideal time to change calibre.

    It's not something that the USSR wouldn't do, they already did when the scaled the AK mechanism to 5.45. But the 6x49 is a different beast.

    I disagree... I think the smaller lighter ammo will actually be cheaper to make and lighter and much more effective to use.

    They could scale in its introduction with elite units getting 6mm calibre sniper rifles and MGs first and AK12s in 5.45 or AEKs in 5.45 too.

    Then distribution could be expanded to eventually include all units.

    The H&K couldn't afford to further develop the caseless round, because the Germans wouldn't want to pay on G11 the price of a surplus M151 or G-wagen rolling train. That's how budget rolls.

    the Germans couldn't afford to change to a new round only they used... the advantage of NATO is that if you are short of ammo you can get an ally to produce some extra ammo for you when you need it fast... with the caseless rounds that couldn't happen.

    And regarding the non nato standard stuff... the US managed to get their 45 calibre pistols and SMGs through unnoticed in an org that has standardised 9mm.

    Like said by KoteMore, that is not just some simple introduction of one further calibre but a REPLACEMENT of one new calibre of replacing two other calibres that are not just among the most used calibres in Russia/Soviet Union but in the entire world.

    You are not listening... the 6mm round is intended to replace the MGs and sniper rifle calibre 7.62 x 54mm. The Russian military is happy with the 5.45mm and has no reason to replace it.

    the 7.62 x 54mm is a rimmed cartridge and while powerful enough to do the job is big and heavy and not modern in design... the rim is no problem for belt feed but in a mag it is a pain.

    That would mean all existing rifles AK-47/AK-103, SKS, PKM,PKT, SVD and any rifles in that calibres.

    The SKS is only ceremonial... for guard duty and marching.

    The 6 x 49mm is not intended to replace the 7.62 x 39mm... the 5.45mm already did that. the fact that some survive in service in some places show that having multiple calibres is not that much of a problem.

    Russia/Soviet Union itself had hundred millions of such Assault Rifles along with MG's, not to mention when Soviet Union/Russia would decommission and stop producing their 7.62x39mm and 7.62x54mm R they would lose an entire market which would than be completley over taken by Romania, Czech, Poland and China for production of such ammunition, while no one would take the burden and pain of dealing of introduction of new calibre and with it new rifles for that calibre, they never had the budget nor could feasible afford it in decades.

    The Russian ammo industry produces 30-06 ammo that it does not use itself... I am sure even when Russia replaces the 7.62 x 54mm cartridge in service the ammo companies will still find markets for them and keep them in production. The 303 is still in production too.

    The Lapua magnum rounds were introduced because they were designed to be effective up to 1,500m... in many ways this new 6 x49mm round achieves the same performance in terms of accuracy with a much smaller round with much less recoil... what is not to like?

    I will repeat there is no need to replace the 5.45mm round... it still does the job well... and probably has rather more potential than the 5.56mm in longer range engagements with its much longer more efficient bullet shape allowing it to retain energy rather better.

    New propellent shared with the new 6mm round could increase muzzle velocity by 30% for the 5.45mm, which should result in a greater effective range too.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3990
    Points : 4007
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Tue Aug 04, 2015 1:23 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    The purpose behind the new round is all about retaining energy rather than just blowing it out the muzzle of the rifle faster.

    The Russian government has made it clear that they intend to completely reequip the Russian military... they can't do that with a 120 year old rifle cartridge.

    this is not an attempt to find some super bullet that can replace all other ammo... it is merely updating the rifle/MG cartridge of the Russian military.

    The idea is that they have already a updated round for the Individual rifle with the 6.5x39 and having the 6x49 for the PKM once again would have the same log train issues. You have to deal with the whole lot. Recalibrate the sights in vehicles for instance. Outright buy new sights for the SVD/SVS.

    The Armata tank divisions have a totally different use than an Individual firearm. Producing a fully new round would impact all the tools around it.

    The new cartridge is not super new technology... it is not a laser, it is not a flechette, it is not even a caseless round or a plastic round.

    Of course there are costs involved in setting up production, but we are not talking trillions and it does not need to happen over night.

    The idea is that those costs can't be justified. It's too big and will replace weapons that still fulfll their duties quite nicely. The Implications as I said is that you'd need to get rid of a good chunk of the sotcks (especially the SVD's). Adding one more calibre is also less than optimal for the current AF leadership. Well it doesn't need to happen all either so far. Russia is evaluating the perfomance of the current ammunition in Ukraine. It will be a way to validate the need for the new ammunition.

    the new round which would require a far more deep approach than simply your rifle now hits up to 600m- success.

    Most of the weapons that currently fire 7.62 x 54mm cartridges could easily be altered to use the newer smaller calibre ammo... in fact for the PK and PKP a new barrel, slightly modified belt feed and a new bolt face would probably do it.

    Just like the AEK/AK 12 debate, that's simply not true. Because the new MG's, SVD's etc will have to be "modernized". It's like we never had the AK-12/AEK discussion. You're speaking about simple, logical changes with an institution whose whole purpose is to make life miserable to innovators. Add to that design bureau wars and yay...success.

    They are planning to introduce several new weapons into service... now would be the ideal time to change calibre.

    It's not something that the USSR wouldn't do, they already did when the scaled the AK mechanism to 5.45. But the 6x49 is a different beast.

    I disagree... I think the smaller lighter ammo will actually be cheaper to make and lighter and much more effective to use.

    They could scale in its introduction with elite units getting 6mm calibre sniper rifles and MGs first and AK12s in 5.45 or AEKs in 5.45 too.

    Then distribution could be expanded to eventually include all units.

    I don't think you understand what that means. They're already cheap since the round we're talking about is a 30 year old design, but the need of it coupled with the ground up modernization cost and hassle is really in discussion. It was deemed unnecessary back in a time when the Armed Forces could have anything, how do you think the round will fare today with a tighter oversight and generally a bigger competition among services for cash?

    The H&K couldn't afford to further develop the caseless round, because the Germans wouldn't want to pay on G11 the price of a surplus M151 or G-wagen rolling train. That's how budget rolls.

    the Germans couldn't afford to change to a new round only they used... the advantage of NATO is that if you are short of ammo you can get an ally to produce some extra ammo for you when you need it fast... with the caseless rounds that couldn't happen.
    Yet they can use the 4.7 colibri-round and field it's weapon of choice without much cost problems. Although the MP-7 cost was almost as important as the G11. You have to take into account the whole array of reasons on what you spend your money. The G11 was relatively a small program as a weapon, but a huge one as munition was regarded. And it still lives on to this day with the LSAT which licensed the round-technology and yeat has to field the said system (gun+ammo+parts). So ammunition isn't really that easy.

    And regarding the non nato standard stuff... the US managed to get their 45 calibre pistols and SMGs through unnoticed in an org that has standardised 9mm.

    The US could throw billions in and expect return (or not), that's not the case for Germany's H&K that would have to compete for that in order to have a return on investment. They were ready when the gun wasn't needed. Same for the LSAT it is being tested while the US need for such tools is being put again on the back burner.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 23774
    Points : 24314
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Aug 05, 2015 6:24 am

    The idea is that they have already a updated round for the Individual rifle with the 6.5x39 and having the 6x49 for the PKM once again would have the same log train issues. You have to deal with the whole lot. Recalibrate the sights in vehicles for instance. Outright buy new sights for the SVD/SVS.

    They will be upgrading the sights of the SVD anyway... and 6.5 x 39mm? Since when has the Russians decided to adopt a foreign cartridge in the form of the Grendel?

    There is no need... out to about 300-400m the 5.45mm is fine... at greater distances use 6x49mm and a weapon with the right optics for the job.

    The idea is that those costs can't be justified.

    Of course they can... you get better performance for lower material costs... the bullet the 6x49mm round fires is smaller and lighter than the 7.62 x 54mm and it uses less propellent per round. the ammo is lighter so the soldier can carry less weight or more ammo for the same weight.

    The improved performance and accuracy should make machine guns and sniper rifles more effective.

    It's too big and will replace weapons that still fulfll their duties quite nicely.

    If that were a good reason then why replace AK-74s with AEKs and AK12s? Just slap rails on the existing rifles and there is no need for new weapons...

    The Implications as I said is that you'd need to get rid of a good chunk of the sotcks (especially the SVD's).

    SVDs don't have secret codes on them... I am sure Syria and Iraq would be happy to buy up large numbers of these weapons, along with a good supply of ammo too.

    New weapons like the SV-98 and VS-121 could easily be rebarrelled and recalibrated.

    The new thermal scopes we have seen details of have ballistic computers and laser range finders so just adding the ballistics of the new round should mean simply selecting the right option in the menu, and firing a zeroing shot and you are good to go.

    Most PKs didn't have optics... all SVDs already in 7.62 calibre can keep their optics when they are sold. AFAIK most Russian and Soviet night vision optics had mechanical compensators so when used on different weapons you used a different setting... so the night vision optic could be used on AK-74, AKM, SVD, RPK, RPK-74, PKM, and even RPG-7 with the different attachments for the different projectile trajectories. This new calibre just means adding a new attachment.

    Adding one more calibre is also less than optimal for the current AF leadership. Well it doesn't need to happen all either so far. Russia is evaluating the perfomance of the current ammunition in Ukraine. It will be a way to validate the need for the new ammunition.

    Well if this new round is all it is cracked up to be it might end up like the SKS/AK... where the AK could do all that an SKS could do, but the SKS was semi auto only and had a limited mag capacity, plus a fixed mag so in the end they just used AK-47s as they were cheaper to make.

    If this round is a good combination of recoil and performance then perhaps in time it could replace the 5.45mm in service, but for now it is fine.

    Just like the AEK/AK 12 debate, that's simply not true. Because the new MG's, SVD's etc will have to be "modernized". It's like we never had the AK-12/AEK discussion. You're speaking about simple, logical changes with an institution whose whole purpose is to make life miserable to innovators. Add to that design bureau wars and yay...success.

    The new weapons they will be introducing are supposed to be modular multi calibre weapons.

    The PK and PKP in existing stocks would need a replacement barrel for the smaller calibre, a new bolt face for the different round, and a new leaf iron sight for the different trajectory and a new belt feed.

    the mechanism doesn't need to be changed on existing weapons.... dragging the round out the back of the belt and then pushing it forward into the chamber is fine even though it could be replaced by a push straight from the belt into the chamber with the new cartridge design. Using the existing mechanism would be simpler and cheaper, and might add to reliability... it has been said that pulling the round back and then ramming it forward increases reliability by shaking off any dirt the ammo belt might have picked up and shaking it off before it gets to the chamber.

    I am sure the MIC will be happy enough with the prospect of producing all the MGs needed to replace every vehicle mounted MG... I suspect in the newer model armoured vehicles the trajectory is calculated via ballistic computer anyway so just new software will be needed to recalibrate the sights... the backup optic sights can simply be recalibrated too.

    Now is the best time to make the change as all new vehicles will be entering service soon and new small arms too.

    I don't think you understand what that means. They're already cheap since the round we're talking about is a 30 year old design, but the need of it coupled with the ground up modernization cost and hassle is really in discussion. It was deemed unnecessary back in a time when the Armed Forces could have anything, how do you think the round will fare today with a tighter oversight and generally a bigger competition among services for cash?

    My information says it was killed because it was developed into the 1990s when there was no cash and no prospect of cash to do it. Now enormous amounts of money are being spent on new armoured vehicles and new small arms... now is the ideal time to make the change.

    The more so when you look at the details about the AK12, with the smaller model in assault rifle calibres, and the larger version being described as being in 7.62 x 51mm and no mention of a 7.62 x 54mm version... that suggests to me either they are changing to 6 x 49mm or 7.62 x 51mm... and I really don't see them taking a step backward to introduce such an inferior round.

    Yet they can use the 4.7 colibri-round and field it's weapon of choice without much cost problems. Although the MP-7 cost was almost as important as the G11.

    That is case in point... the 4.6 x 30mm round for the MP-7 was put forward as the new personal defence weapon calibre for NATO in competition to the 5.7x28mm round used in weapons like the P90, but lost. The PDW was a new weapon category for NATO to replace SMG with a round with low recoil that will reliably penetrate body armour. The 5.7mm round was found to be the superior option, but this was rejected by the Germans who preferred their own cartridge so neither round has been accepted AFAIK.  Note the goal was to find a round to replace the 9 x 19mm which has not happened...

    So ammunition isn't really that easy.

    I dont think you can compare this with that as the caseless round had rather more issues that were not totally solved and was rather a break from traditional ammo.

    the 6x49mm is just a different diameter bullet in a new case shape... they will likely be able to make it in the same lines that make the current ammo.

    The US could throw billions in and expect return (or not), that's not the case for Germany's H&K that would have to compete for that in order to have a return on investment. They were ready when the gun wasn't needed. Same for the LSAT it is being tested while the US need for such tools is being put again on the back burner.

    the real problem for Germany was that the reintegration of East and west germany was costing them a fortune, while the perceived threat from the Soviet Union was gone so it was not possible to justify replacing G3 rifles with the G11... so they ended up having to develop the g36.... which was not free, and then introduce 556 production which was not free either.[/quote]

    Sponsored content

    Ammo calibres for Russian Army - Page 5 Empty Re: Ammo calibres for Russian Army

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:55 am