U.S. Army Says 5.56mm Is Adequate

[KevinB]

Dont bring a pistol round to a gunfight... 9mm ball is not a good choice - even out of a SubGun

Sorry - PBA = Personal Body Armour

There are WAY too many folk (contractors) in Iraq and Afghan enjoying their OP Nimrod fantasies about being SAS with MP-5's

5.56mm in the C77/SS109/M855 is not a bad round -- it works -- but sometimes not as well as it could.  Mk262 is both a good long and short range round.

I think standardizing the C8SFW/FTHB would remove any rifle/subgun issues -- the 16" barrel still put out excellent accuracy (past what troops can use it for) to 500m.
It fragments C77 to 90m as opposed to the 20" barreled C7 series at 140m
With mk262 you get 160m frag out of a C8SFW.

If your at the School you may know RobJ (he had some ammo I gave him for others...)  It won't pass a JAG review but its a nice CQB round

 

[vonGarvin]

Dont bring a pistol round to a gunfight... 9mm ball is not a good choice - even out of a SubGun

Reminds me of the quote of "don't bring a knife to a gun fight"

Sorry - PBA = Personal Body Armour

No probs.  Thanks.

There are WAY too many folk (contractors) in Iraq and Afghan enjoying their OP Nimrod fantasies about being SAS with MP-5's

Thanks.  Anyway, as I said, I was just throwing it out there is all.

5.56mm in the C77/SS109/M855 is not a bad round -- it works -- but sometimes not as well as it could.  Mk262 is both a good long and short range round.
I think standardizing the C8SFW/FTHB would remove any rifle/subgun issues -- the 16" barrel still put out excellent accuracy (past what troops can use it for) to 500m.
It fragments C77 to 90m as opposed to the 20" barreled C7 series at 140m
With mk262 you get 160m frag out of a C8SFW.
If your at the School you may know RobJ (he had some ammo I gave him for others...)  It won't pass a JAG review but its a nice CQB round

Sounds like the mk 262 may then be the trick.  Also, as I think I've mentioned elsewhere, the tools are necessary (of course), but the skills to use those tools effectively are also necessary.  Are there training (shooter) programmes avail that could assist in training a young rifleman (or old crusty guy like me) in the event that they end up in an A-Stan-type place?

 

[HItorMiss]

VG PM inbound on a place I hear is pretty good for tac shooting, but then again it's in Pet.

 

[KevinB]

JTF has been farming out the GunFighter program.

The guys who have taken the UOIC should be able to run it at the home units if your unit is bashful about phoning Ottawa.

MarkC and the guys from 3VP put on a good one via some of the Trout Farms plank owners.

 

[HItorMiss]

Yeah in term of the Urban Op's Instructors Course, those that came back from it really added a depth of knowledge to my skills personally. I highly recommend some of the shooting instruction they passed on.

 

[paracowboy]

I think standardizing the C8SFW/FTHB would remove any rifle/subgun issues -- the 16" barrel still put out excellent accuracy (past what troops can use it for) to 500m.
It fragments C77 to 90m as opposed to the 20" barreled C7 series at 140m
With mk262 you get 160m frag out of a C8SFW.

I agree completely.

Just a sidenote on CQB. We're focussing entirely on firearms and the little things that come out of them on this thread, to the exlusion of other factors. For instance the usefulness of a rifle cartridges at extreme close range. We're zeroing in on the firearm so much, that we're forgetting the true weapons system is the soldier carrying it.

If he's that close, within 21 feet or 7 meters, then do what the Infantryman is supposed to: close with and destroy the sumbitch. Charge the bastard and snap his little pencil neck. Beat him to death with the rifle in your hands. Take his AK away and shove it down his throat, use the foresight to stir his intestines around a bit. Pick Hadji up, and snap his spine over your knee.

Just a reminder that the bullet, and the rifle, while important aspects of fighting, are not the only ones.

 

[vonGarvin]

I agree completely.

Just a sidenote on CQB. We're focussing entirely on firearms and the little things that come out of them on this thread, to the exlusion of other factors. For instance the usefulness of a rifle cartridges at extreme close range. We're zeroing in on the firearm so much, that we're forgetting the true weapons system is the soldier carrying it.

If he's that close, within 21 feet or 7 meters, then do what the Infantryman is supposed to: close with and destroy the sumbitch. Charge the ******* and snap his little pencil neck. Beat him to death with the rifle in your hands. Take his AK away and shove it down his throat, use the foresight to stir his intestines around a bit. Pick Hadji up, and snap his spine over your knee.

Just a reminder that the bullet, and the rifle, while important aspects of fighting, are not the only ones.

Very well put.  Bayonets anyone?  (sorry, being a bit sarcastic here), but in all honesty, VERY good post.

 

[paracowboy]

thanks vG.

And for those who say you won't charge a man that's firing at you, I remind you: he's NOT firing AT you. He's firing in your GENERAL DIRECTION. I can guaran-goddamn-tee you that, whether it’s Mr. Dirka Jihadi, Esquire; an African Baby-soldier; or an O.G. rollin’ outta Compton, he ain’t got the butt of his AK firmly in his shoulder with a  proper cheek-weld, and sight alignment. He’s doing the Beirut Unload. He’s got Comrade Kalashnikov’s contribution to the Arts and Sciences held loosely at waist height, set on rock ’n’ roll, in the Hollywood-approved spray and pray position, and he hasn’t devoted the hundreds of hours it takes to hit anything like that.

You chargin' his underfed, doped-up, untrained and cowardly self is going to further rattle already poor nerves, and what was lousy marksmanship, is now a bullet-hose, with rounds going into the dirt and the sky as much as towards you. You can cover 21 feet damned fast. Especially when motivated by the urge to kill your enemy before he does the same to you.

Anyway, back to guns 'n' stuff.

 

[Kirkhill]

If he's that close, within 21 feet or 7 meters, then do what the Infantryman is supposed to: close with and destroy the sumbitch. Charge the ******* and snap his little pencil neck. Beat him to death with the rifle in your hands. Take his AK away and shove it down his throat, use the foresight to stir his intestines around a bit. Pick Hadji up, and snap his spine over your knee.

Or, I suppose, you could engage the individual opposite with a bayonet.....if you had one.  By the way, how long does it take to re-zero all of those iron sights, reflex sights, day/night sights, "death dots", visible lights, IR lights, and grenade launchers after a one-on-one discussion?

And yes, I am being snarky.

Maybe the idea is not to try and create one weapon that is ideal under all circumstances.  Maybe the idea is to create weapons to suit a variety of circumstances and have people master that variety.

Fighting in open areas, fighting in close confines, fighting isolated individuals, fighting massed bodies, controlling crowds - all, it seems to me, require different weapons, not necessarily different soldiers.  In some instances machine guns and long range snipers are the order of the day, in other cases rifles, shotguns, SMGs, or possibly even bayonets, swords, half-pikes or telescopic "lathis" might be more appropriate.  Is it unreasonable to supply troops with an arsenal of options that they can select according to circumstances?

And a final thought - infanteers are taught that the rifle is their personal weapon while gunners are taught that the bullet is their weapon.  The gun is just a method of delivering the weapon.

With the 5.56 being able to deliver blanks, simunitions, frangibles, low velocity, high velocity, ball, AP, "disintegrating" rounds like this Mk262 and presumably marker rounds like paintballs couldn't some thought be given to having infanteers see their rifles the same way the gunners see their guns?   Issue the rifle with a wide range of rounds available, from Nonlethal to CQB to Long Range and issue a separate club/pointy stick to deal with those intimate discussions.  

And I understand the Conventions issue on disintegrating rounds (dum-dum, defenders etc).  But if the police can legally justify the use of the rounds on the basis of reduced collateral damage (less likely to harm the innocent standing behind the target) surely a similar case could be made in the current circumstances where you are looking at high intensity constabulary duties?  

The argument against the dum-dum was a moral one, about cleanly killing/wounding an honourable foe and not inflicting undue suffering, (fairly bizarre thought on a battlefield dominated by artillery).  The counter is another moral argument about killing an individual that has knowingly accepted the risk associated with taking up arms, balanced against the risk of killing bystanders.  You only want your target to die.

Edit: VG got his comment in as I was writing.  ......something about thinking alike .....seldom differing, Oh well  ;D

 

[paracowboy]

Or, I suppose, you could engage the individual opposite with a bayonet.....if you had one.  By the way, how long does it take to re-zero all of those iron sights, reflex sights, day/night sights, "death dots", visible lights, IR lights, and grenade launchers after a one-on-one discussion?

who gives a shit? If I'm down to my bayonet, chances are it's too tight for anything else, and either I stick the fucker, or I die. I can re-zero later.

Maybe the idea is not to try and create one weapon that is ideal under all circumstances.  Maybe the idea is to create weapons to suit a variety of circumstances and have people master that variety.

you mean like service rifle, shotgun, light machine gun, medium machine gun, bayonet, pistol, riot baton, fist, heavy SRAAW, Medium SRAAW, fragmentation grenade, smoke grenade, OC spray can, tear gas canister, and improvised weapons?

And a final thought - infanteers are taught that the rifle is their personal weapon

no, we are tuaght that WE are are our personal weapon, and that we have a number of options available to us.

With the 5.56 being able to deliver blanks, simunitions, frangibles, low velocity, high velocity, ball, AP, "disintegrating" rounds like this Mk262 and presumably marker rounds like paintballs couldn't some thought be given to having infanteers see their rifles the same way the gunners see their guns? Issue the rifle with a wide range of rounds available, from Nonlethal to CQB to Long Range and issue a separate club/pointy stick to deal with those intimate discussions.

  and, under fire, when li'l Johnny is grabbing for the wrong magazine? "Sorry, Mrs. Bloggins, but he died because he inserted a simmunition magazine into his rifle instead of jacketed hollowpoint." Not to mention that we have a POS Tac-Vest that can't carry enough of the right kit now. And we have an excellent bayonet now, for intimate encounters of the lethal variety, and we get issued blunt objects for situations requiring the delicate touch.

And I understand the Conventions issue on disintegrating rounds (dum-dum, defenders etc).  But if the police can legally justify the use of the rounds on the basis of reduced collateral damage (less likely to harm the innocent standing behind the target) surely a similar case could be made in the current circumstances where you are looking at high intensity constabulary duties?

the Conventions are meaningless if we have a Gov't with the stones.

The argument against the dum-dum was a moral one, about cleanly killing/wounding an honourable foe and not inflicting undue suffering, (fairly bizarre thought on a battlefield dominated by artillery).

And they were based on faulty understanding of hollowpoints, and ballistics in general.

I love this thread.

 

[Kirkhill]

Jings, you're feeling feisty this morning paracowboy. 

1. who gives a crap.....etc.  True enough, do you have room for a bayonet? 
2. you mean like..... Just like that, so why the concern/focus on the 5.56?
3. ....WE are our personal weapon... Great stuff.  It wasn't always thus.
4. ....under fire.....Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance ....Don't necessarily want to get caught in open country with only a shotgun and fists, do you?
5. ...Govt and stones..... Agreed. 
6.  ....faulty ....ballistics ..... Probably.  Science evolves.  Laws evolve too.

Ref 5 and 6.  Observations on hollow-points, dum-dums, etc offered to help stoneless lawyers find arguments to help Government in quest to make paracowboy a more effective death-tech.  ;D

Cheers.

PS ref arsenal of rounds vs arsenal of weapons - You would rather carry a separate 5 kg chunk of metal to launch every different 25 gram round so as to prevent confusion?  Or would you rather carry one 5 kg chunk of metal with 200 distinct 25 gm rounds that would enable you to engage the same variety of targets? 

10 kg of load - option A - two weapons with two rounds total or option B - one weapon with 202 rounds total. 

 

[HItorMiss]

Kirkill

I can honestly say I agree with Para, when the brown stuff hits the fan I don't want to be trying to remember where I put my mags of 5.56 ball, nor honestly will I have the time to analyze the situation enough to think Hmmm I should use my hollow points now cause my target is getting to be 25m away.

I see your point but it's juts not feasible not one little bit. Heck in all honesty you'll be lucky on a mag change if 1 in 10 of your soldiers doesn't waste precious seconds banging the side of his rifle trying to hit that bolt catch (c.ocking handle, c.ocking handle, c.ocking handle I can't stress that enough), now your asking him to to figure out which mag went in which holder all while under fire, not doable sorry I can't see it happening.

Go with a better 5.56mm round forget trying to change the load out or the weapons systems.

 

[paracowboy]

Jings, you're feeling feisty this morning paracowboy. 

we're talkin' about something I have devoted years of study to, and enjoy immensely. Kicking the ass of men who deserve it. I got all kinds of time for this!

1. yes. The bayonet rides on the lug. My bayonet lug is unimpeded. I put my laser sight on the weaver rail on top of the upper receiver, and use a peep-hole sight. Iron sights are more than sufficient for any ranges that I would employ a laser sight for. I dislike optical sights anyway. One jump, one bump, they lose their zero. Or they break. Iron sights don't. And, unlike the majority of our troops today, I know how to shoot. Whenever posible, I replace iron sights with an EOTech holosight. And all ELCANS should be replaced with EOTechs.

2. because it is still the primary tool carried by the majority of soldiers. And most of them are not bayonets, but CS/CSS. And, if there is a better round, we should get it. Not every problem needs a hammer, but if you have a good enough hammer, you can do a lot more with it.

4. which is why carry more than a shotgun and our fists. We have a CQ and RQMS with all kinds of tools. We look at where we're going, and what we're doing, and plan accordingly. But, if you give Johnny too many options ON HIS PERSON, he's gonna screw up under stress. Far better to limit his options to those he's most likely to need. He's gonna need a shotgun, give him a shotgun, and team him up with a man carrying a C7.

Ref 5 and 6.  Observations on hollow-points, dum-dums, etc offered to help stoneless lawyers find arguments to help Government in quest to make paracowboy a more effective death-tech.

 there are entire reams of paperwork on this, and it would exceed Mike's bandwidth. In short, hollowpoints are better.

PS ref arsenal of rounds vs arsenal of weapons - You would rather carry a separate 5 kg chunk of metal to launch every different 25 gram round so as to prevent confusion?

 I would rather carry a rifle/carbine, with an appropriate cartridge; a pistol; a knife/bayonet, and some grenades. In addition, I want some friends along with a suitable mixture of rifles/carbines, shotguns, pistols, grenade launchers, and machineguns. As well as sharp stuff, and exploding stuff. A small toolbox from which to pull the right tool. If we're going into a situation where we don't need to go lethal, we can always downgrade to fists and buttstrokes.

If we know, before departing that we need non-lethal, and don NOT want to escalate, we stop by CQ, drop off the deadly shit, and pick up sticks and sprays.

Or would you rather carry one 5 kg chunk of metal with 200 distinct 25 gm rounds that would enable you to engage the same variety of targets?

Sure. Give me a phaser gun I can set on "stun" or "vaporize". Until then, I'll settle for a service rifle I can rely on, and bitch until I get the best round out there for it. And bitch for a better gun. And continue to master the one I have.

10 kg of load - option A - two weapons with two rounds total or option B - one weapon with 202 rounds total.

 there is always option C - me choking the sumbitch to death with his own intestines.

 

[TCBF]

This '556 ruptures at the cannelure and 762 does not' ignores the question: what about the German and Swedish 762 in the 60s 70s?  They were hacking on the USA about 55 grain 556 out of 1 in 12 barrels causing inhumane (?) wounds, when their 762s would do the same thing.

The bullet design/propellant combinations available for new 762 and 556 rounds are out there.  We just have to find one.  But:

Bearing in mind that a service cartridge is by definition a general purpose cartridge, let us remember that terminal ballistics also concerns itself with targets behind car doors, windshields, body armour, chest rigs full of loaded AK mags, wooden doors, trees, concrete block walls, logs  and other bad guys ( think: landing craft, 7.92mm and an MG-42).

Now,  do we still have issues with 762 'over-penetration'?

 

[Journeyman]

OK, I'll try and fight my shyness and jump in on this one......

By the way, how long does it take to re-zero all of those iron sights, reflex sights, day/night sights, "death dots", visible lights, IR lights, and grenade launchers after a one-on-one discussion?

A whole lot less time than it takes to go through the funeral/graves' registration details for a dead soldier who may still have a well-sighted bayonetless rifle.

And a final thought - infanteers are taught that the rifle is their personal weapon while gunners are taught that the bullet is their weapon.  The gun is just a method of delivering the weapon.

Yes, and the infantry soldier, as mentioned above, is the weapon. The bullet is a weapon we use, but it is far from the only one. An old infantry recruiting spiel used to state, quite well I thought, "you stand alone, but you're never alone," acknowldeging those other folks who support the infantryman (you know, the only one who can take and hold ground). But in our case, the infantry soldier IS the weapon, not the bullet.

And all ELCANS should be replaced with EOTechs.

+1...hell, +2 or +3!!  Right now. Troops are just learning more bad-habit dependancies than the ELCANS are worth.

pretty much everything paracowboy said about clubbing, intestines, death & destruction

Damn, how do you express agreement with someone who, in any other context is clearly in need of therapy...  ;D

 

[Kirkhill]

  To all

 

[paracowboy]

Damn, how do you express agreement with someone who, in any other context is clearly in need of therapy

what? I'm an over-achiever!

 

[a_majoor]

So to summarize:

We need a good general purpose round for the existing rifle/carbine/lmg. Same goes for the GPMG. Special rounds for special occasions are good, but don't confuse or overburden the soldier with too much "stuff". (If I get a magazine of tracer for target indication as a section commander, it always goes in the left pocket of the pants (not webbing or TV) so I don't screw up the magic "watch my trace" moment. Being poor folk, I don't have high speed modular chest rigs to play with, but that would change should I go "over there")

We REALLY need to emphasise marksmanship skills, to get the maximum performance out of whatever you are shooting with.

The soldier (and that goes for any trade, since the bad guys have a nasty tendency to show up where thy are not wanted) need to be able to engage from any range from 0m to the maximum range of their weapon. Pointy end of the bayonet, blunt end of the stock, hands, feet, head butts with a helmeted head are equally valid training points along with the principles of marksmanship.

Longer term, weapons designers should look at the form factors of their weapons to avoid the "rifle sandwitch". I suspect some of the devices could be rolled up into modular "all in one" units (flashlights/pointers, for example), and Paracowboy and others have made some good observations about the sorts of sights which should be considered.

I am still of the opinion that the sort of combat conditions we will face this generation are not so different from the post WWII period as to invalidate the types of weapons and ammunition that we currently use, rather some evolutionary improvements will continue to happen.

 

[vonGarvin]

Yes, and the infantry soldier, as mentioned above, is the weapon. The bullet is a weapon we use, but it is far from the only one. An old infantry recruiting spiel used to state, quite well I thought, "you stand alone, but you're never alone," acknowldeging those other folks who support the infantryman (you know, the only one who can take and hold ground).

To illustrate, the infantry give "parade states" (hats off to the RCR on that one? ) where numbers of troops is given.  Armour will give number of tanks, artillery number of guns, etc.

As for the old "you stand alone, but you're never alone" pamphlet, that little piece of propaganda was on my bedroom wall from the time I was 16 until I joined The Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment.  In fact, I used the photo to figure out how to assemble my webbing (196x pattern). 

 

[paracowboy]

As for the old "you stand alone, but you're never alone" pamphlet, that little piece of propaganda was on my bedroom wall from the time I was 16 until I joined The Hastings and Prince Edward Regiment.  In fact, I used the photo to figure out how to assemble my webbing (196x pattern). 

best one I've ever seen was for the Royal Marines.

Little girl cowering in smouldering wreckage of what used to be a house.
Caption: She's just seen her home ravaged and destroyed by men. Her family tortured and murdered by men. The last thing she needs to see is another man.

Split.

Bootie reaching for her, with a look of concern, other Booties watching arcs in background.
Caption: HE is not just another man.