US uses bullets ill-suited for new ways of war

**DocGKR** · 05-27-08, 11:56

Hluill,

That "some doctor" you mentioned is COL Martin Fackler, former director of the Army Wound Ballistic Research Laboratory and founder of the IWBA. Dr. Fackler is a very experienced combat surgeon and the progenitor of modern wound ballistic research--he DEFINITELY knows what he is discussing--with 5.56 mm FMJ, it is all about velocity. Oh, BTW, the M4 and M4A1 have 14.5" barrels...

**Hluill** · 05-27-08, 12:48

Originally Posted by DocGKR

Hluill,

That "some doctor" you mentioned is COL Martin Fackler, former director of the Army Wound Ballistic Research Laboratory and founder of the IWBA. Dr. Fackler is a very experienced combat surgeon and the progenitor of modern wound ballistic research--he DEFINITELY knows what he is discussing--with 5.56 mm FMJ, it is all about velocity. Oh, BTW, the M4 and M4A1 have 14.5" barrels...

How are we measuring the barrels?

I am not that good at remembering all the numbers, but what little I know about the M4 velocities says that the 16" barrel of the M4 produces a velocity capable of tumbling the bullet on two inches of penentration. From what I have read, this tumbling is what earned the M16 the nickname "Evil Black Gun" by the Vietnamese. I have seen the horrific wounds that it causes and am satisfied with the trauma that it induces, even on "skinny", unarmored bad-guys. I also like that it doesn't penetrate too far, like 7.62, and lowers the risk of hitting security and support guys outside the building.

In the service I used what I was issued, M855 62 grain. Contracting, I used 55grain, usually M193 surplus. I used to swear by the 55-grain, but I have been told by the instructors at Blackwater that heavier bullets have a higher velocity, thus tumble more reliably.

Don't get me wrong, I like 7.62. Give me those long guns on overwatch or three M60s on tripods in support anyday. I like watching them perforate their targets: trucks, huts, bunkers, mobile homes...

So much of combat is based on dramatic experience, it's easy to get strong opinions based on exceptional incidents. For a long time I hated using a collapsable stock because I had seen one shatter which led to some really tense moments on a room entry.

I think training is still the biggest issue, especially in the Army, but I could rant on that for pages.

**KevinB** · 05-27-08, 12:55

THE M4/M4A1 has a 14.5" barrel - end full stop.
Civilian guns typically have 16" barrels to avoid the NFA issues.

I had a lot of Hornady TAP where the brass was not properly annealed and it split at the neck and flame cut thru the brass and marred some chambers. Circa 1999-2000 time frame.

I have (touch wood) no setback issues with the Mk262 Mod1 so far -- the 0 was having problems similar to the 69gr GM that State issued briefly here.

The issue is M855 is not a great barrier round either -- its vaunted semi/light armor piercing capabilities dont really do a lot. Mk262 does a reasonable job messing up an auto, but M995 does it better -- and frankly I dont like any 5.56mm round for trying to "tear shit up".

In the wrung what you brung world here there are still a lot of systems out there that are capable of defeating obstacles and barriers.

I think in the interim a better 5.56mm round needs to be found and quickly fielded.
However I think the priority must be better training and more of it.

After that we can look at fielding a better system - a la Hk418 (IIRC that is the 416 in 6.8 right?) or Mk17 in that 7mmMurray or whatever.

One problem with annecdoatal troop info from my own experiences -- I once shot a guy @ 400m with a Mk18, I also burned a car (Bongo Van) with 1 x round of Mk262 Mod1 (who knew a single round into the engine could sever a fuel line and somehow cause a fire -- BigRed was there and laughing too hard). I've shot a guy [who drove off later] with 4 rounds from an Ak does that mean 7.62x39 is worthless ( I think so, but that is another story). Individual results need to be taken in context -- what about the many people I may have missed with a Mk18? Failure with other things? People, and myself included, tend to fixate on one or two events and as such the objectivity and the whole picutre is lost.

The M4/M4A1 is an excellent weapon system, and M855 is an okay performer. that said I beleive that the American fighting man deserves the best equipment to find fix and destroy the enemy that can be provided, and I do not think that either of the above are the best for that task anymore.

As far as NATO standards go, I would be more interested in the ABCA countries - as other than the Dutch in Afghanistan no one else is shoulder any of the combat in Iraq or Afghanistan -- do we really care what the French or Germans use when drinking a Latte in Kabul?

**Hluill** · 05-27-08, 13:16

Originally Posted by KevinB

THE M4/M4A1 has a 14.5" barrel - end full stop.
Civilian guns typically have 16" barrels to avoid the NFA issues.

Huh, maybe I have been using modified M4s too much... I am not that good at remembering numbers, that is for sure.

Originally Posted by KevinB

However I think the priority must be better training and more of it.

Amen! Too many units that I have been in sacrificed training for recruitment/retention and new office furniture.

Originally Posted by KevinB

One problem with annecdoatal troop info from my own experiences -- I once shot a guy @ 400m with a Mk18, I also burned a car (Bongo Van) with 1 x round of Mk262 Mod1 (who knew a single round into the engine could sever a fuel line and somehow cause a fire -- BigRed was there and laughing too hard). I've shot a guy [who drove off later] with 4 rounds from an Ak does that mean 7.62x39 is worthless ( I think so, but that is another story). Individual results need to be taken in context -- what about the many people I may have missed with a Mk18? Failure with other things? People, and myself included, tend to fixate on one or two events and as such the objectivity and the whole picutre is lost.

I definitely suffer from this, but is there a reliable way to draw a "bigger picture"?

Originally Posted by KevinB

The M4/M4A1 is an excellent weapon system, and M855 is an okay performer. that said I beleive that the American fighting man deserves the best equipment to find fix and destroy the enemy that can be provided, and I do not think that either of the above are the best for that task anymore.

As far as NATO standards go, I would be more interested in the ABCA countries - as other than the Dutch in Afghanistan no one else is shoulder any of the combat in Iraq or Afghanistan -- do we really care what the French or Germans use when drinking a Latte in Kabul?

It's funny that most units that can choose their own weapon systems, choose M4 variants as their default weapon. I have played with a lot of different countries weapons and the best "Assault Rifle" is the M4, for many different, and biased, reasons.

**KevinB** · 05-27-08, 13:38

Dude, I have no idea of your background, but I have a few sudden newsflashes for you.

The M4/M4A1 is no longer the gold standard.

It has and has always had a 14.5 " barrel.

Units that have full control of what they use have typically now gone off to the Hk416, or eagerly awaiting the FN Mk16 SCAR-L

**chadbag** · 05-27-08, 16:56

Originally Posted by KevinB

As far as NATO standards go, I would be more interested in the ABCA countries - as other than the Dutch in Afghanistan no one else is shoulder any of the combat in Iraq or Afghanistan -- do we really care what the French or Germans use when drinking a Latte in Kabul?

Just to help me. I know the Germans and French governments are wussies when it comes to that, but Canada, and I believe Denmark, as well as Australia have guys actually fighting in Afghanistan?

Thanks for any info
Chad

**GlockWRX** · 05-27-08, 17:26

Originally Posted by eguns-com

Just to help me. I know the Germans and French governments are wussies when it comes to that, but Canada, and I believe Denmark, as well as Australia have guys actually fighting in Afghanistan?

Thanks for any info
Chad

I'm guessing, but I think the ABCA is America, Britain, Canada, Australia. You could say it's ABCDA and include Denmark.

**Hluill** · 05-27-08, 18:23

Originally Posted by KevinB

Dude, I have no idea of your background, but I have a few sudden newsflashes for you.

The M4/M4A1 is no longer the gold standard.

It has and has always had a 14.5 " barrel.

Units that have full control of what they use have typically now gone off to the Hk416, or eagerly awaiting the FN Mk16 SCAR-L

Dude, I have been out of the loop for a bit, to be sure. The M16A2 was the standard back when I was in the green line, and I remember when we were first issued them. "White-Elephant hunting" I used M4 variants. ~shrugs~ I had repeatedly heard that it had a 16" barrel. I was down at Blackwater and distinctly remember them talking about the characteristics of the 16" barrel on the M4. I have now been told by several of you that the issued M4 does not have a 16" barrel. I have friends in the green line and their weapons don't look any different than the one I had, but maybe it was an inch and a half shorter. ~shrugs~ Numbers aside, I was happy with that weapon's performance.

I am familiar with the 416, it was coming in as I was going out. Firing one convinced me to invest in a POF for my personal work-gun. I may be a fossil (yeah, still carry .45...), but I see it as another M4 variant. Granted, it's a nice weapon using a great idea, but still just a variant in my mind. But then again, as seen by many, I could be wrong...