223 Effectiveness in Combat
- Thread starter blackops
- Start date
- Status
HorseSoldier
Member
The problem you run into with that data set is that law enforcement shootings, even with long guns, take place at extremely short range compared to military stuff. Even SWAT sniper engagements are usually inside 100 meters, if I remember the numbers right.
Rifleman 173
Member
The .223 caliber rounds suck. There it is. Right out in the open. This is from an old Viet Nam veteran, firearms instructor and experienced police officer.
When the military forces were first inflicted with this mess, it was because of GREED. Historically speaking, as a general rule, the desires of the combat infantryman are passed over to meet the greed of the politicians and gun makers. Money is, was and always will be the primary factor when it comes to the development of arms and ammunition for our military forces. When you look at it, just about every gun or ammo selection involved kickbacks to various people all up and down the selection process.
In Viet Nam, in one battle my unit was in, our guys were pumping 5, 6 or even as many as 18 bullets into enemy soldiers who just would not stop. Of the 3 recovered enemy dead, we found that all 3 had been repeatedly hit with small bore .223 caliber bullets. We also found out that all 3 were stoned out of their minds so that pretty much nothing would stop them. Now here's the kicker... When the .223 caliber M-16 rifles were designed they were not designed to be used by soldiers who would meet up with doped up enemy soldiers. Now the funny part is that in Asia, it is not unusual for combat personnel over there to take pain relieving drugs BEFORE combat. This is not the first time American troops have run into this situation in the Orient. Documentation going back to the days of the Filipino Insurrection, the Korean War and WW2 shows that our weapons SHOULD have been designed to be used against doped up or highly intoxicated enemy troops. That was why the .45 acp pistol was designed and we lost track of that "little fact." The M-16 should have been designed using a bigger diameter and heavier grain bullet.
In another combat operation I saw one fellow paratrooper dump a magazine into an enemy soldier who was walking towards him. The enemy soldier ran off leaving behind a blood trail in his wake.
In another combat operation I saw another paratrooper cut loose with a full magazine into the side of the head of an enemy soldier. The enemy soldier dropped to the ground but continued to breathe for another 5 minutes or so before he finally expired.
Three or 4 years ago Hamilton County Indiana Police served a search warrant for a drug dealer's house. The guy showed up just as the police were about to leave. The guy in his Chevy Suburban tried to run down the police officers rather than surrender. The tactical guys cut loose with their M-4 carbines in .223 caliber and the .40 Glock pistols. The .223 caliber rounds either were deflected by the Suburban's windshield or they stuck in the glass. The bullets that did punch through the glass were the .40 caliber pistol rounds!! The driver died at the scene but NOT from .223 caliber rifle fire.
To me, the .223 caliber round does not have enough weight nor is it a big enough diameter round to be truly effective. The only reason why so many people have opted to use the .223 caliber round is because the military had it forced down their throats and the ammo, via military surplus stocks, is cheaper to purchase than other calibers.
Both the 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel are much more effective bullets which is what I push on my ranges. I do like the .223 for practice but not for my duty needs. I have learned, from personal experiences and experiences of other shooters, that I want something bigger, heavier and better to do the job. Too bad politics forced the .223 caliber rounds on our military because they deserve something much better.
When the military forces were first inflicted with this mess, it was because of GREED. Historically speaking, as a general rule, the desires of the combat infantryman are passed over to meet the greed of the politicians and gun makers. Money is, was and always will be the primary factor when it comes to the development of arms and ammunition for our military forces. When you look at it, just about every gun or ammo selection involved kickbacks to various people all up and down the selection process.
In Viet Nam, in one battle my unit was in, our guys were pumping 5, 6 or even as many as 18 bullets into enemy soldiers who just would not stop. Of the 3 recovered enemy dead, we found that all 3 had been repeatedly hit with small bore .223 caliber bullets. We also found out that all 3 were stoned out of their minds so that pretty much nothing would stop them. Now here's the kicker... When the .223 caliber M-16 rifles were designed they were not designed to be used by soldiers who would meet up with doped up enemy soldiers. Now the funny part is that in Asia, it is not unusual for combat personnel over there to take pain relieving drugs BEFORE combat. This is not the first time American troops have run into this situation in the Orient. Documentation going back to the days of the Filipino Insurrection, the Korean War and WW2 shows that our weapons SHOULD have been designed to be used against doped up or highly intoxicated enemy troops. That was why the .45 acp pistol was designed and we lost track of that "little fact." The M-16 should have been designed using a bigger diameter and heavier grain bullet.
In another combat operation I saw one fellow paratrooper dump a magazine into an enemy soldier who was walking towards him. The enemy soldier ran off leaving behind a blood trail in his wake.
In another combat operation I saw another paratrooper cut loose with a full magazine into the side of the head of an enemy soldier. The enemy soldier dropped to the ground but continued to breathe for another 5 minutes or so before he finally expired.
Three or 4 years ago Hamilton County Indiana Police served a search warrant for a drug dealer's house. The guy showed up just as the police were about to leave. The guy in his Chevy Suburban tried to run down the police officers rather than surrender. The tactical guys cut loose with their M-4 carbines in .223 caliber and the .40 Glock pistols. The .223 caliber rounds either were deflected by the Suburban's windshield or they stuck in the glass. The bullets that did punch through the glass were the .40 caliber pistol rounds!! The driver died at the scene but NOT from .223 caliber rifle fire.
To me, the .223 caliber round does not have enough weight nor is it a big enough diameter round to be truly effective. The only reason why so many people have opted to use the .223 caliber round is because the military had it forced down their throats and the ammo, via military surplus stocks, is cheaper to purchase than other calibers.
Both the 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel are much more effective bullets which is what I push on my ranges. I do like the .223 for practice but not for my duty needs. I have learned, from personal experiences and experiences of other shooters, that I want something bigger, heavier and better to do the job. Too bad politics forced the .223 caliber rounds on our military because they deserve something much better.
HorseSoldier
Member
Actually, this is completely incorrect.
I suppose you are trying to suggest that the AR-15 was some sort of corporate scam by Colt inflicted on the US military.
But, that has nothing to do with 5.56mm. The cartridge was developed based on US military analysis of battlefield realities, and the existing AR-10 was adapted to the new army cartridge because everyone with anything more than a tenth of a clue had figured out that by the 1960s the future was in getting away from the failed 7.62x51 service rifle cartridge as fast as their R&D budgets would carry them.
So if they were dead, how did anyone know if they were under the influence of something? Much less make an assessment as to their level of impairment? Was MAC-V running a medical examiner's office and doing autopsies? Haven't heard about that before if they were.
45 ACP was adopted because the US military adopted a service pistol firing a cartridge that was down below 380 ACP power levels. Mythology aside, it did not prove itself to be an especially effective man stopper, even if it was better than what post dated it.
Now as for intoxicated or doped up soldiers -- frankly if I had the choice I would always prefer to have any gunfight I was involved in have the other side half or more in the bag on booze, pot, or heroin. The solution, in those very rare occasions when it's an issue (because it isn't terribly common) is what LE figured out a long time ago, but the military has been very poor in prepping service people for -- keep going after them until they are dead.
And in another combat operation a guy I know had a face to face encounter with a bad guy (Afghan flavor thereof) and killed that guy with a single round of 5.56mm to the COM while that guy was trying to get his AK pointed back at him.
Anecdotes aren't statistics.
TexasPatriot.308
Member
I served 39 years ago, the M16 was and is a political forced piece of crap...every chance we got we picked up an AK, would have given anythiing for an M14.
kwelz
Member
Amazing how the only people I see really complain about the 5.56 fall into one of two categories..
1: Men who used the M16 in the early days of Vietnam and haven't touched once in combat since.
2: Armchair soldiers who read what group one say and think it is the word of god.
I shoot with a number of soldiers. None of them have had any complaints about the 5.56 inside 300 meters.
1: Men who used the M16 in the early days of Vietnam and haven't touched once in combat since.
2: Armchair soldiers who read what group one say and think it is the word of god.
I shoot with a number of soldiers. None of them have had any complaints about the 5.56 inside 300 meters.
laguna0seca
Member
While the m16 may have been a piece when it was introduced, the current models are reliable and accurate.
Yes, they don't have the power of a 7.62 out to long ranges, but they are still quite accurate. And frankly, at those ranges, the current enemy isn't going to be able to provide very accurate fire anyway. And depending on the engagement, you probably have some better firepower than a carbine. There wasn't a patrol we went on that we didn't have a m240. And if we had vehicles, you better believe we had at least a .50 or two, if not a mk19. And there is nothing more effective (in my experience) than a fully automatic weapon which fires 40mm grenades at 350rpm out to 2000 or so yards. I can only imagine how terrifying it would be to be on the receiving end of that.
However, when it comes to the infantry mainly holding an enemy in place and hitting them with arty and air. That hasn't been my experience. We were ambushed the first day in our AO and were denied on every request for indirect we made. That's including the mortars we had with us. It's complete BS that our troops are forced to fight with their hands tied behind their backs, because the brass is less concerned about their men than their careers and their image. And by brass, i mean, all the way up the chain.
Yes, they don't have the power of a 7.62 out to long ranges, but they are still quite accurate. And frankly, at those ranges, the current enemy isn't going to be able to provide very accurate fire anyway. And depending on the engagement, you probably have some better firepower than a carbine. There wasn't a patrol we went on that we didn't have a m240. And if we had vehicles, you better believe we had at least a .50 or two, if not a mk19. And there is nothing more effective (in my experience) than a fully automatic weapon which fires 40mm grenades at 350rpm out to 2000 or so yards. I can only imagine how terrifying it would be to be on the receiving end of that.
However, when it comes to the infantry mainly holding an enemy in place and hitting them with arty and air. That hasn't been my experience. We were ambushed the first day in our AO and were denied on every request for indirect we made. That's including the mortars we had with us. It's complete BS that our troops are forced to fight with their hands tied behind their backs, because the brass is less concerned about their men than their careers and their image. And by brass, i mean, all the way up the chain.
JASmith
Member
You've put your finger on the issue! The 5.56 with appropriate ammunition (M855 A1 or MK262) is very effective within 200-300 meters. Some would claim an even greater range.
This distance is long enough that one can keep the bad guys far enough out that your grenade launchers, arty, and air can have a field day. Works fine as long as you have the support!
Lose the support and the need for longer-ranging personal weapons becomes acute. We get these situations frequently enough that the ongoing debates continue to have relevance.
Let's not forget that the combined arms doctrine works most of the time, but the exceptions drive some unrecognized needs---
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Okay...Enough of the same-old same-old...
- Status
Similar threads
