.280 British

Rimless bottlenecked intermediate rifle cartridge January 2013 .280 British 280british.jpg 240px Various .280 ball cartridges. The orange-cased cartridge is made out of aluminium. United Kingdom Rifle British British Army 1945 rimless, bottleneckedThe Handloader's Manual of Cartridge Conversions, Book by John J. Donnelly, Stoeger Publishing, 1987, 978-0-88317-269-8 p. 286 .284 .313 .448 .470 .473 .049 1.71 2.54 1:8.66 in (220 mm) 45000 139 Ball 2270 1595 140 Ball 7 mm Mk 1Z 2549 2019 Cartridges of the World Cartridges of the World 11th Edition, Book by Frank C. Barnes, Edited by Stan Skinner, Gun Digest Books, 2006, 0-89689-297-2 p.349 The .280 British was an experimental rimless bottlenecked intermediate rifle cartridge. It was later designated 7 mm MK1Z, and has also been known alternatively as .280/30, .280 Enfield, 7 mm FN Short and 7×43mm. Like most armed forces in the immediate post-World War II era, the British Army began experimenting with intermediate rounds after combat experiences with StG 44-equipped German units. The Army began development in the late 1940s, with subsequent help from Fabrique Nationale in Belgium and the Canadian Army. The .280 British was tested in a variety of rifles and machine guns including the EM-2, Lee–Enfield, FN FAL, Bren, M1 Garand and Taden gun. Despite its success as an intermediate cartridge, the .280 British was not considered powerful enough by the US Army and several variants of the .280 British were created in an attempt to appease the US Army. However, the US Army continued to reject these variants, ultimately adopting the cartridge that was then designated the 7.62×51mm NATO. History Impetus During World War II the standard British rifle and machine gun round was the venerable .303 British. Efforts to replace the .303 with a more modern round predated even World War I, but a series of events kept it in service in spite of its rimmed design causing a number of alleged problemsSeptember 2020. During the war the Allies encountered the new 7.92 "Kurz" cartridge on the battlefield and noted its effectiveness. The Kurz was an "intermediate power" round, less than a conventional rifle round like the .303, but more than pistol rounds like the 9mm Parabellum. This gave the Kurz rifle-like performance in close-range encounters, while still having a small enough recoil that it could be fired in fully automatic fire. This led British small arms designers to begin the development of their own intermediate round, but increased the range requirement so as to be effective out to 400 yards. To the end of achieving the best cartridge, the "Ideal Cartridge Panel," under the direction of Dr. Beeching, started work in 1945, and by 1947 released their findings."EM-2 Concept and development – A Rifle ahead of its time." By Thomas B. Dugalby, Collector Grade Publications, Toronto, Canada, 1980 They suggested that the ideal cartridge would be .276 to .280 inch (6.8 to 7 mm) in diameter, weigh between 130 and 140 grains (8.4 to 9 g) and have a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,400 fps (730 m/s). The .280 cartridge was developed under the direction of Brigadier Aubrey Dixon, and approved for testing in mid-1947, a similar design, the .270, was released in October of the same year. Both designations reflect the groove diameter of the rifling; the .276 bullet's actual diameter was .284 in mm. Work of the .270 was ceased the next year in order to concentrate efforts on the .280. The .280 cartridge at this stage had a rim diameter of .458 inch (11.6 mm), was 1.70 inches long (43 mm), and fired a 130 grain (8.4 g) bullet at 2,270 fps (692 m/s). In 1949 the rim diameter was increased to .473 inch (12 mm), the same as the United States' standard Caliber .30 ammunition, and redesignated .280/30, the bullet was changed to a heavier 139 gr g 1 on, with a mild steel core still at 2270 fps. In addition to the ball cartridge there was armor piercing and armor piercing-incendiary both with a 130 gr projectiles at 2,200 fps, tracer, with a 115 gr projectile at 2,250 fps, and an observing and a grenade firing cartridges. NATO Competition In early 1950, the .280 cartridge was tested by the Development and Proof Services at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland, and the results were disappointing in comparison with the American-developed T65 round in 7.62 mm.http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/896859.pdf A Comparison of United Kingdom and United States Ammunition for Lightweight Weapons, Ninth Report of Project TS2-2015, Volume I 5 June 1950 Development and Proof Services, Aberdeen Proving Grounds Maryland 18-37 7 April 2016 10 May 2017 https://web.archive.org/web/20170510235605/http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/896859.pdf dead The demonstrated accuracy from a Mann barrel was very poor, with an extreme spread of 43.6 in cm 1 on at 600 yd m 1 on, compared to the 16 in cm 1 on of the T65, the armor piercing (AP) round would have trouble reliably penetrating a standard US M12 protective vest at 800 yards (something the T65 Ball round could reliably achieve), and the AP performance against hardened armor plate was about half that of the T65 AP round. And, the low muzzle velocity gave a very arcing trajectory, with a maximum ordinate of over 19 inches at 400 yards, and 10 inches at 300 yards, giving an unacceptably wide "safe zone". The accuracy performance with the steel core ball was so bad, the United Kingdom representative requested that a lot of 130 gr lead core and a lot of 140 gr lead core ball ammunition be used to evaluate accuracy. These two additional lots did better with extreme spreads of 21.0 inches and 21.6 inches respectively, but were still behind the T65. This was not particularly surprising as the T65 had a three-year head start, development beginning in 1944. Concurrently with the Aberdeen tests, the US Army Field Forces Board No, 3 (dealing with Infantry equipment) was holding their own tests at Fort Benning, Georgia."Report of Joint Test of United Kingdom and United States Lightweight Rifles and Ammunition Therefor, Including Implimenting action by A.F.F Board No. 3, Vol. 1," dated 27 October 1950, Army Field Forces Board No. 3, Fort Benning, Georgia Performance at Fort Benning was better using the lead core ammunition, but still lagged behind the T65, with extreme spreads of 12 inches at 600 yards versus 9 inches, and poor AP performance. In spite of these poor showings, in October 1950, Board No. 3 recommended "that development of small arms ammunition, lightweight rifles and machine guns be carried out in US .276 caliber (British .280 caliber)." This recommendation was strongly objected to by three prominent members of the Board, Colonels Burton L. Lucas, C.W. Pence, and Edward A. Chazal,"... The following members of the Army Field Forces Board No. 3 non-concur in the recommendation that the development of small arms ammunition, lightweight rifles and machine guns be carried out in US caliber .276 (British .280 caliber)... There is no objection to a .280 caliber as such, and it appears to offer a reduction in weight and bulk, however, the caliber selected should be that which will provide the best performance." Minority Report to Report of Test of Project No. 2231 as well as the entire Field Forces Board No. 1 (Engineers). The Engineering Research and Development Laboratories went even further, stating that in their opinion, the British and Canadians should adopt the M1 and the US Caliber .30 ammunition. In the end, the recommendation was not acted upon, and development of the T65 continued. The British attempted to improve the performance by seating the bullet less deep in the case allowing for a larger propellant charge, and substituting a lower drag flat based bullet of FN design. These changes brought the velocity up to 2,595 fps, this was what was adopted as 7mm Mark 1z in 1951. However, by this time the T65 cartridge had also been improved going from a 135 gr projectile at 2750 fps, to a 150 gr projectile launched at the same velocity, thus maintaining the performance gap. In mid-1951, a joint meeting between the US, the UK, Canada and France was held to discuss small arms standardization. The US maintained the position that the .280 fell short of requirements, the French preferred the T65, as did Canada, however was willing to accept the .280 if the US did. The British began to back pedal, suggesting that both be adopted. By September 1951, the NATO Standing Group agreed on a set of military characteristics of required performance for new small arms ammunition. Testing of the British 7mm, Mk 1z fell well short."America and Britain - Two Nations Separated by a Common Cartridge," |url= https://slideplayer.com/slide/1678011/| A change of government meant that the 7 mm, EM-2 and Taden gun projects were abandoned soon afterwards by Winston Churchill, who returned as the prime minister who desired commonality between the NATO countries. Small amounts of .280 British ammunition were later produced during the 1960s for various small arms trials. After .280 In the late 1960s, a version of the .280 British was created using a 6.25 mm bullet in a necked-down .280 British case. It was designed in response to experiments in the U.K. trying to find an ideal military small-arms round. Large caliber bullets were calculated to need more energy to penetrate various levels of body armor to inflict disabling wounds on soldiers. Out of several "optimum solutions" ranging from 4.5 mm to 7 mm, the 6.25 mm was the preferred solution. The 100 gr g on bullet had a muzzle velocity of 2,680 ft/s m/s on and 2,160 J ftlb on of muzzle energy. While the 7.62×51mm NATO required 700 J ftlb of force on impact to penetrate helmets and heavy body armor, the 6.25 mm required only 580 J ftlb of impact force to deliver the same penetration effects out to 600 m. It remained effective for a longer distance and produced recoil closer to that of the 5.56×45mm NATO.http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/Assault.htm ASSAULT RIFLES AND THEIR AMMUNITION: HISTORY AND PROSPECTS Anthony G Williams November 2014 2014-11-09 2017-11-05 https://web.archive.org/web/20171105042707/http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/Assault.htm dead However, it was not designed for very long range and its bullet was relatively light.http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/The%20Next%20Generation.htm The Case for a General-Purpose Rifle and Machine Gun Cartridge (GPC) Anthony G Williams 2014-11-09 https://web.archive.org/web/20141109212356/http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/The%20Next%20Generation.htm 2014-11-09 dead Testing of the 6.25×43mm was conducted from 1969 to 1971, when development ceased in favor of the smaller 4.85×49mm.6.25x43mm Experimental - Militarycartridges.nl Specifications Name Bullet Diameter Case Length Rim Base Shoulder Neck OAL MV Bullet Weight .280 British 7.214 mm in on 43.434 mm in on 12.01 mm in on for the .280/3011.633 mm in on for the .280 British - - - 64.516 mm in on Approx. 2500 ft/s m/s -1 on with 140 gr g on bullet 130 – 140 gr g on Types of bullets and colours of tips: AP (130 gr g or on) API (130 gr g or on): black Ball (130 - 140 gr g or on): plain (unmarked), green, pink, yellow, brown Observation (130 gr g or on) (6 gr g or on WP): red Tracer (130 gr g or on): white Note: Most cartridges have been observed with a purple annulus. Several experimental cartridge cases were made out of aluminium, in various colors including orange. Known manufacturers: Radway Green Fabrique Nationale Kynoch Performance The following comparisons are excerpts from a manual published by the "Small Arms Group Armament Design Establishment" from the Ministry of Supply:Reprinted by Dugelby, Thomas B.. EM-2 Concept & Design; a rifle ahead of its time, Collector Grade Publications, 1980, p. 247 .280 British.303 British Mark VII.30-06 SpringfieldBullet weight139 gr g or on174 gr g or on166 gr g or on Muzzle velocity 2500 ft/s m/s or on 2456 ft/s m/s or on 2770 ft/s m/s or onTimber penetration at 2000 yd m 0 2.9 in mm or on 2.4 in mm or on 1.6 in mm or onTimber penetration at 100 yd m 0 45 in cm 0 or on42 in cm 0 or on47 in cm 0 or onRange for penetration of airborne type steel helmet 1000 yd m 0 or on900 yd m 0 or on 1600 yd m 0 or onVertex height for 600 yd m 0 on range3.3 ft cm 0 or on3.1 ft cm 0 or on3 ft cm 0 or onRecoil energy per round7.4 ftlbf J or on with EM-2 rifle 11 ftlbf J or on with No. 4 Rifle 14.4 ftlbf J or on with M1 Garand Variants .270 British: Designed at the same time as the .280 British . It has a slightly smaller bullet diameter of .279 in mm on (versus .284 in mm or on for the .280) but a lighter bullet (93 to 100 gr g or on) with a greater muzzle velocity (2750 – 2800 ft/s m/s or on), longer case (1.8 in mm or on) and shorter overall length (2.45 in mm or on). Research was abandoned in 1948. 7 mm "Optimum": The original .280 British round with the bullet seated less deeply, giving an overall length of 2.6 in mm on. 7 mm "High Velocity": Longer case (1.95 in mm or on), with an overall length of 2.79 in mm on. Similar 140 gr g on bullet fired at 2750 ft/s m/s 0 on. 7 mm "Compromise" (aka T65/7 mm): Necked down T65 (7.62×51mm NATO) to 7 mm. Case length 2 in mm on, overall length 2.8 in mm on, similar 140 gr g on bullet fired at 2800 ft/s m/s -1 on. 7 mm "Second Optimum" (7×49mm): Designed by FN. Also known as the 7 mm "Medium" and the 7 mm "Liviano". FN would later sell FAL rifles chambered in this calibre along with a sizeable amount of ammunition to Venezuela. Longer case (1.935 in mm or on) with an overall length of 2.78 in mm on. 140 gr g on bullet fired at 2755 ft/s m/s 1 on. 6.25 mm (6.25×43mm): A British experimental cartridge designed during the early 1970s, using the .280/30 as a parent case, which was necked down to fit a smaller bullet. Comparable cartridges thumb|right|From left to right: 6mm SAW, 6.5mm Grendel, 6.8mm SPC, 7mm Benchrest Remington, .280/30 British, 7 mm-08, 7mm Second Optimum (Liviano), .276 Pedersen, .308×1.75", 7.62×51mm NATO. For .280 British: 7×44mm Danish, a Danish experimental cartridge fired by the Weibel M/1932 tested in 1936. 7mm BR Remington, a wildcat cartridge, at one time produced by Remington Arms) .308×1.5-inch Barnes and its necked-down 7 mm variant For 7 mm HV, 7 mm Compromise, 7 mm Second Optimum: 7mm-08 Remington See also EM-2 rifle BSA 28P rifle Taden gun 7 mm caliber - other 7 mm cartridges Table of handgun and rifle cartridges References Dugelby Thomas B. 1980 EM2: Concept and Design Collector Grade Publications Toronto Labbett P P.J.F Mead Technical Ammunition Guide: British 7 mm Ammunition Stevens R. Blake 1993 The FAL rifle Collector Grade Publications Toronto 0-88935-168-6 Popenker Maxim Anthony G. Willams 2005 Assault Rifle Crowood Press Ltd Ramsbury 1-86126-700-2 External links 7.62 NATO Contemporaries .280/ 7×43 mm Dimensions (Spanish) https://web.archive.org/web/20120705221125/http://www.municion.org/7x43/7x43.htm 2012-07-05 BSA 28P rifle A Comparison of United Kingdom and United States Ammunition for Lightweight Weapoens, Ninth Report of Project TS2-2015, Volume I, 5 June 1950, Development and Proof Services, Aberdeen Proving Grounds Maryland https://web.archive.org/web/20170510235605/http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/896859.pdf 10 May 2017 A Cartridge in Brief: .280 British, Jack Dutschke, ARES, 6 June 2018 Category:Pistol and rifle cartridges Category:Experimental cartridges Category:British firearm cartridges