If the main criticism that 5.56 is underpowered and lacks range,

>m855a1 debacle

it's not just about speed breh

OP you underaged niggercuck

>>34767386

my apologies, magnum has a lot of different connotations it seems, I just thought it mean that it was a larger cartridge for the same caliber of round.

>>34767280
More expensive I believe, and any weapon system it comes out would have to be engineered differently than what the standard is that's accepted in modern warfare. That is, an intermediate cartridge of which plenty of spare magazines can be comfortably carried, with 30 round capacity in a relatively lightweight package that's also maneuverable.

As cool as a .357 service rifle would be, the ballistics don't make it realistically possible.

>>34767420

Because then you might as well be using .308, considering the length and weight of the cartridge, as well as the longer and heavier receiver required. Also the small light bullet at extreme speed might not be possible to stabilize with rifling

>>34767448

No, no, I meant like a 5.56 round with a larger and more powerful cartridge than a standard load.

I thought that's what magnum meant.

>>34767455

Ah shit, I thought for some reason OP wanted to use a lengthened 5.56

File: 1498023647393.jpg (58KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 700x700px

>>34767280
How about instead of changing the entire round, just change the bullet and propellant?

>>34767455

Ah, I see

>>34767457
Uh no, you're probably thinking of something like Remington 6.8 SPC or 6.5 Grendel, which the military is currently looking at.

Magnum is really just a word that's been slapped onto different calibers throughout history to make them sound important, therefore making them more popular. There's been ammo as small as BB's that have been had "Magnum" attached to the name. It really doesn't mean anything, it's as obscure as caliber numbers.

>>34767500

Oh ok

So what would the proper terminology be for a two bullets of the same caliber but one utilizes a lengthened and heavier cartridge?

>>34767937
It's usually denominated in the name, like 7.62x51 and 7.62x63 (30-06).

But in general, the numbers that different ammunition are given as names are also typically bullshit. Some are named after the diameter of the cartidge, some the length of the cartridge, the circumference, the weight, a few are even named after the year they were introduced. The numbers like 5.56 or .308 or 7.62x39, unless your job is in ballistics research in which they actually factor in, are pretty meaningless, they're just names.

>>34767280
Most every shot fired in combat doesn't hit its target. The point of 5.56 is being able to shoot and carry more rounds than say 7.62 NATO. While 7.62 NATO is absolutely a better person killer, 5.56 can still effectively kill, and you're able to carry much more 5.56.

>>34768030

>Most every shot fired in combat doesn't hit its target

I guess accuracy by volume isn't a meme.

>>34767280
Decreases barrel life, reliability to some extent, increases cost of ammunition, increases weight.

>>34767500
>Magnum is really just a word that's been slapped onto different calibers throughout history to make them sound important, therefore making them more popular.
No.

The word derives from the Latin word "magnus" which means "great". It was never slapped onto caliber to just "make them sound important", the term is usually applied to cartridges that are powerful relative to their size or more powerful that standard cartidges they are derived from.

>>34768477
Considering it was put on calibers as small as BB's I'd say it was more a marketing ploy than it was used to denote the larger size it's known for, disregarding it's roots in a dead language.

>>34768345
Nope. The US developed the doctrine of suppressive fire during the second gulf war. We would use about 250k rounds per enemy killed. Mostly, from my understanding, it was to keep them pinned while they got flanked.

>>34768528

I think they developed that doctrine long before then. Though I don't know for how long it's been called "prophylactic fire"