Replacing the 5.56, has it ever been necessary?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ต.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 5

  • @NopeAsaurusRex
    @NopeAsaurusRex 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Your knowledge is definitely what will grow your channel. Keep it up sir.

  • @IAM-o7o
    @IAM-o7o 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I personally subscribe to the scar concept, which is one lightweight, controllable, modular rifle that can shoot both an intermediate round and a full power round depending on the mission.

  • @IAM-o7o
    @IAM-o7o 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    YES!!! THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS VIDEO!!!

  • @07thunderhawk
    @07thunderhawk 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    5.56 is great, but if ammo availability and price were out of the question, 6.5 Grendel would be a great choice. It's comfortable to fire, incredibly efficient and accurate. I've seen even the cheapest ARs shoot lights out with 6.5 grendel. It's a terrific cartridge.

  • @DogeMcLovin
    @DogeMcLovin 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great commentary on the topic, Murph. Great to see context-based channels aren't going by the wayside.
    For large and protracted operations, artillery and machine guns seem to be the way to close the gap. I'm thinking the individual solider would benefit more from tactics and better utilization of existing gear than a new rifle platform entirely.
    As for special operations targeting HVTs and the like, I could see the possibility of needing such a capability if body armor will assuredly be encountered. Use-case specific, obviously.
    For us civilians though? I dare say 5.56 is more than capable for defense given its performance against soft targets.