« D-Day plus 62 years | Main | Welcome to Hell, Mr. Zarqawi! »
June 07, 2006
Army misses the target
This is disappointing. It seems the military has reached a decision about replacing the 5.56mm round with something packing a bigger punch . . . and the bad guys have nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, the GIs do.
The U.S. Army completed a study of current 5.56mm M855 round, in response to complaints from troops that this ammunition was inadequate in combat. Troops reported ... enemy fighters were hit with one or more M855 rounds and kept coming. The study confirmed that this happened, and discovered why. If the M855 bullet hits slender people at the right angle, and does not hit a bone, it goes right through. That will do some soft tissue damage, but nothing immediately incapacitating.
The study examined other military and commercial 5.56mm rounds and found that none of them did the job any better. The study concluded that, if troops aimed higher, and fired two shots, they would have a better chance of dropping people right away.
The report recommended more weapons training for the troops, so they will be better able to put two 5.56mm bullets where they will do enough damage to stop oncoming enemy troops.
[...]
The army had been considering a switch of a larger (6.8mm) round, and the Special Forces has been testing such a round in the field. But a switch is apparently off the table at the moment. The U.S. Marine Corps is doing its own study, but has not finished it yet.
The army report is not likely to be well received by the troops.
GIs have been complaining for years about the 5.56mm round's inability to incapacitate enemy fighters quickly; excluding lucky shots that destroy the central nervous system or cause rapid exsanguination, wounds that may ultimately prove lethal still allow wounded jihadis to continue firing their weapons. That translates into more dead good guys.
The Army Rangers in Mogadishu in 1993 reported seeing Somalis hit multiple times by troopers wielding M-16 variants chambered in 5.56mm; they fought on, a result of both the caliber's poor performance and the use of a local narcotic that dulled their sensitivity to pain.
The recent experience in Afghanistan and Iraq has added to the chorus of complaints from the battlefield, which has spread to the 9mm army pistol's inability to reliably kill or incapacitate the enemy -- not suprising, given the prohibition on using hollowpoint ammo. Police departments have abandoned the 9mm because of its poor performance as a man-stopper -- even with good hollowpoints -- opting instead for the .40 cal. or the ever-popular .45.
The Army's decision to stick with the 5.56 mm is troubling, especially given that it's officers have acknowledged the problem as recently as last year. Major Robert E. Berg, an Army ordnance and aerospace engineer, wrote about it for Military.com.
In conflicts around the globe, it is becoming apparent that this venerable bullet [the 5.56 mm] may not have enough oompf to take down an enemy -- and keep him down.
[...]
The need to increase ammunition lethality is a pressing issue. For evidence, look no further than the Soldier Weapons Assessment Team Report 6-03, published by the United States Army Infantry Center, Directorate for Combat Developments, Small Arms Division. The report made the following recommendation:
A Government Lethality IPT has been stood up to standardize GEL block testing and an engineering study will be conducted extensive, soft target terminal effects of COTS and military 5.56mm ammunition. The characteristics of each bullet terminal performance will be determined. Based on requirements and using the engineering information, a new round should be type classified and made available.
[...]
Advantages Over the 5.56 NATO
Lethality is the first advantage. The 6.8 SPC edges both the 6.5 Grendel and the 5.56 NATO at short range against unprotected personnel. However, against light armor protected personnel, the 6.5 Grendel has an edge over the 6.8 SPC. Both are an improvement upon the 5.56. (Lethality at long range has not been tested.) For long-range engagements, both cartridges can be compared to the 7.62 NATO, currently in use by the U.S. military.
Telling our troops that the solution to the inadequate ammunition they're given is to carefully aim and double-tap the enemy is insane; combat is an intense environment -- one good shot may be the most any soldier can hope for when the targets are shooting back.
When there appears to be a technological solution that will give our soldiers a better chance of making sure the other guy ends up dead, the GIs deserve a better answer than, "Sorry, shoot straight; shoot twice."
Posted by Mike Lief at June 7, 2006 11:44 PM
| TrackBack
Comments
This is very troubling. I hope that someone in the media makes an issue out of this, sooner rather than later.
Posted by: Vermont Neighbor at June 8, 2006 09:02 AM
The best general-purpose combat round already in major production and widely used around the world is the 7.62 x 54 round chambered by the AK-47 and many of its offspring. But it wouldn't do to arm our boys with commie weapons.
Unfortunately, weight is an enormous factor here. The 5.56 NATO ball round weighs less than half as much as does the 7.62 NATO round. Twelve magazines of 30 (or 360) 7.62 NATO rounds weigh over 20 pounds. 360 rounds of 5.56 NATO weigh about 9 1/3 pounds. There are also significant savings in weapon weights. The importance of weight to any fighter is simply mobility. Far more lives are saved (and shitheads' lives ended) by good maneuver than by bullet-weight comparisons. And a fighter with lighter gear moves better than a heavier fighter.
Lighter fighters move in more quickly, are less fatigued when they get to the line, and can move positions in a firefight with far less difficulty.
This comparison is even more critical when the enemy is unarmored, poorly equipped, and carrying far fewer than 360 rounds. It's not unusual for a Marine or soldier in Iraq to be shooting at (and trying to outmaneuver) someone weighing half as much. Shoot and scoot wins the day.
Not that I've any love for the M-16. It's a piece of shit, and I'll take my M-14 any day. But carrying an M-16 and its ammo is a dream compared to nearly anything comparable.
Posted by: LT at June 8, 2006 08:55 PM
Another GUN article OOAL? Your followers have wet dreams about guns. It's just crazy to me. I've NEVER held a gun and I NEVER will. Murder is illegal so the guns that cause the murders should be illegal. Simple as that. Oh sure, you will say people kill people not guns. B***S***! I've never heard of someone being killed with a loaf of bread! It's always some super shooter weapon in the hands of a crazy ass white guy that causes the deaths of like 20 people at a time in shopping malls. Guns are EVIL EVIL EVIL!
Posted by: Sbarro at June 9, 2006 12:18 AM
Charles Manson and his followers used knives. That has something to do with loaves of bread. It's mental illness and rage that lead to murder.
Are you posting on this board for comic relief? It's as though you don't even have a 9th grade education.
Posted by: Vermont Neighbor at June 9, 2006 09:26 AM
Actually, guns don't kill people either. Not in a statistically significant sense, anyway.
I do think it's wonderful, however, that the Internet provides a place for mentally handicapped people to voice their views.
For what it's worth, the absurdist Polish author Bruno Schulz was killed with a loaf of bread in 1942.
Posted by: LT at June 9, 2006 06:35 PM
Thanks for the Bruno Schulz link. Fantastic, unique ideas ... hope that exhibit makes it to the US. I plan to check him out on the web.
Posted by: Vermont Neighbor at June 11, 2006 07:54 PM