View Single Post
  #61  
Old 04-19-2018, 01:51 AM
funkychinaman's Avatar
funkychinaman funkychinaman is offline
IMFDB & Forum Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bucks County, PA
Posts: 2,537
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazryonh View Post
The process of something being admitted or barred from becoming a NATO standard is a bit fuzzy. The US Armed Forces went with 5.56mm NATO in the Vietnam War long before it became a NATO standard in 1980. There was also the indefinite postponement of 5.7x28mm becoming a NATO standard when the Germans complained about their 4.6x30mm round being left out.

The infrastructure for widespread 10mm Auto manufacturing already exists, in the form of .40 S&W manufacturing lines (because .40 S&W cases are just 3mm shorter than 10mm Auto cases). Furthermore, using 10mm Auto in an compact-SMG-type (perhaps with an MP7-style layout) platform instead of 5.56mm SBRs can save money and soldiers' hearing, because SBRs waste a lot of powder in the casings with every shot, and SMGs are much easier to suppress efficiently from short barrels than SBRs, and SMGs are also quieter than SBRs when unsuppressed.

I still think it would be interesting if SIG-Sauer puts out a 10mm version of their M17 and M18 handguns and some gun vlogger tests it alongside the 9x19mm versions. If it comes down to the handgun or SMG, at least the ballistic performance and barrier-blind performance of the 10mm Auto over the 9mm Para will mean that the soldier with that handgun or SMG will be that much more capable.
SOCOM has tremendous leeway when it comes to weapons selection, and they're happy with 9mm and .45 ACP.
__________________
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"
Reply With Quote