***Additional edits/ information *** According to Vlad's research, the 7N21 (the slower traveling sabot penetrator 9mm) pre-dates the NATO development, but the 7N31 100% came after the NATO trials. Same with the PP2000, which was developed around the 2001-2003 timeframe. Also there was an error: the 9mm / 556 base cased .224 BOZ was a later development that post-dates the trials and the original .224 BOZ was a 10mm parent case. Firearms used were the Glock 20 and the MP5/10 to accommodate the 10mm parent case. Still can have some firearms retrofitted, but not nearly as easily than if they used a 9mm parent case, which would have struggled to perform with the 2500fps that the .224 BOZ was able to achieve. The PDW trials did still kick-start the Russian PP2000 project and still had a direct influence to the importance of the further development of the Russian 9mm AP rounds. Furthermore, if you are interested in this type of research "rabbit hole" you should look up the 6.5mm CBJ and the 22 TCM which are also taking these 9mm-based AP concepts to strange depths.
Sweden started using the M39B for the SMG, a 9mm AP in 1955, after reviewing combat reports from the Korean War. Denmark a NATO member got some ammo from Sweden and repackaged it as M/41 Steel Jacket. The Danish M/41 9mm can be very different and from different sources. Using a magnet and weighing the OAW, can give and idea of what you got.
We all know that the 5.7 and the P90 were developed specifically with penetration of Goa’uld armor in mind rather than anything Soviet or Russian and we know for a fact that it was a resounding success
Exactly. Which also explains why the US had “no involvement,” so the Air Force could keep it a secret. (Although good luck hiding the fact that they bought most of the ammo in existence)
"Ivan, NATO members are testing cartridges for a PDW. They want it to penetrate armour better than 9mm." "That sounds good comrade. Let's try it out." "Where do we start?" "Is simple comrade, make 9mm armor-piercing." "You are promoted tovarisch."
@@Rendo86 ehh, it was "wasted" on the pen, not the ink specifically. And pencils chip bits of graphite all the time which in zero gravity can fly into cracks all around the ship. It's one of those things people repeat that isn't that simple
NATO had plenty of cartridges that could penetrate standard Russian armor, though armor piercing rounds were not the standard round. The exact same is true for the Russians as well though so kind of a moot point lol.
14:05 Boy, the video of the British officer presenting the FAL really cements how long it's been. Rare pictures, documents, and footage like that is why I really appreciate the research and effort you guys put into your videos
@Brupcat the final iteration of the .280 However, was not that much different recoil wise than 7.62x51. It would've been equally uncontrollable in full auto.
@@mikec8086 I agree. I believe the 280 probably would have been a worse choice over the 308 back then anyway, think about the machine gun barrel life. That would be a logistical nightmare.
The 357 SIG is dead, but being a Czechophile I'm still mesmerized by the 7.5FK. We don't know what the flight ballistics of the 7N21/7N31 are, but I wonder what potential the 7.5FK can have for PDW roles.
I came here to say this. I have a PSD and it's pretty precisely what they were after in the original PDW trials. I would trade my right leg and half a ball for a PDW chambered in 7.5FK.
Federal Air Marshals and Secret Service haven't gotten the memo yet, they still use .357 SIG. I guess when it's taxpayer money it's not an issue paying for more expensive boutique ammo like .357 SIG...
7.5 FK might be the baddest pistol round at the moment but I expect SIG will surpass them soon with their hybrid case tech. Whatever the 7.5 FK can do...just imagine it with 20-25 % higher chamber pressure. A sig pistol round using Sig's hybrid tech hasn't been announced yet, but they have to be working on it.
The reason the 5.7 needs lubrication is because it is straight walled which makes it harder to extract. Weapons can have flutes to help extraction (like the g3) or you lubricate the ammo. Never the less, it is only straight walled because the P90 has a straight magazine and you dont want it to be courved by a tempered cartridge. Its kinda weird that you addop a cartridge that could be used in a lot of different platforms that has a workaround for a problem most of those platforms wouldn't have in the first place.
Which is why other 5,7 x 28mm guns have stoppages etc when using non-FN ammo. I doubt they have figured out the FN lubricant formula accurately enough. Most FN owners seem to have very few problems when using FN ammo. Remember the PS90/Five seveN were ALWAYS going to be niche firearms/calibres anyway. Realistically, FN was never really going to replace the very well-entrenched 9mm parabellum anyway - the logistics implications clearly prevented that from the get go. "Rear echelon troops" is a limited "market" by definition! However, the P90 was quickly adopted by numerous Special Forces and Law Enforcement Agencies worldwide, contrary to all expectations. Some detractors seem to have missed this. Replacing an entrenched weapons system/calibre is extremely difficult and expensive, as demonstrated by the whole NGSW programme, which is still only partially adopted, with 5,56mm still firmly entrenched for the most part.
Awesome content as always guys. I love the whole PDW-off and all the interesting things it spawned. The P90 may not be the most effective weapon for every situation, but it's a symphony in abandoning convention and embracing innovation in terms of materials, format etc.
Yep and it did allow for low recoil, high fire rate PDW weapon for non frontline soldiers. Yeah it may not penetrate the armour, but it gives you a better fighting chance than a 9mm barreta lol..
It probably suffers from similar problems as the Dragon scale armor. The segmented plates meant it was good at stopping straight on shots but not ones from oblique angels.
Awesome video guys... you put some effort into this one. Oxide has done some really good ones on his channel... especially all his russian armor trials... people don't realize how much effort goes into just locating some of these items
You know, my time spent working with TACOM, both in and out of the military, and videos like this have led me to the conclusion that Russia's small arms program has always been much healthier than anything in the west, at least the US. They mass adopted the assault rifle concept before us, the polymer magazine before us, they successfully reached a conclusion to this project, they made a somewhat functioning multiple hit burst weapon (the AN94), while we just straight up stopped at duplex ammo, and all of their weapons are developed holistically with the average soldier and real world use in mind. Even details as little as the small hole at the bottom of AK mags to let you know when you have a full magazine. Know what that's for? Yeah you can use it to check if you have a full mag, but it becomes extremely useful if you have to perform an administrative task like ammo accountability, you don't have to unload everyone's mags and risk losing rounds like my dumbass unit did. You only need unload the mags that aren't completely full.
I have very similar sentiments, and honestly I've been trying to research to publish videos like this so we stop doing this stuff... or at the very least try not to. I'm sure that's too much to ask, but I hope it helps a little bit, even a smidge if possible.
@@9HoleReviews I sincerely hope that it has some effect. We've been stuck in this mentality of not thinking things through for far too long. When I got out of the Marines they had finished adopting the PMAGs, and it was apparent that nowhere in the testing did they consider how they fit in the current issue magazine pouches. According to my old boot who became the armory chief, the new magazines were apparently too thick to fit two of in the at-the-time currently issued double-mag pouches, so you ran into situations like SNCOs telling Marines to soak said pouches in hot water then stretch the hell out of them so they would fit. Apparently they set to work on a new magazine pouch system, to which I'm not aware of the details of, but I know for sure it wasn't until after the first magazines were sent to armories to be issued.
Yup, I really like their logic: "we need small ak": AKS-74u, "We need long AK": SVD, "We need quiet AK": VSS ... And so on. They save so much money and time not trying to "reinvent" things they will likely barely use in the first place.
@@unarmored9973 And sometimes this logic has its disadvantages, for example rimmed 7.62x54 which doesn`t allow to construct high - capacity magasines for SVD, or lacking supersonic suppressors among the troops. BTW, SVD is not an upscaled AK, it is completely different inside, and VSS has some major differenses from AK either
@@unarmored9973 PK is completely different, like m249 and m4. I can agree with ots-14, pp19 and saiga which are same aks with different calibers and designs. Maybe Val too. But if you say that svd is ak, than let's say m417 is a custom ar15, mk18 is a fancy ar15. Svd differs more from AK than g36 from m4. It just looks familiar because of same production methods used(large steel stamping, steel magazine, wooden parts), but all major internal parts are different
@@ВячеславФролов-д7я I am NOT saying SVD is the same as AK. Nobody would say that! haha. I do not mean "Platform". Such as: AK74, AK100, AK101, AK102, AK103, AK104, AK105, AKM, AKMS, AKS74u, RPK74, RPK... And so on. Those share enough parts interchangeability, I would never say that the SVD is part of the same "Platform" as AK. Everyone classifies weapons different for "family" or even "series". There are many different books written about how every author thinks firearms should be categorized together into families and series. So many different reasons. - There is DEFINITELY no consensus, even by the manufacturers. Some people think caliber is enough to create a new family, others think operating system is more important, others think combat role is what determines it's family, others think simply by how it looks - There is absolutely no way to grade similar firearms into defined families that we all can agree upon.
Thank you for research and producing that video. Unexpected results in the end, I never thought of it to be honest. Come to think of it, Russia already had 9x39 armor piercing developed. Scale it down, adjust the system and boom, you are done. It might not be the case, but I have visited a few testing bureaus and ranges and I got an impression that R&D most likely have a lot of prototype stuff to be able to adjust to any circumstances quite fast. And I wouldn't call this saga forbidden, but you did an amazing job of debunking some of the myths and provide some good insights. 9-Hole Reviews, once again, produced a great content. Thank you.
That’s kind of what they’ve done. Look up 9x21 and the SR2 Veresk. 9x21 is an absolutely nasty little round, longer than x19, and loaded HOT. Out of the pistol it’s chambered in, it’s rated to do far better than a 5-7.
Honestly, I never recall hearing about the Paratrooper requirement until fairly recently, just that someone in the 1970s/80s decided that maybe the Americans were not so crazy with the M1 Carbine concept, having an intermediate between the rifle and pistol ammunitions of the day, and building a cheap, compact, and simple-to-use weapon around that ammunition to arm non-riflemen. Most everyone at the time was still handing out rather heavy (the better part of 10 or more pounds each) SMGs in 9mm Parabellum, so anything that could deliver more accuracy with less training for less weight was going to be a massive improvement.
The average MP5 weighs the same or less as the average P90 (2.5kg) with range of 2kg to 3.6kg depending on variant thats still a range of 4 pds to say 7 pds nothing near 10 pds. Stop pulling stuff out of thin air. This whole PDW debacle is just pathetic.
17:22 - I wonder if this dry lubricated case is the reason why Chris at Small Arms Solutions could not get the P90 to work with American Eagle 5.7x28 while it works perfectly in 5.7 pistols.
The issue with AE TMJ is it's short bullet and Fiocchi (Fiocchi loads all SS197SR, Speer Gold Dot, and AE TMJ until at least 2023) does not crimp case necks. They use a glue. That glue and short bullet means not a lot of surface for the glue to attach to, and set back occurs. You can increase the reliability of AE TMJ 5.7 by mechanically crimping the case neck. All Factory 5.7 brass is made by FN and has the coating.
Little bit of a note on the PP-2000: the comparisons to western PDWs is all marketing. Currently, its use is seen pretty much exclusively with domestic close protection units and relatively low-budget Rosguard SWAT and counter-terror units as a relatively cheap machine pistol for use with shield doctrine. The PP-19-01 Vityaz has become far more common a rear-echelon gun by comparison. Rather, the demand for their over-pressure armor-piercing 9mm variants likely has more to do with a combination of the standardization of 9x19 parabellum as the standard pistol cartridge with the MP443 Grach (which is designed to cycle 7n21) AND the phasing out of the AKS-74U. These sorts of armor-piercing 9mm cartridges were already popular with Russian CTUs and close protection well before western PDW development came to light, ie the SR-1 and SR-2 using 9x21Gyurza cartridges, and the SR-3 and SR-3M using 9x39 cartridges from a much shorter barrels than the VSS or AS-VAL. These were all made in response to FSB specifications likely in response to domestic combatants (such as in the Caucasus) wearing Soviet era body armor, usually pilfered from military warehouses. Note the design of all of these bullets from the SP-6 through to the 7n31, and you can clearly see their delineation.
Funny thing: AKS-74U is being held onto by army SpetsNaz. They found it to be an utter diamond in the rough when it comes to close-range fighting. All it needed was a modernization kit, and it became a FAR superior weapon to any SMG/Machine Pistol for battle use. Crazy, but there was a video where a soldier hit a target with an AKS-74U at 365 meters. Video is by an instructor from a Russian University of SpetzNaz.
You are completely wrong. Russian army isn`t adopting or going to adopt any smgs. AKS-74U is army`s PDW and it is not going to change. PP19, SR2, SR3, PP2000 are counter-terrorist and law enforcment weapons only, featuring compact design and short lethal range (because you don`t want to shoot AKS74U with lethal range over 1000m in a city full of civilians) and some penetration power. Also SR3 and SR3m have about the same barrel length as VAL, which actual barrel is hidden by its supressor. On the other side, army doesn`t want to equip its soliders with low-range smg, which can only fire at the distances that are rare in modern war
When I did a "hypothetical" PDW cartridge design I followed the concept of the 6.8mm SPC, with personal edits. Where as the SPC is a "compromise" between the 5.56mm NATO and 7.62x39mm M43. I used the 5.56mm and 9mm NATO. My creation is a 6.5x27mm (a shortened 6.8mm SPC parent case) with a 95gr bullet at around 2150-2250fps. My simple requirements is for a cartridge that would fit a grip magazine in a firearm with an 10.5in barrel in a package at 24in or less, with ballistics close to a 5.56 at 300yds. The direct "compromise" design would have been a "7x32mm" cartridge. In my opinion this would have been too long for a grip mounted magazine.
Yeah 5.8 is like half the weight of 7.62 but the same speed??? Keep the original case and weight, pop one of those steel nipples on the end of it, your welcome NATO. ...I'll take those millions in R&D of your hands
Interested in hearing more about the mp7 specifically why the seals chose to use it above the other options. It isn’t hard to find 9mm rounds that can penetrate 3a armor and the mp7 can’t pen hard armor, so would like to hear more there.
I almost wonder if it has to do with the options they had available for a 9mm pdw at the time. MP7 would be better than almost all of them, at least then and possible even now.
@@domenik8339 maybe it was just the modern features, there were versions of MP5s made in very limited runs with more modern features like bolt release and such. With the charging handle it (the mp7) would probably have a more similar manual of arms to the m4, or 416.
The dry lube on the 5.7 is due to the magazine, but not for the reason stated. In order to function in that straight walled magazine the cartridge has no taper - it is truly straight walled. This makes extraction after firing extremely unreliable in the absence of the dry lubricant. Proper extraction, without head stripping is the reason for the dry lube.
It's a high pressure blowback. It's extracting under stupidly high chamber pressure instead of running a gas system to allow for the chamber pressure to drop before unlocking the action. Honestly it should be steel case. The rim cut makes the primer pocket so weak that reloading is very difficult and reloads need to be mild. Not a military issue but it points to issues with the design.
@@randomidiot8142 This seems to my understanding. Coating is there for extraction/blowback operation/brass stretching when firing. The Diamondback DBX is gas driven and brass almost doesn't even need to be re-sized after firing.
I'm a huge fan of these odd caliber guns, there's just something fascinating about 4.6 and 5.7, maybe it's the lore around them, or their adoption in movies and video games that makes these guns so cool. I really love the ps90, would love to see future videos on this topic, and the modern application for these platforms.
I was stationed at NATO AB Gielenkirchen from 2003-2006 and in 2004 we switched over from the MP-5 and P7M8 to the MP-7 and USP. All were great firearms and I have wanted to buy an MP-5 ever since. I did buy the P7M8 though.
It is important to recognize that european armies do not use 9mm hollow points, but only FMJ ammo. Hollow points are banned under The Hague Convention, which only the US did not join. So europeans were also looking for pistols, sidearms and PDWs with another wounding mechanism other than expansion, most likely "unintentional" fragmenting at high speed or tumbling of longer, unstable projectiles to phase out the old 9mm FMJ. Europeans wouldn't be allowed to shoot their guns if they got resupplied by US forces with m855a1 or mk318 sost / bear claw 5.56 ammo or 9mm hollow points.
Speaking of hollow-point ammunition, the exact wording is quite elegant: "The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."
Pretty sure the US have joined the hague convention but use hollow points because the hague convention applies only when fighting other signatories not when fighting non signatory forces (this is also why US police etc can and do use hollow points).
"Section 6.5.4.4 of the DOD manual, “Expanding Bullets,” states that “[t]he law of war does not prohibit the use of bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body.” Hollow point bullets “are only prohibited if they are calculated to cause superfluous injury.” The manual goes on to provide three reasons why expanding bullets are lawful for use in armed conflict: (1) The 1899 Declaration on Expanding Bullets “only creates obligations for Parties to the Declaration in international armed conflicts in which all the parties to the conflict are also Parties to the Declaration” (the United States is not Party to the Declaration). (2) The Defense Department determined in a 2013 review that the 1899 Declaration does not reflect customary international law. (3) Expanding bullets as manufactured today are not “inherently inhumane or needlessly cruel.”" www.justsecurity.org/25200/dod-law-war-manual-returns-hollow-point-bullets-armed-conflict/
The ppk-20 is a modernize version the pp-19 both are chambered in 9x19. the gun doesn't matter 7n31 is in 9x19 any 9mm weapon can use it in comparison 5.7 and 4.6x30 are not universal at all. The point of the trials was to get a universal cartridge to replace 9mm both failed in doing so.
As far as 5.7 vs 4.6 goes; the MP7 looks like the more practical PDW being that it's more compact but the P90 is one of the coolest looking guns ever. So they were right to standardized both.
I think this is the best video on your channel guys! Even if it is slightly off regular topic. Unfortunately, it shows that when two people fight over something, the winner is the third one. Or: " Gdzie dwóch się bije, tam trzeci korzysta" ;) Greetings from Poland!
I think the fact that NATO rear echelon troops do not get a different weapon than the infantry is the larger failure hear and not the lack of a standardized cartridge .Basically the entire idea of PDWs in NATO didnt happen .
I love the mp7 aesthetically and how easy is it is to handle. The p90 has to be given credit for the very forward thinking ideas it had too. I thought I knew the whole story already. Neat that I'm still learning 20 years later. Also, props to this Oxide fellow for using Command and Conquer music in the background.
Frankily this whole "we need a specific round/pdw for REMFs to penetrate sky-Ivan armor" was a massive waste of time. If you are at the point where cooks and truck drivers are watching tens of thousands of russian paratroopers about to land in W. Germany or France... those "99 red ballons" have already been launched and WWIII is about to end, if you catch my meaning.
This kinda reminds me of the current quest for "armor penetration and overmatch" in the NGSW program I believe a futile and unnecessary quest that doesn't really understand the tactical application of small arms in real world combat
The story of Full Circle is complete with the NGSW if it's picked up. The funny thing to me is we, the Army, is going from a Intermediate Carbine back to a Full length Battle rifle. I say battle rifle because in training I know we will use 7.62 instead because the Army has a lot of it. Though I wonder what's going to happen when the powers that be decided to chop the barrels down to 14.5 inches in 30yrs. Lol
DoD acquisitions need to have some crusty bastage on the board asking "would this have won us Afghanistan? No? But it will make a meaningful difference against a far more numerous modern military force with thousands of armored vehicles and aircraft? Seems legit."
@@phucprice6698 The old guard at the DoD are not a fan of things changing to much. A bullpup rifle would send them on a year long geriatric rant about the good old days till they keel over lol
I'll say the 5.7mm is a weirdly deadly round. Might be a bias in much better user vs 9mm, but statistics show 5.7mm is way better at making people dead. Or it could be that being lower recoil, its easier to put where you aim and put a follow up shot down range.
Thanks for the work on this info, very enjoyable. I've always been interested in the 7n21 and 7n31 cartridges. But never knew it was the answer to the 5.7
You are right on the mark. Problem description will make or brake you solutions. Your problem description should take into account the current and projected threats.
IMO, the main two reasons why this isn't feasible is simply because of the US' lack of involvement as well as the the fact that the only way to make something like these cartridges viable are with incendiary ammunition to essentially melt the titanium armor and then a frangible would be needed to create a shotgun effect for terminal ballistics.
🤔I hadn't heard any of this before, makes a lot more sense to standardize a round over the actual weapon. You'd never get everyone to agree on the same weapon to much $$$ involved. After all, it's only human life we're talking about at stake here. Thanks for the clarification 👍
What I got out of this was that, if it wasn't for the US putting their foot down and making a choice, Europeans would squabble for years over standardization and nothing would get done.
.280 was never adopted as STANAG it was adopted by the British with the EM-2 and then quickly unadopted. Frankly whether .280 or. 308 the end result would have been the same because .280 British was still technically a full power rifle round it was just similar in performance to 6.5 Carcano and 6.5 Arisaka.
@@nemisous83 you missed his point. He, and I, want to see what would have happened if NATO adopted the .280 British, possibly including the EM2 as the NATO standard rifle. Then, instead of the overweight FN MAG, you have something closer to the Minimi for your squad MG. Or maybe even a lighter belt-fed MG.
@@ScottKenny1978 well the EM-2 isn't a light machine gun its a bullpup battle rifle also even if. 280 British was adopted in a belt fed format it wouldn't have changed the overall size of weapons like the FN MAG or M60 because. 280 British is still a full length full power rifle round its just more similar to 6.5 Arisaka and 6.5 carcano ballistically.
@@nemisous83 right. The FN MAG wouldn't have to be so overbuilt as to survive 150gr at 2800fps. It could have been built to about the Maximi (7.62 Minimi). The .280 British or 6.5 Arisaka is much closer to intermediate than full power rifle, but still usable to 600m.
@@ScottKenny1978 well the FN MAG and FAL aren't overbuilt and heavy because of .308 they are overbuilt and heavy because FN made them that way even the FAL prototype in 8mm kurz weighed about the same as the one chambered in .308. Also .308 is nearly as powerful as you are making it out to be the G3 for instance operates it off effectively delayed blowback and a sheet metal reciever.
i think the 30carbine cartridge has potential if you bump up velocity a couple hundred fps with a slightly lighter solid spitzer bullet to be a a good option for a pdw. as for a platform ide lean toward three options . the m1 carbine the ruger mini14 or even the ar15 platform. people have ben pretty hard on the 30carbine round but with modern solid bullets and a slightly faster load and results should be interesting.
The "British, French, and Belgians" did not all favor .280 Brit. Not even all of the British favored .280 Brit. .280 Brit is not even really one cartridge. It is a developmental series that starts at a true "less recoil than 7.62 NATO" but objectively horrible design in every other way, and then procedurally gets more powerful until it was literally just a small amount weaker than 7.62 NATO, except still requiring years of development while 7.62 NATO was mature already, and still worse in every other conceivable way.
Wondered why NATO didn't go the same route as the Russians by updating their 9mm ammo instead of developing two non standard rounds costing millions of dollars. First thing I'd have thought of was a tungsten or hardened steel penetrator in a lightweight sabot.
Thats how it always goes in NATO - the Germans say "Lets use something from H&K", everybody else - except the Brits perhaps - say "Lets use something from FN", and the US says "Lets use a AR 15 for everything". The Russians and Chinese have a big advantage there, they look at various own developements, and then actually adopt the best one. They have no need to negociate with anybody on that.
@@ichderjogi You've never seen chinese mil-spec small arms in action, almost nobody has. Everyone is basing their evaluation on exports made to commercial spec and with utter contempt to the clueless laowai. Russian SF use locally-made gear, adapted from Western best practices and modified for specifics of their tasks and environment. Increasingly, they are moving to locally-developed gear with less and less Western lineage in it.
Thanks guys for creating TH-cam's best golf channel! BTW, what do you think of the Cleveland Frontline Elevado? Is it worth it's bargain basement price? Or if you don't like those questions... How well do you think the .950 JDJ would do on the Practical Accuracy course?
I had always assumed that these PDW cartridges were designed to penetrate soft body, not hard body armour. Most hard plate armour is ready designed to resist full sized rifle rounds to begin with, so the idea that these micro rifle rounds was expected to penetrate various hard armours that resist larger rounds is absurd even on the face of it.
So the standard they used was a CRISAT designated armor with a 1.5mm ti plate and 20 layers of kevlar, which both have no issues penetrating, but is a poorest example of soviet armor of its era. It does work just fine on LvIIIa
Thing is, the soviet army didn't use soft flak vests at all, unlike us and some European armies. Ussr jumped from no body armor straight into hard titanium vests. Sure, first models weren't great, but they were still rated against assault rifles at some distance. So the weapon designed to punch through soft armor makes sense for ussr (like all those subsonic cartridges), but not for the nato side
Well US involvement in Canadian and European aerospace has been disastrous for those countries where it acted entirely in it's own self interest with underhanded methods .
Thank you, very informative video. With regard to PDW classification, what class would you consider the Stribog (SP9A1 & A3)? I’m thinking it would be classed a Class 3, but looking for your opinion based on your extensive knowledge on the subject matter. TIA Cheers🍻, Mach
PDW round? All you need is a 1911 in .45. It may not punch through Ivan's armor, but it will hurl him back with such force he is Guaranteed to be incapacitated. I saw it in a movie once.
I wish the people designing AP rounds would get in contact with tank experts. Steel sucks at armor penetration especially when it's soft steel, lead is better than soft steel at piercing metal armor because it slams more mass into the armor and induces adiabatic shear. We used to use soft steel as caps for hardened steel or tunsten carbide shells to act as a CUSHION to keep the brittle shell from shattering. Like with M855, you're making half the bullet into a cushion and reducing the velocity. No joke, regular M193 is better at defeating metal armor because it has enough density and raw speed to actually cut a plug out the metal with adiabatic shear. They keep making mistakes we solved back in the 1930's and 1940's.
M193 is worse at penetration than M855. The only circumstance in which M193 beats M855 is at penetrating steel at close enough range to hit with higher velocity. Since M193 has a flatter bullet base and less weight, it loses velocity quick so this advantage is almost not worth discussing.
In fairness, with the USA representing more than 50% of NATO's actual and potential military strength, and only growing bigger over the years as Europeans sought to limit their commitments, it is not without virtue to let the Americans set the standard. Add in the USA would and will be making most of the ammunition for NATO, it seems wise to me that you want your ammo supplier to be comfortable with what it is making.
@@genericpersonx333 Yet arguably the two major US led adoptions, 7.62 and 5.56 were regressions from the original .280, to the point now we are now moving back to 6mm class intermediate weapons. Following US adopted rounds is one thing, letting the US (or any other country) effectively dictate for political reasons choices rather than technical outcomes has obviously been a huge issue.
From memory it was obvious that the levels of protection implied were the older soviet style body armour in use at the time which was not close to level 4. The 1990-2010 era soviet/Russian older style body armour was in common use. You can look back to the soviet operations in Afghanistan where armour started showing up in use and how it changed up to the 2010 era. This is what the 9mm has having trouble with.
The downside is how big the Five-seveN is. Quite a bulky thing. I overall like the ergonomics, like where the safety is (ambidextrous index finger), and it's relatively narrow. But the reach to the trigger is very long.
I think that, in light of the fact that neither the P-90 nor MP7 can penetrate even decades-old infantry armor, it actually makes sense for NATO to not invest in standardizing and supporting any particular PDW cartridge, because the demand for that type of PDW just isn't there at this time. That might change in the future, but as it currently stands, the MP7 sees a lot of use with special forces (like the raid that killed Osama bin Laden) where its ease of mounting a slew of optics, night-fighting attachments, and ability to collapse the stock to make it a very short and compact weapon makes it ideal for elite troops in night raids where combat is expected to be at fairly short ranges. The P-90, by contrast, is a much simpler system that can more easily be slung onto one's back or to one's side without snagging on anything, and the 50-round magazine means that you might not even need to carry a spare magazine if all you really need is a weapon for a matter of seconds as you flee or defend yourself against one or two guys at close range AS you flee. But when it comes to defeating modern body armor, the US military seems to be going with adopting a HIGHER power and larger sized rifle to outright defeat even the most modern body armor with precision, velocity, and range, using cutting edge optics. Perhaps leadership in NATO feels that it's better to wait and see what kind of threats should be expected and if something substantially better comes along. Something the M1 Carbine never had to deal with was body armor; so long as the enemy was within range, then the weaker cartridge could still be very lethal and effective, even if it wasn't the overwhelming power of a full-sized rifle cartridge. In modern times, trying to design a round that is both small and powerful enough to penetrate body armor is a huge challenge, especially when increasing the power makes it harder to control or design a weapon capable of handling it with such small size and light weight.
Regarding the U.S. having more influence on NATO standards than other governments there are some reasons for it. First is money. The U.S. spends dramatically more on defense than the rest of NATO combined. Getting the U.S. alone to adopt your product is a bigger win than if all other NATO members did except the U.S.. Also it's about in person use influence. The U.S. has bases (plural) inside almost every NATO member. None of them have bases in the U.S. and few of them have as many flags still planted on foreign soil. If a NATO member military is going to practice and cross train with another NATO member one of those two always has a high chance of being the U.S. because they are already where the other is. Also, being familiar with what the U.S. is using is to your benefit because if there is a big ground war in Europe your military aid will be whatever the U.S. sends you unless you're fighting against them.
I believe the French needed American logistical support just for the bombing in Libya, at some point they ran out or just about ran out of bombs. In a serious conflict, I imagine problems would show up much quicker.
What's hilarious is that there is an upper for the AR platform, that functions much like the P90 ejecting downward through the AR's lower magazine well. Works damn well. But yeah, the PDW is an old concept that some counties used as a way to test their ammunition/arms and push there agenda. I really like Ruger model 57 pistol in 5.7x28mm. It's incredibly accurate and reliable, plus a hoot-to-shoot. Way better than FN's over priced attempt. 0~o CMF-63 Ordnance all the way... MOS 45-Bravo, 45-Kilo/Golf, 45-Zulu... Ah the memories... ^~^
4:05 the BOZ would have been like the handgun equivalent of the blackout - a hot round you could enjoy with a barrel swap. in the end the 22TCM9r took that place, with a less aerodynamic projectile
This video reminded me that I need to swap in my shorter barrel for my PS90 (yes tattletales, I have my stamp). I have a Switchback can to mount and test.
![What is a PDW? [The 4 types of Personal Defense Weapons]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5eEt4Y_STOw/mqdefault.jpg)
***Additional edits/ information ***
According to Vlad's research, the 7N21 (the slower traveling sabot penetrator 9mm) pre-dates the NATO development, but the 7N31 100% came after the NATO trials. Same with the PP2000, which was developed around the 2001-2003 timeframe.
Also there was an error: the 9mm / 556 base cased .224 BOZ was a later development that post-dates the trials and the original .224 BOZ was a 10mm parent case. Firearms used were the Glock 20 and the MP5/10 to accommodate the 10mm parent case. Still can have some firearms retrofitted, but not nearly as easily than if they used a 9mm parent case, which would have struggled to perform with the 2500fps that the .224 BOZ was able to achieve.
The PDW trials did still kick-start the Russian PP2000 project and still had a direct influence to the importance of the further development of the Russian 9mm AP rounds.
Furthermore, if you are interested in this type of research "rabbit hole" you should look up the 6.5mm CBJ and the 22 TCM which are also taking these 9mm-based AP concepts to strange depths.
this was very interesting, more of these please :-))
6.5mm CBJ is *very* interesting...
I do want a 22tcm pistol.
Sweden started using the M39B for the SMG, a 9mm AP in 1955, after reviewing combat reports from the Korean War.
Denmark a NATO member got some ammo from Sweden and repackaged it as M/41 Steel Jacket. The Danish M/41 9mm can be very different and from different sources. Using a magnet and weighing the OAW, can give and idea of what you got.
There is an experimental gun developed arround the 6,5x25 cbj, called the CBJ MS
The lack of US involvement was good, otherwise the adopted PDW would have been a shortened M14.
XD
...I wish you were joking. :(
Fucking spilled my drink
Yeah, I totally agree. And I must contest 9-hole stating the 7.62x51 stanag as effective...
It would have penned the Russian armor at least.....
Doubtful. Speed is one of the most important parts about penetrating armor and .308/ 7.62MM NATO loses a lot of velocity out of a short barrel.
We all know that the 5.7 and the P90 were developed specifically with penetration of Goa’uld armor in mind rather than anything Soviet or Russian and we know for a fact that it was a resounding success
Exactly. Which also explains why the US had “no involvement,” so the Air Force could keep it a secret. (Although good luck hiding the fact that they bought most of the ammo in existence)
incredibly effective against Replicators too.
@@Epson5000 ... and Wraith!
Outstanding
Indeed.
"Ivan, NATO members are testing cartridges for a PDW. They want it to penetrate armour better than 9mm."
"That sounds good comrade. Let's try it out."
"Where do we start?"
"Is simple comrade, make 9mm armor-piercing."
"You are promoted tovarisch."
The Grach was literally built around the russian 9mm AP cartridge.
"Sergei! Fetch the Stalinium inserts. We test this new round."
This reminds of the time NASA wasted millions on ink that could write in zero gravity. The Russians used Pencils.
@@Rendo86 ehh, it was "wasted" on the pen, not the ink specifically. And pencils chip bits of graphite all the time which in zero gravity can fly into cracks all around the ship. It's one of those things people repeat that isn't that simple
@@Mixu. and the problem with graphite dust is that it's electrically conductive, so has a tendency to kill the electronics on board.
NATO: *fails at creating cartridge to penetrate Russian armour*
Russia: "Fine, I'll do it myself."
NATO had plenty of cartridges that could penetrate standard Russian armor, though armor piercing rounds were not the standard round. The exact same is true for the Russians as well though so kind of a moot point lol.
Russia: what armor.... don't look over as the mafia is taking the armor and stuffing hay into the holders * hides 50,000 rubles in hand behind back*
*AKS-74U has entered the chat*
@@weasle2904 r/woooosh
NATO: Builds a more complicated mousetrap that accidentally lets the mouse escape
Russia: Adds spikes
Russia: gets a cat
@@mwnciboo But it turns out the cat is dead because the defense minister embezzled the funds to keep it fed.
14:05 Boy, the video of the British officer presenting the FAL really cements how long it's been. Rare pictures, documents, and footage like that is why I really appreciate the research and effort you guys put into your videos
I love that it had an EM2 optic on it.
@Brupcat the final iteration of the .280 However, was not that much different recoil wise than 7.62x51. It would've been equally uncontrollable in full auto.
@@mikec8086 oh I did not know that that is very useful.
@@mikec8086 I agree. I believe the 280 probably would have been a worse choice over the 308 back then anyway, think about the machine gun barrel life. That would be a logistical nightmare.
Literally up on British Pathe's TH-cam channel for eight before this video... th-cam.com/video/qT435uvS0js/w-d-xo.html
The 357 SIG is dead, but being a Czechophile I'm still mesmerized by the 7.5FK. We don't know what the flight ballistics of the 7N21/7N31 are, but I wonder what potential the 7.5FK can have for PDW roles.
I came here to say this. I have a PSD and it's pretty precisely what they were after in the original PDW trials. I would trade my right leg and half a ball for a PDW chambered in 7.5FK.
@@ericgrumbles447 I would be really surprised if CZ was reluctant enough to not go into the idea. They make great rifles already!!!
@@ABCantonese An upper for the Scorpion chambered in 7.5fk would be so epic.
Federal Air Marshals and Secret Service haven't gotten the memo yet, they still use .357 SIG. I guess when it's taxpayer money it's not an issue paying for more expensive boutique ammo like .357 SIG...
7.5 FK might be the baddest pistol round at the moment but I expect SIG will surpass them soon with their hybrid case tech. Whatever the 7.5 FK can do...just imagine it with 20-25 % higher chamber pressure. A sig pistol round using Sig's hybrid tech hasn't been announced yet, but they have to be working on it.
Love that you collabed with Oxide, need this till he uploads somewhat after christmas
yea i am sure that it will be worth the wait
It's Army boot camp. Shit's easy considering all the soy boys getting through these days.
This is an interesting change in direction for the channel.
As a firearm enthusiast I am very happy with it.
Another Indian furearm enthusiast? Sheesssh
The reason the 5.7 needs lubrication is because it is straight walled which makes it harder to extract. Weapons can have flutes to help extraction (like the g3) or you lubricate the ammo. Never the less, it is only straight walled because the P90 has a straight magazine and you dont want it to be courved by a tempered cartridge. Its kinda weird that you addop a cartridge that could be used in a lot of different platforms that has a workaround for a problem most of those platforms wouldn't have in the first place.
Which is why other 5,7 x 28mm guns have stoppages etc when using non-FN ammo. I doubt they have figured out the FN lubricant formula accurately enough. Most FN owners seem to have very few problems when using FN ammo. Remember the PS90/Five seveN were ALWAYS going to be niche firearms/calibres anyway. Realistically, FN was never really going to replace the very well-entrenched 9mm parabellum anyway - the logistics implications clearly prevented that from the get go. "Rear echelon troops" is a limited "market" by definition! However, the P90 was quickly adopted by numerous Special Forces and Law Enforcement Agencies worldwide, contrary to all expectations. Some detractors seem to have missed this. Replacing an entrenched weapons system/calibre is extremely difficult and expensive, as demonstrated by the whole NGSW programme, which is still only partially adopted, with 5,56mm still firmly entrenched for the most part.
- High pressure
- Straight walls
- Inertia blowback
Pick two.
Awesome content as always guys.
I love the whole PDW-off and all the interesting things it spawned.
The P90 may not be the most effective weapon for every situation, but it's a symphony in abandoning convention and embracing innovation in terms of materials, format etc.
Yep and it did allow for low recoil, high fire rate PDW weapon for non frontline soldiers. Yeah it may not penetrate the armour, but it gives you a better fighting chance than a 9mm barreta lol..
@@teaser6089 I dont see what any other SMG could not do instead or better. It was a waste of resources and tax payers money.
@@kleinerprinz99 if you say so chief P90 and mp7 have seen widespread use outside of military contracts...
That Boz round seems kind of interesting. A neck down 9 mm case? You could retrofit a hell of a lot more weapons with a new barrel.
It was very potent. From my recollection it’s major downside was it destroyed the breach face of guns
22tcm Is the modern equivalent
The .22 TCM is still around, which is kind of the same thing.
It was the 10mm case rather than 9mm
@@BuffRANGE That honestly does not surprise me
I love how you have watermarks in the b roll footage to give credit to the original creator. Thanks for being so transparent.
Very interesting ! Thanks a lot for this video.
Cool to see you here
I'm glad that you're back
Wow, that Soviet paratrooper armor looks pretty darn effective.
How heavy is a west like that!? 🤔
It probably suffers from similar problems as the Dragon scale armor. The segmented plates meant it was good at stopping straight on shots but not ones from oblique angels.
“We need a bullet that can penetrate russian armor.”
What if they are wearing plates?
“You’re fired!”
"Good job NATO!"
That pretty much sums up the management/performance of modern western militaries.
Awesome video guys... you put some effort into this one. Oxide has done some really good ones on his channel... especially all his russian armor trials... people don't realize how much effort goes into just locating some of these items
You know, my time spent working with TACOM, both in and out of the military, and videos like this have led me to the conclusion that Russia's small arms program has always been much healthier than anything in the west, at least the US. They mass adopted the assault rifle concept before us, the polymer magazine before us, they successfully reached a conclusion to this project, they made a somewhat functioning multiple hit burst weapon (the AN94), while we just straight up stopped at duplex ammo, and all of their weapons are developed holistically with the average soldier and real world use in mind.
Even details as little as the small hole at the bottom of AK mags to let you know when you have a full magazine. Know what that's for? Yeah you can use it to check if you have a full mag, but it becomes extremely useful if you have to perform an administrative task like ammo accountability, you don't have to unload everyone's mags and risk losing rounds like my dumbass unit did. You only need unload the mags that aren't completely full.
I have very similar sentiments, and honestly I've been trying to research to publish videos like this so we stop doing this stuff... or at the very least try not to. I'm sure that's too much to ask, but I hope it helps a little bit, even a smidge if possible.
@@9HoleReviews I sincerely hope that it has some effect. We've been stuck in this mentality of not thinking things through for far too long.
When I got out of the Marines they had finished adopting the PMAGs, and it was apparent that nowhere in the testing did they consider how they fit in the current issue magazine pouches. According to my old boot who became the armory chief, the new magazines were apparently too thick to fit two of in the at-the-time currently issued double-mag pouches, so you ran into situations like SNCOs telling Marines to soak said pouches in hot water then stretch the hell out of them so they would fit. Apparently they set to work on a new magazine pouch system, to which I'm not aware of the details of, but I know for sure it wasn't until after the first magazines were sent to armories to be issued.
@@Motoboo_Marine well this aged like milk lmao
@@jb76489 it was at least true for the Soviets
@@9HoleReviews Why is Russia🇷🇺 an enemy for NATO? Just don't write back like - you attacked Ukraine.
The Russians are good at keeping things simple and it works so well for them.
Yup, I really like their logic: "we need small ak": AKS-74u, "We need long AK": SVD, "We need quiet AK": VSS ... And so on. They save so much money and time not trying to "reinvent" things they will likely barely use in the first place.
@@unarmored9973 And sometimes this logic has its disadvantages, for example rimmed 7.62x54 which doesn`t allow to construct high - capacity magasines for SVD, or lacking supersonic suppressors among the troops. BTW, SVD is not an upscaled AK, it is completely different inside, and VSS has some major differenses from AK either
Has it though? You’d think if “it works so well for them” Russia would be in a better state than it is……or ever has been
@@unarmored9973 PK is completely different, like m249 and m4. I can agree with ots-14, pp19 and saiga which are same aks with different calibers and designs. Maybe Val too. But if you say that svd is ak, than let's say m417 is a custom ar15, mk18 is a fancy ar15. Svd differs more from AK than g36 from m4. It just looks familiar because of same production methods used(large steel stamping, steel magazine, wooden parts), but all major internal parts are different
@@ВячеславФролов-д7я I am NOT saying SVD is the same as AK. Nobody would say that! haha.
I do not mean "Platform". Such as: AK74, AK100, AK101, AK102, AK103, AK104, AK105, AKM, AKMS, AKS74u, RPK74, RPK... And so on. Those share enough parts interchangeability, I would never say that the SVD is part of the same "Platform" as AK.
Everyone classifies weapons different for "family" or even "series". There are many different books written about how every author thinks firearms should be categorized together into families and series. So many different reasons. - There is DEFINITELY no consensus, even by the manufacturers.
Some people think caliber is enough to create a new family, others think operating system is more important, others think combat role is what determines it's family, others think simply by how it looks - There is absolutely no way to grade similar firearms into defined families that we all can agree upon.
Thank you for research and producing that video. Unexpected results in the end, I never thought of it to be honest.
Come to think of it, Russia already had 9x39 armor piercing developed. Scale it down, adjust the system and boom, you are done. It might not be the case, but I have visited a few testing bureaus and ranges and I got an impression that R&D most likely have a lot of prototype stuff to be able to adjust to any circumstances quite fast.
And I wouldn't call this saga forbidden, but you did an amazing job of debunking some of the myths and provide some good insights.
9-Hole Reviews, once again, produced a great content. Thank you.
That’s kind of what they’ve done. Look up 9x21 and the SR2 Veresk. 9x21 is an absolutely nasty little round, longer than x19, and loaded HOT. Out of the pistol it’s chambered in, it’s rated to do far better than a 5-7.
Honestly, I never recall hearing about the Paratrooper requirement until fairly recently, just that someone in the 1970s/80s decided that maybe the Americans were not so crazy with the M1 Carbine concept, having an intermediate between the rifle and pistol ammunitions of the day, and building a cheap, compact, and simple-to-use weapon around that ammunition to arm non-riflemen. Most everyone at the time was still handing out rather heavy (the better part of 10 or more pounds each) SMGs in 9mm Parabellum, so anything that could deliver more accuracy with less training for less weight was going to be a massive improvement.
@LabRat Knatz e
The average MP5 weighs the same or less as the average P90 (2.5kg) with range of 2kg to 3.6kg depending on variant thats still a range of 4 pds to say 7 pds nothing near 10 pds. Stop pulling stuff out of thin air. This whole PDW debacle is just pathetic.
Thanks for the history lesson, Henry. Now I can play Tarkov knowing that 4.6 and 5.7 shouldn't be penetrating my armor but does anyway :D
Which armor?
it DOES go through soft armor, they're talking about plate in this
@@bradhaines3142 yes I know
You should be more conserned that basic PM with 9*18FMJ should reliably penetrate helmets that reliably hold JHP 7.62*39 in the game
@@tsorevitch2409 also correct
Great stuff. I know it's hard to discuss anything about the 5.7 and 4.6 rounds without questioning a lot of firmly held beliefs.
At the 3:16 mark, "There was a lack of US involvement" NOTHING could have been better, had our pentagon been involved it would have been a sh@tshow
Nah, they could have come up with ".308 for the 2000's". Would have been great. Oh, wait, that's what 6.8mm is...
It ended up being a sh@tshow anyway, ended up in adoption of 2 cartridges that supposed to replace one that remained the logistic chain.
It’s wasn’t a sh&$ show as it was?
17:22 - I wonder if this dry lubricated case is the reason why Chris at Small Arms Solutions could not get the P90 to work with American Eagle 5.7x28 while it works perfectly in 5.7 pistols.
The issue with AE TMJ is it's short bullet and Fiocchi (Fiocchi loads all SS197SR, Speer Gold Dot, and AE TMJ until at least 2023) does not crimp case necks. They use a glue. That glue and short bullet means not a lot of surface for the glue to attach to, and set back occurs. You can increase the reliability of AE TMJ 5.7 by mechanically crimping the case neck. All Factory 5.7 brass is made by FN and has the coating.
Little bit of a note on the PP-2000: the comparisons to western PDWs is all marketing. Currently, its use is seen pretty much exclusively with domestic close protection units and relatively low-budget Rosguard SWAT and counter-terror units as a relatively cheap machine pistol for use with shield doctrine. The PP-19-01 Vityaz has become far more common a rear-echelon gun by comparison. Rather, the demand for their over-pressure armor-piercing 9mm variants likely has more to do with a combination of the standardization of 9x19 parabellum as the standard pistol cartridge with the MP443 Grach (which is designed to cycle 7n21) AND the phasing out of the AKS-74U.
These sorts of armor-piercing 9mm cartridges were already popular with Russian CTUs and close protection well before western PDW development came to light, ie the SR-1 and SR-2 using 9x21Gyurza cartridges, and the SR-3 and SR-3M using 9x39 cartridges from a much shorter barrels than the VSS or AS-VAL. These were all made in response to FSB specifications likely in response to domestic combatants (such as in the Caucasus) wearing Soviet era body armor, usually pilfered from military warehouses. Note the design of all of these bullets from the SP-6 through to the 7n31, and you can clearly see their delineation.
Funny thing: AKS-74U is being held onto by army SpetsNaz. They found it to be an utter diamond in the rough when it comes to close-range fighting. All it needed was a modernization kit, and it became a FAR superior weapon to any SMG/Machine Pistol for battle use.
Crazy, but there was a video where a soldier hit a target with an AKS-74U at 365 meters. Video is by an instructor from a Russian University of SpetzNaz.
You are completely wrong. Russian army isn`t adopting or going to adopt any smgs. AKS-74U is army`s PDW and it is not going to change. PP19, SR2, SR3, PP2000 are counter-terrorist and law enforcment weapons only, featuring compact design and short lethal range (because you don`t want to shoot AKS74U with lethal range over 1000m in a city full of civilians) and some penetration power. Also SR3 and SR3m have about the same barrel length as VAL, which actual barrel is hidden by its supressor. On the other side, army doesn`t want to equip its soliders with low-range smg, which can only fire at the distances that are rare in modern war
Excellent coverage of the obscure details of the NATO PDW program.
When I did a "hypothetical" PDW cartridge design I followed the concept of the 6.8mm SPC, with personal edits. Where as the SPC is a "compromise" between the 5.56mm NATO and 7.62x39mm M43. I used the 5.56mm and 9mm NATO. My creation is a 6.5x27mm (a shortened 6.8mm SPC parent case) with a 95gr bullet at around 2150-2250fps. My simple requirements is for a cartridge that would fit a grip magazine in a firearm with an 10.5in barrel in a package at 24in or less, with ballistics close to a 5.56 at 300yds. The direct "compromise" design would have been a "7x32mm" cartridge. In my opinion this would have been too long for a grip mounted magazine.
Well, how about the 7.5 FK ? It seems to be a good PDW cartridge. Surprisingly your hypothetical cartridge almost match the swedish 6.5x25 CBJ
Having owned a Five-seveN, that grip is long.
I would say that you cannot exceed .45 case overall length to be a useful cartridge.
This really interesting. I appreciate the amount of work you guys put in to this, it’s a really great source of knowledge.
Dust off your tokarevs and modernize the 7.62×25mm. Such an underrated cartridge out of a carbine. Make the PPsh great again
I wonder why we didn't go with something like 5.45x25. Considering that later everyone switched from 9x18 to 9mm Luger why not go even further.
@@trofchik9488 Didn't the chinese basically do that with their pistol cartridge 5.8x21 or something like that.
@@Deathbyreality1 Just looked into it and it seems like they did. Minus the velocity due to heavier bullet.
Yeah 5.8 is like half the weight of 7.62 but the same speed??? Keep the original case and weight, pop one of those steel nipples on the end of it, your welcome NATO. ...I'll take those millions in R&D of your hands
They have bizon in 7.62 tokarev. They even made a helical mag version for it
It's awesome you guys worked with Oxide! Love that channel !! 👍
Interested in hearing more about the mp7 specifically why the seals chose to use it above the other options. It isn’t hard to find 9mm rounds that can penetrate 3a armor and the mp7 can’t pen hard armor, so would like to hear more there.
I almost wonder if it has to do with the options they had available for a 9mm pdw at the time. MP7 would be better than almost all of them, at least then and possible even now.
@@domenik8339 maybe it was just the modern features, there were versions of MP5s made in very limited runs with more modern features like bolt release and such. With the charging handle it (the mp7) would probably have a more similar manual of arms to the m4, or 416.
It's like the old adage (although un- true) USA spent millions developing a pen that would write in space, Russia used a pencil.
The dry lube on the 5.7 is due to the magazine, but not for the reason stated. In order to function in that straight walled magazine the cartridge has no taper - it is truly straight walled. This makes extraction after firing extremely unreliable in the absence of the dry lubricant. Proper extraction, without head stripping is the reason for the dry lube.
It's a high pressure blowback. It's extracting under stupidly high chamber pressure instead of running a gas system to allow for the chamber pressure to drop before unlocking the action. Honestly it should be steel case. The rim cut makes the primer pocket so weak that reloading is very difficult and reloads need to be mild. Not a military issue but it points to issues with the design.
@@randomidiot8142 This seems to my understanding. Coating is there for extraction/blowback operation/brass stretching when firing. The Diamondback DBX is gas driven and brass almost doesn't even need to be re-sized after firing.
It's cool that overpressure 7N21/7N31 with AP core is robust: it behaves like an ordinary high energy bullet when hitting a soft target.
I'm a huge fan of these odd caliber guns, there's just something fascinating about 4.6 and 5.7, maybe it's the lore around them, or their adoption in movies and video games that makes these guns so cool. I really love the ps90, would love to see future videos on this topic, and the modern application for these platforms.
Probably just makes more sense for the US to use m4s instead of either PDW.
I was stationed at NATO AB Gielenkirchen from 2003-2006 and in 2004 we switched over from the MP-5 and P7M8 to the MP-7 and USP. All were great firearms and I have wanted to buy an MP-5 ever since. I did buy the P7M8 though.
It is important to recognize that european armies do not use 9mm hollow points, but only FMJ ammo. Hollow points are banned under The Hague Convention, which only the US did not join. So europeans were also looking for pistols, sidearms and PDWs with another wounding mechanism other than expansion, most likely "unintentional" fragmenting at high speed or tumbling of longer, unstable projectiles to phase out the old 9mm FMJ. Europeans wouldn't be allowed to shoot their guns if they got resupplied by US forces with m855a1 or mk318 sost / bear claw 5.56 ammo or 9mm hollow points.
Speaking of hollow-point ammunition, the exact wording is quite elegant:
"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which
expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions."
Pretty sure the US have joined the hague convention but use hollow points because the hague convention applies only when fighting other signatories not when fighting non signatory forces (this is also why US police etc can and do use hollow points).
"Section 6.5.4.4 of the DOD manual, “Expanding Bullets,” states that “[t]he law of war does not prohibit the use of bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body.” Hollow point bullets “are only prohibited if they are calculated to cause superfluous injury.” The manual goes on to provide three reasons why expanding bullets are lawful for use in armed conflict:
(1) The 1899 Declaration on Expanding Bullets “only creates obligations for Parties to the Declaration in international armed conflicts in which all the parties to the conflict are also Parties to the Declaration” (the United States is not Party to the Declaration).
(2) The Defense Department determined in a 2013 review that the 1899 Declaration does not reflect customary international law.
(3) Expanding bullets as manufactured today are not “inherently inhumane or needlessly cruel.”"
www.justsecurity.org/25200/dod-law-war-manual-returns-hollow-point-bullets-armed-conflict/
That .224 Boz is fucking adorable
Great info
This is the kind of crossover content I was asking for
Valuable content, as always. Thanks.
Yeah, but Solidus didn’t roll around with dual PPK-20s. 5.7 wins.
When MW2 was released, I had an akimbo P90 loadout named "Solidus" haha
The ppk-20 is a modernize version the pp-19 both are chambered in 9x19. the gun doesn't matter 7n31 is in 9x19 any 9mm weapon can use it in comparison 5.7 and 4.6x30 are not universal at all. The point of the trials was to get a universal cartridge to replace 9mm both failed in doing so.
@@shootinbruin3614 nice!
Fantastic essay. Who won? FN. they sold an incredible number of guns because of it
Yea that's the damn truth
As far as 5.7 vs 4.6 goes; the MP7 looks like the more practical PDW being that it's more compact but the P90 is one of the coolest looking guns ever. So they were right to standardized both.
I think this is the best video on your channel guys!
Even if it is slightly off regular topic.
Unfortunately, it shows that when two people fight over something, the winner is the third one.
Or: " Gdzie dwóch się bije, tam trzeci korzysta" ;)
Greetings from Poland!
13:29 what a chad. "carry me out, i'll cover you"
I think the fact that NATO rear echelon troops do not get a different weapon than the infantry is the larger failure hear and not the lack of a standardized cartridge .Basically the entire idea of PDWs in NATO didnt happen .
I love the mp7 aesthetically and how easy is it is to handle. The p90 has to be given credit for the very forward thinking ideas it had too.
I thought I knew the whole story already. Neat that I'm still learning 20 years later.
Also, props to this Oxide fellow for using Command and Conquer music in the background.
Frankily this whole "we need a specific round/pdw for REMFs to penetrate sky-Ivan armor" was a massive waste of time. If you are at the point where cooks and truck drivers are watching tens of thousands of russian paratroopers about to land in W. Germany or France... those "99 red ballons" have already been launched and WWIII is about to end, if you catch my meaning.
Amazingly informative. Thank you for sharing.
This kinda reminds me of the current quest for "armor penetration and overmatch" in the NGSW program
I believe a futile and unnecessary quest that doesn't really understand the tactical application of small arms in real world combat
The story of Full Circle is complete with the NGSW if it's picked up. The funny thing to me is we, the Army, is going from a Intermediate Carbine back to a Full length Battle rifle. I say battle rifle because in training I know we will use 7.62 instead because the Army has a lot of it.
Though I wonder what's going to happen when the powers that be decided to chop the barrels down to 14.5 inches in 30yrs. Lol
@@DisgruntledK28 you can still keep the 20 inch barrels and the firepower that come with it...just switch to bullpup LOL
I think that is why the US is also phasing out the M855 for the M855A1 and seeing how that compares to the whatever NGSW weapon it choosing.
DoD acquisitions need to have some crusty bastage on the board asking "would this have won us Afghanistan? No? But it will make a meaningful difference against a far more numerous modern military force with thousands of armored vehicles and aircraft? Seems legit."
@@phucprice6698 The old guard at the DoD are not a fan of things changing to much. A bullpup rifle would send them on a year long geriatric rant about the good old days till they keel over lol
I'll say the 5.7mm is a weirdly deadly round. Might be a bias in much better user vs 9mm, but statistics show 5.7mm is way better at making people dead.
Or it could be that being lower recoil, its easier to put where you aim and put a follow up shot down range.
It has rifle-type ballistics in a handgun size. It isnt equal to a 5.56, but its clearly not a normal handgun round.
Thanks for the work on this info, very enjoyable. I've always been interested in the 7n21 and 7n31 cartridges. But never knew it was the answer to the 5.7
I learned stuff here. Keep it comin' Texas!
That was very interesting (and probably quite a lot of work) - thanks for the effort.
You are right on the mark. Problem description will make or brake you solutions. Your problem description should take into account the current and projected threats.
"I cannot underemphasize" - you meant the exact opposite, "I cannot overemphasize".
Why not both? (insert Old El Paso taco advertisement) or is that Ad in Australia only?
@@markredacted8547 nah, we in the US have that too.
IMO, the main two reasons why this isn't feasible is simply because of the US' lack of involvement as well as the the fact that the only way to make something like these cartridges viable are with incendiary ammunition to essentially melt the titanium armor and then a frangible would be needed to create a shotgun effect for terminal ballistics.
We need one of these deep dives on the 1911
🤔I hadn't heard any of this before, makes a lot more sense to standardize a round over the actual weapon. You'd never get everyone to agree on the same weapon to much $$$ involved. After all, it's only human life we're talking about at stake here. Thanks for the clarification 👍
What I got out of this was that, if it wasn't for the US putting their foot down and making a choice, Europeans would squabble for years over standardization and nothing would get done.
Very Informative! Thanks for your research.
This is very interesting information!
Thank you for this very informative video.
Still want a window into the timeline where .280 Brit was adopted as STANAG
.280 was never adopted as STANAG it was adopted by the British with the EM-2 and then quickly unadopted. Frankly whether .280 or. 308 the end result would have been the same because .280 British was still technically a full power rifle round it was just similar in performance to 6.5 Carcano and 6.5 Arisaka.
@@nemisous83 you missed his point.
He, and I, want to see what would have happened if NATO adopted the .280 British, possibly including the EM2 as the NATO standard rifle.
Then, instead of the overweight FN MAG, you have something closer to the Minimi for your squad MG. Or maybe even a lighter belt-fed MG.
@@ScottKenny1978 well the EM-2 isn't a light machine gun its a bullpup battle rifle also even if. 280 British was adopted in a belt fed format it wouldn't have changed the overall size of weapons like the FN MAG or M60 because. 280 British is still a full length full power rifle round its just more similar to 6.5 Arisaka and 6.5 carcano ballistically.
@@nemisous83 right. The FN MAG wouldn't have to be so overbuilt as to survive 150gr at 2800fps. It could have been built to about the Maximi (7.62 Minimi).
The .280 British or 6.5 Arisaka is much closer to intermediate than full power rifle, but still usable to 600m.
@@ScottKenny1978 well the FN MAG and FAL aren't overbuilt and heavy because of .308 they are overbuilt and heavy because FN made them that way even the FAL prototype in 8mm kurz weighed about the same as the one chambered in .308. Also .308 is nearly as powerful as you are making it out to be the G3 for instance operates it off effectively delayed blowback and a sheet metal reciever.
I've always wondered why the 6.5 mm cbj was never considered and where it went.
TIL that they made a version of the .224 Boz based on the 9mm case. The only version I've seen before was based on a 10mm case.
i think the 30carbine cartridge has potential if you bump up velocity a couple hundred fps with a slightly lighter solid spitzer bullet to be a a good option for a pdw. as for a platform ide lean toward three options . the m1 carbine the ruger mini14 or even the ar15 platform. people have ben pretty hard on the 30carbine round but with modern solid bullets and a slightly faster load and results should be interesting.
The "British, French, and Belgians" did not all favor .280 Brit. Not even all of the British favored .280 Brit. .280 Brit is not even really one cartridge. It is a developmental series that starts at a true "less recoil than 7.62 NATO" but objectively horrible design in every other way, and then procedurally gets more powerful until it was literally just a small amount weaker than 7.62 NATO, except still requiring years of development while 7.62 NATO was mature already, and still worse in every other conceivable way.
The French were quite happy to stick with their 7.5x54 (from the 30's to the 80's!)
Great job guys
Wondered why NATO didn't go the same route as the Russians by updating their 9mm ammo instead of developing two non standard rounds costing millions of dollars. First thing I'd have thought of was a tungsten or hardened steel penetrator in a lightweight sabot.
Thats how it always goes in NATO - the Germans say "Lets use something from H&K", everybody else - except the Brits perhaps - say "Lets use something from FN", and the US says "Lets use a AR 15 for everything".
The Russians and Chinese have a big advantage there, they look at various own developements, and then actually adopt the best one. They have no need to negociate with anybody on that.
Yeah thats why chinese small arms are amazing (/s) and russian special forces use run off the mill western gear.
@@ichderjogi You've never seen chinese mil-spec small arms in action, almost nobody has. Everyone is basing their evaluation on exports made to commercial spec and with utter contempt to the clueless laowai.
Russian SF use locally-made gear, adapted from Western best practices and modified for specifics of their tasks and environment. Increasingly, they are moving to locally-developed gear with less and less Western lineage in it.
Thanks guys for creating TH-cam's best golf channel! BTW, what do you think of the Cleveland Frontline Elevado? Is it worth it's bargain basement price?
Or if you don't like those questions... How well do you think the .950 JDJ would do on the Practical Accuracy course?
I had always assumed that these PDW cartridges were designed to penetrate soft body, not hard body armour. Most hard plate armour is ready designed to resist full sized rifle rounds to begin with, so the idea that these micro rifle rounds was expected to penetrate various hard armours that resist larger rounds is absurd even on the face of it.
So the standard they used was a CRISAT designated armor with a 1.5mm ti plate and 20 layers of kevlar, which both have no issues penetrating, but is a poorest example of soviet armor of its era. It does work just fine on LvIIIa
Thing is, the soviet army didn't use soft flak vests at all, unlike us and some European armies. Ussr jumped from no body armor straight into hard titanium vests. Sure, first models weren't great, but they were still rated against assault rifles at some distance. So the weapon designed to punch through soft armor makes sense for ussr (like all those subsonic cartridges), but not for the nato side
Well US involvement in Canadian and European aerospace has been disastrous for those countries where it acted entirely in it's own self interest with underhanded methods .
Thank you, very informative video.
With regard to PDW classification, what class would you consider the Stribog (SP9A1 & A3)?
I’m thinking it would be classed a Class 3, but looking for your opinion based on your extensive knowledge on the subject matter. TIA
Cheers🍻,
Mach
PDW round? All you need is a 1911 in .45. It may not punch through Ivan's armor, but it will hurl him back with such force he is Guaranteed to be incapacitated. I saw it in a movie once.
I wish the people designing AP rounds would get in contact with tank experts. Steel sucks at armor penetration especially when it's soft steel, lead is better than soft steel at piercing metal armor because it slams more mass into the armor and induces adiabatic shear. We used to use soft steel as caps for hardened steel or tunsten carbide shells to act as a CUSHION to keep the brittle shell from shattering. Like with M855, you're making half the bullet into a cushion and reducing the velocity. No joke, regular M193 is better at defeating metal armor because it has enough density and raw speed to actually cut a plug out the metal with adiabatic shear. They keep making mistakes we solved back in the 1930's and 1940's.
M193 is worse at penetration than M855. The only circumstance in which M193 beats M855 is at penetrating steel at close enough range to hit with higher velocity. Since M193 has a flatter bullet base and less weight, it loses velocity quick so this advantage is almost not worth discussing.
that was great, keep em coming
Typically the US skews NATO to use the US's cartridge, not the other way around.
With the one notable exception of SS109, right? :)
In fairness, with the USA representing more than 50% of NATO's actual and potential military strength, and only growing bigger over the years as Europeans sought to limit their commitments, it is not without virtue to let the Americans set the standard. Add in the USA would and will be making most of the ammunition for NATO, it seems wise to me that you want your ammo supplier to be comfortable with what it is making.
@@genericpersonx333 Yet arguably the two major US led adoptions, 7.62 and 5.56 were regressions from the original .280, to the point now we are now moving back to 6mm class intermediate weapons.
Following US adopted rounds is one thing, letting the US (or any other country) effectively dictate for political reasons choices rather than technical outcomes has obviously been a huge issue.
I’ve wanted an mp7 forever, and in that process I’ve learned to love other things
The P90 is fun to shoot until you have to reload it.
And pay for more 5.7🤦🏻♂️
From memory it was obvious that the levels of protection implied were the older soviet style body armour in use at the time which was not close to level 4. The 1990-2010 era soviet/Russian older style body armour was in common use. You can look back to the soviet operations in Afghanistan where armour started showing up in use and how it changed up to the 2010 era. This is what the 9mm has having trouble with.
Judging by the looks of the cartridge, the 224 boz would have been a good stop-gap but not a good total replacement
What about 30.06 black tip ammo? I got plenty of that.
HELL YEAH
Fascinating, thanks for sharing!
In terms of replacing 9x19 in SMG & pistol applications, imho FN won, as HK withdrew the UCP/P46 since they never got it to work reliably
The downside is how big the Five-seveN is. Quite a bulky thing.
I overall like the ergonomics, like where the safety is (ambidextrous index finger), and it's relatively narrow. But the reach to the trigger is very long.
@@ScottKenny1978 Yep and I've been asking Apex for years to make a dang trigger :D We've got 2 choices now, and both offer reduced reach.
@@BuffRANGE hopefully my FLGS can get in another Ruger 57 for me to handle.
@@ScottKenny1978 It's thinner but it's nothing earthshattering over the FSN. The FSN is WAY more robust and reliable.
I think that, in light of the fact that neither the P-90 nor MP7 can penetrate even decades-old infantry armor, it actually makes sense for NATO to not invest in standardizing and supporting any particular PDW cartridge, because the demand for that type of PDW just isn't there at this time. That might change in the future, but as it currently stands, the MP7 sees a lot of use with special forces (like the raid that killed Osama bin Laden) where its ease of mounting a slew of optics, night-fighting attachments, and ability to collapse the stock to make it a very short and compact weapon makes it ideal for elite troops in night raids where combat is expected to be at fairly short ranges. The P-90, by contrast, is a much simpler system that can more easily be slung onto one's back or to one's side without snagging on anything, and the 50-round magazine means that you might not even need to carry a spare magazine if all you really need is a weapon for a matter of seconds as you flee or defend yourself against one or two guys at close range AS you flee.
But when it comes to defeating modern body armor, the US military seems to be going with adopting a HIGHER power and larger sized rifle to outright defeat even the most modern body armor with precision, velocity, and range, using cutting edge optics.
Perhaps leadership in NATO feels that it's better to wait and see what kind of threats should be expected and if something substantially better comes along. Something the M1 Carbine never had to deal with was body armor; so long as the enemy was within range, then the weaker cartridge could still be very lethal and effective, even if it wasn't the overwhelming power of a full-sized rifle cartridge. In modern times, trying to design a round that is both small and powerful enough to penetrate body armor is a huge challenge, especially when increasing the power makes it harder to control or design a weapon capable of handling it with such small size and light weight.
Regarding the U.S. having more influence on NATO standards than other governments there are some reasons for it. First is money. The U.S. spends dramatically more on defense than the rest of NATO combined. Getting the U.S. alone to adopt your product is a bigger win than if all other NATO members did except the U.S.. Also it's about in person use influence. The U.S. has bases (plural) inside almost every NATO member. None of them have bases in the U.S. and few of them have as many flags still planted on foreign soil. If a NATO member military is going to practice and cross train with another NATO member one of those two always has a high chance of being the U.S. because they are already where the other is. Also, being familiar with what the U.S. is using is to your benefit because if there is a big ground war in Europe your military aid will be whatever the U.S. sends you unless you're fighting against them.
I believe the French needed American logistical support just for the bombing in Libya, at some point they ran out or just about ran out of bombs. In a serious conflict, I imagine problems would show up much quicker.
What's hilarious is that there is an upper for the AR platform, that functions much like the P90 ejecting downward through the AR's lower magazine well. Works damn well. But yeah, the PDW is an old concept that some counties used as a way to test their ammunition/arms and push there agenda. I really like Ruger model 57 pistol in 5.7x28mm. It's incredibly accurate and reliable, plus a hoot-to-shoot. Way better than FN's over priced attempt. 0~o CMF-63 Ordnance all the way... MOS 45-Bravo, 45-Kilo/Golf, 45-Zulu... Ah the memories... ^~^
If this gun and ammo was to face Russian paratroopers then why go any farther once you know the ound can't penetrate Russian armor.
tl;dw Europe can't have nice things when there's too much or too little US involved
4:05 the BOZ would have been like the handgun equivalent of the blackout - a hot round you could enjoy with a barrel swap. in the end the 22TCM9r took that place, with a less aerodynamic projectile
This video reminded me that I need to swap in my shorter barrel for my PS90 (yes tattletales, I have my stamp). I have a Switchback can to mount and test.
10mm > 5.7, 4.6, 9mm .45acp etc
This was wonderful, helpful info, thanks