Religious Shooter Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080529/ap_on_....Y0W7XPqOdI2ocA HUNTSVILLE, Ala. - The military is reviewing soldiers' complaints that their standard ammunition isn't powerful enough for the type of fighting required in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army's highest-ranking officer said Thursday. But Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, said it was too soon to say whether the Pentagon will switch. Current and former soldiers interviewed by The Associated Press said the military's M855 rifle rounds are not powerful enough for close-in fighting in cities and towns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Speaking with reporters at a conference in Huntsville, Casey said leaders are constantly soliciting feedback from soldiers in the field and were aware of complaints about the M855 ammunition. "To effectively prepare them we have to adapt as the enemy adapts, and that is some of the feedback we have gotten," Casey said. "We'll evaluate it quickly and then we'll decide how we want to proceed." But Casey said it would be premature to say if the Pentagon will consider a different type of ammunition. "I can't tell you exactly what we're going to do," he said. The M855 rounds were designed decades ago to puncture the steel helmets of Soviet soldiers from hundreds of yards away. Some soldiers said that they are not large enough to stop an enemy immediately in close quarters. Casey said the military has been evaluating its equipment and practices since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. "Technology is pulling us, and what we're learning on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan is pushing us," he said. So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDRODA396 Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? A Ninja Edited May 30, 2008 by CDRODA396 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el pres Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Short barrel 16" 50 BMG "Hollow Point" !! With a really good muzzle brake, of course !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caspian guy Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Maybe the Mk 262 with the 77 gr bullets? Peter Adams FY-39604 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? A Ninja what about a :blizzard: ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 There have been a couple of articles about this lately. One of the big problems is that the short barrel on the M4 really cuts back on the velocity and with the drop in energy you get a big drop in terminal performance. I had to laugh when one of the articles said that a .308 wouldn't always do a better job of stopping bad guys....yeah, who are they kidding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? That lesson has already been learned. A big honkin' .45... or .50's good too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? That lesson has already been learned. A big honkin' .45... or .50's good too. A bowling ball at 40 mph will do the job better than a baseball at 100...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? That lesson has already been learned. A big honkin' .45... or .50's good too. A bowling ball at 40 mph will do the job better than a baseball at 100...... Yes. But how many bowling balls do you think you can carry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I would rechamber to 50 Beowolf for cqb. That should knock them down pretty good Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revchuck Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I would rechamber to 50 Beowolf for cqb.That should knock them down pretty good Jim Jim - FWIW, the first round of .50 Beowolf I ever saw was in Afghanistan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GentlemanJim Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I would rechamber to 50 Beowolf for cqb.That should knock them down pretty good Jim Jim - FWIW, the first round of .50 Beowolf I ever saw was in Afghanistan... Cool It has rather interesting ballistics Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrawandDuck Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I wonder if they still have some Thompson .45's laying around in some crates somewhere?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocBall Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 I think I remember them making a buckshot round for the 40mm 203. Lots of "00" buck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JKSNIPER Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Hornady T.A.P. should do for now until they can re-learn that the 7.62 was the way to go. JK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el pres Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) I wonder if they still have some Thompson .45's laying around in some crates somewhere?? This was just a story but I always heard that Germans taken down by multiple hits with a Thompson hit the ground so hard their eyeballs were loose ??? Sounds like knockdown power to me !!! Heres one of the best resorces on the .556 NATO for anyone that has not read this, very educational !!! http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm He really explains why a .224 caliber bullet is just a .22lr at lower velocities and why it is also "sooo" deadly at 3200fps. Great stuff on 7.62x39 also in there. How about an M4 with a +p+ load ?? and Hollow point of coarse... I got it ** How about a 45ACP M203 launcher with a Thompson stick mag for CQB, pump away !!! Edited May 30, 2008 by DIRTY CHAMBER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080529/ap_on_....Y0W7XPqOdI2ocAH. So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." 00 Buck? This will: "The Russian military issue 5N7-specification 5.45 mm bullets are a somewhat complex full metal jacket design. The bullet's core consists mainly of a length of soft steel rod, cut to length during the manufacturing process to give the correct weight. There is a hollow air space ahead of the steel rod behind the bullet tip. The base of the bullet is tapered to reduce drag (a boat-tail bullet) and there is a small lead plug crimped in place in the base of the bullet. The lead plug, in combination with the air space at the point of the bullet, has the effect of moving the bullet's center of gravity to the rear; the hollow air space also makes the bullet's point prone to deformation when the bullet strikes anything solid, inducing yaw." LINK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Ho Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) Wasn't the M855 an attempt to beef up the 5.56? The old 55 gr just barely stable out of a 1/12 twist barrel would probably do some very interesting things when it hit something fleshy. I still like the idea of a 6.5 mm round. The 6.5 Grendel is interesting. Pretty damn close to the 6.5 x 55 (Swede), one of my favorites. Even closer to the 6.5 x 50 (6.5 Jap, or 6.5 Arisaka). IMHO one of the most underrated cartridges in a long time. edited cuz I kaint type. Edited May 30, 2008 by J-Ho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neomet Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Reach about 8" forward and pull the trigger on the M203. You'll need a mop for clean up and hearing aids for the rest of your TOD, but mission accomplished! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huston in Austin Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Also on the M203, if you are too close to spin arm the grenade, it is just a really big bullet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 what about a :blizzard: ? Now you're talkin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robomanusa Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Also on the M203, if you are too close to spin arm the grenade, it is just a really big bullet. I remember when we were qualifying on the mk19, this female MP was on the platform and lettin'er rip when the front legs of the tripod came out of there pucks and slid forward off the platform, she stayed on it as the weapon was going nose first over the front, firing 40mm grenades into the ground directly in front of us, shit we were scattering, shut the range down for awhile while EOD removed the unexploded ordnance,LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 (edited) Wasn't the M855 an attempt to beef up the 5.56? The M855 added a little weight over the 55 grn we used in Vietnam. More weight is never a bad thing - unless it starts to really drop the velocity & increase the recoil. But, what the M855 REALLY brought to the table was a steel core which enhanced its ability against helmets and armor. In Iraq, body armor has saved MANY U.S. soldier's lives. I am not aware of our current combat opponents using armor (yet) - but when they eventually wise up and "up armor" their bodies, the M855 might come in handy. The 6.5x55mm is the same length as a .30-06. A .308 necked to 6.5 (the .260 Remington) will fit a medium action 700 or an AR-10 and can match the old Swede - but either gun is considered too big by today's military and the ammo is too heavy. One proposed solution is to pack the punch (or most of it) of the .260 into a cartridge that is no longer than the .223. The 6.8, the Whispers, the Grendle and a few others are trying to get there. NATO standardization will be an issue and a road-block though. Hence, the use of the "SMK" 77 grain loading for the M4 and A2/3. But, the M4's 14.5" barrel is another hurdle even for the newer SMK. Our military used to change calibers and platforms every few years. The M16 and the 5.56mm have been in service far longer than other service weapons. Maybe its time for BOTH a new caliber and weapon design? (I personally like the Tavor - but that is just me). Edited May 30, 2008 by Carlos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 \So what round will "stop an enemy immdediately in close quarters." Phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range... or so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-Ho Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 Wasn't the M855 an attempt to beef up the 5.56? The 6.5x55mm is the same length as a .30-06. A .308 necked to 6.5 (the .260 Remington) will fit a medium action 700 or an AR-10 and can match the old Swede - but either gun is considered too big by today's military and the ammo is too heavy. One proposed solution is to pack the punch (or most of it) of the .260 into a cartridge that is no longer than the .223. The 6.8, the Whispers, the Grendle and a few others are trying to get there. I don't like the lenght of the 6.5x55, but the ballistics are wonderful. Great on deer usually translates pretty well to two legged critters. That's why I brought up the grendle. I think it is a good modern rendition of the old 6.5 caliber rounds. We tried really powerful (30-06) and really small (55 gr 5.56) It makes sense to try somthing in between. Short term solution. I just tried some Barnes Varmit Grenades. I like 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now