If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks to all for the answer. I'm assuming the larger x number, the longer the
case and the longer the case the greater the load of powder? True to a good first-order approximation: case capacity matters a great deal, and certainly gives you a decent expectation of the performance class to expect. In a broad view, the full-power thirtysomethings (.303 British, 7.62x54 Russian, 8mm Mauser, and .30-06 and its shorter, somewhat differently shaped successor 7.62x51) did about the same thing in about the same way; and that is rather more (at a penalty in weight and volume and recoil) than the lighter cartridges that have been the postwar trend, and far more than you would get from a reasonable sidearm-type pistol; and they look as though this ought to be the case (no pun intended and not much of one achieved). Of course, God is in the details and so is the devil. Length doesn't tell the whole story; the shape/diameter of the case, the technical limits and conventions restricting the pressure of the cartridge, and the choice of powder type and bullet weight can all be substantial variables. The result of all this is not only differences between one cartridge and another, but a range -- sometimes big -- of performance potential for each cartridge. Usually the military chooses one or a few points in this parameter space and sticks to 'em. They are not necessarily maximal -- the way that bolt-gun-only hunting loads for .30-06 can bend certain parts of the M1 Garand is a case in point. Shape is interesting. Makers of civilian rifles and ammo have been exploring the power and accuracy potential of shorter, fatter cartridges. Of course, their customers' priorities are much different than the army's, including many factors that bear upon the number of rounds in the magazine; and there is more variety in what they need. Individual hunters and target shooters also have a lot of freedom to chase the latest trend in search of better performance (and/or treat themselves to a new bit of sporting goods) -- polar opposite to the military's motivation to buy, maintain, and train upon huge quantities of a few standard items. So one hardly expects, say, .243 Winchester Super-Short Magnum to be the next military cartridge; my guess is that, role by role, the continued resurgence of 7.62x51 amid the existing assortment is more likely, at least until something entirely different comes along. But it goes to show how complicated the parameter space is, and how much innovation (some of which, admittedly, will always lead up blind alleys) is still occurring in what one might have imagined to be a very mature field. Cheers, --Joe |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Eight Pakistani troops executed near Afghan border | Dav1936531 | Military Aviation | 0 | March 27th 04 06:30 AM |
US troops denied medical benefits | John Galt | Military Aviation | 1 | December 20th 03 08:59 PM |
Warszaw Pact War Plans ( The Effects of a Global Thermonuclear War ...) | Matt Wiser | Military Aviation | 0 | December 7th 03 08:20 PM |
French block airlift of British troops to Basra | Michael Petukhov | Military Aviation | 202 | October 24th 03 06:48 PM |
U.S. Troops, Aircraft a Hit at Moscow Air Show | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | August 28th 03 10:04 PM |