The British on the 5.56 caliber

[Shadow Man]

We don't get much respect from our British counterparts either. More than one place in Iraq has "Name one war the Americans won without the help of the English"

Just below that is
The American Revolutionary War
The War of 1812
The American Civil War

Conversely, the joke also went: Name one war the British won without American help since we became allies; uhh...uhhmm...the Boer War! There we go. I may have forgotten some, but so have the Brits; Tripoli, Spanish-American, Mexican-American...

As for the whole on-topic debate: only hits count; you can't possibly miss fast enough to catch up. With that said, a short-barrelled 5.56x45 with the M855 round is woefully inadequate. However, that same rifle with the MK 262 becomes more effective, but still lacks any longer-range acceptability. When used within its design parameters and utelizing a heavier grain round, the 5.56x45mm is a very versatile round. Problem is, it is rarely used as it was intended.

The 5.56x45mm is a good blend of light recoil, terminal effects, and ammunition capacity. Are there better options out there? Probably, yes. But the 5.56 has become accepted the world over, and changing that isn't going to be easy.

 

[everallm]

For those of a technical and historical bent who might be interested in both the take up of the 7.62x51 as well as the politics of the NIH (Not Invented Here) of the US Army in the '50's which killed the British 7x43 and EM-2 rifle.

I finally managed to get hold of a scanned copy of the 1950 test report and it makes interesting reading to say the least in how an institution will bends facts to suit its personal objectives....

( I have attached a link BEWARE, IT IS A 15MB file)


handle.dtic.mil/100.2/AD896858

I particularly like the parts where the weight of the EM-2 was deliberately inflated whilst the comparison weapon they used was the T-25 which was already going to be dropped in favour of the much heavier T-44 (which became the M14).

Same with the ammunition where the .280 bullet weight was inflated to 139gr when the actual designed combat weight was 130gr and the opposing round was stated as 137gr when the designed combat weight was 147gr - 155gr.

Similar tactics and economy with the truth occurred with the M16 and the 5.56.

"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose"

 

[navyretired 1]

Hawkeye, thats right about vast amounts of 30-06 and the British didn't go with the 280 because of the total cost of a new rifle system and stores of ammo and rifles, not U.S. ? preasure.
Yeh how in hell did this go from my .30 is better than you .223 to my country is smarter than I am.

 

[everallm]

Navyretired,

I'm sorry but your point about the British and the 280 isn't accurate at all.

Pre WW2, the British were already in the process of evaluating the move from bolt action to semi automatic rifles along with a caliber change.

This was put on hold due to the war where a move was simply not practical.

Post WW2, the British spent a lot of time, effort and skull sweat in evaluating all the lessons learned from the various conflicts and the various armies.

They developed the EM-1 and EM-2 rifles, along with a cartridge that took ALL the lessons learned and would be useable both in rifle as well as a GPMG (General Purpose Machine Gun) the Taden.

The EM-2 was actually limited issued (Rifle No. 9 Mk1) as was the 7x43 (7mm Mk 1Z) but was killed off by a combination of

Outright lies during the Aberdeen proving grounds testing,
Not Invented Here syndrome,
Generals fighting the last war
Politics where Churchill, who had been re-elected in 1951 saw it as a easy trade to help bolster NATO standardization

The British then still had to move to the 7.62x51 and FAL so your view that "the British didn't go with the 280 because of the total cost of a new rifle system and stores of ammo and rifles, isn't supported.

 

[josh...just josh]

on the subject of the 5.56 "only" being a 300 meter cartridge; I'm in the Army reserve and I'm a pretty average shooter (in 6 years I have never not qualified on my first try, but I have never gotten expert either). On the qualifying range the brightly colored man-size target is plenty hard to see at 300 meters (I have 15/20 vision too!). Terrorist don't wear yellow as far as I know... I have shot at 500 meter ranges a few times over the years and I got to say, I couldn't imagine having to shoot an enemy at that range. I could hardly the target! I have never shot my m16 in combat, but from my experience it seems that 300m is more than enough range!

 

[Shadow Man]

I have never shot my m16 in combat, but from my experience it seems that 300m is more than enough range!

Until you start taking fire from a position you know is about 400 yards away and it is "too bright with too much cloud cover" (AKA, B.S. reason your CAS can't come in) so you're stuck there with your fifth point of contact flapping in the breeze because "It doesn't matter that I ignored your requests for a change in weapon systems, I understand the situation perfectly from my air-conditioned trailer 20k away at the FOB."

 

[RedLion]

^^^ And what would soldiers from earlier periods done?

What if you had the "range" but they were in a bunker?
http://www.defense.gov/home/features/iwo_jima/iwo.html

What if they have a better cartridge and a better position?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_San_Juan_Hill

And what about when you might be in a biohazard/nuclear zone?
Would you be willing to spend 24/7/365 in the suits that they wore in desert storm??
The chance of that happening is low enough that those suits are only needed in certain situations, because the suits inhibit mobility and maneuverability, as well as add weight and cost to every soldier....

 

[Fosbery]

SMAW - IMI Israel (derived from the British LAW)

As far as I know the B-300/SMAW launcher itself is an original Israeli design. The sighting rifle is based on that used on the British LAW 80 though.

The basic (smaller, M72) LAW is an American design.

Until you start taking fire from a position you know is about 400 yards away and it is "too bright with too much cloud cover" (AKA, B.S. reason your CAS can't come in) so you're stuck there with your fifth point of contact flapping in the breeze because "It doesn't matter that I ignored your requests for a change in weapon systems, I understand the situation perfectly from my air-conditioned trailer 20k away at the FOB."

1) 5.56mm can still hit targets out to 400 yards
2) But this is what DMRs, snipers and machineguns are for anyway
3) Taliban/insurgents who can shoot accurately out to 400 yards are not exactly common
4) Neither are US/British soldiers who can do the same
5) What about when you come under fire from 1,500 yards? You can't issue .50 BMG to everyone, you have to draw a line somewhere based on things other than effective range e.g. weight, size, cost, control/repeatability etc. What about when they come up against a main battle tank? Not everyone can carry a Javelin.

That's one hypothetical situation. What about the hypothetical situation: contacts at 100 yards, and lots of them. You're going to be shooting 7.62 a lot slower than you would 5.56, you're going to be changing mags more often and you're going to run out of ammunition a lot sooner.

 

[Shadow Man]

Let me clarify my "hypothetical" situation for Fosbery and RedLion; the request had been made to switch from M-4A1's with 10" barrels to full-sized M-16A3's. Request denied, stating they were unnecessary for our current job. I fully understand that a 5.56x45mm round can hit targets at 400 yards away. In fact, that range is no problem for the right barrel length and bullet grain weight combination. Our SDM's (A DMR is a rifle...Designated Marksman's Rifle. What you are thinking of is a Squad Designated Marksman) and hogs were about 75yds behind us, engaging targets in the opposite direction, with our SAW gunner providing backup. No, these guys weren't shooting MOA at us, but when rounds start impacting your building, you sit there all John Wayne/Clint Eastwood cool and say "They aren't accurate enough for me to be bothered yet." Number four is just....really? I mean...really?? :banghead: Marines train to fire out to 500 yards, Army to 300, I'd bet they could both make a 400 yard shot if needed. If I come under fire from 1500 yards out, and I can't engage, I'm moving. As for your situation, there was a MOH recipient a few years back, a sniper using an M14 to protect a crash site. He and his spotter (also an MOH recipient) held out for something like four hours before they were overrun, keeping the onrushing mobs at bay. Yes, at the end, he did run out of ammunition, but so did his spotter who was using a 5.56x45mm CAR-15. To both of your questions RedLion, I'd have to say fire and maneuver, that seems to have worked before.

Since you both obviously missed the point I was trying to make, I'll make it more clear: 300 yards is enough range...until it isn't.

 

[josh...just josh]

I won't dispute actual combat experience because I have much more respect for opinions formed when bullets are flying in your direction (and for the soldiers in the direction of those bullets) than what my limited experience has given me. I know that personally that I would have a hard time being very accurate at 400 yards with ANY round with ghost ring sights. Maybe if the rifle was equipped with a low power scope the differences between the range of the 5.56 and the 7.62x51 might become more of an issue for the average soldier. On the logic that your squad weapons should be engaging the targets beyond you range; I have only shot a SAW a handful of times and never at any real great range, but seeing as it shots the same 5.56 in what would have to be a less accurate configuration than that of a M16 I would say that it would be less effective at those ranges. Although the M240B in 7.62x51 may be a lot more effective, but then again I have only shot that one twice and it is much heavier than a SAW so there is the mobility argument

 

[Chindo18Z]

Chindo, you know a lot of really torn up people. Do you work in a VA hospital or something?

Several decades of ongoing military service (Army).

Chindo18Z Quote:
I've seen a lot more folks survive 7.62 x 39 hits than 5.56 x 45. Several friends of mine are still walking around my unit after having been drilled by AK fire.

Ever think that might be due to far more advanced medical services they receive?

I've actually posted that exact thought in other posts, but I've also observed survivors who got damn little first rate trauma care and survived anyway. Just not as frequently with 5.56 wounds in my experience.

7.62 x 39 is (statistically) slightly less lethal than 5.56, but a good hit with either round will be VERY BAD for the intended target. Neither is a death ray; either will do the job. I've seen torso hits from both...I'm a believer. This applies to most military caliber centerfire rifle rounds. Generally, if you take a centerfire rifle hit center mass and don't have the services of a good trauma evacuation/treatment system, you are in very, very deep trouble. Regardless of caliber.

------------

Regarding 5.56 wounds:

They are generally horrible. Forgetting fragmentation as a primary wounding mechanism for a moment...the little 5.56 will exit at an acute tangent fairly often. Nothing magic about it. Almost any varmint round can do the same. Very light bullet at high velocity enters flesh, yaws, fragments in to two or more chunks (or not), and then is deflected by bone (after losing velocity in a micro-second). The round deflects out the body at a different angle. I was standing a few feet from someone hit with M193 in the hip; bullet exited thru clavicle (shoulder). I've seen the results of someone shot through lower left arm into lower left throat (upward angle) with exit out of lower right of jaw (after encountering jaw, facial bones, and skull. Quite a mess. Guy was alive but definitely out of the fight and crippled for life. Head shot to skull? You are done. Skull fragments and eyeballs popped out. Exploded pumpkin time.

Will a 5.56 always do this? No. In fact, at certain ranges (and usually through soft tissue), M855 sometimes fails to fragment and punches knitting needle through-and-through holes in a man.

Most folks fail to appreciate the damage ANY high velocity rifle caliber can create in a human body. Even extemity wounds can be catastrophic when leg or arm bones are hit and shattered.

-------------

Regarding Rifleman Logistics:

In Iraq or Afghanistan, I'm wearing 45-55 pounds of on-body kit in 120+ F temperatures. Helmet, ESAPI plate & soft armor, 6-10 magazines, CIRAS, MBITR radio, PVS-14 NVD, water, smoke/frags, IFAK, signal kit, gunbelt & holster, pistol, .45 reloads, etc.. Every ounce counts against me. Its already difficult enough to carry a whole lot of 5.56 due to MOLLE armor configuration and tight quarters in helos, vehicles, doorways, windows, or turrets.

Our opponents (in both OIF & OEF) are usually not carrying much 7.62 x 39 (2-3 magazines). They are going to run dry before I do. I can nail them to their ground while I call up a bigger stick and maneuver to their flank. Sucks to be them.

7.62 basic load? No thanks. 5.56 is fine...and I can carry more. YMMV

---------------

Regarding M4A1s:

After a recent rotation to Iraq, no negative M4A1 AAR comments were noted by any of our ODAs. Multiple battalions worth of Green Berets bitched about a lot of things (including weapons), but not the M4A1 or its ability to kill.

I've carried the M4A1 in both Afghanistan & Iraq (including during dust storms). No issues. Nobody around me seemed to have any issues either.

 

[C-grunt]

Let me clarify my "hypothetical" situation for Fosbery and RedLion; the request had been made to switch from M-4A1's with 10" barrels to full-sized M-16A3's. Request denied, stating they were unnecessary for our current job. I fully understand that a 5.56x45mm round can hit targets at 400 yards away. In fact, that range is no problem for the right barrel length and bullet grain weight combination. Our SDM's (A DMR is a rifle...Designated Marksman's Rifle. What you are thinking of is a Squad Designated Marksman) and hogs were about 75yds behind us, engaging targets in the opposite direction, with our SAW gunner providing backup. No, these guys weren't shooting MOA at us, but when rounds start impacting your building, you sit there all John Wayne/Clint Eastwood cool and say "They aren't accurate enough for me to be bothered yet." Number four is just....really? I mean...really?? :banghead: Marines train to fire out to 500 yards, Army to 300, I'd bet they could both make a 400 yard shot if needed. If I come under fire from 1500 yards out, and I can't engage, I'm moving. As for your situation, there was a MOH recipient a few years back, a sniper using an M14 to protect a crash site. He and his spotter (also an MOH recipient) held out for something like four hours before they were overrun, keeping the onrushing mobs at bay. Yes, at the end, he did run out of ammunition, but so did his spotter who was using a 5.56x45mm CAR-15. To both of your questions RedLion, I'd have to say fire and maneuver, that seems to have worked before.

Since you both obviously missed the point I was trying to make, I'll make it more clear: 300 yards is enough range...until it isn't.

Sometimes Im glad my Division decided on A4s instead of the carbines. Maybe thats the difference between guys who have had good results with the 5.56 and the guys who havent?

 

[leadcounsel]

Since when did we take any warfighting advice from the Brits? Men who generally know zip about guns and cannot own many guns privately aren't the best 'advice givers' on munitions...

 

[josh...just josh]

well I am without question a POG, but if the question is between 5.56 and 7.62x39 I think that we picked the winner. The one time that I shot an AK I couldn't hit the broadside of broad barn and I am fairly accurate with a M16

 

[Chindo18Z]

C-grunt: Sometimes Im glad my Division decided on A4s instead of the carbines. Maybe thats the difference between guys who have had good results with the 5.56 and the guys who havent?

Good point. The 14.5" M4s can still reach out (even more so with a good optic and zero). But a 20" barrel can deliver a bit more accuracy.

I can sympathize with Shadowman's comments about the piston driven shorties. Lot's of guys carry 'em without thinking completely through the advantage/disadvantage equation. Great for CQB and egress/ingress of vehicles and structures, but you lose a lot (range, accuracy, velocity, & fragmentation threshold) in open country. A lot of my teams run standard M4A1 uppers and switch to shorty uppers for night DA raids in built up areas.

 

[C-grunt]

Good point. The 14.5" M4s can still reach out (even more so with a good optic and zero). But a 20" barrel can deliver a bit more accuracy.

I can sympathize with Shadowman's comments about the piston driven shorties. Lot's of guys carry 'em without thinking completely through the advantage/disadvantage equation. Great for CQB and egress/ingress of vehicles and structures, but you lose a lot (range, accuracy, velocity, & fragmentation threshold) in open country. A lot of my teams run standard M4A1 uppers and switch to shorty uppers for night DA raids in built up areas.

You know, the SF guys on my FOB never complained about their M4s either. Where we were in 05 was pretty rural farming areas and much of our engagements were long distance. But then again if they were ever out-ranged they could call us in with the Brads, and we did have 155s on base.

 

[Chindo18Z]

Brads & Paladins give a warm fuzzy feeling.

Screw rifles.

 

[Tim the student]

Maybe thats the difference between guys who have had good results with the 5.56 and the guys who havent?

Maybe we have a winner here.

I've carried the M4A1 in both Afghanistan & Iraq (including during dust storms). No issues. Nobody around me seemed to have any issues either.

Only Iraq for me, but its amazing how reliable your rifle will be if you take care of it. I'm skeptical of all the accounts of weapons jamming.

M855 sometimes fails to fragment and punches knitting needle through-and-through holes in a man.

And knitting holes aren't good for killing folks.

 

[Old Guy]

EM2 in .280 Bull Pup

As a kid in Liverpool UK, I saw that rifle fired by a Gent in a suite and tie, on a news cast in the movies.

He held it on the tip of his chin, and fired short bursts. With one hand, impressed this wee kid.

Being one of the Brits who can shoot (I know not many out there) and I taught hand guns for 23 years as well.
An opinion (I know we all have them) it is, IMHO where you hit, location, location, like buying a house.

I don't think the design of the military Rifle round has reached it's full potential yet, when all is said and done, the bit that hits, does the damage, does it not.

The new H&K 416 Automatic Rifle seems kind of nice, if thats the way we go, cant be bad.

The Yanks and Brits fight well along side each other, I would be talking German but for those fields of white crosses in Europe, with lots of young American men sleeping beneath them.

God Bless the American fighting man.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

I just read the British study that Shawn Dodson linked to and it asserts that more than 50% of combat engagements in Afghanistan take place between 500m and 900m? Does that sound correct to those of you with Afghanistan experience?

The first thing I thought when I saw that is "Somebody is fudging the numbers."

I also note that the British study notes that due to their Ministry of Defence rulings, they cannot use open-tip match ammunition, and also use thicker-jacketed SS109 that does not fragment. That might have a lot to do with the problem right there.

 

[Shadow Man]

The 14.5" M4s can still reach out (even more so with a good optic and zero). But a 20" barrel can deliver a bit more accuracy.

More velocity than accuracy. All things being equal (which they are not) a shorter tube the same diameter as a longer tube will be stiffer, and consequently more accurate. However, when you loose the velocity, the round becomes more unpredictable at range, and can seem to be less accurate because of that.

Lot's of guys carry 'em without thinking completely through the advantage/disadvantage equation. Great for CQB and egress/ingress of vehicles and structures, but you lose a lot (range, accuracy, velocity, & fragmentation threshold) in open country.

That was what we were running into. Great for door kicking, house to house and the like, but when the fight turned open, as in this case, we were seriously undergunned; not a pleasent place to be. We had thought it all through though, and had put in multiple requests to switch systems, but it took our inability to engage a VBIED resulting in friendly casualties to actually get the change.

When we could get Brads, CAS and 155's, we were happy campers, but that wasn't always possible. Never had serious reliability issues with my weapon, even during shamals. Weapon was my life, I tried to keep it spotless. Never was fond of the M855, just didn't perform for me. Could that have been due to the short barrel? Probably, yes. SBR's have their place, and they perform their role well, but are not exactly the handiest things when the situation is fluidly changing, and you can go from a close urban setting, taking shots at no more than 75 yards to a roof-top or open country setting where shots need to be made at 300 yards +. I was content to deal with the slightly less manueverability of an A3, because it afforded me more options. Just my experience.

I just read the British study that Shawn Dodson linked to and it asserts that more than 50% of combat engagements in Afghanistan take place between 500m and 900m? Does that sound correct to those of you with Afghanistan experience?

Engagement ranges are greater in the 'Stan, I would be inclined to agree that those numbers sound plausible. Afghanistan is a unique battlefield, with open plains/desert/low rolling hills in the south, and some of the most wickedly trecherous mountains in the north. A longer-range weapon is more suited to that area, but the greater weight of that weapon system conflicts heavily with the harsher physical demands placed upon your body. It is an interesting conundrum.

 

[Maj.Striker]

The XM8 is a more advanced system and is waaaaaay more customizable than our current platform, and it was supposed to hold us over until the XM29 was completed and produced en masse (and yes the XM29 is a lot more capable than the M4s and M16s are).

I don't see how the plastic covered XM8 is/was waaay more customizable than the M4/M16? You can customize an M4 to just about any possible variation today. I certainly don't see how the XM8 offered anything innovative enough to justify the cost of replacing hundreds of thousands of rifles. We should be looking for the next step...something so similar is more like a slightly lateral move as opposed to leaping forward.

 

[Gungnir]

Fosbery correct on the SMAW, as I said it was off the top of my head. I was actually trying to point out the ridiculousness of the argument that equipment origin dictates lead in anything.

On barrrel length, interesting I had no issues with 5.56mm but always used it from the SA80 M85A1 IW which has a barrel length of 20.4" (even though it's marginally shorter than an Extended stocked M4). It's an interesting point, I don't own an M4gery (or an SA80) to do comparative velocity tests on M855 (which I do have), it might have some bearing at extended (200+ meters) ranges for sure since we all know the round fragmentation needs 2500fps or more velocity.

leadcounsel, like the US the UK develops munitions from their battlefield experience in labs with a bunch of guys who all have letters after their names. What civilians do or don't do is largely irrelevant to military development. Perhaps that's why this argument on the military effectiveness of this over that cartridge is so prevalent on firearms forums.

When you're on the ground fighting a common enemy it doesn't matter what the flag insignia is as long as it's an allied insignia and they're coming to help you out.

Old Guy indeed you're right, I know that there's a lot of folks in the UK who like to argue that "we were winning the wars" (both WW1 and 2) when the Americans joined. Reality is though all of Europe would be speaking German without the US supply of munitions, materials, fuel and men and munitions, materials and fuel were being supplied long before men. Oh so you're a scouser are you I've never seen that footage of the EM2 I'll have to dig through YouTube.

 

[Old Guy]

Gungnir,

I was a Bouncer at The Cavern from 1960 to 1964, then 65 at the Blue Angel on Seal St. At 5'9" I was the shortest one in Liverpool (Did not have a bent beak either!) handed out a few.

Only got stabbed twice, not bad for the 60s.

Ar yu over er den?

 

[Gungnir]

Ar yu over er den?

Check location opposite end of the continent. I always liked Arctic training, now I'm living it.