Or that 5.56 is made to injure so it takes 4 soldiers out of the battle to carry the wounded one.
The amount of ignorance being spread and accepted can be pretty bad sometime.
5.56 lethality with various bullet weights
- Thread starter mbogo3
- Start date
Or that 5.56 is made to injure so it takes 4 soldiers out of the battle to carry the wounded one.
The amount of ignorance being spread and accepted can be pretty bad sometime.
Cameron SS
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Ground Zero
Yeah its the readiness with which some of this nonsense gets accepted is whats alarming to me. These shameful madrassas we call public schools leave students with such a poor grasp of basic physics that so many graduate susceptible and desperate for the sweet sweet smell of fresh bull $hit.
It probably became an urban legend back in the 80's when people wondered why they moved from 762 to 556, so they came up with this reasoning.
But with the Russian and especially the Chinese are mass producing ceramic plates, this urban legend may become partially true in future conflict with near peers.
The reason the US is specifying 6.8, a 7.62 sized cartridge, in the NGSW, is to have a cartridge that can load a bullet with enough velocity and section density to defeat ceramic plates.
But with the volume of 6.8 cartridges, one simply cannot carry as much ammo as 5.56. The 6.8 has almost the same volume as 7.62. The availability of armour piecing weapon will also de-incentivize opponents to wear their heavy armour plates. The opponents will start trading off heavy armour for speed of manoeuvre, knowing that one side has less ammo available to restrict movement and last the fight.
The US is already saying the NGSW will change the way infantry fights. My opinion is that 5.56 will stay around to complement the 6.8 SAW. 5.56 will keep the enemies wear their armour and restrict their speed and movements, so the NGSW ( and a DMR in 6.8 )could do the killing. In a sense, 5.56 will be repurposed to "degrading" enemies than actually being expected to kill with shots in the COM.
This thinking is already sort of manifesting in the HK 417 as the urgent fielding of 7.62 squad DMR in the US army. This is because of the urgency of introducing AP capability through the 762 Tungten core Xm1185. The long term solution is the 6.8.
ThatM305Guy
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- North Texas
To be honest, there is a reason the U.S Army will be moving to a new (as of yet undecided) 6.8 round.
Why is the value of penetration so quickly dismissed in discussions of lethality? Yes there is body armour in some cases now, but in many more there are barriers, and cover there whether they are being used intentionally or not. Whether you are shooting game in branches and brush, or a soldier on the battlefield. Other than a cardboard cut-out, who in their right mind is always standing up out in the open when the lead is flying? One of the first things they teach you is use of cover.
A bullet that penetrates cover to reach its target is 100% more lethal than the ones that get stopped by it.
A bullet that penetrates cover to reach its target is 100% more lethal than the ones that get stopped by it.
Actually, the word sabot translates to "shoe",,,which just so happens to fly off in flight and free up those tiny little feet.
Lethality, what lethality,,,no paper ever survives the range trip.
mbogo3 maybe a short history helps.
M193 in 55gr was used originally with a 1 in 14 twist.
Immediate tumbling and immediate fragmentation.
Problem was testing in cold weather showed very bad ballistic performance and massive drop in range.
So, for early sixties switch to 1 in12 twist. Better ballistics and range.
Still had the immediate tumbling and fragmentation effect.
Come the eighties NATO insists on a newer round, hence the 62gr SS109 or M855 or C77 whatever each country calls it. Due to tracer performance they chose a 1 in seven twist to stabilize the tracers in things lke the C9 or SAW but then insisted that all small arms used the same rifling in case there was a K-Mart special on tracer rounds. Must have been watching too much #### in Germany and Holland because they had the idea this round had to do better penetration to get through all that thick Soviet summer cotton shirts and all that.
Thing is the M855 drives into the target for four to eight inches and then and only then tumbles and fragments.
Now come the Somali Olympic Looting Team trials in '93, it was clearly revealed that if the round did not hit a vital organ or bone,,,that the round simply ice picked and went through and through because there was not sufficient body in which to tumble like a pre-pubescent gymnast. Worked great in theory against frag vests and nylon webbing though.
Keep in mind that police prefer 5.56 due to the fact the round will fragment and dissipate its' energy in drywall while a 9mm will go through the wall and into unintended victims.
Now there is a drive on for these super over-penetrating ounds like M855A1 or Mk 262 and so on.
Must have run into some nephelim with six inch thick skulls or the like to justify this.
The use of lighter 40 and 45gr rounds for specialty varmint and hunting with these newer twists is a bad combination. Too high a velocity and fast a twist and you can watch the round disintegrate in the air as it leaves a trace of grey smear. You gave to find the projectile and velocity combination happy place.
Like stated, where you hit or shot placement can be far more important than how many times you hit.
There are always those targets that needed a second or third burst of fifty cal or JDAM.
M193 in 55gr was used originally with a 1 in 14 twist.
Immediate tumbling and immediate fragmentation.
Problem was testing in cold weather showed very bad ballistic performance and massive drop in range.
So, for early sixties switch to 1 in12 twist. Better ballistics and range.
Still had the immediate tumbling and fragmentation effect.
Come the eighties NATO insists on a newer round, hence the 62gr SS109 or M855 or C77 whatever each country calls it. Due to tracer performance they chose a 1 in seven twist to stabilize the tracers in things lke the C9 or SAW but then insisted that all small arms used the same rifling in case there was a K-Mart special on tracer rounds. Must have been watching too much #### in Germany and Holland because they had the idea this round had to do better penetration to get through all that thick Soviet summer cotton shirts and all that.
Thing is the M855 drives into the target for four to eight inches and then and only then tumbles and fragments.
Now come the Somali Olympic Looting Team trials in '93, it was clearly revealed that if the round did not hit a vital organ or bone,,,that the round simply ice picked and went through and through because there was not sufficient body in which to tumble like a pre-pubescent gymnast. Worked great in theory against frag vests and nylon webbing though.
Keep in mind that police prefer 5.56 due to the fact the round will fragment and dissipate its' energy in drywall while a 9mm will go through the wall and into unintended victims.
Now there is a drive on for these super over-penetrating ounds like M855A1 or Mk 262 and so on.
Must have run into some nephelim with six inch thick skulls or the like to justify this.
The use of lighter 40 and 45gr rounds for specialty varmint and hunting with these newer twists is a bad combination. Too high a velocity and fast a twist and you can watch the round disintegrate in the air as it leaves a trace of grey smear. You gave to find the projectile and velocity combination happy place.
Like stated, where you hit or shot placement can be far more important than how many times you hit.
There are always those targets that needed a second or third burst of fifty cal or JDAM.
Another reason they went with a small fast caliber is that it was not as deadly but left a very nasty wound. They did this based on the idea that a wounded soldier drained far more resources then a dead soldier. A wounded solder required multiple other soldiers to help him get off the battlefield and then all the medical help and resources. They also believed that an country who did not provide extraordinary means to help their wounded soldiers would lower moral of the fighting troops.
There is no argument to be made that it is a effective round for stopping the enemy. Special Forces soldiers who need to dispatch enemies quickly have always had an issue with the 5.56
There is no argument to be made that it is a effective round for stopping the enemy. Special Forces soldiers who need to dispatch enemies quickly have always had an issue with the 5.56
Gunnerlove
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Which is why they pretty much all run 5.56mm?
Most people complaining about lethality can't hit anything.
ThatM305Guy
CGN frequent flyer
- Location
- North Texas
Sounds like a personal problem lol
Different "covers" have different properties. Something that is good at penetrating steel doesn't mean it is good at penetrating brick walls. A different combination of Speed, hardness and mass - if you want all three it will end up to be a big bullet in a big cartridge.
And your concern is actually being addressed by the US. So basically the US is trying to go with a big bullet in big cartridge with 30% more pressure to get the best of both worlds by putting 6.8 bullet in a plastic or hybrid case - but they only only partially address the problem. Yes, it is "lighter" than tradition 308 but it is taking as much volume. So if you back pack only has space for 200 rounds 7.62, it probably will still only have enough space for 200 rounds 6.8.
But we forgot why we move to 5.56 in the first place - more ammo, not just weight but volume! How many 556 magazines you can have on your chest vs 762/6.8 magazines? So I think at one point the US will be to the point that the SAW will be shooting 6.8 while the people armed with carbines will need to stick with 5.56.
And also that the NGSW has a next generation optic to come with it - it has internal ballistic computer and LR, environmental correction. That is a big part of how they justify a bigger platform with less ammo. That goes back the USMC's rationale of ditching SAW and going with HK416 M27 ( and VCOG). More precision and less volume - but a minimum amount of volume is still needed, and I don't believe a "battle rifle" with 5X20rd mag in the ready is that minimum.
Last edited:
rommelrommel
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Just for the record, mk262 is 77gr OTM so it's nothing like M855A1 (or M995.)
It's interesting to hear from guys who spent a few decades in units that saw a lot of combat (i.e. Green Berets, CAG guys) during the height of Afghanistan and Iraq. The consensus seems to be that super-fast and lighter 5.56 seems to be devastating in CQB and this lethality frustratingly falls off at distance (200-300m). I suppose the theory is the combo of energy transfer and chaos of the round pre-stabilization. 7.62 at comparable distance simply punches holes with little energy transfer but is obviously more effective at range (this from SEALs who hated the SCAR-17, mainly for reasons beyond caliber).
I don't know how objective it is but I also think throwing out the pattern-recognition experience of people who have cleared a lot of rooms is probably not wise either. They may not know why it works but they'll probably know what works.
I don't know how objective it is but I also think throwing out the pattern-recognition experience of people who have cleared a lot of rooms is probably not wise either. They may not know why it works but they'll probably know what works.
Last edited:
