There are mods for the M-16/AR-15 that trade it from 5.56 to 50 Bewulf in a matter of seconds, I know that those two are both 45mm long, but couldn’t something like that be done with the 7.62 NATO?

Or you have a DM in your squad with an accurized rifle (and a point man with shotgun… but I’m getting off topic) and someone to hump a few more mags of high caliber. Maybe have every member of the squad carry 1 mag of whatever the sniper/DM has.

Problem is grunts can’t see the logistics problems and the fact that if politics play out wrong they’ll be eating cotton candy instead of MREs, and politicians can’t see what friggin’ idiots they are.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

There was a post a couple days ago about the Brits buying AR-10s. Much more versatile.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

Just in case
A new video is on its way from PMP(manufacturers of the ammo).
They will shoot brick walls,car doors etc

Talk later
GM

Please rate this comment: 0  0

I asked my CO once , (we were in the mountains) , how we were suppose to engage enemies if they were in the next hill (+-800yards), with m4 carbines , m16s , and just one m16a3/acog per squad and he laughed .

He said to me that only the FN-MAG(M240) , that we had in our squad was the weapon for these ranges . He also said , that soldiers were not sharpshooters . If we spotted enemies in ranges more than 300yards , we were to call immediately fire support .

Now the weight factor plays a very big role for the soldier , but i think that in open areas , were there might be long range visibility or in areas were enemies might be in higher elevation , the squad MGs should change to 7,62X51 . That could increase the overall weight that a squad has to carry(assuming everybody carries an amount of 7,62AMMO) , but increases the squads capabilities.

Groot i would like to see or just reed how The 20mm round performs against (single-double) ceramic brick walls , and if it can reach the enemy behind . I saw a video of the NTW against a pole . THANX

Please rate this comment: 0  0

Despite after the fact rationalizations by some writers, the switch from 7.62mm to 5.56mm was always about improved control of hand held full-auto fire and not about reduced ammunition weight. Ammunition for rifles, regardless of caliber, has never been the primary or even secondary weight burden borne by leg infantry. The primary weight burden of infantry is from carriage of organic supporting arms and ammunition, such as machine guns, mortars, and rocket launchers.

If infantry combat was on a known distance target range, then no doubt 5.56mm rifles would be perfectly adequate as far out as 1000 meters. Instead the rifleman has to deal with a speeding car approaching a checkpoint, or a jihadi taking pot shots from behind a mud wall 500 meters away while gusting mountain winds roar. In the chaos and cover of combat, a reasonably accurate .30 caliber semi-auto rifle with a low magnification telescopic sight would serve the modern rifleman better than what he has now.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

You’re serious about the accuracy of the G3? The PSG1 cost over $12k and get 1MOA @ 100 yards (match ammo). A typical $1k AR15 with free floating tube will get you .75 MOA @ 100 yards (match ammo) and that’s without match parts.

The PSG1 might be good in video games but real life it is completely different.

—-

This will be my last post on the subject. Before I start, in no way am I marginalize the ultimate sacrifice that our troops have made.

Since Obama was elected my liberal newspaper stop posting Iraq and Afghanistan war casualties. I had to google it finds out.

Icasualties.org listed from 2001 to 2009 the total US troop deaths at 911. I assume this include non-combat related deaths, ie accidents. A lot of the deaths in Afghanistan is caused by IED (2009: total deaths 281, 242 was cause by IED) and not small arms. Eight year, 911 US deaths in Afghanistan and not all of are related to combat deaths.

What can we assumed by this? The Taliban are piss poor shooters with piss poor rifles. Hits only counts the rest is BS. So if we’re out gun and the Taliban are excellent marksmen shouldn’t the US death toll be much much higher? Shouldn’t the Taliban suffer fewer casualties? Ever time they send 400 of their kids fighting a platoon size (around 40) of ours kids, the Taliban end up losing half of their numbers. What does that tell us?

The 7.62x51NATO is superior to the 5.56 in range, hitting power, and accuracy but at the high cost of weight. Three times as much. US troops are carrying like SeanN said over 70lbs on their back. Getting kills over 1k takes a lot of skills and luck. Being top rated marksman take years to learn. It makes no sense to force them to carry more weight and less ammo on long patrols in the hope that they score those 800+ yards kills.

Around 9 people in America die from drowning each day. That’s over 3000 a year. Over 4,000 Americans die from car related accidents a month. Over 40,000 Americans die from the common flu each year. Chicago homicide 2008 is over 500.

http://www.icasualties.org/OEF/

Please rate this comment: 0  0

This ‘wounding not killing’ aspect is completely irrelevant when fighting an enemy like the Taliban, who essentially will never run out and have no medical support services whatsoever.

So in this sense, the British are completely correct. Their bullets may wound the Taliban but that doesn’t stop them. If anything it may encourage them to be even more effective since they know that they will most certainly die.

An Ak round on the other hand no matter where it hits will do serious damage. But in anycase, with the training Taliban/Alqueda now have in IED’s, they will be the biggest killer and maimer of this war, not direct firefights.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

The excellent kill ratio of American infantry in Afghanistan is most likely the outcome of three factors: a preference for night operations that exploits American night vision and excellent communication and navigation systems, use of bulletproof body armor, and outstanding medical trauma services. With advantages like that the American infantry had better be kicking ass.

To determine the quality of Taliban guerillas, a better comparison would be to judge how effective they are compared to Iraqi insurgents. I think it would be a safe bet that American forces would greatly prefer a firefight with Iraqi insurgents to a firefight with Taliban. Certainly the Taliban forces are mostly ill-trained peasants who spray and pray with rusty old Kalashnikovs. But even so it is foolish to ignore the crusty veterans who salt the Taliban and who take pride in the old Afghan tradition of marksmanship and who posses the right equipment to follow that tradition.

Let’s turn your question around. If American small arms are so superior to the Taliban’s at long range, why do the Taliban seem to prefer to engage at long range? Why don’t the Taliban use the old NVA tactic of ‘grabbing the enemy by the belt’ and prefer to engage at point blank range?

Please rate this comment: 0  0

No I haven’t seen any videos beyond the one so widely circulated about two years ago. If you can post a link, I’d be appreciative.

As for the one shot, one kill comment I may have gone a bit beyond what you intended. But your post I referenced does imply a belief that the 5.56 is a 400 yard cartridge. I’m sorry but it really isn’t. Punching holes in paper isn’t the same as stopping an enemy combatant in his tracks. The bullets speak for themselves. Much beyond 200 m, 5.56mm Ball doesn’t do much more than poke tiny holes even when fired from 20″ barrels. It no longer fragments and exhibits poor tumbling characteristics.

You must not be aware of why the Mk262 cartridge was developed. It was designed to improve both long range accuracy and wound ballistics compared to M855. Much like choosing a JHP over FMJ in your handgun, the BTHP used in Mk262 significantly increases 5.56mm lethality to at least 300m.

As for civilian contractors using 5.56mm weapons, they’re primarily involved with personal security. Read that as short(er) range engagements. At closer ranges, the 5.56 does pretty well. I’d be very surprised if anything approaching the long range battle fought by Travis Haley & Co. in 2004 had occurred before or since. PSD’s also work closely with coalition troops. It only makes sense to have common ammo, magazines, parts, etc. I know someone who spent a year in Iraq and confirmed there was a lot of interplay between Big Army and PSD’s. Finally, with companies like Blackwater/Xe hiring former U.S. military trained on and comfortable with the M16/M4 is it any wonder most equip themselves with similar weapons? (Not that I haven’t seen more than a few photos posted online showing PSD’s armed with AK’s and “Krinkovs.” One of the PSD’s my friend met in Iraq carried a Sterling SMG. While very popular among PSD’s, AR-based weapons are not universal.)

Please don’t think I’m a 5.56 basher. Not so. My own personal SHTF carbine is a 5.56mm Arsenal AK. But I use bonded core SP’s and don’t expect to engage anyone much past 200-250 yards.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

(Yep dates are wrong).

Please rate this comment: 0  0

For the sake of augment let assumed everything you pointed out in reference to super duper Taliban training, super duper G3 (which is very bad in the accuracy department), or whatever super duper rifle that you think is accurate.

Now let’s use brutal logic. Why isn’t there more dead GI coming back from Afghanistan in body bags. You would expect that boat load and boat load of dead soldiers coming back if the Taliban are good shooters, have better small arms and our is inferior, right? What is the kill ratio in Afghanistan? 1000 to 1 100000 to 1? So something is wrong here. Why are we killing a lot more of them then they are killing us. CAS can’t account for all of it?

Here is another brutal fact. The AR15 that our troops are using is much more accurate then what the Taliban are using. In fact is the most accurate mass produce auto loading rifle every made.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

Did you saw the video where his partner confirmed that he took out a lot of targets at a very short time. It was also confirm on AR15 a few years back.

Second where did I say that I assumed one shot one kill. If you read my past post here you will find that I suggest you keep shooting until your opponent is out right dead. Also I’m not saying that he killed over 100 combatants. I’m saying on that video that he took out enemies combatants with 5.56 at over 400 yards.

I’m not sure that he was using matchgrade ammo. It doesn’t look like it but for the sake of augments let assume it is. Does it make a difference other then an improve accuracy? It still 5.56 and matchgrade ammo unlike standard military factory ammo tends to be way under-power.

This whole entire pointless augment is about the vast majority of people believing that the 5.56 drop like a rock and bounce off people skin when it goes past 200 yards is ridiculous. I put two videos showing otherwise.

The vast majority of PSD in Iraq used 5.56. They are not in the military and not limited to 5.56 or AR15. So you have to wonder why these PSD people that are better trained and probably have more combat experience then the avg. GI using an inferior caliber. It’s not like the can’t afford it. They were getting paid a lot of money for their time in Iraq.

Steve,

Travis Haley was a former blackwater PSD that went to Iraq at the height of the insurgency. He is now working for Magpul Dynamics and got two training videos out called Magpul Dynmaics: The Art of the Tactical Carbine: I and II. He also post on AR15.com in the Magpul industry board under the screen name Magpul Dynmaics.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

Study 20th century combat and the lessons learned no matter what battlefield conditions are the same issues come up. The people that try to solve the problems do so in a manner that includes cost. By adding cost into the factor you already limited yourself. By making cost a high priority you have just caused the death of many soldiers and that’s what has happened with every decision made by every country who did so.

A rifle like the ones issued with the 5.56mm round works OK out to about 200M but with a full 20″ barrel. Take the barrel down and what you have is a weapon that does not have the same killing ability out to that range. By cutting down the barrel you made the weapon useless. The 5.56 was designed for longer barrels. The 7.62×39 was designed for short barrels like the German’s did with their 7.92. So either we keep the 5.56mm and go with a bullpup so we can keep the 20″ barrel or we get a round that works better out of a short barrel. Like the 6.8mm. For those who like the 6.5mm Grendel all the data I read says it’s better with the longer barrel and out of a short barrel the 6.8mm is superior.

Even if we did adopt the 6.8mm we still need a weapon that can take out not only the enemy at longer range but destroy their cover. Nobody talks about that. The 5.56 cannot destroy cover. One of the greatest things the BAR and Garand did was that they tore up any cover the enemy was using. A volley from a simple rifle squad was devastating. A modern squad cannot do that with 5.56mm only.

So we need a SAW in 7.62×51 and to make the rifle squad even more deadly a marksmen with a weapon also in 7.62×51. The 40mm grenade launcher is a good weapon but does not do what a volley of 7.62 rounds can do to the enemy hiding behind something. A GPMG tears it apart.

I also think another weapon the infantry squad or platoon should have is a dedicated anti-material weapon. Again the 40mm is fine but limited and not a man killer. The Barrett XM-109 25mm was a great idea and the Chinese picked up on it with their version in 35mm. The 40mm is more like a light mortar the XM-109 was a direct weapon that could have been deadly on a battlefield shooting directly at enemy positions, like a .50 cal M2 is.

So what is needed by our small infantry units is a good mix of overlapping weapons systems that support each other under many different situations. Plus we need weapons for troops who do not face the prospects of combat everyday.

We need to keep each weapon simple. In another word the do everything mentality has to go. Yeah great idea to be able to fire both belt and magazine for the SAW but you added cost and weight onto the weapon. Eventually everybody said take it off to keep it lighter and easier to maintain. Even to the point of adding very expensive titanium bipods and again going with a shorter barrel making an already questionable weapon useless. A 17 pound peashooter, the same weight as a PKM GPMG. Who has the advantage? It seems to me the advantage goes to the Russian equipped infantry squad with their AK, RPG, SVD, PKM weapons. And if they are fully Russian Equipped they also have some other really deadly weapons to add to that including a LAW type thermobaric rocket and grenade launchers for their rifles.

Please rate this comment: 0  0

On a totally unrelated matter, the date displayed for our respective posts this morning is Nov. 1st. Unless I slept through Halloween, that’s just a bit off.

Please rate this comment: 0  0