Thanks very much for that John, very interesting.
One question occurs though: if the round is going to be that effective at penetrating body armour, will Western countries actually want to develop this and sell it widely?
there seemed to be what I thought was a distinctly dodgy undercurrent of favouring accurate mag-fed automatics over proper belt-fed guns. Some people in the defence procurement system seem determined to show that the LSW (a routine procurement) is a better weapon than the Minimi (procured as a UOR), hence a graph showing “proportion of effective rounds fired” rather than effective rounds per unit time.
I think Jim Storr makes the case for the LSW here https://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Real_Role_of_Small_Arms_RDS_Summer_09.pdf ,whilst the basis of the refutation and preference for an MG34-derivative LMG comes from the weapon push/weapon pull/effects of cohesion on suppression ideas outlined in Brains and Bullets. Iwonder if some of the preference for the LSW-type solution with a small number of highly accurate suppressive rounds might be partly because it makes the solution to the combat-load problem a bit easier, whereas it is hard to haul loads of ammunition whilst wearing the heavier sets of modern body armour.