Posted on 02/02/2007 12:23:59 PM PST by John Jorsett
Troops from the U.S. Army and Marine Corps are still complaining about the "inadequate stopping power" of the 5.56mm round used in the M-16 family of assault rifles. Last year, the army did a study of current 5.56mm M855 round, in response to complaints. Troops reported many reports where enemy fighters were hit with one or more M855 rounds and kept coming. The study confirmed that this happened, and discovered why. If the M855 bullet hits slender people at the right angle, and does not hit a bone, it goes right through. That will do some soft tissue damage, but nothing immediately incapacitating. The study examined other military and commercial 5.56mm rounds and found that none of them did the job any better. The study concluded that, if troops aimed higher, and fired two shots, they would have a better chance of dropping people right away. The report recommended more weapons training for the troops, so they will be better able to put two 5.56mm bullets where they will do enough damage to stop oncoming enemy troops. Marines got the same advice from their commanders. But infantrymen in the army and marines both continue to insist that the problem is not with their marksmanship, but with the 5.56mm bullet. Marines say they have used captured AK-47 rifles in combat, and found that the lower velocity, and larger, 7.62mm bullets fired by these weapons were more effective in taking down enemy troops.
The army study did not address complaints about long range shots (over 100 meters), or the need for ammo that is better a blasting through doors and walls. The army had been considering a switch of a larger (6.8mm) round, and the Special Forces has been testing such a round in the field. But a switch is apparently off the table at the moment. The army report was not well received by the troops, and there is still much grumbling in the ranks over the issue.
There must be a treaty against using dum dum's.
And we always play by the rules.
Meanwhile, the Marines have "discovered" all those M14's that went "missing" a few years ago and are busily refurbishing and reissuing them...
I say give em all M14 receivers in hopped up metal or fiberglass stocks.
That'll fix em.
Hah! You beat me to it by a few seconds...:)
Yeah, but such rounds won't penetrate cover or armor AT ALL, which outside of any treaty, makes them pretty much useless on the modern battlefield.
I can't remember for sure but wasn't this an issue that was pointed out BEFORE making the decision to go to the 5.56 round instead of the 7.62?
Would this be a good time for someone to post a Garand or BAR picture?
Deja vu all over again...........
Skinny people live longer.
338 lapua
Are Iraqi's any more slender than NVA or Viet Cong infantrymen? I'm sure that this is indeed a problem, but didn't Army Ordnance shelve it's immediate plans to go to a new 6.8 mm infantry rifle?
Indeed there are. Exploding, mushrooming, and other bullets that cause "unnecessary harm and suffering" are not banned under international treaty. Oddly enough, silencers and flash suppressors are also restricted, and I have no idea why. That's why we need one of those microwave guns fast. Just wholesale cook the bastards.
I hear that Dog.
6.8spc bump.
There is a REASON why 30 caliber rounds were the mainstay of the battle field during the two largest wars. AR10 and M14 bring firepower when needed.
Oh and by the way .... long range is not 100 meters.... more like 300 meters. Out there, you really do want some heavy lead.
Yes there is - it's called the Geneva Convention and the signatories have to use 'full metal jacketed' ammunition so that it doesn't 'mushroom' on impact. Of course Al Quaida is not a signatory but it doesn't matter - we are and will will continue to comply...
T"he United States Marine Corps Designated Marksman Rifle (DMR, NSN 1005-01-458-6235; more formally the United States Rifle, 7.62-MM, M14, DMR) is a semi-automatic, gas-operated rifle chambered for the 7.62 × 51 mm NATO cartridge. It is a modified and accurized version of the M14 rifle built and utilized solely by the United States Marine Corps (USMC)." USMC DMR
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.