Report of American small arms performance infantry unit in Afghanistan

E-Mail | 3/26/2002 | John Farnam

[Scutter]

Report of American small arms performance from a friend currently assigned to an infantry unit in Afghanistan:

"The current-issue 62gr 5.56mm (223) round, especially when fired from the short-barreled, M-4 carbine, is proving itself (once again) to be woefully inadequate as man stopper. Engagements at all ranges are requiring multiple, solid hits to permanently bring down enemy soldiers. Penetration is also sadly deficient. Even light barriers are not perforated by this rifle/cartridge combination. Troopers all over are switching to the seventy-seven grain Sierra Matchking (loaded by Black Hills) whenever it can be found. Its performance on enemy soldiers is not much better, but it does penetrate barriers. We're fighting fanatics here, and they don't find wimpy ammunition particularly impressive!

Adding to our challenges, our issue M-9 pistol (Beretta M92F) is proving itself unreliable. They are constantly breaking. To make matters worse, the 9mm hardball round we use is a joke. It is categorically ineffective as a fight stopper, even at close range. Some troopers, after numerous, desperate requests, are now being reissued 1911s! However, the only ones available for issue are worn out. Magazines are hard to find, and 45ACP ammunition is scarce.

We are frustrated here that none of the forgoing seems to be of the slightest concern to people in Washington. It is a damn good thing that we have air superiority and are not yet heavily engaged on the ground. Inferior weapons and ammunition are making us all nervous."

Lesson: Here we go again! We're going into war with small arms and ammunition we know to be impotent and (in the case of the M-9 pistol) lacking in durability. What makes the iniquity even worse is that these inadequacies have all been common knowledge since the Gulf War ten years ago.

During WW1, American troopers were issued a French light, automatic rifle, as part of an economic sweetheart deal with the French. The gun, called the CSRG (Chauchat), was notoriously unreliable, and that fact was well known by Americans and French alike. But, it was issued anyway, and we will never know how many Americans were needlessly killed as a result. That this kind of casual nonchalance is apparently still standard procedure at the Pentagon, is disillusioning. We really haven't come very far in eighty-five years. Our young men, in the minds of politicians and military brass alike, are still cannon fodder!

/John Farnam

[Scutter]

I received this e-mail via a firearms training mailing list.

[Illbay]

My Czech-made Pellet gun ca. 1963 can obliterate all comers.

[freedomcrusader]

My father-in-law loves the M-14 he had when he was in the military.

[dts32041]

I have no problem colt magazines, as for the M-16 always prefered the A2 over andy of its other variants.

But the M-14 was always my favorite.

As for ammo when you want to send the best use COR-BAN.

[RogueIsland]

the first thing I would do is "requisition" an AK-47/74 from the nearest dead Talinut.

And you'd probably end up with a poorly maintained piece of crud with no rifling left. Basically, you'd get the delightful experience of shooting a cartridge with horrible ballistics when compared with 7.62 NATO out of a borderline smoothbore.

[WhiskeyPapa]

I wonder if anyone can confirm this e-mail. This isn't one of those phantom things is it?

Doesn't the government have something like 500,000 M-14's stored somewhere?

When I was on sea duty back in 1974-76 we had M1911A1's and we thought they were great. We knew their reputation. The ones we had were manufactured in 1957 and were famously inaccurate. They'd been banged around a lot. We didn't have an armorer. I still had a lot of faith in them.

I didn't like the 9 Mil when it came out; but we fired a fam fire course before going on Desert Storm that made me feel better about it. It has some ambidextrious features and I liked that, as I am left handed.

I didn't like the M16A1 at all; the A-2 engendered a little more enthusiasm. I;d think that the fact you can carry a lot more 5.56 rounds than 7.62 (assuming a return to the M-14) would be a good thing. Humping lots of ammo at 13,000 feet gets tough, I am thinking.

Walt

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

The '03/A3, even though bolt-action, sounds like it would be much better than what they are currently using.

[antidisestablishment]

But, women prefer the lighter weapons. If we switch back to heavy arms, many women wouldn't qualify. </sarcasm>

Many police departments have found the same problems with 9 mils--they don't have the takedown power. I wouldn't want to rely on it for my primary pistol.

[max61]

What makes the iniquity even worse is that these inadequacies have all been common knowledge since the Gulf War ten years ago.

More like this has been known since 1898. More proof that history repeats itself and that those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.

---max

[CatoRenasci]

I've spent cadet and active duty time with the M-1, M-14 and M16A1 and M16A2, and civilian time with M1903A3 and a Johnson semiauto rifle. I have to say I like the 7.62NATO cartridge better than average .30-06 ammo (M2 Ball), but as a kid my dad had quite a bit of .30-06 M1 Ball and national match ammo. Wow, THAT was sweet shooting stuff. I really like my Johnson (10 round circular magazine, takes M1903 5-round stripper clips, or can be set up for belt feed if you have the model with the selector switch) but in truth it's not as accurate as the Garand and its harder to maintain.

I never really liked the M-16, we called it "Matty Mattel" because it seemed like a toy. The upside was supposed to be it was lighter, you could carry more ammo and the wounds it made at typical ranges were more debilitating (the round tumbled).

I did like the M-14 a lot, even though it was more awkward than the M-1. Easiest rifle to qualify expert I ever shot.

[Citizen Tom Paine]

I am not a firearms expert. As I recall. the 45 cal became US Army issue because the previous pistol would not stop the Moros in the Philippines. The Moros would wrap themselves with a type of wooden body armour before they attacked. When they were hit with the issue pistols, they kept coming even after two or three hits. One hit with a 45 would stop them and knock them down.

I fired some .223 green tip surplus army ammo into some 2 X4s. It would penetrate 5 or 6 and stop (the projectile had come apart also). For grins, I got my 8mm Mauser Model 98 out with some surplus amma made in Portugal. The Mauser went through 8, 2 X 4s (that was all I had) and left a finger sized hole in a walnut tree.

My conclusion was that, if necessary, I would rather be shot with a .223 than a .303 British, 30-06, or 8mm.

The only good thing that I can say about the .223 is that it is light. and I can easily carry 100 rounds of ammo. Women and girls can easily shoot it because of its light recoil.

[CatoRenasci]

Indeed, during the Phillipine Insurrection, the Krags and the .38 pistols in army use proved inadequate. Anyone who could put their hands on a Colt Single Action Army in .45 long Colt did so, and the requirement for the .45 cartridge was put out. That's the reason the M1911A1 automatic pistol was designed in .45 caliber, to stop the charging Moros.

[Lee Heggy]

1911 Colt and M1 carbine still the best combo. I was never very good with a 1911 but face it, if you have to use it you're in deep dudu anyway and your targets are going to be real close. The M1 carbine was always a fine and accurate weapon. Why fix something if it isn't broke? Is this maybe another part of the 'Clinton Legacy' or does it go back even further? The idea of under-equipping our soldiers to save a few bucks or make a sweetheart deal with some arms company infuriates me but it dosen't surprise me.

[fourdeuce82d]

It is categorically ineffective as a fight stopper, even at close range. Some troopers, after numerous, desperate requests, are now being reissued 1911s!

Question- is this categorical ineffectiveness something the troops are experiencing first hand? There was a story posted here from Army Times about a guy engaging a goomer with his berreta, but other than that one instance in a gulley, how many other troops a) have engaged the enemy w/their issue 9, b) hit the enemy they engaged c)had a bad result w/the cartridge.

I'd be very, very surpised if more than one or two line troops have engaged and hit any of the bad guys w/a pistol.

I'm partial to .45 ACP, but let's face it- from a handgun, "knockdown power" is a bit of a myth, whether it's a 9, .40, 45...- the bullets just don't have that much energy/momentum.

Any hunters here want to chime in w/stories about deer that have been tagged w/30.'06, and run off?

If I was ordered to carry a pistol as a primary weapon, sure, 1911A1 would be my first choice. But I wouldn't want to carry a pistol in the first place.

[Q6-God]

Yes, the DA has the M-14s stored en Mass at Camp Perry Ohio. As far as the 5.56 is concerned, the rounds do not tumble! The penetration is not needed as much as the velocity is the most important factor in this weapons leathality. When it comes to rounds you can carry a standard load much easier. In addition, the mags. can also be used on the M-249 when needed. The M-14 is way too heavy, it might be ok for the mech guys, but for us 11Bs, the M-4 is the cats meow