Strictly academic question

.221 Rem Fireball and .22 rem. Jet are different cartridges. Either would make an effective shortbarrel rifle.....but for the survival concept I think commonly available ammunition is more appealing. .223 with a chamber adaptor to shoot .22 long rifle would be pretty practical.

I have to go with Stumper on this one. A 27 Savage 410/223 would be my pick. Especially with a 22lr adapter.

The last generation air crew survival rifle focused on reducing as much size and weight from the package as possible. The Henry AR-7 accomplished that beautifully. The entire rifle could break down and fit inside it's own buttstock. And .22LR rifle is probably the most compact ammo you can carry without logistically cranking out .22Long or 22Shorts. 22LR will work fine hunting small game to keep a downed pilot alive. But it won't do much against a hostile force.

The current USAF survival rifle is basically a break down M4 called the GAU-5A. The barrel comes out of the receiver and the pistol grip folds up. And instead of being limited to 10ish rounds of 22LR found in an AR-7 magazine, pilots have 4 magazines of 30 rounds of 5.56.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a30987343/gau-5a-assault-rifle/

For my own type survival/woods rifle, I would base choices off what the USAF and other DOD sections have already worked with. I think a twin barrel system like Springfield M6 is a great basis as long as I won't be followed by anything on two legs or 4 legs over a few hundred pounds. A single shot 5.56 top barrel for deer-ish sized game and a 410 lower barrel for killing anything 5.56 would vaporize.

herrwalther said:

The current USAF survival rifle is basically a break down M4 called the GAU-5A. The barrel comes out of the receiver and the pistol grip folds up. And instead of being limited to 10ish rounds of 22LR found in an AR-7 magazine, pilots have 4 magazines of 30 rounds of 5.56.

Click to expand...

Be careful with that designation! The GAU-5A was an XM-177 variant used by special forces in the Vietnam War.



221 FB was designed for a short (10") barrel. It will excell in one versus 223 or probably even the venerable Hornet. Now a 16" barrel is where the others will start to take over, especially past a few hundred yards.

PWC said:

I carried a GAU-5 for 2 yrs with its 2 lb muzzle brake.

Question was Hornet vs Jet experience only. Not rabbit trails for other calibers.

Click to expand...

OK, Without looking that up… recoilless gun?

PWC said:

I have neither a 22 Hornet no a 22 Jet so this query is a academic. There is an interesting thread here about a 22 Hornet woods rifle and someone else started a 22 Jet thread.

I remember when the Jet / Fireball first came out and the slick bolt action pistol for it.

As a short bbl survival type rifle, how do you rifle builders think they would compare? I know the Hornet has already been vetted by the USAF in 2 rifle types.

I used the 410 / 22 Hornet over / under in 1967 at Jungle Survival School, in Panama.

Just wondering...

Click to expand...

The RemJet was also known as center fire magnum and it’s ballistically equivalent to a .22WMR. The Jet was intended as a revolver round but suffered from setback issues in a cylinder. No bueno. But it does have the advantage of being designed from the ground up for shorter barrels. The Hornet is a small game rifle round and excels in carbine length barrels. For these reasons as much as I really like the Jet (I have a Contender 10” barrel) I’ll have to say the Hornet has the advantage.

PWC said:

I carried a GAU-5 for 2 yrs with its 2 lb muzzle brake.

Question was Hornet vs Jet experience only. Not rabbit trails for other calibers.

Click to expand...

Thank you for your service. I didnt realize the moderator weighed that much.

He did mention Fireball in his first post... I wasnt trying to introduce a new caliber to the thread.

----------

Imho, the hornet is great for a civilian survival rifle. Add a .410, and its even better. The USAF M4 hornet bolt action was not supposed to be used for enemy combatants. Only for food gathering and defense against wild animals.

22 Jet is a revolver round that also obviously works in rifles. Its not as hot as the hornet but should do well in a 100yd role. The thing both the Hornet and Jet have in common is their report is not as loud or sharp as, say, a 223. This is key in a survival situation as it will be harder to pinpoint the source of the sound. Or maybe trick any nearby enemies into thinking the shot was farther away. Either work well in a short barrel, though i have no experience with the Jet.

Ive shot the Hornet from 10 and 18" barrels, as well as 223 in 14, 16 and 18", and 22-250 in a 14" barrel. The hornet in a 10" barrel has less noise and concussion than 223 in any length ive shot. The 22-250 i threw in as an extreme. Its a raging handful of hate. But it does share the bolt face diameter and action length of the 308 based rifles...

All in all i think i would take the Hornet in a survival rifle over the Jet because it can be loaded with a wider range of loads, and takes up less space per cartridge. Its also more widely available.

@Mark_Mark the GAU-5A and a couple variants were a CAR-15/XM177 pattern M16 rifle with a 10.5" (or so) barrel and a 3.5 or 4.5" moderator muzzle device. The moderator suppressed the shot by about 3dB, but more importantly, altered the distinct sound the short barreled M16 made into a sound more like that of an M16 with a normal 20" barrel. All so as to not give away the Special Forces special identity. Or so ive read. What makes that null is the fact above that the moderators apparently weighed 2 pounds, negating the handiness of a short barrel.

PWC said:

I remember when the Jet / Fireball first came out and the slick bolt action pistol for it.

Click to expand...

Are we talking about the .22 Jet (a .357 Magnum necked down to .224), or the .221 Fireball (basically a shortened. 223)?

Because as far as I know, nobody ever made a bolt action pistol in .22 Jet.

I can't think of a single reason that a .22 Jet would be preferable to a .22 Hornet in a survival rifle.

The .221 Fireball would be a better choice than the Hornet if you wanted a semi auto.

PWC said:

What? GAU-5? Stubby M16, (CAR-15), no fwd assist, first of the platforms to have telescoping butt stock, also called the "Commando". Not as good as the M16 even after they got the powder and chrome chambers straightened out. I preferred the M14.

What's the purpose of your question? To see if I knew them? To see if the USAF actually issued them to Combat Control Teams? Certainly they did, even had the 49MM grenade launcher with a stupid trigger.

Click to expand...

the question was for me… Me without looking it up, I was guessing it was a recoiless gun. My guess was way off! lol

PWC said:

Never knew about sound modification. Once the shooting starts only listened for AK's.

Click to expand...

Its only what ive read or watched online. I cannot comment on the truth to that. Only reason i even know about the GAU-5A and moderator is i inherited an original SinglePoint OEG just like what was used in the Son Tay prison raid in 1970. So i built a GAU-5A around it.

I don’t have a Jet revolver but I do have a .22 Hornet rifle, I have shot some .4” 5 shot groups with it but it wouldn’t be my first pick as a “survival” caliber, for the same reasons 221 fireball wouldn’t be. Though, not the last choice either…

BigBlue 94 said:

Its only what ive read or watched online. I cannot comment on the truth to that. Only reason i even know about the GAU-5A and moderator is i inherited an original SinglePoint OEG just like what was used in the Son Tay prison raid in 1970. So i built a GAU-5A around it.

Click to expand...

that’s very cool! it made the sound of a regular service rifle, so enemy can’t tell the difference between SpecOperatior and regular hippies

Skgreen said:

If it isn't https://hodgdon.com/ , it isn't Hodgdon.

Click to expand...

PWC said:

I carried a GAU-5 for 2 yrs with its 2 lb muzzle brake.

Question was Hornet vs Jet experience only. Not rabbit trails for other calibers.

Click to expand...

Thread drift is inevitable. It is very (too) common for a thread starting out with "I need info on XXX caliber gun" and if lucky two follow up posts with be on track but often drift off to "My army training was with a Jeep". When I first started visiting forums this bothered me (2005), but it's just a fact of internet life; a question is asked on a forum and 10,000 minds start spinning, many spinning out of control...

Given the most recent developments in optics technology, I'm not sure barrel length (e.g. better/longer sighting radius) has as much merit as it used to. However, velocity and terminal impact are still big factors in how "effective" any cartridge is. So is a shorter barrel - say 10" vs. 14" or 16" - with a cartridge (case/powder/projectile) tuned to that barrel length and in a frame that supports the very precise use of a durable optical sight a better solution than the existing options of retrofitting a Stoner-actioned receiver to be shorter and lighter or a break-action weapon designed for shortness and lightness, each in the standard service round?

Maybe not the most practical or economical survival weapon ever issued, but the quality and versatility of the WWII Luftwaffe M30 survival drilling can't be denied.


A SxS 12 gauge over a 9.3x74R should allow one to survive anything from an elephant attack to downing a bunch of sparrows for food (and do it all with STYLE )!

Swampman said:

Maybe not the most practical or economical survival weapon ever issued, but the quality and versatility of the WWII Luftwaffe M30 survival drilling can't be denied.
View attachment 1051201

A SxS 12 gauge over a 9.3x7R should allow one to survive anything from an elephant attack to downing a bunch of sparrows for food (and do it all with STYLE )!

Click to expand...

take that to the trap field… funny story, was shooting trap and a deer was in the fields and would not leave. that would have been a handy shotgun to have

“Survival Rifle” is a funny term, with variable enough meaning to different people to virtually have no meaning at all.

The proposed scenario can’t be ignored. Being shot down behind enemy lines in hostile territory is a different thing than being stranded in the wilderness, and still different than roaming some dystopian wasteland in a post apocalyptic fantasy…

22 Jet would not be on my list, nor 221 Fireball, nor even Hornet, for any of these purposes. Fighting to survive or hunting for sustenance, I would want either a 223/5.56 fighting carbine if in hostile territory, or a more impactful cartridge with less performance loss in shorter barrels, like a 6x45, 6.5 Grendel, etc.

I have always thought of a 22 Hornet as a reloadable 22 MAG. Slightly less powerful but with newer propellants close. That factor was why I own one. Also with a lead bullet and downloaded it can become 22 LR for a meat getter.

PWC said:

I have neither a 22 Hornet no a 22 Jet so this query is a academic. There is an interesting thread here about a 22 Hornet woods rifle and someone else started a 22 Jet thread.

I remember when the Jet / Fireball first came out and the slick bolt action pistol for it.

As a short bbl survival type rifle, how do you rifle builders think they would compare? I know the Hornet has already been vetted by the USAF in 2 rifle types.

I used the 410 / 22 Hornet over / under in 1967 at Jungle Survival School, in Panama.

Just wondering...

Click to expand...

If I'm going obscure. I would use a 22TCM.
It's hard to beat the 22 hornet's killing power or lack of for small to medium game.
It gives better reliability than 22wmr.
Either way it would need a short barrel and suppressor if legality isn't an issue.
22 jet would have me worrying about my empties.