Deer Hunter
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,097
DO NOT TURN THIS INTO A CALIBER WAR DAMNIT!
ok, now that that's out of the way. This is a guy I helped while he was in iraq. I helped him keep an eye on his girl, and make sure she's ok. I basically was their means of communications, so we became friends. Turns out he's coming to live near my house, so there's a plus. I'm going to edit this post so that Allan's name on yahoo is hidden.
I understand some may think this doesn't truely represent every facet of every military experience involving the 5.56 NATO. Voice your disapproval if you want, I don't mind.
And, he does know I'm using it for this.
ndk91588: Hey allan, are you there?
ndk91588: I'd like to ask a favor
***: whats up?
ndk91588: Well, do you feel comfortable talking about a war-related subject? I'm comprising some information regarding the inability of the 5.56 NATO cartriage in terms of man-stopping power for the last fifty years of service.
ndk91588: I'll be doing a presentation to my class about the subject, and Iw ould like some straight, no bull???? questions answered from a guy who's been in the dirt.
***: go for it
ndk91588: In any of your experiences while serving in the Iraqi war, did you come to find that the 5.56/.223 was an underpowered cartriage, or you didn't feel as though the round was adequate for your situation?
ndk91588: Examples would be urban combat, shooting at ranges of 200 yards+, or having to shoot an enemy combatant multiple times before he stopped fireing his weapon?
***: hmm
***: by cartiage i assuming u mean the magazine/clip correct?
ndk91588: Cartriage, as in the actual 5.56 NATO bullet. The .223 caliber bullet being fired from your M4.
***: i dont think it was good enough
ndk91588: The magazine's fine, more is always better, but in regards to that I've heard many reports where the .223 was an ineffective bullet.
ndk91588: Any first hand experience you would care to share?
***: we had an incedent by the euphrates river where we were getting small arms fire from a building. i personally watch two iraqi terrorists get shot and was stopped by their vests which were made to only stop 9mm rounds.
ndk91588: So... the velocity of the .223 round, fired from the shortened M4 barrels wasn't enough to push through the enemy's armor? That's an interesting point. On a side note, I hear they're bringing back the .45 ACP and making it the main cartriage for the military use. (Use of only FMJ AP rounds makes this possible). Now, in your experience were these rounds (5.56 NATO) sufficient in punching through obstacles?
***: a regular vehicle yes, when it came to sandbags or even some mud and straw walls no.
ndk91588: Given the chance, would you have swapped your standard issue M4 for something along the lines of a .308 battle rifle, such as the M14 or FN FAL? Also, do you feel that the military should put more work into changing the standard issue firearms over to the new 6.8 SPC remington cartriage?
***: yes and yes
***: Did you ever have the chance to make that change?
***: no
ndk91588: So there was no way for you to obtain another rifle if you chose? Alright. Besides the incident at the euphrates river, was there any other incident where the 5.56 NATO was lacking in the ability to kill somone in 2 to 3 hits? Anything else you'dl ike to add?
***: none that im permitted to say..my main weapon was a mk19 grenade launcher. the times ive used my rifle were desperate fighting for my life times
***: I understand. Thank you for allowing me to ask these questions, wars are always a touchy subject. One last thing, and I'll be done. In your honest opinion, do you think our soldiers are being put in danger due to an underpowered cartriage?
***: no i cant say they are. although there are underpowered rounds the M4 is lightweight which allows for a more comfortable line of sight and ability to hold it up longer without being fatigued. the round is underpowered but the army makes up for it with the weapon system
***: i think it floats the line of dangerous and not dangerous
ndk91588: I see. You had the standard, no frills rifle since you were trained with the grenade launcher, but there were variations on each rifle, wasn't there?
***: yeah i suppose
ndk91588: And, if you had the choice of a .308 that weighed the same as your M4 (they exist, DSA makes them), would you have choose it over the M4?
***: yeah
***: but they are more expensive than the m4s
***: meaniing less of them can be purchased for our soldiers and in the end someone is gonna get screwed
ndk91588: I understand that. I'm sure the army gets a discount from the manufacturers, right? If they could start making the para-model FALs availble, they could be made quicker and easier than the M4. Much less moving parts
***: the only discount the army gets is they buy it straight from the manufacturer. they dont pay extra for size, weight, shipping, taxes and profit
ndk91588: I see. Yet if these guns ever became the main tool of our army, it'd make a lot of our soldiers happy?
***: yeah it would
***: if not happy at least theyed feel safer
ndk91588: Very true. Well, thanks for your imput man.
***: np
***: ill catcha later
ok, now that that's out of the way. This is a guy I helped while he was in iraq. I helped him keep an eye on his girl, and make sure she's ok. I basically was their means of communications, so we became friends. Turns out he's coming to live near my house, so there's a plus. I'm going to edit this post so that Allan's name on yahoo is hidden.
I understand some may think this doesn't truely represent every facet of every military experience involving the 5.56 NATO. Voice your disapproval if you want, I don't mind.
And, he does know I'm using it for this.
ndk91588: Hey allan, are you there?
ndk91588: I'd like to ask a favor
***: whats up?
ndk91588: Well, do you feel comfortable talking about a war-related subject? I'm comprising some information regarding the inability of the 5.56 NATO cartriage in terms of man-stopping power for the last fifty years of service.
ndk91588: I'll be doing a presentation to my class about the subject, and Iw ould like some straight, no bull???? questions answered from a guy who's been in the dirt.
***: go for it
ndk91588: In any of your experiences while serving in the Iraqi war, did you come to find that the 5.56/.223 was an underpowered cartriage, or you didn't feel as though the round was adequate for your situation?
ndk91588: Examples would be urban combat, shooting at ranges of 200 yards+, or having to shoot an enemy combatant multiple times before he stopped fireing his weapon?
***: hmm
***: by cartiage i assuming u mean the magazine/clip correct?
ndk91588: Cartriage, as in the actual 5.56 NATO bullet. The .223 caliber bullet being fired from your M4.
***: i dont think it was good enough
ndk91588: The magazine's fine, more is always better, but in regards to that I've heard many reports where the .223 was an ineffective bullet.
ndk91588: Any first hand experience you would care to share?
***: we had an incedent by the euphrates river where we were getting small arms fire from a building. i personally watch two iraqi terrorists get shot and was stopped by their vests which were made to only stop 9mm rounds.
ndk91588: So... the velocity of the .223 round, fired from the shortened M4 barrels wasn't enough to push through the enemy's armor? That's an interesting point. On a side note, I hear they're bringing back the .45 ACP and making it the main cartriage for the military use. (Use of only FMJ AP rounds makes this possible). Now, in your experience were these rounds (5.56 NATO) sufficient in punching through obstacles?
***: a regular vehicle yes, when it came to sandbags or even some mud and straw walls no.
ndk91588: Given the chance, would you have swapped your standard issue M4 for something along the lines of a .308 battle rifle, such as the M14 or FN FAL? Also, do you feel that the military should put more work into changing the standard issue firearms over to the new 6.8 SPC remington cartriage?
***: yes and yes
***: Did you ever have the chance to make that change?
***: no
ndk91588: So there was no way for you to obtain another rifle if you chose? Alright. Besides the incident at the euphrates river, was there any other incident where the 5.56 NATO was lacking in the ability to kill somone in 2 to 3 hits? Anything else you'dl ike to add?
***: none that im permitted to say..my main weapon was a mk19 grenade launcher. the times ive used my rifle were desperate fighting for my life times
***: I understand. Thank you for allowing me to ask these questions, wars are always a touchy subject. One last thing, and I'll be done. In your honest opinion, do you think our soldiers are being put in danger due to an underpowered cartriage?
***: no i cant say they are. although there are underpowered rounds the M4 is lightweight which allows for a more comfortable line of sight and ability to hold it up longer without being fatigued. the round is underpowered but the army makes up for it with the weapon system
***: i think it floats the line of dangerous and not dangerous
ndk91588: I see. You had the standard, no frills rifle since you were trained with the grenade launcher, but there were variations on each rifle, wasn't there?
***: yeah i suppose
ndk91588: And, if you had the choice of a .308 that weighed the same as your M4 (they exist, DSA makes them), would you have choose it over the M4?
***: yeah
***: but they are more expensive than the m4s
***: meaniing less of them can be purchased for our soldiers and in the end someone is gonna get screwed
ndk91588: I understand that. I'm sure the army gets a discount from the manufacturers, right? If they could start making the para-model FALs availble, they could be made quicker and easier than the M4. Much less moving parts
***: the only discount the army gets is they buy it straight from the manufacturer. they dont pay extra for size, weight, shipping, taxes and profit
ndk91588: I see. Yet if these guns ever became the main tool of our army, it'd make a lot of our soldiers happy?
***: yeah it would
***: if not happy at least theyed feel safer
ndk91588: Very true. Well, thanks for your imput man.
***: np
***: ill catcha later
Last edited:
