I said, the effect wouldn't be as dramatic, I never said there would be no effect on that unfortunate soul that'd be at the receiving end.
Bones shattering, heavy internal bleeding, organs tearing, blood vessels in lungs getting burst are all know issues, I'm not making them up Saar. Trust me. People have died
There is this whole field of terminal ballistics called Behind Armour Blunt Trauma (BABT)
That I know, and I get what you're saying. But when the entire argument is based around extending the engagement range, then don't you think it'd render the issue of after-armor effects largely irrelevant, as at such distances, let's say 500 meters, the effect would be no where close to being as debilitating as it'd be if the ranges were shorter, but in that case, an armor-piercing 5.56 like M855A1 would be a lot more practical is all I'm saying.
Well what you're saying is like a conundrum; you can use a 7.62 FMJ at long range but lose penetration or you can use a 5.56 AP but at a close range.
But what if I use an 7.62 AP?
You gave example of 500m engagement; 7.62 AP (M993) can easily penetrate 5mm of RHA steel at 500m. If it's ceramic then extend it bit more.
Dude, first of all, our army does not happen to be made of clones of Carlos Hathcock, far from it. I thought it was common knowledge. You think your average rifleman is capable of accurately engaging a man-sized moving target at 600–700 meters and beyond? Then why even bother giving everyone a handcannon, which the vast majority of them will have no use for??!!
Plus, have you actually looked at the physique of the average Indian Army soldier?? Like half of them look like Grim from The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy, with literal twigs for arms and virtually nothing in the way of shoulder and back muscles, and you expect them to keep using such a high-powered rifle for a prolonged period of time??
First of all, this is not "the" physique of Indian army. You'll find a plethora of physique belonging from various different places. And as for this argument of soldier not being able to engage targets because they're not muscular...I've just one thing for you.
Also, before INSAS 7.62x51mm was the only thing we knew
In my opinion, a much better option would have been to standardize on an improved 5.56 rifle with a dedicated armor-piercing variant as standard issue for the riflemen and adopt the SIG 716s only for DMR roles with a quality LPVO sight.
Agree, can't argue there
The best solutions for us would have been to adopt a single new 6mm caliber round and replace everything.
And the second best solution would be have been to make 5.56x45mm the standard caliber but have multiple ammo for different scenarios. An extremely heavy fragmenting round to replace 7.62x39mm AKs in CI/CT ops, a regular FMJ and a lightweight steel cored for neer peer engagement; covering everything with a single caliber.
But in that case too you'd have need a handful of longer range rifles. Everyone needs. When US army faced ridgeline to ridgeline combat for the very first time in Afghanistan they had a mental breakdown. Almost everyone in the platoon had M16/4 and only a handful and that too rarely had M240s because of its weight. But the Talibans on the other hand had multiple PKMs. US Army became so desperate that they started pulling out old M14s from reserves.
I won't even go into the whole increased weight and the resultant logistics issue.
The weight increase would be an issue but not that much. Remember we're not standing on the doorsteps of complete manned - unmanned training. Earlier it would have been a pita to carry even 1000 extra rounds of 7.62x51mm but now a drone can deliver resupply to the front lines in minutes.
And as for logistics is considered, our standard MMG is in 7.62x51mm. The replacement Negev 7 is also in the same. If you see it in that way then we're actually streamlining our logistics in high altitude areas (obviously we're doing it unknowingly, but it's happening nonetheless)
While modern rifle designs have indeed reduced recoil, they're still nowhere close to being identical to those chambered for 5.56 NATO. I mean, those same recoil mitigation techniques are applied to the 5.56 rifles as well, aren't they??
It's kind of hard to describe; there are 5.56x45mm guns that like a mule and there are also 7.62x51mm guns that give a gentle shove. But ya, if it's a modern 7.62x51mm rifle like SCAR firing proper speced ammo then the recoil won't be exponentially more than 5.56x45mm. Noticeable yes, but not too much
TL;DR to this whole rant of mine
Imagine if I say I'm buying S23 Ultra to achieve maximum productivity then would you consider it a good decision or not?
But if I tell you I'll be using 2G in it, a non-fast charger and won't subscribe to any utility application; then?
This is more or less what we have done with our procurement. We identified the problem of long range engagement and we chose a very good platform to deal with it...and then we very intricately f-up every single thing. For a long time we lacked even NATO spec ammunition, we're still unable to convince our troops that they can shoot slightly more accurate if they flip up their iron sights, proper LPVO won't come atleast in this
Kali Yuga, we are no where close to procure AP rounds...I guess you understood the whole problem. And how it's more of a management issue than a technical one
