Every War Has Its Caliber

[cleetus03]

I randomly found this opinion article and thought it was an interesting read so I decided to share it with the forum. It's full of unsubstantiated claims but none the less it made me curious to learn more on the history of "Caliber Wars" in warfare. That is the history of calibers being adopted, being declared obsolete, and the caliber that then replaces it. If any of you can provide more links to this subject it would be greatly appreciated!




Here's the link to the article; http://www.nolanchart.com/article3901.html

 

[starkadder]

Thanks to the know-nothing idiots that were running the show in the early sixties we have been saddled with a varmit round for a battle rifle instead of the AR-10 that Eugene Stoner origionally submitted, if he had his way and his weapon had not been redesigned to please McNamara, Winchester, and others we wouldn't be having this disscusion now.

This is this! It's not something else, it's this!

Don't pull it if you don't plan to use it, and don't use it if you don't plan to kill!

ALWAYS REMEMBER OUR MEN AND WOMEN OVER THERE.

 

[Kayback]

Woot, bashing the 5.56mm abd the 9x19mm.

KBK

 

[Eagles6]

The author should be embarrassed to sign his name to such crap, but then it is AP>

 

[Elvishead]

What was his point?

Big slow, or fast small light, or.....a compromise?

War's are not just fought by bullet's, they are fought with "Fire power" Bombs, missiles and intelligence. And sheer number of troop ratio.

I know, because I have the same fat finger's on my lazy boy.

Sounds like me when I've been drinken to much, and I'm angree at my father.:banghead:

 

[Bill2e]

Honestly, my opinion shouldn't carry much weight here. I'm just reporting and analyzing what I see. I'm an out-of-shape civilian, sitting in my easy chair, thousands of miles away from any battlefield, with my fat fingers at a computer keyboard. It's been over 20 years since I've shot anything, mostly range practice with a .22. My paper targets didn't shoot back.

So why write the article then???

 

[nicholst55]

So why write the article then???

Because he had to write an article in order to get paid.

 

[Jim Watson]

There are so many errors of fact in that mess, I don't have the time to catalog them.

 

[crazy-mp]

And in the future we will fight war with water guns, as soon as you dry out you can go back to fighting. Instead of having hand grenades there will be water balloons, and body armor will be rain coats! Oh look a rainbow!!

Leave the gun/ammo articles to the people who know what they are talking about, or at least the ones who get free guns for writing reviews.

 

[KBintheSLC]

Big slow, or fast small light, or.....a compromise?

Big and Fast = 7.62 NATO.

The best of both worlds.

 

[eye5600]

The firearms field is very conservative. New designs appear rarely and are adopted cautiously. You would not want a 1911 automobile or 1911 airplane, but a 1911 pistol doesn't leave you far behind the leading edge. (Granted, the latest "1911" is not John Browning's 1911, but it's close enough.) Depends on how you count, I suppose, but the M-16 is only the 4th principle infantry rifle of the last 100 years, and it's been in service for nearly 50 years. With so many options available and so few choices made, there are bound to be critics.

 

[Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow]

There are so many errors of fact in that mess, I don't have the time to catalog them.

ThisiswhatI'msayin. Next thread.

 

[SquirrelNuts]

Quality work right there! They couldn't find someone with more background? Most boy scouts have more background than him.

 

[545days]

I find it interesting that while lots of people support a return to the 7.62 NATO, I never hear anyone advocating carrying half as much ammo.

7.62 NATO weighs about twice as much as 5.56. Therefore, assuming that troops are carrying as much as they can, it equals half as many rounds. Does that really sound like a good idea? Any idea how many rounds are fired on average before one hits an enemy? Ever carried as much ammo as you could haul, plus body armor, a helmet and all the other necessary crap that an infantryman is saddled with these days?

There is a strong argument that terminal ballistics are not the most important consideration (or even in the top two) when standardizing on a military cartridge. War is not like deer hunting. The deer don't shoot back.

Snipers on the other hand are another issue entirely.

Amateurs talk tactics. Professionals talk logistics.

Edit: The quotation should be "Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics." A quick search reveals that this quotation has been attributed to Omar Bradley, Gen Robert H. Barrow USMC, Lt Gen Alfred M. Gray, Jr., Tom Clancey, and others.

 

[The Annoyed Man]

I've never fired an M16, but I do own four AR15s - two carbines, and two varmint rifles, and I would have no problem taking one of the carbines into a firefight. Well, let me amend that. . . .I would have no problem with it if I could just imagine it from my easy chair while my fat fingers typed it up.



I think it is a great rifle, the AR15, and I imagine that this would extend to the M16 also. But, I also like .308s, own 3 bolt rifles in that caliber, and wish I owned an AR10 or an M1A. I do think that the AR15/M16 does have an advantage over any .308 in both weight of the rifle, and the quantity of ammo in a full load out. But the .308 does have certain advantages, most of which have been listed here. Perhaps the answer is to equip one rifleman in each squad with a .308 caliber rifle?

 

[gunnie]

wouldn't know where to begin talking about that article.

guess i'll cover things that got left out instead...

the tests that led to adopting the M-14, which was the shortest ever issued rifle in US history, determined it superior to the original HK 91 designs, and the FAL. not sure without looking, but maybe the AR-10, also.

the heavier SS109 has slowed the bullet a lot. as did the short BBL on the 16-A4. but even the original rounds issued for the weapon didn't reach stoner's and the air force's velocity spec. then they slowed it even more looking for fixes in the problematic period of first issue in 'nam.

before WWI, john "God Bless Him" browning had approached the army with his schemes about creating a "light machine gun". something a guy could pick up and run to the next trench with. he managed to raise an utter firestorm of disinterest. from his own monies, he designed redesigned, and built the BAR.

when, as browning had told them they would the army was sent to europe, it was ready with everything but a production line...

browning outright gave them the patent to expedite the process.

the american revolutionaries took solid cover and waited for the brits, who were ordered to fight in rows of straight lines, with ample targets of chance for a round that missed the first row.

the US military small arms trailed woefully behind in technology compared to what the public had untill about the 03 springfield. still i'd pick an 1894 winchester in 30-30 over the '03 in 30-06 in baghdad.

there's a link here @ THR, the army had been desigining the garand for decades (+) before WWII even broke out.

the moro rebellion included an adversary wearing body armor, of sorts. [an I.B.A?] the government seems to overeact to same. the .357M and the 38 super were FBI generated vest specific designs. i read of a policeman in portland who was wearing a vest rated for WAY over the .22lr that hit over his heart and left him hospitalized long afterward. until the snakeskin concept gets fully developed, blunt impact trauma will remain a problem. the 7.62 plates in our current system are BAD heavy, not as big as one would dream of in a firefight, and so large they are awkward to shoot long or short iron [two handed] with.

$0.02

gunnie

 

[berettashotgun]

I'd rather wrap my fat fingers around another brewsky and stir the pot..................

 

[BornAgainBullseye]

Sorry fellers.... The 7.62 NATO is far more powerful and less resistant to wind. Also is far more deadly above 300 yards where the 5.56 has the energy of a rimfire at that range. I wouldn't feel outgunned with a M16 until I had to shoot through cover or a car or a door or a few interior walls. I guess in a perfect battlefield with no wind no cover it might be ideal. But I'm going to grab 7.62 if I have the chance. I have shot living creatures at and beyond 300 yards with both .223 and .308 and I have to say that the .308 is far better at the longshots and kills cleaner and faster than the .223

 

[scrat]

ya a little dissapointed. when i saw the title. i thought cool were going to talk about the .30 calibers of WWII. like the 30 carbine, 30-06, 303. then i opened this up.

 

[22lr]

The AP writer was smoking something. All he did was bring back the ole urban legends of how week the 5.56 and 9mm are. Forgot the mention the part about how the 9mm just sucks because its a ball round, or that the 5.56 was jacked up from its original form. Gosh I hate these writers. :banghead:

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics

I never hear anyone advocating carrying half as much ammo.

It seems to my uneducated, civilian, sofa sitting eye that:

1. Many if not most patrolls and all our supply lines in Iraq are mechanized. So our soldiers dont "carry" anything.

2. Many firefights are in an urban environment where 7.62 can make a big difference in converting cover to concealment.

So why not allow U.S. soldiers in the field to carry whatever they feel is best suited to that days work?

7.62 if driving through town, and 5.56 if playing in the woods?

 

[Dan Crocker]

Oh God, not again.

 

[berettashotgun]

If I was there....I'd rather let the USAF bomb the living dog$#i+ out of the place while I wrapped my fat fingers around a beer.
If I had to chose - a 243 would be very nice with a 90gr bullet.
Is that sorta' like the 6mm lee-navy? wink-wink

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Covering fire. I'll keep my 5.56, and by greater quantity, thanks.

 

[rbernie]

Twenty four posts, and nobody actually read the OP:

That is the history of calibers being adopted, being declared obsolete, and the caliber that then replaces it. If any of you can provide more links to this subject it would be greatly appreciated!

This request is the only reason that I'm holding this tread open. Let's ignore the referenced article with its silly well-trodden armchair warrior pap regarding the effectivity of 5.56 vs. 7.62x51 and address the stated question, OK?