The following had been bugging me for quite some time:
Some observers are convinced that Special Operations Command officials’ refusals to test RBCD ammo stem from work that’s well underway at that command. For some time, the special-operations community has been conducting work on a new 6.8mm round to replace the 5.56mm. If a 5.56mm round proved to be as effective as larger 6.8mm ammo, the rationale for new ammo and a new weapon would disappear.
Thomas isn’t interested in any of the reasons that might be keeping RBCD ammo from reaching U.S. special-operations forces, but he is convinced that its use would save soldiers’ lives. An adversary hit by a blended-metal bullet — even if struck in an arm or leg — would be in no condition to continue the fight, he said.
The former SEAL’s experience with RBCD ammo should be reason enough for Pentagon officials to insist that Special Operations Command immediately begin realistic testing of the blended-metal ammunition. Further foot-dragging by the command should trigger a congressional inquiry."RBCD has been using smoke & mirrors for so long I was wondering just when someone would take them to task and determine precisely what WAS up with their supposed new bullet technology. Not a lick of it made much sense to me, so I bided my time until the following:
RBCD Bullets Found To Be Nothing But Deceptive Advertising
That's right, gang, their so called blended metals technology proved false when at long last someone examined the cartridges in a real laboratory, and not some old retired guys backyard. Nothing but lead and plastic filler, but click the link to read it all for yourself.
EDITED TO ELABORATE
Duh. In re-reading this I came to the conclusion that perhaps not EVERYONE was aware of what RBCD is,and the amount of stir they created in the civilian, law enforcement, and military circles.
Several years ago RBCD introduced a new line of ammunition. Most of the rounds were light and super-fast...think a 77 grain .40 cal cranking along at over 2000 fps...but the real claim to fame was the metallurgy. RBCD claimed the rounds were a proprietary amalgam of metals, including platinum, that reacted to sudden impact in a far different manner than plain old lead or copper.
Accounts began trickling in from police and military sources who claimed these new munitions to be nothing short of miraculous, and I was beginning to develop an interest until I read one officer's story of how a badguy flew 6 feet through the air after being shot with a RBCD bullet, then knew that something was amiss. Nobel metals or not, the laws of physics still apply, and it appeared that some folks might have been exaggerating just a tad.
Turns out to have been lots more than a tad as the rounds were disassembled to reveal what the second link talks about.
4 comments:
If the military is not pleased with the .223 I don't suppose that it would occur to them to go back to the excellent .308?
It is a round already in production. We have load data out the ass for it and it's effectiveness on the battlefield is very well known.
There are several excellent battle rifles already in production and if none of them is exactly what the Pentagon wants how hard could it be to update one?
Am I missing something?
Easier to update an existing battle rifle than to start from scratch and make our combat forces into guinea pigs.
Then there's JAG putting the kibosh on munitions because they're too effective and might piss off the EUrinals, or the sort of folken that hang out at Daily Kos.
Getting harder and harder to fight a good war anymore.
Since the European armies use 7.62 themselves how could they object to us doing so?
We make nasty's. Special forces from all branches of the service have been tinkering with rounds other than full metal jacket such as the Le Mat blended metals gimmick, but some aren't gimmicks and do work. Our Judge Advocate General's office gets to decide what muniitions won't piss off the EUrinals, and sometimes they look the other way. For example; a SEAL team will use some marvelous bullets that all but explode inside of a target, and JAG will say, hmmm, that might be cool, give us some more info. A coalition field commander gets wind of it then next thing NATO is sending some nasty emails wanting to know if we're even thinking of using something horrible like dum-dums.
Post a Comment