Your Military round is ??

Mission dictates. Room to room, 9mm from a Hecker & Koch MP5 is just about perfect. Of course, that doesn't help the designated marksmen much. There isn't a "one size fits all" caliber for the military. The mission of military is such a wide and varied thing; limiting it to one caliber is NOT of use to anyone, and will get servicemen killed.
 
Service Pistol: .40 S&W
Infantry Rifle: 6.8x43
Marksman Rifle: 7.62x51 NATO
Long Range Rifle: .408 Cheytac

Enough Said Gentlemen
 
BBroadside said:
It's the Hague Declaration that banned non-FMJ bullets. 1899
No soft points (e.g. .303 Dum Dum), no hollow points, and I guess no lead round nose (e.g. .38-200) either. Which put 00 Buckshot in an ambiguous position - not designed to flatten, but not FMJ either.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the Hague Convention banned all non-FMJ bullets. What they did was ban bullets that are designed to expand or flatten in human targets.

Non expanding hollowpoints, like match HPBT bullets are allowed. Hard cast bullets would be allowed too. Since buckshot isn't designed to expand or flatten, there really isn't a question as to its acceptance.
 
This thread is very interesting to me, but I have to admit, I have no military experience.

Pistol=10mm
Rifles=6.5 Grendel

The fmj 9mm is a very poor man stopper. I can't believe it is the military's sidearm caliber.

The 10mm is... not a poor man stopper and would penetrate cars much more effectively than a 9mm. And it would be great in the MP5.

The 5.56 is a varmit round. Sure you can carry a lot of it. Sure the recoil is very low. But it is a varmit round. Ideal for 35 pound Coyotes.

The 6.5 is a true high powered rifle round. It is has moderate recoil, shoots flat, is more than powerful enough at short ranges and actually more powerful than a .308 at long ranges.

If your concerned about recoil, just remember that our soldiers in WWI and WWII were much smaller and they did just fine with 30-06s.
 
It's the Hague Declaration that banned non-FMJ bullets. 1899
No soft points (e.g. .303 Dum Dum), no hollow points, and I guess no lead round nose (e.g. .38-200) either. Which put 00 Buckshot in an ambiguous position - not designed to flatten, but not FMJ either.
Click to expand...

The US never signed the Hague Declaration, we just abide by it.:eek:

I think the cartridges in use now....5.56mm and 7.62 nato are fine, but a little better ammo would help terminal performance greatly.
 
257 SPC using 110 gr ammo. Design the throat to allow seating the bullets out like the russians do to increase case capacity. Contract with Hornady to develop the max velocity in short barrels while managing pressure.

You don't want to go back to 7.62X51 for logistical and non logistical reasons. There's something to be said for carrying twice the ammo at the same weight. Also picture this. I am banging away getting hits at 200 yd plates with my M1a like this Bang........Bang........Bang.........Bang.
The guy beside me with a scoped A4, in the same time frame gets hits like this : Bang..Bang..Bang..Bang..Bang..Bang..Bang
Get my drift?
 
The only thing I'd change would be to back to the .45 for pistol. If I have to shoot at someone close I would want to make the biggest hole I can so I stop them ASAP. At pistol range I may only have time for 1 shot.
 
Mission dictates. Room to room, 9mm from a Hecker & Koch MP5 is just about perfect. Of course, that doesn't help the designated marksmen much. There isn't a "one size fits all" caliber for the military. The mission of military is such a wide and varied thing; limiting it to one caliber is NOT of use to anyone, and will get servicemen killed.
Click to expand...

Over the years there have be a heck of a lot more people killed due to logistical problems and delays then not having the proper round (what ever that its).

In a combat situation, everyone has to be on the same sheet of music. You have to be able to use your buddies ammo, (and gun) if you can't be re-supplied, and there are times when you can't be re-supplied. Its happened to me and its happened thousands of time in the history of warfair.

Bastogne was a good example. Those paratroopers had to set it out quite a while without being re-supplied, by ground because they were surrounded by three armor divisions, by air because of the heavy snows and cloud cover.

The military is where "one size fits all" works. Even police departments. Normally, from what I've seen, the Sgt or range officer carries extra ammo and spare service revolver/pistol in his trunk uncase its needed. Its silly to carry fourteen different types of guns and ammo.
 
The military is where "one size fits all" works. Even police departments. Normally, from what I've seen, the Sgt or range officer carries extra ammo and spare service revolver/pistol in his trunk uncase its needed. Its silly to carry fourteen different types of guns and ammo.
Click to expand...

I think the point he was driving at was that you dont use a 9mm to kill a sniper in a bell tower and you dont use a 7.62x51 for shooting someone across the street. you need to have a round suited for the application. interchangeability is a good thing, that's why we use 5.56, 7.62, 9mm and 50 cal...because that's what the brits use, that's what the germans use, that's what the Israelis use etc etc. you can always be sure if you run out of ammo, the guy right next to you with the same job has the same ammo. a marksman still needs to be able to hit targets far out and a handgun still needs to make an enemy drop his AK47 when all else has failed. the whole purpos of the hague convention was to make it so that a simple flesh wound did not require amputation anymore. the purpose of shooting a combatant is not to kill him...it's to get him to STOP shooting at YOU
 
Of course the Army doesn't let me pick what my Soldiers use, but since you asked politely, I'll play!

I'm going to stick with what we've already got.. 5.56 and 7.62 for machine guns and marksmen. Based on my experiences, we don't get enough range time to teach Soldiers to shoot accurately and consistently past distances greater than 300m (maybe this doesn't apply to Infantry units? Never been a part of one). A lot of Soldiers don't even shoot at the 300m targets when qualifying because they know they won't hit it using iron sights. They prefer to save those rounds for accidental misses at 200m and less. At the ranges the average Soldier can reliably hit a man sized target, the 5.56 has plenty of power to do its job. Also, when the 249s and 240Bs start sending lead down range, people start looking for cover. The average conflict now a days doesn't end when all people on the other side are dead. It ends when one side runs away because they the other side has gained fire superiority. And If by chance an intense firefight does pursue and the enemy doesn't break contact, chances are attack helicopters or Field Artillery are only one radio message away. Bottom line, the 5.56 does its job just fine because it's got the backing of much bigger and scarier equipment.

What I would change is the M2. I've talked at great length with our armament repair guy and he agrees that there are just too many things that have to be tuned, tweaked, gauged, timed and oiled before it runs right. Once everything is right, it's a joy to shoot though. :D
 
Every time we go to war, it is with the last war's weapons. What worked in one theater of action is not the best for another. It seems we are always one war behind in weapon production.

The next issue is what weapons the oposing force will be using. An army of spear carriers is no match agains an army of archers. As little a difference as 50 to 100 meters will make a huge difference.

While the 5.56 AR is a light weapon system, the bullet weight is too light, it's range is modest and lethality is slow and not intantaneous. Fine for small animals but much better systems are available for that purpose.

It is not by accident that the 30-06 was developed for the 1913 Springfield or that Mauser chose the 8mm for use. 5mm, 6mm, 7mm or 8mm all have their uses but the compremise for weight and lethality would require that something that is light but still retains sufficient energy at longer range say 3 to 4 hundred meters whould give your troops an edge on the enemy in the desert. That brings my choice to something in the 6mm range, 243 or 6.5 or 6.8 with a bullet weight range of 95 to 110 grains. While slightly larger than the current 5.56 they still provide better lethality and balistics.

And as to carrying more rounds of ammo, if you really need to spend that much ammo down range you are better served with close air support or a good mortar team or a couple of 30 cal MGs squads.

For me I would chose the 6.8 SPC for rifle and 45 ACP for side arm (FNP-45 Tactical 15 rounds)

Jim
 
I think the point he was driving at was that you dont use a 9mm to kill a sniper in a bell tower and you dont use a 7.62x51 for shooting someone across the street. you need to have a round suited for the application.
Click to expand...

I disagree, as does the army for that matter.

The 223 works in house clearing (M4)
The 223 works as a main battle round (M16A2 and A3's)
The 223 works as a SDM Round, works good to 800 yards
The 223 also works good as a competition service rifle, 200, 300, 600 & 1000 yards.

The ammo for above with work in all the listed guns.
 
the purpose of shooting a combatant is not to kill him...it's to get him to STOP shooting at YOU
Click to expand...

That's an important point that I believe many who participate in these discussions overlook. They tend to focus on equipping everyone with a round and bullet design that kills the target as best as possible. However, in an organized military confrontation, wounding your target us often much more effective. When you wound a combatant you not only take him out of the fight, but you also take those surrounding him out of the fight because they have to stop and care for their fallen comrade's wounds. I'd rather take 3 or 4 people out of the fight by wounding one than take one person out of the fight by killing him.
 
5.56... I could easily carry 12 mags on me and two coupled in the rifle on long patrols and I'm only 5'8 160. To the people saying it doesn't have enough stopping power, Why don't you try fighting after you take one to the chest. No guns a death ray besides a 50bmg maybe... Even when our snipers/dm's would hit people with the 7.62s the Bgs would sometimes stumble around like they were drunk for awhile before collapsing.
 
When you wound a combatant you not only take him out of the fight, but you also take those surrounding him out of the fight because they have to stop and care for their fallen comrade's wounds
Click to expand...

You must be crazy to think I am going to stop shooting untill I kill you because the guy next to me got hit. That kind of fuzzy thinking loses wars and gets more of my buddys killed.

The only way to insure that the enemy will stop shooting at you is to KILL them.

Hope you are in a differnt squad than mine when the shootng starts.
Jim

Why don't you try fighting after you take one to the chest
Click to expand...

You are not that good a shot at 200 yards while being shot at, the arm maybe or the leg yes, but center mass in the chest?????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top