Better bullets also will help, experts say

Stars and Stripes ^ | 20 December 2002 | Mark Oliva

[45Auto]

Soldiers who fought in Afghanistan have some hard-earned opinions about the rifles on which they relied to stay alive. Mostly, they want more firepower.

The standard-issue ammunition compounded the problem, they said: The 5.56 mm round shot — a bullet equivalent to that marketed in the States to shoot small vermin — wasn’t effective in stopping al-Qaida and Taliban fighters. “Should be a 7.62 mm, so it will drop a man with one shot,” wrote one soldier.

Not all soldiers’ reviews were negative. Pat, a Special Forces soldier who is serving in Afghanistan, wrote the military watchdog group Soldiers for the Truth that “the M-4 with optics and the newer hand guards tends to be a pretty good weapon. Guys can change the optics out depending on the mission, and misfeeds don’t happen too often with good weapon maintenance.

The adjustable shoulder stock and assault sling, front pistol grip works well with body armor and different sized guys also,” the soldier said.

Army Lt. Col. Robert Carpenter, project manager for the small arms section of the report, said: “Somewhere between the trigger pullers and the maintainers is the ground truth.”

Also a factor, he said, are the rounds soldiers use today.

Soldiers now use the M-855 ball round, a lighter bullet designed during the mid-1980s with a steel penetrator designed to pierce body armor. But soldiers now find themselves shooting at al-Qaida, an enemy that doesn’t use body armor.

Some soldiers who fought in Afghanistan said the small, current-issue 5.56 mm rounds just lack needed punch.

The commercially available equivalent to a 5.56 mm round is a .223-caliber — marketed as a vermin round, for killing small game such as rabbits or coyotes, said John Bloodgood, a 19-year Air Force master sergeant with 11 years in tactical units, who also is a private firearms instructor.

More effective are .308 bullets — commonly used for large-game hunting and similar in size to bullets used up through the Korean War, he said.

“A .308 bullet has almost twice the frontal area of a .223,” he said.

It’s not the size but the type of round the military’s using, and shot placement, that determines a bullet’s stopping capability, said Ken Cooper, director of Tactical Handgun Training, a New York state certified law-enforcement pistol-training facility.

“The military uses hardball rounds and the effect is less than if soldiers were shooting expansion rounds,” Cooper said. “You can penetrate the human body with little to no effect.”

Cooper teaches law-enforcement officials to shoot low, for the pelvis. He said the human torso is like a sponge; it easily can absorb the impact of small pieces of lead, especially non-expanding jacketed bullets that leave small, clean holes that close quickly.

Shots to the pelvis, Cooper said, increase the likelihood of breaking the pelvic bone or severing the femoral artery, resulting in an immobilized attacker at a minimum or one rapidly losing blood at a maximum.

“The military teaches people to shoot center mast, in the middle of the body,” he said. “But if you hit people low, they will go down quickly. That’s what we want, both in civilian law enforcement and in military combat.”

[The KG9 Kid]

Never heard of it. The only changes to the A2 model AUG over the A1 was a different charging handle and a roller on the top rear of the bolt carrier.

Same barrels, it seems. I can't tell the difference. The gas piston cylinder assembly is extremely beefy.

If there was a problem with the AUG's gas system, I believe that I may have heard of it by now.

[XBob]

40-"I've heard that same talk, but can you imagine the cost and logistical nightmare of rebarreling a couple million M16's? And the military has a sizable investment in 5.56 ammo. What would they do with it? I can only shoot so much, y'know!"

From what I have heard, this may be a moot point. It seems to me, (please correct me if I am wrong), but I thought that about a year or so ago they changed the rules on veterans funerals because there were not enough riflemen in the US military to attend funerals, only 17,000 or so, in the whole military.

[harpseal]

RE the .308 vs 5.56 argument mission, and terrain determine equipment and tactics. Both the M14 and the M16 can be ean excellent choice. In a desert with plenty of resupply I might prefer a .308 (7.62 X 51) over a .233 (5.56 X 45). In a jungle or urban envirornment with close range fire and no easy re-suply I might well prefer a .223 cal

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[RLK]

"Secondly, I have always questioned the use of hardball ammo for combat." The Hague Convention. We don't use nerve gas either.

----------------------------------

Certainly, using a soft point in a 30-06 or .308 would nearly explode the target. What the .223 attempts to do is get around the dum-dum prohibition with a tumbling action.

[sneakypete]

I think the problem is the 62 grain penetrator round, versus the old 55 grain FMJ.

I agree. The trade off is that the newer 62 gr round is more accurate at long range.

[boris]

When shooting ragheads, aim for the head. If enemy is wearing a helmet, aim low.

--Boris

[SBprone]

Sorry, wrong gun. I was thinking of the Enfield SA-80. That one is one mean bullpup!

[SBprone]

"RE the .308 vs 5.56 argument mission, and terrain determine equipment and tactics."

Absolutely!

A new 7.62mm rifle should be found to replace the dwindling stock of M14s. All that has been learned in using and maintaining the M14s should be put to use in selecting a new weapon. Maybe something like a modernized AR10. It should be a special purpose weapon, for when 5.56mm just ain't enough. For everything else, there's the M16 family.

[Pagey]

An "I love these weapon threads and learn much from them" BUMP!

[Shooter 2.5]

6.5 X 52 Italian[Mannlicher-Carcano]
162 Grain Round Nosed Bullet
2296 FPS
"Cartridges of the World" calls it a good deer, antelope or Black Bear cartidge.

The 6.5 X 55 Swedish Mauser is a much better Cartridge.

[Blood of Tyrants]

No, the M1 carbine was developed as a light rifle for rear lines people who would rarely if ever see action.

[RogueIsland]

I would have thought the fatality rate inflicted by the Beltway sniper would have finally put to rest the canard about the impotence of the .223 round against human beings. Ah well, some debates never end.

[SBprone]

It's a meat chopper all right! But just as a particular combination of bullet and barrel twist rate can make a devastating weapon, the wrong combination can render the weapon less effective.

The current M855 cartridge sounds like it is poorly suited for fighting in Afganistan. The old M193 from the Vietnam era might be a better choice. The cheap ball ammo at your local gun shop is essentially the same thing as M193. Maybe we should chip in and send a couple of pallets to Afganistan. God knows they have to buy a lot of their own gear as it is.

Let me try to clear up one thing: The modern M855 round combined with the current faster barrel twist has greatly extended the effective range of the US service rifle. I don't think range is the issue here because there are any number of weapons such as heavy machine guns, mortars and precision bombs for dealing with folks who are hundreds of meters distant. I think the problem with the M855 is its effectiveness as a defensive round at relatively short distances. That's where you want to stop somebody in their tracks.