DOCSLIB.ORG

Envisioning the Deep Future of Small Arms 2022-2042

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Envisioning the Deep Future of Small Arms 2022-2042 Deputy Assistance Secretary of the Army for Research & Technology Technology Wargaming Implementation Office (SAAL-ZT) Envisioning the Deep Future of Small Arms 2022-2042 Contributors Jason Augustyn, US Army Natick Soldier RD&E Center SAALZT-TR-2013-03 Nathan Burkholder, SAAL-ZT Dan Evans, Network Science Center, United States Military Academy Brian Freeman, Department of History, United States Military Academy John Graham, Network Science Center, United States Military Academy Nicholas Sambaluk, Department of History, United States Military Academy David Siry, Department of History, United States Military Academy Charles Thomas, Department of History, United States Military Academy John Willis, Institute for Innovation and Development, United States Military Academy Peter A. Wilson, RAND Corporation UNCLASSIFIED Approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited. Mary J. Miller Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Research & Technology Developing Future Technology Concepts for Small Arms ii Table of Contents Executive Summary iv List of Figures and Tables vii Figures vii Tables vii List of Acronyms viii Introduction 1 Lessons for the Future from the History of US Army Small Arms 3 Insights into the Strategic and Tactical Environment of 2022-2042 7 Insights into Future Technologies for Small Arms 10 Insights into the Nature of Innovation in Army S&T 15 Conclusions 17 References 19 Appendix A: Historical Perspectives on Small Arms 21 The Parallel Evolution of Small Arms and Small Unit Doctrine 21 Small Units in the Muzzle Loading Era (1648-1866) 21 Technological Boom and the Initial Alteration of Doctrine (1866 to 1914) 23 The Great War and its Doctrinal Revolution 24 Interwar Years and whither the Americans? 25 The Second World War and Beyond (1945-2012) 26 Conclusion 28 Appendix B: Alternate Futures for Small Arms 30 Development of Alternate Futures 30 Assumptions about the Future 31 Axes of Uncertainty 34 The Scenario Framework 37 Cold War II 38 Global Footprint 39 Turning Inward 41 Standing in a Tinderbox 42 A Hybrid or “Surprise Free” Future 43 Appendix C: Ideation Workshop- Objectives and Methods 48 Network Building 48 SAALZT-TR-2013-03 UNCLASSIFIED Developing Future Technology Concepts for Small Arms iii Seminar Series 48 Ideation Workshop Methods 49 Appendix D: New Concepts for S&T Exploration 54 Small Arms Concepts: 2022-2042 54 SWEAT Analysis 57 Concept Clusters 57 Utility Ratings 58 Applicability Across Alternate Futures 59 Appendix E: Network Analysis 62 Background 62 Use of Network Analysis 62 Data Collection 62 Data Analysis 63 Way Ahead 67 Appendix F: Small Arms Seminar Attendees 69 SAALZT-TR-2013-03 UNCLASSIFIED Developing Future Technology Concepts for Small Arms iv Executive Summary In the summer of 2012, HQDA G3 provided a presentation to the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) focused on small arms overmatch at the squad level. This presentation resulted in questions raised by the CSA regarding the nature of the Army’s holistic strategy for small arms dominance into the future. HQDA G3 received the task to follow up on these questions and present back to the CSA a comprehensive small arms strategy. In support of the HQDA G3 mission, ASA(ALT) SAAL-ZT as the responsible agent for the Army’s science and technology investments, agreed to identify and prioritize future concepts with potential to enable long-term small arms overmatch for US military forces from the period 2020-2040+. ASA(ALT) SAAL-ZT identified the following key questions to address through this activity: o What technological and other trends, to include changes in the threat environment, will influence the evolution of small arms over the mid to far term given the need for emerging/new technology to remain under development longer in order to reach a higher Technology Readiness Level (TRL) before seeking transition to a program executive office (PEO)? o Given these trends, what future small arms technology concepts are possible in 2020-2030 and 2030-2040 under various scenarios? o How would the capabilities provided by these future small arms technology concepts support a variety of alternate future scenarios? o What S&T investments are needed to realize these future small arms technology concepts? ASA(ALT) SAAL-ZT reached out to the United States Military Academy’s (USMA) Network Science Center and to the Natick Soldier Research, Development and Engineering Center (NSRDEC) to lead the team that would address these questions. The study team took a comprehensive approach to looking into the future of small arms that encompassed several key thrusts: o An analysis of the history of small arms technology within the US Army, from the Revolutionary War through recent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. o Interviews with experienced commanders at the platoon/company, battalion, and brigade/division level. o Development of a set of alternate futures that describe potential scenarios for the strategic and tactical environment from 2022-2042. o An ideation exercise that used the alternate futures and emerging insights from the other study thrusts to ground a free-thinking exploration of conceptual technologies for small arms in 2022-2042. This process yielded numerous insights into the role of small arms technology in enabling squad overmatch in 2022-2042: Lessons for the Future from the History of US Army Small Arms Technological overmatch is part of a complex system that requires simultaneous coordination on many fronts. Technological overmatch can be denied by Institutional Inertia. Technological overmatch is transient. Insights into the Strategic and Tactical Environment of 2022-2042 The definition of “technological overmatch” will change dramatically over the next 30 years It is impossible to discuss technological overmatch without considering rules of engagement SAALZT-TR-2013-03 UNCLASSIFIED Developing Future Technology Concepts for Small Arms v Insights into Future Technologies for Small Arms Future small arms technologies will blur established “lanes” within the S&T and PEO/PM community Emerging technologies promise to radically change the nature of how we define the relationship between Soldiers and small arms. In particular, robotic platforms and exoskeletons could provide disruptive capabilities for squads that address many limitations of current systems. However, these technologies will increase the "footprint" of the squad, with implications for the design of air assault and ground vehicles Few of the concepts provided overmatch across all alternate futures Insights into the Nature of Innovation in Army S&T The Army has a rich tradition of small arms innovation, including many concepts that arrived "before their time". These represent a significant, largely untapped resource. Innovation is an inherently human exercise dependent on "hot teams" given time and space to think big. Ideation must become a routine business practice for Army S&T. This report details the methods that were employed in this study and discusses the points noted above in detail. Based on the insights gained from the study several recommendations are made to ASA(ALT) and Army G3. The study team recommends: That the Army G3 lead a deep consideration of how the Army should define, and more importantly, measure overmatch in the future. The development of new measures of effectiveness/measures of performance for overmatch in small arms is essential to guide research and development of new small arms systems. That ASA(ALT) portfolio leads work with TRADOC, HQDA, and SOCOM (collectively comprising the small arms requirements Community of Interest (CoI)) as well as USMC and others to develop an architecture for small arms to baseline current investments and guide future S&T activities. That ASA(ALT) work with DARPA and the S&T Enterprise to determine the state of the art in exoskeleton- related technologies and whether a TECD or ATO-level program should be funded to develop these systems. Furthermore, we recommend that ASA(ALT) leads an ongoing dialog between TRADOC and the S&T community to ensure that the revolutionary capabilities of an exoskeleton are matched with appropriate developments in doctrine and materiel requirements. That ASA(ALT), the CoI, and the intelligence community collaborate on a “deep dive” into the potential disruptive effects of squad robotics as a small arms platform to: a) roadmap the technologies that are feasible and b) prepare for the doctrinal, organizational, and acquisitions changes that will be driven by the robotics revolution that will spread from the air to the ground. That ASA(ALT) continue to engage with the CoI and other thought leaders in future operations to articulate the demand signals that will drive future small arms needs and that the S&T portfolio be reviewed regularly against these projections to ensure that the strategy for small arms technology development remains adaptive to future trends. That ASA(ALT) and the S&T Enterprise leadership investigate how the capabilities of the Federal Research Division of the Library of Congress could be leveraged to enhance the Army’s corporate knowledge of innovative small arms concepts from the past that could be worth revisiting today. SAALZT-TR-2013-03 UNCLASSIFIED Developing Future Technology Concepts for Small Arms vi That ASA(ALT) work with the CoI and the S&T Enterprise to develop a regular process for conducting structured ideation activities that are grounded in threat and mission projections and that utilize sound analytical methods to encourage the transition from ideas "on the drawing board" to new S&T programs. That ASA(ALT) lead a deep and comprehensive look at the 6.1 and 6.2 components of the small arms S&T portfolio and ask hard questions about whether our investments in future small arms technologies align with the forces that are shaping future operational needs. In leading this strategic conversation we encourage ASA(ALT) to engage individuals and organizations outside the traditional centers of mass involved with Army small arms science and technology. In thinking about the deep future it is essential to bring in perspectives well outside the box (and the beltway).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National World War I Museum 2008 Accessions to the Collections Doran L
    NATIONAL WORLD WAR I MUSEUM 2008 ACCESSIONS TO THE COLLECTIONS DORAN L. CART, CURATOR JONATHAN CASEY, MUSEUM ARCHIVIST All accessions are donations unless otherwise noted. An accession is defined as something added to the permanent collections of the National World War I Museum. Each accession represents a separate “transaction” between donor (or seller) and the Museum. An accession can consist of one item or hundreds of items. Format = museum accession number + donor + brief description. For reasons of privacy, the city and state of the donor are not included here. For further information, contact [email protected] or [email protected] . ________________________________________________________________________ 2008.1 – Carl Shadd. • Machine rifle (Chauchat fusil-mitrailleur), French, M1915 CSRG (Chauchat- Sutter-Ribeyrolles and Gladiator); made at the Gladiator bicycle factory; serial number 138351; 8mm Lebel cartridge; bipod; canvas strap; flash hider (standard after January 1917); with half moon magazine; • Magazine carrier, French; wooden box with hinged lid, no straps; contains two half moon magazines; • Tool kit for the Chauchat, French; M1907; canvas and leather folding carrier; tools include: stuck case extractor, oil and kerosene cans, cleaning rod, metal screwdriver, tension spring tool, cleaning patch holder, Hotchkiss cartridge extractor; anti-aircraft firing sight. 2008.2 – Robert H. Rafferty. From the service of Cpl. John J. Rafferty, 1 Co 164th Depot Brigade: Notebook with class notes; • Christmas cards; • Photos; • Photo postcard. 2008.3 – Fred Perry. From the service of John M. Figgins USN, served aboard USS Utah : Diary; • Oversize photo of Utah ’s officers and crew on ship. 2008.4 – Leslie Ann Sutherland. From the service of 1 st Lieutenant George Vaughan Seibold, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 1.0 Firearms History
    1.0 Firearms History 1.0.1 Introduction While a history of firearms should start with the earliest of hand cannons, progressing through the It may seem that a history of firearms is an illogical wheel lock, miquelet and so on. For this book, way to begin this book, but any competent forensic however, it will start at the flintlock, as it is unlikely firearms examiner needs to have a good working that anything earlier would be encountered in every- knowledge of this subject matter. As such, it should day case work. A much more comprehensive history form part of the court qualification process at the of firearms is offered in Appendix 4. beginning of any trial. Having said that, though, it would be unreasonable to expect a firearms examiner with many years’ experience to be able to give, for 1.0.2 The flintlock (Figure 1.0.1) example, a precise date for the introduction of the Anson and Deeley push button fore-end. Such an The flintlock ignition system really signalled the esoteric piece of firearms history may have formed advent of an easy-to-use firearm with a simple part of the examiner’s training many years ago, but mechanism for the discharge of a missile via a unless s/he had a particular interest in shotgun powdered propellant. In this type of weapon, the history it would be unlikely that s/he would remem- propellant was ignited via a spark produced by ber little other than an approximate date or period. striking a piece of flint against a steel plate.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Military List of the European Union
    0102.3.81 NE Official Journal of the European Union C 69/19 IV (Notices) NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES COUNCIL COMMON MILITARY LIST OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (adopted by the Council on 15 February 2010) (equipment covered by Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP defining common rules governing the control of exports of military technology and equipment) (updating and replacing the Common Military List of the European Union adopted by the Council on 23 February 2009) (CFSP) (2010/C 69/03) Note 1: Terms in ″quotations″ are defined terms. Refer to ’Definitions of Terms’ annexed to this List. Note 2: In some instances chemicals are listed by name and CAS number. The list applies to chemicals of the same struc­ tural formula (including hydrates) regardless of name or CAS number. CAS numbers are shown to assist in iden­ tifying a particular chemical or mixture, irrespective of nomenclature. CAS numbers cannot be used as unique identifiers because some forms of the listed chemical have different CAS numbers, and mixtures containing a listed chemical may also have different CAS numbers. ML1 Smooth-bore weapons with a calibre of less than 20 mm, other arms and automatic weapons with a calibre of 12,7 mm (calibre 0,50 inches) or less and accessories, as follows, and specially designed components therefor: a. Rifles, carbines, revolvers, pistols, machine pistols and machine guns; Note: ML1.a. does not apply to the following: a. Muskets, rifles and carbines manufactured earlier than 1938; b. Reproductions of muskets, rifles and carbines the originals of which were manufactured earlier than 1890; c.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample File Miquelet Ferguson Mfg: Greek 1790 to 1850 Mfg: English 1776 to 1778 .65 Cal .60 Cal Muzzle Velocity: 800 Fps Weight: 13 Lb
    Recoil Action: Firearm action that uses the force of the recoil to provide energy to cycle the action. Roller-delayed Blowback: A type of fi rearm action where rollers on the sides of the bolt are driven inward against a tapered bolt carrier extension. This forces the bolt carrier rearward at a higher velocity and delays movement of the bolt head. Rolling Block Action: A fi rearm action where the breech is seeled with a specially shaped breechblock able to rotate on a pin. The breechblock is locked in place by the hammer preventing the cartridge from moving backwards when fi red. Cocking the weapon allows the breechblock to be rotated to reload the weapon. Short Recoil Action: Action where the barrel and slide recoil together a short distance before they unlock and separate. The barrel stops quickly, and the slide continues rearward, compressing the recoil spring and performing the automated extraction and feeding process. During the last portion of its forward travel, the slide locks into the barrel and pushes the barrel back into battery. Slide Action: A fi rearm action where the handgrip is moved back and forth along the barrel in order to eject a spent cartridge and chamber a new one. This type of action is most common in shotguns and is also used in some rifl e designs. It is also called pump action. Snaphance: A method of fi ring a gun that uses a fl int set in the hammer that when the trigger is pulled causes the fl int to strike the frizzen to create a shower of sparks to ignite the priming powder.
    [Show full text]
  • Bob Was a Shoo-Shoo
    NEW ORLEANS NOSTALGIA Remembering New Orleans History, Culture and Traditions By Ned Hémard Bob Was a Shoo-Shoo Every boy that grew up in New Orleans (at least in my age group) that managed to get himself into the least bit of mischief knows that the local expression for a firecracker that doesn’t go off is a “shoo-shoo”. It means a dud, something that may have started off hot, but ended in a fizzle. It just didn’t live up to its expectations. It could also be used to describe other things that didn’t deliver the desired wallop, such as an over-promoted “hot date” or even a tropical storm that (fortunately) wasn’t as damaging as its forecast. Back in 1968, I thought for a moment that I was that “dud” date, but was informed by the young lady I was escorting that she had called me something entirely different. “Chou chou” (pronounced exactly like shoo-shoo) was a reduplicative French term of endearment, meaning “my little cabbage”. Being a “petite” healthy leafy vegetable was somehow a lot better than being a non-performing firecracker. At least I wasn’t the only one. In 2009 the Daily Mail reported on a “hugely embarrassing video” in which Carla Bruni called Nicolas Sarkozy my ‘chou chou’ and “caused a sensation across France”. Bruni and Sarkozy: no “shoo-shoo” here The glamourous former model turned pop singer planted a passionate kiss on the French President and then whispered “‘Bon courage, chou chou’, which means ‘Be brave, my little darling’.” The paper explained, “A ‘chou’ is a cabbage in French, though when used twice in a row becomes a term of affection between young lovers meaning ‘little darling’.” I even noticed in the recent French movie “Populaire” that the male lead called his rapid-typing secretary and love interest “chou”, which somehow became “pumpkin” in the subtitles.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Apply LSA-T, LSA, Or GMD Lubricant Generously (Enough to 1
    1. Apply LSA-T, LSA, or GMD lubricant generously (enough to 1. Use the original plastic bag (barrier bag) used to pack the GTA 43-01-030 spread with your finger) to the MK19 receiver rails and the weapon to keep the sand out of the AT4’s exterior moving mating bolt surfaces (LSA and GMD are alternate lubricants). parts that are listed in TM 9-1315-886-12. SMALL CALIBER (5.56MM TO Cal .50) WEAPONS Using improper lubricants can result in functioning problems. HOT WEATHER/DESERT OPERATION 2. If operating in sand without the original plastic bag, stand up This abbreviated checklist is not to be used as a replacement for 2. Be sure to pay close attention to temperature ranges for exposed AT4 on the aft end instead of laying flat on the ground. the –10 series Tech Manuals or any other PMCS guide lubricants in any climate condition. At temperatures of +33 OF to +145 OF and in sand and dust conditions generously 3. Ensure rubber dust seal at muzzle end is not broken. A broken MACHINE GUNS (5.56MM TO CAL .50) lubricate dust seal will allow contaminant inside the tube, adversely affecting performance. 1. Inspect twice as often as normal. Keep weapon covered when M130 FLARE DISPENSER possible. 1. Inspect and clean, with a soft brush, the 30 contact pins and 2. Generously lube internal working parts. Wipe lubricants from exposed surfaces (Only for 5.56mm to 7.62mm). grounding springs of the M130 dispenser breech. 3. If weapon stops firing, apply Immediate Action Procedures (IAP).
    [Show full text]
  • Machine Guns
    GUN CLASS #4 – Machine Guns Weapon Magazine Fire Recoil ROF Range Reloads Reload Ammo Origin Notes capacity Modes Time Morita 99 FA,SA 2 400 Long 6 10 N/A N/A The Morita is the standard issue gaming gun representing a typical light machine gun from Battlefield Sports. The Morita has been in continuous manufacture since 2002. FN Minimi / M249 200 FA 2 M Long 7 6 5.56x45mm Belgium The Minimi light machine gun features a NATO 200 shot belt, fires fully automatic only, has long range, has 7 spare belts of 5.56mm NATO ammunition, and takes 6 seconds reload. The Minimi light machine gun was developed by FN Herstal. Mass production began in 1982 in Belgium. About the same time it was adopted by the US Armed forces as the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW). The Minimi is used by many western allied countries. The longer reload time reflects time it takes to let the barrel cool down and then change. M60 GPMG 100 FA,SA 2 550 Long 7 8 7.62x51mm USA The M60 general purpose machine gun NATO features a 100 shot belt, fires both fully automatic and semiautomatic, has long range, has 7 spare belts of 7.62mm NATO ammunition and takes 8 seconds to reload. The M60 machine gun was designed in the late 1940's based on the German MG42. The M60 was adopted by the US military in 1950. .The longer reload time reflects the time it takes to let barrel cool down and the awkward barrel change as well as the general poor reliability of the M60.
    [Show full text]
  • Protective Force Firearms Qualification Courses
    PROTECTIVE FORCE FIREARMS QUALIFICATION COURSES U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Health, Safety and Security AVAILABLE ONLINE AT: INITIATED BY: http://www.hss.energy.gov Office of Health, Safety and Security Protective Force Firearms Qualification Courses July 2011 i TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION A – APPROVED FIREARMS QUALIFICATION COURSES .......................... I-1 CHAPTER I . INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... I-1 1. Scope .................................................................................................................. I-1 2. Content ............................................................................................................... I-1 CHAPTER II . DOE FIREARMS QUALIFICATION COURSE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ................................................................................ II-1 1. Purpose ..............................................................................................................II-1 2. Scope .................................................................................................................II-1 3. Process ..............................................................................................................II-1 4. Roles .................................................................................................................II-2 CHAPTER III . GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIREARMS QUALIFICATION COURSES.............................................................................III-1 CHAPTER IV
    [Show full text]
  • International Traffic in Arms Regulations As of April 15, 2021 Page 2 of 246 How to Use This ITAR
    International Traffic in Arms Regulations as of April 15, 2021 Page 2 of 246 How to use this ITAR NOTE 1: This edition is prepared by Exports International USA, LLC, and it incorporates all official State/DDTC changes through April 15, 2021. To aid understanding, we at ElL have reformatted this ITAR with an outline-indented format that makes the regulation much easier to understand. For reasons of tradition, U.S. statutes and regulations tend toward a minimalist formatting, with all levels of paragraph numbering and lettering sharing the left margin. This can get bewildering when there are four or five levels of logical subservience, and conventional indent-formatting is more easily followed. NAVIGATION LIVE LINKS: Clicking on the cover page will take you to the master TOC page. We added that master Table of Contents on Page 3, and it is live-linked to the pages in the ITAR. That is, if you hover over any TOC line entry and click, you will be taken to that particular page in the ITAR. Additionally, we live-linked each individual TOC at the beginning of each Part (120 thru 130) to do the same. You can click on the heading titles of the 11 main Parts (i.e. Parts 120 thru 130) to return to the main TOC. As an example, starting with the bottom half of the cover page, it is three clicks to get you to the Canadian Exemptions at § 126.5. And once at § 126.5, you can click on that 126.5 paragraph title to return to the individual Part 126 TOC.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Force Quarterly
    JFQJOINT FORCE QUARTERLY The Security of the Americas Autumn00 A PROFESSIONAL MILITARY JOURNAL ...we must find a better balance between independence and joint- ness. This is bound to be a painful process. Self-sufficiency is a kind of cultural imperative....But we simply cannot afford to configure each service’s combat forces for sustained, independent operations. The key word these days is jointness. And...jointness means depending on one another. —Merrill A. McPeak JFQ AWord fromthe MV–22 Osprey on deck of USS Essex. Chairman U.S. Navy (Jaime D. Hernandez) espite the unparalleled strength of the instances when nations failed to understand that Armed Forces, we should not become successful methods and technologies applied in complacent. Maintaining the status one conflict may be inadequate in the next. Vic- Dquo will not serve national interests. torious powers benefitted from dramatic innova- The evolving security environment of today, re- tions. Such changes, often regarded as a revolu- plete with new challenges and new opportunities, tion in military affairs (RMA), have occurred demands a capable and flexible military. Our throughout history. New technologies and their great strength is service core competencies. We applications can alter the balance of power as the must expand on them to provide seamless inter- champion of a new RMA assumes a position of operability in joint operations—our first joint dominance. Successful warfare in the Middle Ages core competency. was represented by knights in armor. To over- come them, English yeomen introduced the long- Looking Back bow—a revolution in its day—to defeat the close- In developing a transformation strategy, we in superiority of French arms in the 12th century.
    [Show full text]
  • Northcentral University
    Guerilla Warfare During 1 Running head: Guerilla Warfare During WWI and WWII . Guerilla Warfare During WWI and WWII MSG Albert Crawford United States Army Sergeants Major Academy Class 58 SGM Vidakovich 17 Mar 2008 Guerilla Warfare During 2 Abstract An amplification and Comparison of the change in the U.S. Army due to the use of Guerrilla Warfare during World War I and World War II. Illustrating positive and negative factors of the shaping of the U. S. Military due to experiences with the enemy’s use of guerrilla tactics which has caused a considerably change in fighting tactics over the years. Finally, the conclusion will synthesize the insights gained from the analysis of Guerrilla Warfare’s impact on the American military Guerilla Warfare During 3 Thesis During World War I (WWI) and World War II (WWII) there were numerous instances of guerilla warfare being used both against and by the United Sates Military. These techniques were valuable in the shaping of the military and how we would fight in the future. Outline I. Intro A. Used both by and against U.S B. TTP’s II. World War I A. New outlook B. Future doctorine III. World War II A. Need for small force B. Philippines IV. Impact of Guerrilla Warfare on WWI and WWII A. New doctrine and TTPs B. FM’s Guerilla Warfare During 4 Introduction During World War I (WWI) and World War II (WWII) there were numerous instances of guerilla warfare being used both against and by the United Sates Military. These techniques were valuable in the shaping of the military and how we would fight in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • 7.62×51Mm NATO 1 7.62×51Mm NATO
    7.62×51mm NATO 1 7.62×51mm NATO 7.62×51mm NATO 7.62×51mm NATO rounds compared to AA (LR6) battery. Type Rifle Place of origin United States Service history In service 1954–present Used by United States, NATO, others. Wars Vietnam War, Falklands Conflict, The Troubles, Gulf War, War in Afghanistan, Iraq War, Libyan civil war, among other conflicts Specifications Parent case .308 Winchester (derived from the .300 Savage) Case type Rimless, Bottleneck Bullet diameter 7.82 mm (0.308 in) Neck diameter 8.77 mm (0.345 in) Shoulder diameter 11.53 mm (0.454 in) Base diameter 11.94 mm (0.470 in) Rim diameter 12.01 mm (0.473 in) Rim thickness 1.27 mm (0.050 in) Case length 51.18 mm (2.015 in) Overall length 69.85 mm (2.750 in) Rifling twist 1:12" Primer type Large Rifle Maximum pressure 415 MPa (60,200 psi) Ballistic performance Bullet weight/type Velocity Energy 9.53 g (147 gr) M80 FMJ 833.0 m/s (2,733 ft/s) 3,304 J (2,437 ft·lbf) 11.34 g (175 gr) M118 Long 786.4 m/s (2,580 ft/s) 3,506 J (2,586 ft·lbf) Range BTHP Test barrel length: 24" [1] [2] Source(s): M80: Slickguns, M118 Long Range: US Armorment 7.62×51mm NATO 2 The 7.62×51mm NATO (official NATO nomenclature 7.62 NATO) is a rifle cartridge developed in the 1950s as a standard for small arms among NATO countries. It should not to be confused with the similarly named Russian 7.62×54mmR cartridge.
    [Show full text]