U.S. Army Says 5.56mm Is Adequate

[MG34]

Really.....all that humping through rice patties and jungle was to protect the big guys.....?   ;D

In a word: Yes

The Rifleman does contribute to the close in fight but at range it is the GPMG and light mortars that do most of the killing (as well a Supporting Arms of course).
Despite what the Pam says with the current issued ammunition the  effective range of the C7 is only about 150m (due to velocity required for the ammunition to achieve full potential) the C8 HBAR is a bit less and the C8 is quite a bit less . Beyond that range the round does not fragment reliably and it's terminal performance suffers,not to say a hit in the CNS will not have the desired effect at range, but in the event of a non CNS hit the enemy will still be able to function as a threat.
  The Rifleman does have to be able to suppress long range threats to allow the support weapons to manuver and whatnot but their contribution to the long range fight is more to add to the volume of fire than to cause fatalities, this is simply due to the nature and the limitations of hand held weapons.
I will add that these are my observations in combat operations and individual experience may vary.

 

[KevinB]

I would disagree in retrospect to a true COIN Op.  When we are concerned about the safety of the populace, lobbing arty and mortars, and sending a ton of lead down range with LAV cannons etc is just not a great idea. 
  Especially true in Low Intensity Urban Combat, where the rifle/carbine
is king.

 

[MG34]

I would disagree in retrospect to a true COIN Op.  When we are concerned about the safety of the populace, lobbing arty and mortars, and sending a ton of lead down range with LAV cannons etc is just not a great idea. 
   Especially true in Low Intensity Urban Combat, where the rifle/carbine
is king.

As I said above in the close fight the Rifleman is key, however don't confuse my wording "support weapon" to include supporting arms. The GPMG/LMG is even in a COIN OP the prime source of firepower in the PL/Sect securing and  allowing the manuver elements entry into buildings in Urban Combat and cutting off avenues of  En escape. The Rifleman does not move unless they are covered, in any phase of warfare COIN or not.
Afghanistan is still not a Low Intensity fight so I can't see use going back to the LAR Group just yet

 

[KevinB]

I misunderstood, sorry I thought for a moment you had been co-opted by the firepower borg  that has assimilated a ton of CF personnel recently.

You need our Stoner LMG - the Assault Machine Gun that handles like a carbine...

Shoot me an email - I have some interesting info.

 

[MG34]

No problem, yes the stand off clowns are irritating to say the least it seems that casualty avoidance has taken over close with and destroy.

PM inbound!!

 

[ballz]

Back to the topic of a better 5.56mm...

There is probably a blatantly obvious reason that this has not yet been mentioned, perhaps I'm misunderstanding everything or something (let's face it I'm an FNG), or perhaps it's illegal in some way, or perhaps not possible with such a high-powered rifle, but what about making a 5.56 nylon tipped?

I realise we're not shooting at coyotes here for pelts, but isn't the whole point to this that the current 5.56 isn't fragmenting fast enough and is exiting the body? And the idea of a nylon tip is so that it fragments much quicker and doesn't exit the other side? Seems like it's just what the doctor ordered?

Again, FNG here, probably won't take much to shoo this down but I'm always up for some enlightenment.

 

[1feral1]

In lay terms, in the morals and legalities of 'civilised' warfare, one cannot use any soft pt ammo in SAA, and projectiles must be ball (FMJ). I am sure some aspring jr officer can find a reference, ha!  ;D

Don't think for a second you can cop a shot from 5.56mm and walk away with a flesh wound. The wound cavities created by 5.56mm SS109 FMJ's and variants are shockingly horriffic.

One exit wound I seen in Iraq had two field dressings in it for packing alone.

The SS109 ball varaint (Australian F1) internally has a small air pocket, a steel 'penetrator' tip, and then lead. It does its job WELL. I do beleive the C77 has the same principal.

Below are the fol ( did these myself):

US M193 5.56mm Ball - note just led internally
Aust F1 5.56mm Ball - note air space, steel penetrator, then led
Aust F4 7.62mm Ball - for comparison

EDIT: If memory serves me correctly the Russian 5.45mm projectile also utilises an air pocket, so we are not the only ones using this design.

 

[KevinB]

As Wes mentioned the Ballistic Tip Nylon rounds have been rules to be a soft point, and thus not legal for use in land warfare as per the Hague Convention.

However the Barnes X Soldid Copper bullet and many of the BTHP's ahve been ruled legal for land warfare. 

 

[ballz]

So, I'm guessing this talk of "if our gov't had stones" is referring to the fact that the Hague Convention only applies when all parties involved have signed the Hague Convention, and I have a feeling the Taliban/Al Quada certainly haven't signed it. Would it matter if, whomever or whatever was governing Afghanistan at the time, had signed it (don't know if they did or not)? Since the Taliban no longer govern Afghanistan and are in all aspects a terrorist group that operate within the country and want to take over under the mask of political party?

Or was the talk of gov't and stones referring to a different kind of bullet? If so, what kind?

Also, just so I know if I'm understanding the concepts or not, was I correct that a nylon tip would be just what the doctor ordered (in regards to expanding faster) to cause an incapacitating wound?

Why exactly is it outlawed? Is it considered to be "calculated to cause unnecessary suffering?" Because I'm under the impression that it would kill a person faster rather than slower?

But I've never been shot or even seen a bullet wound in a person so I really have no idea.

 

[KevinB]

Laws of War :
Declaration on the Use of Bullets Which Expand or Flatten Easily in the Human Body; July 29, 1899
The Undersigned, Plenipotentiaries of the Powers represented at the International Peace Conference at The Hague, duly authorized to that effect by their Governments,

Inspired by the sentiments which found expression in the Declaration of St. Petersburg of the 29th November (11th December), 1868,

Declare as follows:

The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions.

The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.

It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.

The present Declaration shall be ratified as soon as possible.

The ratification shall be deposited at The Hague.

A proces-verbal shall be drawn up on the receipt of each ratification, a copy of which, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to all the Contracting Powers.

The non-Signatory Powers may adhere to the present Declaration. For this purpose they must make their adhesion known to the Contracting Powers by means of a written notification addressed to the Netherlands Government, and by it communicated to all the other Contracting Powers.

In the event of one of the High Contracting Parties denouncing the present Declaration, such denunciation shall not take effect until a year after the notification made in writing to the Netherlands Government, and forthwith communicated by it to all the other Contracting Powers.

This denunciation shall only affect the notifying Power.

In faith of which the Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Declaration, and have affixed their seals thereto.

Done at The Hague the 29th July, 1899, in a single copy, which shall be kept in the archives of the Netherlands Government, and of which copies, duly certified, shall be sent through the diplomatic channel to the Contracting Powers.

The issue at hand is that we now have evolved small arms into much better killing tools, bullets that fragment are much harded to treat than bullets that simply mushroom, but for archaic laws and rulings we are stuck with it.
Also since we are the good guys, just becuase our enemy does not follow the convention, we hold ourselves to the convention.

  However the fact remains that their are (non open source) bullets that are LEGAL for use.  The fact that we are not using them is a blight on the chain of command, who of course are so casualty adverse that flattening a village is much easier than a protrated small arms fight... :

 

[a_majoor]

Minor technical note:

One of the reasons for having an "air pocket" in the nose of an SS109 is to ensure the weight and center of mass are distributed correctly for stable ballistic flight, and has little or no bearing on terminal ballistics (i.e. when it hits you).

If the desired end point is horrific wounds then other mechanisms besides expanding and fragmenting bullets are possible. One version of the HK G-11 rifle used a 4.7mm (I believe) round with a small "spoon" shaped cavity on the nose. This had little effect on the ballistic performance, but induced wild tumbling in the target on impact. In the 1960's, the US Army became enamoured of the concept of hypervelocity flechettes to replace bullets; after the flat trajectory and ease of marksmanship training flechettes offered to the shooters, flechettes also had the ability to penetrate current types of IPE and deliver horrific wounds by bending or "fish hooking" as they passed through the target.

Most of this is moot; these mechanisms work in specific manners and under specific circumstances, but the "real world" has so many variables that there are no "perfect" rounds. For any combination of ammunition and weapon, someone can always come up with a "Oh yeah?, What about x?"

 

[KevinB]

FYI the Hk MP-7 4.6x30 round uses the same spoon idea -- terminal effect is less than desireable...

 

[a_majoor]

FYI the Hk MP-7 4.6x30 round uses the same spoon idea -- terminal effect is less than desireable...

"Oh yeah?, What about x ?"

 

[KevinB]

Its a method to increase wounding, in a Hague compliant way (the whole letter not the spirit of the law thing...)  However due to light weight and short length the wound profile is less than ideal.

I'd much rather see C77/M855 bullets continued to be issued and troops getting enough rounds to properly train.  I worry that if any ammunition chnages take place that training allotments will suffer.  By far the biggest issue is markmanship.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

I'd much rather see C77/M855 bullets continued to be issued and troops getting enough rounds to properly train.  I worry that if any ammunition chnages take place that training allotments will suffer.  By far the biggest issue is markmanship.

That is an excellent point. A more-lethal round that doesn't hit its target because soldier didn't fire enough to become proficient is not very lethal.

 

[j0hn_r1]

Just saw this related story about the compitency of the M-16/AR-15/C-7 and 5.56mm rounds...

WARNING - Graphic photos inside link..!

http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?topic=17111.0

Happened in the Philipines. Close range hit, est range is 5-10meters.

Cop was drunk, the man shot claims the cop shot him. The cop claims it was an accidental discharge. THIS IS NOT THE THREAD TOPIC!

The bullet DID NOT hit the bone, it was shattered by the Temp. Stretch Cavity created from the high velocity of the projectile. (Or so the claim is)

Pretty narsty hit... 55 grain M193 ball ammo

 

[1feral1]

Yes, thats a typical wound caused by a small high velocity projectile.

The AFP are still using the old M193 ammo in thie 1/12 bbl's, or they were the last time I trained with them in 2004. They had Elisco M16A1's, or at least the ones I observed.

Hard to believe the SS109 has been around since the early 1980s, and this is an imoproved version

Cheers,

OWDU

 

[KevinB]

For the bullet to come apart like that in that section of tissue and the bone to break like that the round must have hit bone.

Bone will not fracture unless it is hit direct from a small caliber bullet

 

[observor 69]

http://www.military.com/entertainment/outdoor-guide/hunting/predator-ar-15-round-up.html?ESRC=dod.nl

Predator AR-15 Round Up