Weapons failed US troops during Afghan firefight

[ALS]

The gun is only as reliable as the amount of routine maintenance done by it's owner. There was a whole lot of so called problems with the M-16 in 65-66 in Vietnam. Sure the main problem was dirty powder initially but that problem was solved pretty quickly. The biggest reason for weapons failure came down to the guy in the field not performing proper maintenance and properly cleaning of the weapon in the field.

Remember the Jessica Lynch convoy attack? They said most of their weapons had jammed. It came out later that most of the soldiers in that unit hadn't performed basic field maintenance on their weapons since hitting the Iraq border.

[Franky4Fingers]

Originally Posted by Tomcat088

Even if our soldiers were carrying 7.62mm rounds, most of the time the extra 2.06mm wouldn't mean the difference between a kill or not. Both rounds simply pass thrugh and keep on going, only causing a 5.56mm hole or 7.62mm hole. The 5.56 doesn't tumble and break at the cannelure the way they show in the manuas, as often as people think. Most of the time a FMJ just shoots directly through it's target.

Hydrostatic pressure.


Take two identical milk jugs and fill them with water. Fire a .223 at one and a 7.62 at the other. The .223 will make a nice surgical hole, MAYBE a small rupture around the hole and that's it. The 7.62 will blow the jug apart. Its a larger diameter bullet, its a heavier bullet, its faster and has a lot more power.


There is a HUGE difference.

[buster2209]

Before I was deployed to Iraq in 2003 with the British Army, we had our piece of sh*t SA-80 upgraded to an equally bigger piece of sh*t called the SA-80 A2. It was the same rifle except the parts we're now 'tougher'.

We were told how it could shoot x amount of rounds without failing and could be buried in sand for x amount of days and would still fire.

Long story short, it failed so many times we used confiscated AK-47s

[buster2209]

Originally Posted by Tomcat088

I've heard of what you're talking about in terms of wounding soldiers. Maybe that's how someone had to justify it back in the day when they were trying to sell the adoption of that caliber.

When I was in the service, we were told the idea behind using a 5.56mm round instead of a 7.62mm was that the 7.62mm will more than likely kill a man whereas a 5.56mm will wound him and take 2 other guys off the battlefield as they attempt to drag him to safety to administer first aid.

[d90king]

Originally Posted by buster2209

Before I was deployed to Iraq in 2003 with the British Army, we had our piece of sh*t SA-80 upgraded to an equally bigger piece of sh*t called the SA-80 A2. It was the same rifle except the parts we're now 'tougher'.

We were told how it could shoot x amount of rounds without failing and could be buried in sand for x amount of days and would still fire.

Long story short, it failed so many times we used confiscated AK-47s

Just think, now you can buy as many AK-47's as you like! It will make you feel like you are back in the sand box... Might as well add a couple M4's while you are at it. Colt or LMT should suffice...

God Bless, The US Of A!

[buster2209]

Originally Posted by d90king

Just think, now you can buy as many AK-47's as you like! It will make you feel like you are back in the sand box... Might as well add a couple M4's while you are at it. Colt or LMT should suffice...

God Bless, The US Of A!

While I'm at it, I'll buy 2 months supply of army issue ration packs, stick a lot of sand in my ass crack and hey presto, instead PTSD!!!

[Tomcat088]

Originally Posted by Franky4Fingers

Hydrostatic pressure.


Take two identical milk jugs and fill them with water. Fire a .223 at one and a 7.62 at the other. The .223 will make a nice surgical hole, MAYBE a small rupture around the hole and that's it. The 7.62 will blow the jug apart. Its a larger diameter bullet, its a heavier bullet, its faster and has a lot more power.


There is a HUGE difference.

I hate to break it to you, but shooting milk jugs is not even CLOSE to what a bullet does when it hits a human body. There's a reason that ballistic gel was invented and is still in use today. Shooting water jugs doesn't tell you anything about what a bullet does to a person, it only tells you what it does to milk jugs.

I've shot plenty of milk jugs with .300 winmags and FMJ's, and lots of times they don't explode, they just start leaking water. I've shot lots of milk jugs and cans with .223 and they do the same thing, leak water. You throw an expanding bullet in either of those cartridges and they explode with 1 round. Either way, it still doesn't tell you very much about what a bullet does when it hits a human body.

Sure a 7.62 has more "power" (kinetic energy), but many times the bullet isn't moving any faster. It has more kinetic energy because it has more mass and is moving the same velocity. The 7.62 NATO with the heavier bullets doesn't have the velocity that the 5.56 NATO has, because it's shooting a heavier bullet; but it still has more power because it has more mass and is moving reasonably close to the same speed.

Even if it does have more kinetic energy, it only matters if it dumps all or most of that energy into the target. FMJ's don't dump very much of their energy because they easily shoot through a human and keep going. Energy only matters if the bullet loses it.

Have you ever shot a living animal or something with some mass? The reason that I ask is because from what you're saying, it dang sure doesn't sound like it. I've shot lots of animals, including feral hogs weighing 300 lbs with FMJ's and expanding ammunition from .223 and various .308 (7.62) caliber weapons. I know exactly what they do to flesh and bodies. Pigs are some of the best analogs that you can have to the human body and I assure you with a FMJ, the 7.62 shoots right through and doesn't do what you're talking about. The only time I've ever busted pigs open was with expanding bullets. Like I said, hydrostatic pressure only counts if the bullet dumps that energy on the target, with FMJ from either caliber, it doesn't happen. I'm as big of a .308 caliber fan as anybody, and hunt and shoot religiously a .300 WSM; so I'm not saying something biased, I'm telling you how it is.

[d90king]

Originally Posted by buster2209

While I'm at it, I'll buy 2 months supply of army issue ration packs, stick a lot of sand in my ass crack and hey presto, instead PTSD!!!

If you get homesick, you can always add a couple HK rifles, maybe a 33 or MP5, for those lonely nights when you are missing your homeland.

You won't be missing it enough to leave your new toys though.

[d90king]

Originally Posted by Franky4Fingers

Hydrostatic pressure.


Take two identical milk jugs and fill them with water. Fire a .223 at one and a 7.62 at the other. The .223 will make a nice surgical hole, MAYBE a small rupture around the hole and that's it. The 7.62 will blow the jug apart. Its a larger diameter bullet, its a heavier bullet, its faster and has a lot more power.


There is a HUGE difference.

Water jugs are kinda worthless when considering terminal ballistics...

Take some time and study this and I think it could open your eyes a little on terminal ballistics we aren't talking about penetration... If I need to shoot through a car, I'll take an AK, but for people 62-77gr 5.56 is plenty.

http://www.frfrogspad.com/terminal2.htm

[TonyF]

Someone call the local waste management company because we're knee deep in trash being passed of as fact in this thread.