Survivalist Forum banner

121 - 140 of 155 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,812 Posts
5.56x45mm was developed before drug-crazed attackers became common on the battlefield. In Somalia 1993, tribesmen under the influence of Khat[a kind of native marijuana that makes you feel no pain]took multiple hits from 5.56mm weapons without stopping. Take DSA Congo FAL carbine, ditch the gas regulator and make it in 6.8mm. Or a G3A4 in 6.8mm, too.
Just FYI, during WWII, meth was handed out to lots of German Foot Soldiers on the battlefield (and pilots during long missions) one of the reasons why they overtook France so fast, even when France had the upper hand in terms of military technology. But the allied forces were also using 30-caliber rifles like the 303 British and the M1 Garand, for the most part, which left pretty nasty holes and provided adequate stopping power, even with ball ammo. Knowing that, why the military decided to go with a downsized round since knowing drugs would be used in all wars and battles since, is beyond me.

IMHO, they should have ditched the M16 in favor of the M14 (or the M1A), cut the barrel down by 4-inches and swap the birdcage for a linear compensator, in all wars/battles since WWII, for the infrantrymen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I get the concept of 556 as far as being smaller, more ammo for a given weight and bulk etc. and it seems to have worked over the years in most cases anyway.

Read somewhere that one thing that might be driving this hunt for a more powerful caliber is russia, and maybe china as well but at least russia, developing and issuing more and/or better body armor. That to me at least makes sense if their stuff really does make 556 that much less effective. Would at least be one valid reason beyond just raking in more contracts $$.

Also seems if the army manages to take 5 pounds off a soldier in one area they'll add 6 back in another so may as well make it more or more effective ammo & weapon. It's not like they're gonna just let them carry a little lighter load.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,359 Posts
It is a logic convention. It is the difference between arguing facts or feelings pretty much.
Yeah, we know.
And this is an internet chat room thread, where 90% of “facts“ are opinions, and 98% of all percentages are made up.
But one can take it as given that MANY companies don’t produce for the military.

However, Lake City isn’t the only place anymore. Winchester recently took a contract to produce military ammo in their new facility. I read it online, so we know that’s true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
My aren't you dramatic.....

Federal no longer runs Lake City, Winchester now holds the contract. If you notice, Federal part numbers for 5.56 have been slightly changing to coincide with product produced in Anoka, rather than LC. Just as Winchester was making plenty of 5.56 before they won the current LC contract. Remington was all but non-existent in the US Mil market. PMC, Wolf, PPU, Sellier & Bellot, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., are non factors in the US Mil market. It doesn't take holding the production figures and contracts for all the ammo companies in the world in your hand, to know there's plenty of 5.56 capacity available to supply the US commercial market, even if the US Mil was to adopt another caliber.


But if you prefer your tinhat conspiracy theories based on absolutely nothing, by all means.... enjoy yourself.

Lemme guess...... you thought Homeland Security bought up all the .40 ammo a few years ago so the public couldn't get any too....
You’re making two assertions. First, that Federal hasn’t been a supplier to the US Military since they lost Lake City (because otherwise your argument is irrelevant if they do still contract with the military). Are you sure that’s true?

Second, the other companies you name are generally foreign companies. We can’t rely on foreign imports of 5.56 to meet our demand. All it takes is a waive of the hand to stop ammunition imports. Or a major war. Which of those companies have US factories that are currently making 5.56 and will likely continue to during periods of trade turbulence or war?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
There’s no burden of proof outside of a court proceeding.

Stop being a jack donkey.
I would be embarrassed to run from a challenge as fast as you have. Especially if it was something I started as you did here. I release you from the challenge. You can run along and play now. The adults will continue the conversation.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,260 Posts
One of the reasons for adoption of the 5.56 was the Korean War. Massed human wave attacks when your troops only carry @100 rounds scared the beegeebers out of tacticians. Now I said one of the reasons. Granted, experimentation with smaller cartridges began in during the Civil War and continued until adoption of the 5.56.

To be completely factual, the US Army started the "smaller, faster bullet" trend in the 1880-1890's when they switched from the 45.70 BP cartridge to the .30-40 Krag. All done while dragging the "Army Establishment" along with them kicking and screaming.

So lets look at the cartridge family tree from the end of the Civil War forward;

Springfield Model 1861- .58 caliber
Spencer Model 1860 .56 caliber
Springfield 1873 .45-70 caliber
Krag Model 1898 .30-40 caliber
Springfield Model 1903 .30-03 then 30.06
M1 Garand .30.06
M14 7.62x51
M16 5.56x45

As you can see, cartridges have been slowly becoming smaller and faster for over 100 years. The longest in service cartridge is by a slim margin, the 5.56, followed closely by the .30-06 and the the 7.62x51. (assuming the 7.62x51 has been in continual service since its adoption in the 50's would actually place it in first, although it did not serve in front line service).

Is the US going to adopt a new cartridge? It could, but I doubt it. There have been lateral developments before, i.e. the .30-40 to .30-03 to .30-06 done in a span of less than 10 years. Those changes were made to correct platform deficiencies or ballistic enhancements. I don't see a big cartridge change coming. The one we have works and does what it is intended to. Now if they perfect careless ammo with liquid propellant? All bets are off. Platform? There may be platform changes, just as the M4 today is vastly different from the M16-a1. But whatever the changes, they are really going to have to bring something to the table to justify the massive cost to change.

Nothing I said above is to be taken as gospel. Just the opinion of someone with more than a passing interest in the subject. YMMV.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,164 Posts
I asked a recently retired Brigadier General about such, and his answers don't seem to align with yours.
First off the claim that 5.56 was designed to increase wounded over dead is likely a myth. I can not find any actual military policy or defense contractor or politician saying anything to confirm this as real.

Secondly wounded may not change the battle outcome by draining resources. However in a war between large powers ( US/ USSR ) the infrastructure to care for wounded and disabled would cost more than for the dead. In VERY large conflicts involving hundreds of thousands of soldiers this could matter.

I do not see a big advantage fighting insurgents.
 
Joined
·
21,494 Posts
Yeah, we know.
And this is an internet chat room thread, where 90% of “facts“ are opinions, and 98% of all percentages are made up.
But one can take it as given that MANY companies don’t produce for the military.

However, Lake City isn’t the only place anymore. Winchester recently took a contract to produce military ammo in their new facility. I read it online, so we know that’s true.
Especially this forum.

I am pretty sure a thousand collective braincells die every time someone says fact but doesn't provide a source.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,359 Posts
I would be embarrassed to run from a challenge as fast as you have. Especially if it was something I started as you did here. I release you from the challenge. You can run along and play now. The adults will continue the conversation.
And I'd be embarrassed to be so ignorant of reality that I felt the need to act like a pompous jerk and challenge a guy over a point that is OBVIOUSLY not wrong.

Especially this forum.

I am pretty sure a thousand collective braincells die every time someone says fact but doesn't provide a source.
No sweat, science says we lose 190,000 brain cells a day just as a part of being alive. Google it, I'm not citing squat.

Anyone that can't figure out which things matter enough to NEED to be backed up with proof, versus which are just an idea from which to begin, or a bit of argumentative hyperbole, versus which are real world realities that are too freaking obvious to be questioned by any but the ignorant, is either a leftist fact checker, or in DIRE need of those thousand brain cells you mentioned.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter · #133 ·
I like many others here have read many history books, never in any of those books was "wound them not kill them" in any of those books. The argument of wound not kill is outrageous, I've never met a person who went to combat be told to wound the enemy.
 
Joined
·
21,494 Posts
And I'd be embarrassed to be so ignorant of reality that I felt the need to act like a pompous jerk and challenge a guy over a point that is OBVIOUSLY not wrong.



No sweat, science says we lose 190,000 brain cells a day just as a part of being alive. Google it, I'm not citing squat.

Anyone that can't figure out which things matter enough to NEED to be backed up with proof, versus which are just an idea from which to begin, or a bit of argumentative hyperbole, versus which are real world realities that are too freaking obvious to be questioned by any but the ignorant, is either a leftist fact checker, or in DIRE need of those thousand brain cells you mentioned.
Emperors new clothes.

This is how we get these shoot to wound myths in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
305 Posts
Gosh Jam, THIS THREAD WENT ALL KINDS OF SIDEWARDS.

7.62 X 39 is cool but The US gov is way too cool to admit it.
7.62 X 51 is the bomb but you actually have to be a man to carry a bunch of it and have an actual rifle to shoot it at distance.
.556 is also pretty cool if you are smaller than a man and closer than 400 yards.
6.5 Grendel limits AOL in an AR-15 with all but the lighter bullets so distance becomes too much maths. It does well from shorter barrels though.
300 Blackout might as well be a trebuchet.

We obviously do not need a new rifle or a new caliber.

The ones we call "they" obviously want more money.

That is all.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,164 Posts
I'm not up to date on all of the advances on body armor so will leave that to others. What I will chine in on is that during Desert Shield/Desert Storm the shift towards adding optical sights was in the works. To me it makes perfect sense to adopt a cartridge that can stretches the effective range to match the capability of the optics.

It was only a matter of time that optics started to expose some of the inherent ballistic weaknesses of the 5.56 round. Ask any person that shot the Marine known distance qualification/competition courses (prior to the 90s) about how often they got dinged by projectiles bouncing off of the 500 yard targets (made from cheesecloth, paper and paste). I spent a lot of time on the range as both a coach and competitor and the average scores went up several points after the switch to the A2. We saw the 500yard scores improve the most. More improvements happened after my time in but there is only so much a 55gr, 62gr or even a 77gr bullet can do at extended distances.

Don't take this to mean that I'm not a fan of the little high speed projectiles but due to different battlefield environments call for different capabilities. Why do you think so many M14's were hastily pressed back into service? If I recall correctly there were more than one investigations as units with high head-shot kills was suspected of summary execution style kills. What may have worked well on soft targets at extended distances often failed miserably against hardened targets or longer ranges. I see value in our troops having additional capabilities and time will tell how well that new platform works.

Now, all that aside (putting my tinfoil boonie cap on) I think its a plan by the anti-2nd amendment factions to dry up our source of surplus brass to help disarm us <grin>...
Naw cuz IF the rest of nato switches to 6.8 and we get less surplus ammo , we can just buy 6.8 ARs and buy the new surplus.
 

·
Retired and luvin it!
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
Naw cuz IF the rest of nato switches to 6.8 and we get less surplus ammo , we can just buy 6.8 ARs and buy the new surplus.
Given the animosity towards the 2nd Amendment so many of these hoplophobic career politicians I wouldn't put it past them to be spiteful and spite destroy the inventory or sell it to a 3rd world country rather than to follow the laws and let it be sold to the American people :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,359 Posts
Emperors new clothes.

This is how we get these shoot to wound myths in the first place.
The main difference is, one is obviously not a myth, and the one about wounding is obviously stupid.

Seriously...if one feels the need to bolster his man feelings by challenging an obvious FACT that anyone can see is a FACT with 30 seconds of thought, maybe he should check the freaking FACT himself, rather than look like an idiot by being completely and absolutely wrong and demanding proof about a FACT that is THAT easy to check yourself. I mean, even the Google FACT checkers wouldn't have any issue with this one, and they are intentionally misleading.
 

·
Semper Fi
Joined
·
9,776 Posts
Gosh Jam, THIS THREAD WENT ALL KINDS OF SIDEWARDS.

7.62 X 39 is cool but The US gov is way too cool to admit it.
7.62 X 51 is the bomb but you actually have to be a man to carry a bunch of it and have an actual rifle to shoot it at distance.
.556 is also pretty cool if you are smaller than a man and closer than 400 yards.
6.5 Grendel limits AOL in an AR-15 with all but the lighter bullets so distance becomes too much maths. It does well from shorter barrels though.
300 Blackout might as well be a trebuchet.

We obviously do not need a new rifle or a new caliber.

The ones we call "they" obviously want more money.

That is all.
30.06 but the point is still valid...real man

 
  • Like
Reactions: TENNGRIZZ
121 - 140 of 155 Posts
Top