Re: New US Military .300 Win Mag Match MK 248 MOD 1
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TomS308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Let me answer a few of the topics brought up in this thread..
Rifle calibers are limited to whats been adopted by our US Military and meet NATO military specifications. That includes 9mm, 45 ACP, 223, 308, 30-06, 300 Win Mag, 338 LM, 50 BMG.. The 30-06 is retired, and the 338 LM has not been adopted yet. That rules out the US Military from using other cartridges. Adoping a new cartridge or weapons platform is a major expense, and a logistical nightmare.
Bullets.. Only FMJ`ed bullets are legal to use by the Geneva Convention, the Hague Convention IV of 1907, Article 23(E), and the rules of war. It took some doing to get the Sierra Match King approved and legal for war time use. So that rules out other manufacture brands of bullets. Other bullet manufactures brought up dont have the manufacturing capacity for 38.4 million rounds, even if there bullets were approved. <span style="font-weight: bold">JLK is a one man, hand press operation, LOL</span>.
We are talking about 38.4 million rounds. Federal owns Lake City Arsenal. Lake City produces ammo for the US Military.
http://www.thegunzone.com/opentip-ammo.html
http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html
The Laws of War
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/lawwar.asp</div></div>
First of all the Hague convention doesn't specify a FMJ bullet. It says a bullet not intended to expand or not cause undue wounding. We chose the FMJ route. The hollow point was approved on our side because of it's flight characteristics, not because it was intended to cause undue wounding. So we use it for long range precision fire.
Second, JLK may be a one man operation, but when Vought couldn't produce Corsairs fast enough they farmed out to Goodyear. Colt couldn't produce the M-16 (that they pretty much stole the rights to) so GM and other smaller manufacturers built them. The LD/VLD/ULD bullet design is there. It can be built in mass. I'm tired of hearing it costs too much when they just approved 136 billion to develop a second engine for the F-35/F-36 fighter. M1 Garands got built by a number of manufacturers. P-51 engines were even built by such unusual companies like Maytag. There is no reason the design can't be purchased and used. And a royalty be paid for x number of items produced.
And third, Already addressed. Just because Federal and Sierra are big doesn't mean they should automatically get the contract.
Edit:
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TomS308</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Montana Marine.. i understand what your saying..
Another thing to consider with going to a VLD bullet is.. The OAL of the cartridge has to fit the magazine length of the rifles used by our US Military. The VLD bullet has to shoot accurately out of chambering and throats used. I understand thats why they did not choose the SMK 210 gr which has a higher BC, and is of a more of a VLD design. It wasnt shooting as accurately as the SMK 220.
The Military doesnt have the options we civilians enjoy. They have to standardize everything. New ammo designs needs to fit, function, and shoot accurately out of the thousands of rifles out in the field.</div></div>
The 210 was dropped because it wouldn't stabilize past supersonic range.