Replies

First, kinetic energy is basically non-existent in a handgun round. The 45 starts out with a larger hole. It lets more air in and more blood out. Unless you hit the central nervous system, that is all you got.

when I said "six shots" I was making the point that the man with limited firepower is more likely to know where each bullet is going to go before he squeezes the trigger. The guy with "unlimited firepower" does not have to know, he just hopes he hits something

I do agree that the first few seconds of a firefight are critical and lots of lead in the air can make the opposing force keep their heads down.

“First, kinetic energy is basically non-existent in a handgun round. The 45 starts out with a larger hole. It lets more air in and more blood out. Unless you hit the central nervous system, that is all you got.”

The JSSAP team senior analyst (I forget his formal title; he was interviewed by Soldier of Fortune magazine after the pistol selection decision caused such a stir in the gun enthusiast community) declared that after they studied the test data, and every bit of archival data they could scrape up, they concluded that energy transfer to the target was the best predictor of terminal effectiveness. In turn, energy transfer correlated to bullet mass and velocity, and bullet shape.

“Stopping power” - a term often thrown about by gun enthusiasts, as if they knew what they were talking about - was found to have no quantifiable definition and was in consequence of no use in predicting terminal effectiveness.

“when I said “six shots” I was making the point that the man with limited firepower is more likely to know where each bullet is going to go before he squeezes the trigger. The guy with “unlimited firepower” does not have to know, he just hopes he hits something”

“fewer ready rounds equals a surer aim for each round” expresses a hope, not any phenomenon measurable in action. Or at least, none yet identified. Natural abilities, training states, and mindset cannot help but vary for each individual. We’d like to see all troops getting serious about marksmanship, but once adversaries engage, most bets are off.

“I do agree that the first few seconds of a firefight are critical and lots of lead in the air can make the opposing force keep their heads down.”

I was merely citing US Army doctrine, which is based very tightly on the work of S.L.A. Marshall during WWII. I do not necessarily agree with it. Some have begun questioning the validity of his approach.

USMC doctrine is quite different: they believe hits per minute is the proper measure of firepower.

Military doctrine is not holy writ set in stone. It was defined by the late I.B. Holley Jr as the most current expression of what is believed to be the best way for a military force to prepare for and accomplish its mission. It is always in a state of flux, because technology impacts the state of things. So do political constraints, and the possible array of adversaries, and even shifting interpretations of historical events.