what if 7mm rounds and 4.85mm rounds NATO standard ?

[King_Typhoon]

what if NATO take 7mm ( .280 ) indeed that 7.62mm which issue NATO standard?

is it offer good accurately for machine gun? or SAW?
Good balance power and recoiled that 7.62mm ?

other bullet doesn't standard for infantry assaults rifle is 4.85mm rounds both round could be change event war? is 4.85mm better that 5.56mm in someway

why it not selection for NATO standard due USA prefer thier economic reason not defence?

please info about it

many thank

Danny

 

[Chino]

Same thing, eventually someone will find something wrong with them and ask why we got rid of the .303 Lee-Enfield.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

what if NATO take 7mm ( .280 ) indeed that 7.62mm which issue NATO standard?

If the US had agreed to the 7mm back in the 1954 I think it would still be the standard bullet today. .303, .30/08 and 7.92mm lasted in service for half centuries during which the type of rifle that fired them changed very little (similar to assault rifles since the 1950s).

I still think the 5.56mm would have appeared as the reasons it and the AR-15 were adopted in the early 1960s were not so much rejection of the 7.62mm but service politics. However with the US Army in Vietnam with 7mm rifles they wouldn’t have gone to 5.56mm but maybe the 7mm AR-10 to save weight in place of a 7mm T44 (I doubt the FN FAL as the T48 would have beaten the US product even in 7mm). However without the US Army behind it 7mm would have stayed the dominant and NATO standard round with 5.56mm just being an exotic air force, SF and lightweight statue weapon.

Many of the rifles and machineguns armies use would be different. The British would probably be on a third generation EM-2, the US the AR-10 and so on. Machinegun wise many of the 7.62mm MGs we are familiar with, the MAG and MG3, would never have emerged except in smaller, lighter (~7-8kg) 7x43mm versions, like beefed up Minimis and Amelis. Because of the round there would be common machineguns between sections and battalion MG platoons.

Sniper rifles would be the most changed without the 7.62x51 round to standardise on. While many armies would use accurised versions of their 7x43 assault rifle others would have kept sniper versions of the WW2 round in service. So .303, .30/08 and 7.92mm would have hung around until new specialised rounds like .300 Magnum, .338 and others took over.

other bullet doesn't standard for infantry assaults rifle is 4.85mm rounds both round could be change event war? is 4.85mm better that 5.56mm in someway

The British 4.85mm (actually a 5mm) round has better penetration than the 5.56x45mmm SS109 thanks to a higher section density. But not by much.

please info about it

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm

 

[kato]

Machinegun wise many of the 7.62mm MGs we are familiar with, the MAG and MG3, would never have emerged except in smaller, lighter (~7-8kg) 7x43mm versions, like beefed up Minimis and Amelis.

The point of the MG3 was that there were several 10,000 MG42 in stocks to be refitted, a cheap option both for domestic use and export. Subsequently the design was re-published, with minor improvements depending on use - in Switzerland even as a far heavier machined version with 17 kg weight in 7.5mm GP11.
Doubt that all would have changed much with a lighter NATO caliber - there's even a 5.56x45 NATO MG42/59, after all.