5.56 don`t put `em down!!!

[hicky1300]

Heard on the radio this morning (06,00hrs) that apparently our men & women out in Helmand etc don`t rate the stopping power of 5.56!!
Personaly an advocate of 7.62 (hated the SA80 & didn`t particularly like the M16/AR15).
Whilst I fully realise different scenarios in battle call for different approaches/utilimsation of weapons I have always been a firm believer in the British practise of controlled aiming & firing.
In the right place any bullet will do its job.
As I once got told on the ranges the British tax payer doesn`t pay for our ammo for us to miss!

 

[Tony Williams]

Which programme was that, as a matter of interest? I suspect that they had got hold of a report put together by Nicholas Drummond and myself, which looks at the problems British troops (and others) are finding with the 5.56mm in Afghanistan (mainly, lack of effective range) and examines potential alternatives. It is briefly written up in the Sun today.

 

[hicky1300]

Ah so you`re the guilty party.
Messr`s Brown & co won`t like such statements!!
It was on radio 2 & then one of the guys said sarah K was on about it & she does an o/view on the papers 1st thing.

Thought the LSW SA80 a waste of time - unless you just like repetitive noise!!
rather have the LMG.
Will have a read of the Sun if i can find one in the crewroom today & let you know my thoughts.

 

[smle2009]

I'm with H on this one,although the LMG,in British military terms refered to the Bren in 7.62mm,was quiet useless as a machine gun,it was too accurate therfore did not have the "spead" that was expected with a MG(think they should have called a automatic rifle like the BAR)
I have also noted referance to the GPMG on this site and other sources as now being re-deployed in the British Armed forces,well chaps you may take some comfort from this but it has never been out of service with our Army(someone at the top must have had foresight on this for once)
I work(part time) on military ranges and seen the GPMG in use from the days of the SLR until the present day,why fix it if it ain't broke and think from what MG was the design copied from!
Cheers
Tony

 

[Tony Williams]

The GPMG has been redeployed down to section level to be carried on foot patrols - thats what's new. Surplus 7.62mm L96 sniper rifles (replaced by the .338 L115) have also been passed to foot patrols. Before this, all of the guns carried by foot patrols were 5.56mm calibre (L85A2, L86A2, L110). The Taleban are using PKM LMGs and SVD rifles in the old 7.62x54R Nagant calibre, and can attack at up to 900m range.

 

[hicky1300]

I always found - as did my mates - my accuraccy/that of the LMG made it a very offensive weapon. Add to it the penetration capabilities of the NATO 7.62 it was not a weapon you wanted to be at the wrong end of!
I also liked the Gimpy & hanging of the end of a rope on the ramp of a wokka was fun - but i was crap at aiming it & found I had to `walk` a 5 - 10 round burst onto target.
The L96 makes a good weapon against an identified specific target (also used these) & the cyclic rate could be v good but again the LMG with a good 2 man team or even a single, if you can hump the spare mags, was much better as a patrol support weapon.
These are only my views on the basis of what I did & saw & what the feedback post ops was.
Given the situation in Helmand etc I agree with the feedback from the troops 7 the article conveys this well.
Do what the enemy do use/adapt to their tactics & that means use comparable equipment.

 

[V40]

You Guys cannot go back to your SLR's?

If you don't mine can I say something about the 5.56mm?

 

[hicky1300]

Biggest drawback with SLR was length (but that helps accuracty so hard trade off) & weight - but with todays composite materials etc I ould have thought a variant would be feasible?
Go ahead on the 5.56 V40

 

[Millsman]

Bring back the SMLE and the mad minute. Keep their heads down at 1000 yards! Kill 'em all at 600. Never let them get to 300.

John (Luddite)

 

[hicky1300]

Oh John
less than 300 is when things get interesting!
Agree with the .303 though & Maybe MP40`s or 34`s insted of SMG`s?

 

[V40]

Without going through the whole story behind the development of the 5.56mm. I will continue.

Its all about twist rates and the round itself. Back during testing of the 55grn bullet it was used in the first AR-15 using a twist rate of 1 and 14". It was very unstable round back then,but if it were to hit you it would really tear up flesh and internal organs. So Eugene and the Army cut it off. The next twist rate was 1 and 12". This is where the round really had some significant accuracy and on top of this, it went in the body through a small hole and it zigzagged throughout the body doing an amasing amount of internal damage. Did I say it was accurate too? So much so that the rifle went almost straight into Competition throughout the services. Oh, by the way the 55grn round had a good range of 450-500 yards. The Air Force picked her up immediately.
Now, this why the 5.56mm and the 55.grn round were coupled together and did it's part in Vietnam. Now this was after the "Jaming" problem in the mid 60's.

Anyhow they would find dead NVA and VC that looked like they were not hit. They found very small holes going in to the body and then would find huge explosive of a wound that came out the other side. For instance the round would hit someone in the chest and come out there around the upper thigh region. The 55grn round would start to yaw if it hit anything denser than air.

This is why we either go back to the M16A1 or we go back to a M-14, DSA with collapsable stock and a 18-20" barrel or even the SLR. We all know that the T-48 and the T-44 trials were rigged, and evebn the U.S. Army stated loudly that if it wasn't made in the US then it doesn't belong here! I am a big fan of the SLR because I own one.

Bottom line, the 5.56mm would be a good choice in Irag and Afghanistan as long as they used the the 1 and 12" barrel and the M16A1 platform.

On the other hand, the 7.62mm round is being tested again right now in Afghanistan by SF and certain other identities. Their rifles are made by DSA, mostly at this time. I know for a fact that they all are impressed with it.

The 62grn round was developed to give the rifle more range and extreme accuracy. Problem is is that it does not expand most of the time when it hits anything denser than air. The rounds are simply going through people over there and there is hardly any hydrostatic shock happening to the body. Going up in round weight is not the answer with the 5.56mm round. The 7.62mm is the way to go now! This comes griefly as I am a huge fan of the M16A1 and the 55grn round and full auto for the instances of being over runned or on the assualt. This brings up another part of doctrine on the USA. If you have an AK47, what is the first part of the selector, right off of safe are you putting it on. Figure that one out and you will have guessed were the Warsaw Pact nations were coming from. Now, what is the first position the selector goes to after safe on the M16A1's and A2's. It is just as bad shite to keep using an arm that is using a 62grn round inside a 1 and 7" twist rate, especially if the rifle your using is an M4 series.

Just my $.002 worth of edumecation.

I hope that I have put the same aspect on this serious problem.

 

[Tony Williams]

The M193 in the M16A1 could indeed be destructive - within about 200m. The problem is that the Taliban are attacking at up to 900m, well beyond the range of any 5.56mm.

A return to 7.62mm would certainly solve that problem, but at double the ammo weight and much more recoil. Something in between would be nice.

Bring back the 7mm EM-2!

 

[hicky1300]

Tony
The ammo weight was never a problem as round per round we can make them count more effectively than 5.56 & over the distance.
It has always been more disconcerting to the enemy to be hit by accurate penetrating fire. Not just the air filled by angry `bees`.
Using 100K rockets etc to take out one guy is colourfull but de-moralising as well as expensive. It also blatantly shows our shortfalls to the enemy!
If a patrol strength squad can use its LMG/GPMG combination to bring its riflemen into offensive but easily defended positions without the need to fire off 100`s of wasted rounds not only does the body count go up but the morale does as does the morale of the enemy come down.
7.62 is better suited to keeping the enemies heads down in a marked & spotted area for arty/mortar teams or even attach heli`s to take out.
At present they are happy to keep us at arms (7.62 x 39) length as, until an Apache etc appears we`re buggered!
Maybe for the time being, as V40 suggests, bringing back the SLR may be a step in the right direction - or how about a mix of SA80 & SLR? Use the SLR`s as a sniper/cover weapon until the SA80 guys havegood use in range of their weapons?

 

[falcon5nz]

A return to 7.62mm would certainly solve that problem, but at double the ammo weight and much more recoil. Something in between would be nice.

Can NATO/US Military say 6.8 SPC?

 

[Tony Williams]

Can NATO/US Military say 6.8 SPC?

That would be a good choice for replacing the 5.56mm, but was optimised to achieve much greater effectiveness at up to 300m when fired from the short-barrelled carbines the US Army is in love with. It wouldn't solve the range problem the BA is facing now.

The 6.5mm Grendel, OTOH, could...

 

[falcon5nz]

The NZDF were/are looking at re-chambering the Steyr AUG (or the Austeyr F-88's we use) for 6.8 SPC.
Obviously the British Empire got weapon design right-
UK-SA80
Ireland-Steyr
Aussie-Steyr
NZ-Steyr
France-FAMAS
China-QBZ-95
(Note all bullpups)

States-M-4

Judging by this survey it is obvious that the bullpup is the more popular design.
(OK so it might SLIGHTLY be biased:xd

Now all we gotta do is sort the calibre and cartridge

 

[TimG]

The 6.5mm Grendel, OTOH, could...

Not too dissimilar from .280" (7 x43)

TimG.

 

[Tony Williams]

Not too dissimilar from .280" (7 x43)

TimG.

That's right - it's like a smaller version of the 7x43, in that it's a compact and efficient round which fires a relatively heavy, aerodynamic bullet at moderate velocity. I suspect that the ideal rifle/LMG cartridge would be somewhere in the range bounded by the 7x43 at the top and the 6.5mm Grendel at the bottom. And with such a good long-range performance, the 7.62x51 could become redundant.

 

[Millsman]

Oh John
less than 300 is when things get interesting!
Agree with the .303 though & Maybe MP40`s or 34`s insted of SMG`s?

That made me smile!

I'm sure the good old SLR could be made a bit lighter for modern use. Made shorter as a bullpup? Certainly the 7.62 has more stopping power than modern rounds. Add a more modern sight and the SA80 is history.

John

 

[TonyE]

That made me smile!

I'm sure the good old SLR could be made a bit lighter for modern use. Made shorter as a bullpup? Certainly the 7.62 has more stopping power than modern rounds. Add a more modern sight and the SA80 is history.

John

Been there, done that!

The FN SLR as a bullpup? Here is the .280 prototype of Dieudonne Saive's .280 FAL from about 1947 (the No.1 carbine) and below that is the bullpup version, known as the No.2 Carbine.

Regards
TonyE