The UK's Finest Independent Forum for Shooters and Gun Owners. Est 2010.

John MH wrote:This is still very funny thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q362H-xg0ZA

Laurie wrote:The early work on range v effectiveness v cartridge 'power' was done by the Germans pre WW2 in which they came to the conclusion that the individual rifleman is only effective to a maximum range of 300 metres, potentially less so if a hurriedly trained conscripted man. This was validated post war in US Operational Research Department work for the US Army and was very much the intellectual basis for Project Salvo, the first go at the small calibre, high velocity based weapons system. On that basis, 5.56mm just works even in M193 (55gn) form. The biggest problem it seems with the current 62gn Nato (SS109) bullet based system was the specified requirement to penetrate a Kevlar helmet at whatever long distance (700, 800 yards or some such range). The steel penetrator insert degrades the bullet's lethality especially at lower retained velocities, hence the need to have over 2,600 fps remaining at the target. Conversely, barrier penetration is becoming more of an issue as body armour becomes more common on battlefields, but also the resistance afforded by heavy webbing straps and chest harnesses packed with AK magazines.

The original 5.56 M193 worked brilliantly in Vietnam in short-range firefights because of the very high retained velocities and massive explosive bullet disintegration creating large and complex wound cavities. As range to target increases, the bullet effectiveness reduces and the M193 'explosive effect' drops out at around the 300 yard mark. It is so range dependant that in criminal shootings involving AR-15s, forensic pathologists can accurately determine the range of the shot(s) from the nature and size of the wound track and how much the bullet fragmented. The current 62gn model should have improved on the 55gn M193 with its much improved external ballistics, but apparently not - and has now been seriously degraded in US service by the decision to go for a 14.5" barrel carbine as the standard battle weapon knocking 200 + fps off the M16A2's MVs.

Also, the 5.56 is increasingly used by heavier support weapons such as the FN Minimi. These have the ability to effect hits at much longer ranges than the individual rifleman's 300 metres, but a single bullet strike at 500, 600 yards may be ineffective as a manstopper due to the poor wounding effect and the 7.62 or other more ballistically powerful cartridge is required. This was the lesson that the 1930s German Army took from its prewar research - the infantry squad killing weapon isn't the rifle, it's a lightweight but powerful machinegun. So eight or ten men see three on the GPMG and the rest are there primarily to protect the MG crew.

Laurie wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q362H-xg0ZA

Jeez ... is this guy for real?

(I suppose you have to give him 12 out of 10 for enthusiasm, and he is keeping a lot of retailers and manufacturers in business.)

User702 wrote:Fedaykin, sadly the new kit task time to filter down to all units. For example, OPTAG were using the ELCAN/LDS in 2012 on their kit, but I mobbed that same year with a SUSAT having done MATTs the previous year with iron sights. As it was, I saw people in theater using ACOGs.

As far as accessories goes, if you have the real estate available, people will use it, but the M4/HK416 options means that you can add a lot more before you get to the unladen weight of a stock A2. This might be going a little too far though...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q362H-xg0ZA

Sixshot6 wrote:

John MH wrote:This is still very funny thread.

Is that all you going to say. At least contribute to the discussion a bit.

John MH wrote:

Sixshot6 wrote:

John MH wrote:This is still very funny thread.

Is that all you going to say. At least contribute to the discussion a bit.

Sorry, too busy laughing.

No definatley laughing.