Dangerwing
New member
I am an OC/T in the US Army, and recently got into a "discussion" with another trainer. One of the soldiers going through our lane fired about 200 rounds of blank ammo through a M249 SAW cyclic - he never let up till the belt ran out. To avoid bias (and embarassment if Im wrong) I'm going to explain the argument in 3rd person, rather than identify which position was mine.
Trainer A felt that extended cyclic fire of blanks could damage a barrel just like extended cyclic fire of standard ball ammo. The reason being that the Blank Firing Adapter on the muzzle will keep the hot gasses inside the barrel causing heat to build and damage to occur.
Trainer B felt that extended cyclic fire of blanks will NOT damage a barrel because 1) the lack of bullets causing friction within the bore means drastically less heat will be produced and 2) blank ammo uses slow buring black powder that burns at a much lower temperature, thus again less heat will be created.
So, what do y'all think? Is trainer A right? Trainer B? Both? None of the above? Feel free to add your reasoning as well.
Thanks!
Trainer A felt that extended cyclic fire of blanks could damage a barrel just like extended cyclic fire of standard ball ammo. The reason being that the Blank Firing Adapter on the muzzle will keep the hot gasses inside the barrel causing heat to build and damage to occur.
Trainer B felt that extended cyclic fire of blanks will NOT damage a barrel because 1) the lack of bullets causing friction within the bore means drastically less heat will be produced and 2) blank ammo uses slow buring black powder that burns at a much lower temperature, thus again less heat will be created.
So, what do y'all think? Is trainer A right? Trainer B? Both? None of the above? Feel free to add your reasoning as well.
Thanks!