Dude, I know about Behind Armour Blunt Trauma. All I'm saying is that, at the ranges where you're expecting to engage the PLA femboys (and I very much doubt your average Pandu can hit anything worth shit at those ranges), the effect would be greatly reduced.
And if the engagement happens at closer ranges, then I'd much prefer to send my enemies to the morgue rather than to a hospital where they will likely make a full recovery and be back in a month or two with vengeance at his heart.
And I'm saying your average trooper can not hit anything worth of note at 500-600 meters under battle field conditions. So, cutting your ammo count to half for that supposedly increased range appears to be quite silly, it does to me anyway.
Why not?? But how many of the said rounds you can carry at any given time?? And how many of 5.56 AP rounds you would be able to carry for the same weight?? And to how far out you can hope to reliably tag your enemies?? You need to take into account everything, and not just the terminal ballistics.
Of course it can, I'm not disputing that. But can you reliably hit a man sized target, who by the way would be scrambling for the nearest cover or hit the deck the moment he hears the first shot being fired.
The more mass you have, the easier it'd be to manage recoil, simple. And besides, that's not the only thing or even the main thing I'm worried about. What about fatigue?? Shooting at a range for a few minutes at a time is one thing but having to fight with such a heavy rifle (I mean the caliber, not necessarily the weight of that boomstick) for days on end, with little rest in between, it will add up rather quickly.
Lack of muscle mass is a real issue and the standard diet of the Army has got everything to do with it. I'm not saying the troopers would have to be IFBB pro level mass monsters but a certain level of it is indeed necessary.
No arguments there.
I know that and that's why I made the case for procuring the SIG 716 in more limited numbers with LPVO sights as the standard issue DMR, with each 10 men section having one or two guys equipped with it. Plus, if my memory serves me right, then a single infantry platoon has 2 or 3 GPMGs at any given time, so long range firepower shouldn't be an issue with the current set up.
Yes, when you are on the defensive. But when you'll be on the offense, resupplying will become an issue.
Streamlining, maybe but increasing the strain as well, considering you'd be literally cutting the ammo load to half by converting to 7.62 NATO.
I see what you're saying but from what I've seen on youtube, while a modern 7.62mm chambered rifle like the SIG 716s have indeed reduced recoil profile as compared to let's say a FAL or a G3, it's still significantly higher than your typical AR-15 platforms.
Just take the footage of our soldiers firing the INSAS and then compare it to a video of the SIG - the difference is more than just noticeable.
Agreed. It's quite a shame that our top brass lacks any semblance of common sense.
It would have been bit lengthy if I quoted each paragraph...so if I'm not wrong then more or less these are the points you made. Correct me if I'm wrong or missed any point
1. Damage at 500-600m
2. The rounds you'd have per soldier
3. Engaging targets at 500-600m
4. More recoil Vs low mass of soldiers
5. Resupplying under offensive
5 in the morning and you're making me do maths...Chor. Anyways
1. Damage at 500-600m
Let's consider M80 bullet fired from SIG716i
From 16" barrel it would be 780m/s and the bullet weight is almost 10g so using basic [½mv²] it's every should be just shy of 3kJ.
But there's a problem, this energy is at 0m from muzzle and at a climatic condition of NTP. So now we'll have to add multiple constraints. For Galwan the temperature should be something around 15°C (peak temperature of summer, summer should be the optimum condition for war) and at 17,880ft elevation the pressure should be around 8psi. Now add ballistic coefficient of 0.45(G1) to it to reduce velocity because of drag. And finally let's take the engagement distance as far as 700m.
After doing some
sekrit calculation or maybe simply refering to a ballistic chart the energy comes to be around 1.2kJ.
Now it's extremely difficult for me to show what damage 1.2kJ would do on person standing at 0m, wearing Level III armour because that would need a proper full size NIJ spec ballistic gelatin dummy. But we can get a rough idea.
In this video he's firing a 5.56x45mm XM1193 (3.5 gram) from a 22" barrel at a speed of 3240fps. It should generate approximately 1.7kJ of energy.
Definitely 0.5kJ more than what a M80 ball would generate at 700m, but still the results are significant.
I could have skipped all these by stating the simple fact that for decades Indian soldiers used to call their FN FALs
haathi maar rifle. But still, in case someone needed a detailed technical analysis from a "you know nothing, just read brochure, you're a kid and I'm here since Jesus was crucified" guy.
2. Number of rounds per soldier
On paper yes, you can carry double the number of 5.56 in the weight of 7.62.
But it's also a fact that you'll need less rounds to kill vs 5.56; as you'll be shooting from beyond enemy's range you can take time in making precise aimed shots. Moreover each round would carry almost double the energy. (I know you're currently reading this and typing "And how they'll shoot accu...". Shaanti vats, shaanti. I'll touch that too)
3. Engaging targets accurately at long distance
This whole idea of using 7.62x51mm to shoot at 600m revolves around the basic requirement of seeing at 600m. If they had procured even a 6x LPVO then it would have been sorted. But our guys are still going around with folded sights and that too in photo ops then what can I say.
But ya, if MoD buys a 6x LPVO or heck even a 6x magnifier + red dot sight combo then this accuracy issue would be sorted.
4. Countering repeated high recoil of 7.62 and that too with low mass body.
First thing first, SIG716i were kicking so much because we're using high pressure rounds and also our standing shooting posture is outdated. So if those minor things are corrected then this too gets solved.
As for low mass and recoil, remember the perceived recoil is directly proportional to the distance above the ground the gun is being shot. If you shoot a rifle standing, it would kick. But you shoot the same rifle from prone and you'll feel a good reduction in recoil. In our scenarios, it would most often be fired from prone or crouching.
And we've fired SLRs for so long, not a big deal
5. Resupply during an offensive
To be very honest with you, in the current sorry state of affairs we'd struggle to resupply even in defense. But all things considered if we maange to use technology then it won't be that big of an issue. We are already doing trails to UAVs to resupply food and medicines.
