Quotes about the 5.56

[landshark]

The facts from soldiers and ballistic experts:

" ...the troops want a round that will put the enemy down with only one hit… the current issue 5.56 round… is proving itself to be woefully inadequate as a man stopper…" ~from a declassified report from the troops involved in Operation Anaconda.

"We have a very stable, accurate round that can pierce body armor. However, the bullet has a regrettable tendency to remain stable, even after striking an adversary, with a resultantly small wound channel." ~Seth R. Nadel.

"Unfortunately, the over-stabilized 5.56 M855 round does not yaw readily, and may do so only after exiting the body, thus creating a .22 caliber through and through hole. Unless this hole is in near solid material, like the spleen or liver, or hits the heart or central nervous system, it does little damage." ~Dr. Martin Fackler, formerly of the Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory.

"The Marines shot what they were conditioned to fire, and the 5.56 round will not put a man to the ground with two shots to the chest." ~Marine Expeditionary Unit-Special Operations Command (MEUSOC)

"5.56 rounds were passing through the enemy without much effect" "I looked through my scope and observed a bad guy rolling around on the ground after taking at least six hits. These hits were to the torso, but they were not stopping the enemy even with a good chest shot." "My first 5.56 round seemed to have little or no effect and the second just slowed him down." ~U.S. Marines protecting the old Ba’ath party headquarters in downtown Mosol

[Some Guy]

cherry picking.
I can find you quotes about 7.62mm and .50 cal. failing to stop. What does that mean? I can also find AARs compiled from surveys and from individuals that express grat satisfaction with greentip.
..so is the problem with 5.56mm or is the problem that no one can adequately define the problem?

[Black Dots]

Botom line: you can't beat a well placed bullet. Although certain calibers do fit certain roles (obviously), it won't matter what you're shooting if your aim isn't all that great. As Some Guy mentioned, larger rounds can also fail to put somebody down right away. However, I bet a .223 to the chest would be more effective than a .308 to the arm.

[Burncycle]

"Unfortunately, the over-stabilized 5.56 M855 round does not yaw readily, and may do so only after exiting the body, thus creating a .22 caliber through and through hole. Unless this hole is in near solid material, like the spleen or liver, or hits the heart or central nervous system, it does little damage." ~Dr. Martin Fackler, formerly of the Army Wound Ballistics Laboratory.

The M855 through a 1/9 twist barrel isn't overstabilized. It will fragment just as violently as M193, albiet after penetrating deeper (which could pose a problem) as long as the round is traveling with sufficient velocity.

This is why I get a kick out of soldiers saying they want more M4's, then complain about poor terminal performance.

I think the type of ammo they issue should depend on the threat. If they are insurgents not wearing body armor, give soldiers M193. If they are a regular army that is well equipped (say a major country like... china?) give them M855. More expensive, but the different rounds are more suited to the threat they're built for.

As for the 5.56 round in general:
I think 6.8 SPC would be an improvement, and is in the "ideal" range for assault rifle cartridges IMO. Even 6.5 grendel is in that range, although it's more centered towards long range performance. But are these rounds ENOUGH of an improvement to justify replacing the 5.56? I dunno. The Steyr ACR claimed almost double performance (whatever that ment). It was like a laser; it traveled fast enough that you didn't have to worry about leading your target at most ranges. Other calibers, and other rifles, have come along sporting better performance than 5.56 and the M-16 in one way or another. None have been adopted so far.

I agree that shot placement is the most important thing.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

There is some good info in Major Plasters book Ultimate Sniper on the .223 round.

[yiorgo]

how about a heavier bullet maybe 77grain instead of 62 and also.....why not use hollow points...i think there is an agreement to only use FMJ ammo but DAMN were in war and if my ass is going to be on the line i want to know when my rifle goes bang the bad guy goes down....i think the 223 is a great round...shot placement is everything but tweeking it a little would solve all these issues even out of a 16in barrel (heavy bullet or Hollow points)

[Seraphim]

how about a heavier bullet maybe 77grain instead of 62 and also.....why not use hollow points...i think there is an agreement to only use FMJ ammo but DAMN were in war and if my ass is going to be on the line i want to know when my rifle goes bang the bad guy goes down....i think the 223 is a great round...shot placement is everything but tweeking it a little would solve all these issues even out of a 16in barrel (heavy bullet or Hollow points)

14.5inch bbl

[martinexsquaddie]

well there this thing called the hauge convention thats why you can't have hollow points :roll:
In the real world most people hit by a round go down and play little more part in the action. No round fired from a rifle is going to always stop someone.
don't really get these complaints with sa80a2 what it hit stops

[hank]

well there this thing called the hauge convention thats why you can't have hollow points :roll:
In the real world most people hit by a round go down and play little more part in the action. No round fired from a rifle is going to always stop someone.
don't really get these complaints with sa80a2 what it hit stops

rules, schmules ;)

hank

[mocking_loudly_died]

What is this obsession with 7.62mm and .45.

I never read about the Brits moaning about having to use 5.56mm and 9mm weapons. Is this an American complex?
The fact is if you get hit by any miltary round - it will f*ck you up.

Some people write as though getting shot by an M16 is no big deal and the human body can take a few assualt rifle rounds and function perfectly.

[Midav]

What is this obsession with 7.62mm and .45.

I never read about the Brits moaning about having to use 5.56mm and 9mm weapons. Is this an American complex?
The fact is if you get hit by any miltary round - it will f*ck you up.

Some people write as though getting shot by an M16 is no big deal and the human body can take a few assualt rifle rounds and function perfectly.

Depends on whom you are fighting and under what condition.

I can't speak for the military, but I can for law enforcement. The reason why police here in the US are going with a .45 round, is because of certain drugs people are using. Increased strength, oblivious sensations to pain and the like is forcing the police to go with a more bigger round than a 9mm.

It's happened on numerous occasions that where it took several well placed 9mm rounds to knock someone down on a certain drug, it only took one, perhaps two rounds of a .45.

However, I do agree that the 5.56mm round should be adequate under normal conditions. Just have to look at the DC sniper shootings to see how effective the round can be... :|

[Tony Williams]

However, I do agree that the 5.56mm round should be adequate under normal conditions. Just have to look at the DC sniper shootings to see how effective the round can be... :|

Fortunately I've no personal experience of being shot, but from all I've read there's a world of difference between taking a bullet when you're relaxed and not expecting trouble, and taking one when you're in combat mode, tanked up to the gills with adrenaline.

No-one has ever argued that the 5.56mm won't kill someone - a .22LR will do that. The problem is, will it put them out of the fight quickly enough? SOCOM is obviously concerned about the effectiveness of the 5.56mm, otherwise they wouldn't have sponsored development of the 6.8x43 Rem SPC.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[rob]

the 6.8 was developed with the help and input of soldiers from socom, but i have seen anything about socom putting out requirments for such a round.

but then again i have not seen a lot of things.

[yiorgo]

HAUGE Convention?? big friggin deal your gonna tell me if im going out on the line and i KNOW hollow points are going to put them down better than FMJ round that i wont have a mag or 2 on me.....i mean damn when your in battle you think a Ref steps out to check who got shot and by what??lol.....its very simple, hollow points work....we use against scum bag bad guys....bad guys die case closed, let the other countries do what ever the hell they want.......also if were going to talk about RULES...im pretty sure that only certain countries are allowed to have Nukes, but i see the chinease, Iran will be there soon, India, Israel all have them??? so we can allow other countries to build nuclear plants but we CANT USE HOLLOW POINTS????? LOL

[landshark]

Why is it that so many of you don't like bigger bullets like the 7.62? I would think that in combat you would want to upgrade your bullet as fast as you could if there was any doubt about it's performance. Also why is it that you people are scared of using a 7.62? Does it have too much recoil for you? If you’re that much of a pussy you should not be in a combat zone in the first place. Finally, yes any bullet can kill first shot if you have excellent shot placement. Like sniping. The fact of the matter is that you don't snipe with a M16/M4 in combat. You are going to fast. :slap:

[Howitz]

The point being made is that it would be stupid to completely rearm the Us military with 7.62 weapons when the current weapon system is still very effective. Even if it does lack the stopping power of a larger round. So take your 7.62 cartridge, bend over, and shove it up your ass. Stop trying to be cool, you self procalimed weapons expert.


(my first flame! p-) )

[Seraphim]

HAUGE Convention?? big friggin deal your gonna tell me if im going out on the line and i KNOW hollow points are going to put them down better than FMJ round that i wont have a mag or 2 on me.....i mean damn when your in battle you think a Ref steps out to check who got shot and by what??lol.....its very simple, hollow points work....we use against scum bag bad guys....bad guys die case closed, let the other countries do what ever the hell they want.......also if were going to talk about RULES...im pretty sure that only certain countries are allowed to have Nukes, but i see the chinease, Iran will be there soon, India, Israel all have them??? so we can allow other countries to build nuclear plants but we CANT USE HOLLOW POINTS????? LOL

You go ****ing try that. Welcome to court marshall 101.

[landshark]

The point being made is that it would be stupid to completely rearm the Us military with 7.62 weapons when the current weapon system is still very effective. Even if it does lack the stopping power of a larger round. So take your 7.62 cartridge, bend over, and shove it up your ass. Stop trying to be cool, you self procalimed weapons expert.


(my first flame! p-) )

Guess what retard? The U.S. military IS COMPLETELY REARMING! It's time to acknowledge the problematic 5.56 and get at least a 6.8 SPC. Have fun trying to sound bad ass, but work on being realistic first.

[Seraphim]

Like sniping. The fact of the matter is that you don't snipe with a M16/M4 in combat. You are going to fast. :slap:

Ever heard of a SPR?

[landshark]

Like sniping. The fact of the matter is that you don't snipe with a M16/M4 in combat. You are going to fast. :slap:

Ever heard of a SPR?

Yes I have, but in this context it is irrelevant.

[Some Guy]

Also why is it that you people are scared of using a 7.62? Does it have too much recoil for you? If you?re that much of a pussy you should not be in a combat zone in the first place.

Amazing that this quote came from a guy(?) who would later say


Have fun trying to sound bad ass, but work on being realistic first.

Listen Hulkster.. Its sexy to talk about big bullets..penetration.. spewing fragments 7.62mm etc.. etc.. It isn't so sexy to talk about much slower follow-up shots, decreased accuracy thanks to "recoil anticipation", guns riding on slings cuz the 18 year old attached is too smoked to keep his 12 pound rifle in a ready position, M14 barrels smacking into doorways and car doors (or guys going blind/deaf from firing 7.62 from a short barrel- your choice), the M203 now becoming a crew served weapon because attached to your 7.62mm, the whole thing now weighs as much as a LMG.. What else have I missed?

Only Chairborne Rangers push for a switch to 7.62mm

6.8mm? I'm sure some will buy it but I'm willing to put $100 on the table in a bet that Remington can't sell 1,000 rifles/uppers to .Gov in the next 5 years.

Also- To Tony Williams- SOCOM did not sponsor development of the 6.8mm. Ask the guys who developed the round and they'll tell you the same.

[yiorgo]

LOL court marshal......LOL!! thats some funny ****, here we got assholes cutting peoples Fu***** heads off and your worried about using Hollow point bullets in Battle.....you see it everyday that these **** heads over there dont give a damn for life by executing innocent people and you want to sit and talk about legalities rofl HAHAHAh

[landshark]

Slower follow-up shots If you even need to make a follow-up shot after drilling someone with a 7.62mm, (common for the 5.56; rarely for the 7.62) the delay is so small it’s irrelevant. If you disagree then show me some credible numbers. The fact is you can fire a 7.62 quickly and accurately.
decreased accuracy thanks to "recoil anticipation" Where did you get that from? Please give some credible backing for your weak ideas. Can you quote me saying that the M14 should be issued again as a standard rifle? No? Then don’t put words in my mouth. Finally, do some research. You will find that HK is making the XM8 capable of caliber changes to 6.8 SPC, making you argument about Remington uppers also weak.

[Some Guy]

Slower follow-up shots If you even need to make a follow-up shot after drilling someone with a 7.62mm, (common for the 5.56; rarely for the 7.62) the delay is so small it?s irrelevant.
Sorry Snake-Eyes- I guess I just miss more often than you. My suggestion- take a 9mm, 5.56, and 7.62 in anything to a range and try multiple targets- two shots each as fast as you can- Trust me- you'll start to look more lovingly at 9mm, not the 7.62. 5.56 is a compromise we can work with.


decreased accuracy thanks to "recoil anticipation" Where did you get that from? Please give some credible backing for your weak ideas.
I got that one from going to a rifle range. You may not be familiar with that one. How can I put this so you'd understand? Its like Counter-Strike but the guns are heavier.

Can you quote me saying that the M14 should be issued again as a standard rifle? No? Then don?t put words in my mouth.
Uh Ok.. Can you "quote me quoting you" on that? I don't even see the words "standard rifle" in my post.

Finally, do some research. You will find that HK is making the XM8 capable of caliber changes to 6.8 SPC, making you argument about Remington uppers also weak.
Since the designers of the 6.8mm made it able to retrofit to any 5.56mm weapon, your statement is like saying Eugene Stoner made his ar-15 capable of caliber changes to 6.8mm.. What exactly did H&K have to do to make the XM8 "capable" of changing to 6.8?

Let me re-phrase.. $100 says no one sells Uncle Sam 1,000 6.8mm uppers/rifles made by anyone in the next 5 years ..

[maw]

somebody correct me if i'm wrong but i belive the initiative for 6.8 come out of 5th group?

spoke to a bud at a company responsible for the testing of the 6.8 and they said that the barret uppers were still ****e to jamming. sure this same company now has an upper of its own to sell that competes with the barret, but it's worth mentioning especially when we're talking about adoption timeframes for the big army.

[Some Guy]

somebody correct me if i'm wrong but i belive the initiative for 6.8 come out of 5th group?

Thats my understanding - the development of the round was undertaken by individuals from 5th group plus others. (but not at the behest of SOCOM per se)

[Seraphim]

LOL court marshal......LOL!! thats some funny ****, here we got assholes cutting peoples Fu***** heads off and your worried about using Hollow point bullets in Battle.....you see it everyday that these **** heads over there dont give a damn for life by executing innocent people and you want to sit and talk about legalities rofl HAHAHAh

Obviously your ten years old and have no clue how things work.

[maw]

negative on that. apples to apples, same length barrels, no can - follow up shots with 5.56 are hands down faster over 7.62. felt recoil with 7.62 is about double that of a .223 (and that's with a heavier gun!). don't take my word for it. take an ar10 an ar15 and a pact timer out to the range some time. a lot of the three gun ranger matches now make shooters firing 5.56 fire double taps into the target while 7.62 shooters only have to make one hole. there's one here in north carolina next month i might go to and if they space the targets apart i'll still use an ar.
just for ****s 'n' giggles and to make things worse, shorten the barrel of your 7.62 down to say 14.5" and watch what happens, your shoulder will be sore, your night vision will be gone and your ears will be ringing.



Slower follow-up shots If you even need to make a follow-up shot after drilling someone with a 7.62mm, (common for the 5.56; rarely for the 7.62) the delay is so small it’s irrelevant. If you disagree then show me some credible numbers. The fact is you can fire a 7.62 quickly and accurately.

[Seraphim]

negative on that. apples to apples, same length barrels, no can - follow up shots with 5.56 are hands down faster over 7.62. felt recoil with 7.62 is about double that of a .223 (and that's with a heavier gun!). don't take my word for it. take an ar10 an ar15 and a pact timer out to the range some time. a lot of the three gun ranger matches now make shooters firing 5.56 fire double taps into the target while 7.62 shooters only have to make one hole. there's one here in north carolina next month i might go to and if they space the targets apart i'll still use an ar.
just for ****s 'n' giggles and to make things worse, shorten the barrel of your 7.62 down to say 14.5" and watch what happens, your shoulder will be sore, your night vision will be gone and your ears will be ringing.



Slower follow-up shots If you even need to make a follow-up shot after drilling someone with a 7.62mm, (common for the 5.56; rarely for the 7.62) the delay is so small it’s irrelevant. If you disagree then show me some credible numbers. The fact is you can fire a 7.62 quickly and accurately.

The recoil is more than double on a 7.62 nato compared to the 5.56

[maw]

those guys are especially serious about their shooting.



somebody correct me if i'm wrong but i belive the initiative for 6.8 come out of 5th group?

Thats my understanding - the development of the round was undertaken by individuals from 5th group plus others. (but not at the behest of SOCOM per se)

[Tony Williams]

The recoil is more than double on a 7.62 nato compared to the 5.56

The recoil energy is actually four times as great, in guns of the same weight. It would be double if the 7.62mm rifle weighed twice as much as the 5.56mm weapon.

Tony Williams

[Tony Williams]

somebody correct me if i'm wrong but i belive the initiative for 6.8 come out of 5th group?

Thats my understanding - the development of the round was undertaken by individuals from 5th group plus others. (but not at the behest of SOCOM per se)

Who paid for the development?

Tony Williams

[GazB]

However, I bet a .223 to the chest would be more effective than a .308 to the arm.

And a Drawing Pin through the brain is much more effective than a 150Kt Tactical nuke that lands 500 miles away... is that really the point.

These examples... if they are representative of what is happening in the field are of chest hits and in some cases multiple chest hits that are not stopping the target.

One solution is the step back to 30 cal rounds... but they were dropped for several very good reasons... and a few bad ones.

The real problem is why aren't the rounds currently being used effective and what can be done right now to solve the problem. Longer term plans can also be prepared but you really want a very fast solution if the problem is as serious as is suggested.


This is why I get a kick out of soldiers saying they want more M4's, then complain about poor terminal performance.

Ask a soldier what he wants and he will probably tell you he wants the most accurate, most long range, largest calibre most powerful weapon ever made or fired, that cleans itself and zeroes itself, and will fit in a matchbox and will kill anything and penetrate any armour and never run out of ammo or break... even if you use it to open beer bottles or hammer in nails.

(Ask a designer what the best Assault Rifle is and he or she will build the best BB gun in the world... such low recoil a child could be trained to use it... of course it isn't powerful enough to kill at any range, but it is an exceptional design otherwise, light, compact, doens't cost much to make, ammo is light and cheap, and ther will be no flinching when you train soldiers to fire this... with an expensive scope it will get 100% hits on the range... just don't take it away from the range.)

[gilgoul]

I think the type of ammo they issue should depend on the threat. If they are insurgents not wearing body armor, give soldiers M193. If they are a regular army that is well equipped (say a major country like... china?) give them M855. More expensive, but the different rounds are more suited to the threat they're built for.

If you want to do such a thing, you`ll have also to issue two weapons or a set of two different barrels for standart weapon, since the m193 goes 7 twist lwft and the ss109 (M855, green tip in NATO code) goes 9 right.
The profile and weight of the two bullets are cmpletely diferent, and try to fire m193 in ss109 designated weapon, it will work, but with really poor performances in terms of precision.
The problem could be the 5.56 itself, just like the russians don`t seem to be over satisfied with their supersonic 5.45. Those two ammos might be pretty nasty in term of imprevisibility, but are known to have little stoping power, and the great combat acuracy is a myth, since stress and confusion are bringing a serious drop in shooting capacities.
If a solution was to be found it would be more in the direction of pre fragmented bullets, or of JHP, those being forbidden for military use by the geneva convention.
Otherwise, a "on the ground" solution, you just killed your local insurgent, take his AK, you`ll have the pleasure to enjoy the stopping power of the good old 7.62 by 39

[gilgoul]

edit

[Some Guy]

somebody correct me if i'm wrong but i belive the initiative for 6.8 come out of 5th group?

Thats my understanding - the development of the round was undertaken by individuals from 5th group plus others. (but not at the behest of SOCOM per se)

Who paid for the development?

Tony Williams

I think this round may be less "developed" than you realize p-)
My understanding is that it was developed in much the same way many other 'wildcat' cartridges were developed- by a couple guys with reloading/reaming equipment and a _lot_ of gunsmithing/reloading experience (e.g. lead designer is in the Army Marksman Unit)- Its an endeavour that requires persistance and motivation but not millions of dollars. Someone can correct me, but most wildcat cartridges aren't made by rich companies- more like a guy in his garage.

I think everyone here understands the 6.8 is a no-go as far as general issue- After taking two countries in 3 years with 5.56mm and few casualties, there isn't going to be a cry out for better ammunition for the troops.. (and any problems we're having in Iraq now aren't because of small bullets). I think there is a potential need for the 6.8- Specifically, units that expect to engage a numerically superior force in very close quarters fighting- situations where you have to turn your back on someone just shot because there are multiple targets still standing and you need to keep up momentum because your unit is outnumbered... You can't have the just shot tango try to stand and shoot you in the back with his last few moments- anecdotes like this spurred the development of 6.8..

The Problem is twofold: One, The number of units that can expect to do that kind of fighting _frequently_ is very very small- hence my remark about 1,000 uppers in five years..
Two, I think that, in practice 6.8 won't really make a night and day difference in incidents like that described above- I'm sure it is an improvement but eventually someone shot by 6.8 will pop up again and people will wonder how much of improvement it really is.. i.e. The 'need' for 6.8 is driven by anecdotes, not hard numbers, so anecdotes about it not being a death ray will hit especially hard...

[One_A]

...The M855 through a 1/9 twist barrel isn't overstabilized...

1/7

[One_A]

Like sniping. The fact of the matter is that you don't snipe with a M16/M4 in combat. You are going to fast. :slap:

Ever heard of a SPR?

It's called the Mk12.

SPR = Special Pupose Reciever...a few pieces of metal...not a weapon.

[Chris1]

Why is it that so many of you don't like bigger bullets like the 7.62? I would think that in combat you would want to upgrade your bullet as fast as you could if there was any doubt about it's performance. Also why is it that you people are scared of using a 7.62? Does it have too much recoil for you? If you’re that much of a pussy you should not be in a combat zone in the first place. Finally, yes any bullet can kill first shot if you have excellent shot placement. Like sniping. The fact of the matter is that you don't snipe with a M16/M4 in combat. You are going to fast. :slap:
Strong words
Since your thread is themed "Quotes from soldiers" i would assume you are in fact, not, otherwise your posts would in fact be a quote from a soldier no?

Why don't we just line out and start blatting at each other with .50 cals eh?
1) "Follow up shots"
Not necessary?
Ok, on a non-moving fig.11 maybe, but unfortunately in reality people tend not to stand still while mother ****ers are shooting at them.

2) Too much of a pussy for the recoil?
hard words for a hard man?
Ever tried carrying 300 rounds 7.62?
Ever tried carrying 300 rounds 5.56?
Ever tried doing it uphill in a respirator?

3)Ever been in a "combat zone" yerself sparky?
I haven't.
Just carried a 5.56 rifle around for a few years and had things thrown at me most of the time...

More research is definately in order and is being done every day
However the requirements for a new cartridge consist of more than "smack that fecker down in one shot"
Going back to 7.62 would be a step far backwards, in some areas SS109 out-performs 7.62 NATO.
If going to 6.8 is a step forwards
Its about time
If its another attempt to go back to individual musketry over effective use in realistic situations
Back to the bin please!

[landshark]

Chris1 you have some valid points, but I would like to respectful counter some of your points.

1) Follow-up shots.
Yes you might have to make follow-up shots if your target is moving. Simply make a follow-up shot. You cannot effectively double tap with a 7.62 but you can make follow-up shots if necessary.

2) Yes you are absolutely right, one of the downsides of the 7.62 is that it’s much heavier than 5.56.

3) If the 7.62 is wanted it should be a ready option. (And many units are requesting it.) The Armed Forces should and are most likely switching to 6.8 SPC due to the over-all dissatisfaction with 5.56 from soldiers in the field. (Although there are plenty of civilians who defend it, ultimately the Armed Forces don’t give a sh*t if civilians like their ARs or not.)

Thanks for actually contributing to the debate. :)

[Stl. boy]

You all have seen this probably, but i think this is the way to go...may need some tweaks to training and to the whole primer indentation seen to avoid accidental discharge. But from what i see, this could take care of the lethality problems.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/

[Tony Williams]

I've read a lot of critical comment about these 'blended metal' bullets on other boards (especially ar15.com).

When the 5.56mm first came out and was on trial in Vietnam, the same sort of anedotes were told about people getting their heads or arms blown off by it etc.

All sorts of trick bullets for rifles and pistols have come and gone. They can sometimes perform well in specific situations but none of them has so far proved better overall.

And then there's the legal issues about the military use of such bullets...

Tony Williams

[landshark]

Thanks for the link Stl. boy. :)

[Mongrel]

Chairborne Rangers
Damn that was good! rofl

Besides if yah can't shoot properly then it doesn't matter what size the bullets are. ;)

Cheers!
M.

[Royal]

I never read about the Brits moaning about having to use 5.56mm and 9mm weapons. Is this an American complex?

We complained long and hard when we lost the L1A1, up 'till then (at least in the province) we'd had a balance; M16's and L1A1's together. Yes, humping 7.62 is a pain (as Chris rightly points out) and on balance I've been converted by being in places where 5.56 ran low where 7.62 would have run out.1) Follow-up shots.


The fact of the matter is that you don't snipe with a M16/M4 in combat. You are going to fast.

As you may be surprised to discover if you ever 'see the elephant', most time in combat is spent trying to work out where the f**k the enemy is, so sniping/sharpshooting is most certainly in.


Yes you might have to make follow-up shots if your target is moving. Simply make a follow-up shot. You cannot effectively double tap with a 7.62 but you can make follow-up shots if necessary.

I'd dispute that. I could double tap with an L1A1 (accurately to 100m+, less so further out). The only thing (other than a bolt action) that I couldn't double tap with was a Glock 17.

[100_Percent_HOOAH]

You all have seen this probably, but i think this is the way to go...may need some tweaks to training and to the whole primer indentation seen to avoid accidental discharge. But from what i see, this could take care of the lethality problems.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/bullets/

Good article. I think instead or replacing the weapon themselves, looking into this blended metal ammo may be the way to go. The military should at least do some testing on it and see what they come up with.