5.56x45 vs 7.62x39 ?

[snayperskaya]

I may stand to be corrected but I don't think the M43 has ever won in a fight against British soldiers expressing their feelings with 5.56 ammo !

Is that more to do with the enemy they have faced rather than the ammunition?.I think I would be right in saying that the British army hasn't faced an equally well trained and disciplined regular army that were equipped with an AK, ie the Soviet Union/Russian Federation.The NVA and Vietcong sent enough GI's back to the States in bodybags with the M43 round, they would regularly drop US troops in the paddyfields at 500m with it.I remember reading an account of a US firebase being over-run where a Vietcong soldier was running for the command post with an explosive charge on his back.Despite being hit by multiple 5.56 rounds from an M16 he continued running until an Australian trooper with a 7.62x51 FAL dropped him with one shot.A bigger heavier round will drop an enemy more effectively than a lighter round ever will.

" If 5.56 mm bullets fail to upset (yaw, fragment, or deform) within tissue, the results are relatively insignificant wounds. This is true for all 5.56x45mm bullets, including both military FMJ and OTM (open tip match) and civilian JHP/JSP designs used in law enforcement. As expected, with decreased wounding effects, rapid incapacitation is unlikely: enemy soldiers may continue to pose a threat to friendly forces and violent suspects can remain a danger to law enforcement personnel and the public.

This failure of 5.56x45mm NATO bullets to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short-barreled weapons or when the range to the target increases. Failure to yaw and fragment can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the chest of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. Two other yaw issues: Angle-of-Attack (AOA) variations between different projectiles, even within the same lot of ammo, as well as Fleet Yaw variations between different rifles, were elucidated in 2006 by the Joint Service Wound Ballistic Integrated Product Team (JSWB-IPT), which included experts from the military law enforcement user community, trauma surgeons, aero ballisticians, weapon and munitions engineers, and other scientific specialists. These yaw issues were most noticeable at close ranges and were more prevalent with certain calibers and bullet styles — the most susceptible being 5.56x45mm NATO FMJ ammunition like SS109/M855 and M193.“

—Dr. Martin Fackler, head of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory for the US Army’s Medical Training Center, Letterman Institute

[tackb]

Would I be right in assuming that the ruskies use a 5.45 round now my little commie friend ?

How does that stack up?

[DW58]

I may stand to be corrected but I don't think the M43 has ever won in a fight against British soldiers expressing their feelings with 5.56 ammo !

Is that more to do with the enemy they have faced rather than the ammunition?.I think I would be right in saying that the British army hasn't faced an equally well trained and disciplined regular army that were equipped with an AK, ie the Soviet Union/Russian Federation.The NVA and Vietcong sent enough GI's back to the States in bodybags with the M43 round, they would regularly drop US troops in the paddyfields at 500m with it. I remember reading an account of a US firebase being over-run where a Vietcong soldier was running for the command post with an explosive charge on his back.Despite being hit by multiple 5.56 rounds from an M16 he continued running until an Australian trooper with a 7.62x51 FAL dropped him with one shot.A bigger heavier round will drop an enemy more effectively than a lighter round ever will.

" If 5.56 mm bullets fail to upset (yaw, fragment, or deform) within tissue, the results are relatively insignificant wounds. This is true for all 5.56x45mm bullets, including both military FMJ and OTM (open tip match) and civilian JHP/JSP designs used in law enforcement. As expected, with decreased wounding effects, rapid incapacitation is unlikely: enemy soldiers may continue to pose a threat to friendly forces and violent suspects can remain a danger to law enforcement personnel and the public.

This failure of 5.56x45mm NATO bullets to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short-barreled weapons or when the range to the target increases. Failure to yaw and fragment can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the chest of a thin, small statured individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. Two other yaw issues: Angle-of-Attack (AOA) variations between different projectiles, even within the same lot of ammo, as well as Fleet Yaw variations between different rifles, were elucidated in 2006 by the Joint Service Wound Ballistic Integrated Product Team (JSWB-IPT), which included experts from the military law enforcement user community, trauma surgeons, aero ballisticians, weapon and munitions engineers, and other scientific specialists. These yaw issues were most noticeable at close ranges and were more prevalent with certain calibers and bullet styles — the most susceptible being 5.56x45mm NATO FMJ ammunition like SS109/M855 and M193.“

—Dr. Martin Fackler, head of the Wound Ballistics Laboratory for the US Army’s Medical Training Center, Letterman Institute

That's a big assumption - when involved in large-scale conflict in Afghanistan, the Soviet army was neither well trained or well organised, and bearing in mind it was largely conscript throughout the Cold War it could hardly have been said to be so at all.

I think your misguided admiration for the Russian bear has clouded your judgement somewhat.

[snayperskaya]

Other than some large scale operations near the Pakistan border most of the Soviet Conflict in Afghanistan was small scale Counter-Insurgancy operations, not the large scale operations it had trained for during the Cold War ie Western Europe against NATO with an emphasis on mechanized warfare.It was also muddied be unbelievable bureaucracy between frontline units,military advisors, political advisors and the Politburo.For a better insight to the Soviet Russian campaign in Afghanistan may I recommend "Afgansty" by Rodric Braithwaite, widely recognised as probably the best and most insightful accounts of the conflict ever written and one that should be read by any government contemplating going into Afghanistan.

Tackb.....yes the 5.45x39 round is the standard round but it is not that popular with the troops for the same reasons some NATO troops dislike the 5.56 and unlike the 7.62x39 it has been adopted by very few other countries.
Some Spetsnaz,OMON and VDV units prefer to use the newer AK-103 and 104 rifles in 7.62x39, same reason as why most specialist units in Soviet Afghanistan still used the AKM and AKMS rather than the newer AK-74.....because the old round packed more of a punch.

[froggy]

the M43 has ever won in a fight against British soldiers expressing their feelings with 5.56 ammo !

Not so sure about that...
Looks like the British 5.56 expressed its feelings in Irak to eventually pack it in, leaving the 7.62x39 to rule the ground and speaking increasingly louder ever since...
May well be the same story in Astan soon ...

Not to mention the incredible amount of time it took & the huge cost of getting that British 5.56 to speak in an audible manner, while the 7.62x39 has ben roaring all over the world ever since it was born for couple of rubles ...

Having said that, your comment is not fair, as my money would go on the well trained (at a cost of course) Brit expressing his feeling even with a Martini over most AK users expressing themself in their best "Lebanese shooting" , the same way I have no illusions Lewis Hammilton in a 2CV would reach the finishing line before me in his Mercedes ...

[tackb]

it was packed in , not because the rifle or round wasn't up to it and certainly not because our troops were not up to it but because they are led by spineless interfering lickspittle politician's !

do the French use the M43 froggy ?

[froggy]

do the French use the M43 froggy

Beside the point my dear fellow.
In 1978, 600 well trained Para-Legionaires armed in WW2 area style (Mat 49 sub-machine guns in 9x19 + SLR rifles MAS 49/56 in 7,5x54) defeated in an airborne assault an AK47 armed 6,000 strong force entrenched in Kowesi with overwhelming fire power included armour vehicules.
I guess you lot have similar tales fielding L1A1 + Sterling agst AK47 ?
While of course, nobody would try to explain the US humiliation in Vietnam on the ground of the calibre, 5,56x45 used by the capitalist troops.

[dave_303]

do the French use the M43 froggy

Beside the point my dear fellow.
In 1978, 600 well trained Para-Legionaires armed in WW2 area style (Mat 49 sub-machine guns in 9x19 + SLR rifles MAS 49/56 in 7,5x54) defeated in an airborne assault an AK47 armed 6,000 strong force entrenched in Kowesi with overwhelming fire power included armour vehicules.
I guess you lot have similar tales fielding L1A1 + Sterling agst AK47 ?
While of course, nobody would try to explain the US humiliation in Vietnam on the ground of the calibre, 5,56x45 used by the capitalist troops.

ahem Froggy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mirbat

:55:

In all seriousness, just spent a little time reading on the Battle of Kolwezi, that was one ballsy operation. :goodjob:

[snayperskaya]

To be honest I don't care if they yaw,keyhole,fragment,see-saw or do loop-da-loops.......I wouldn't want to be hit by either of them!!!!

sign85

[saddler]

... just spent a little time reading on the Battle of Kolwezi, that was one ballsy operation. :goodjob:

Aye...it's amazing how good the French military can be, when they get foreigners to do the fighting for them... tongueout