Article

2004-09-01 Iraq-Jordan

The Last "Big Lie" of Vietnam Kills U. S. Soldiers in Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymous5089 2004-09-01 3:36:17 PM|| || Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 hmmm...sounds like someone looking for anti-war propaganda to me. Answer carefully.

Posted by B 2004-09-01 7:17:31 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:17:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#2 There are two cartridges that have been recently developed as possible "drop-in" replacements for the .223 round: the 6.8mm SPC and the 6.5mm Grendel. I would rather have the Grendel than the 6.8, but would prefer to get the 6.8 rather than have the .223.

You can read more about the grendel at http://www.65grendel.com.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-09-01 7:17:56 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2004-09-01 7:17:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#3 Well I have killed lots of Deer sized stuff with a 222 and 223 so I can't say I buy into this whole thing. You can carry a hell of alot of 233 mags and rounds. My personal choice is 7.62x51mm but carrying more than 100 rounds (5 mags) is quite a bit of weight when you figure in the rifle which is also big and heavy and other gear. 223 will kill, no doubt about it. The holes on the other side are not relevant. The relationship to the amount of hydrostatic shock (tissue damage) is not related to the exit hole size. Not saying the 223 is great but getting NATO to change is not going to happen for along time. All ammo has it's plusses and draw backs.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-01 7:32:04 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:32:04 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 B: I have seen volumes of complaints about the .223 round myself. I think it's a bad choice, and I think the situation is made worse by all the short-barreled versions of the M-16/AR-15 being used over there.

I've also seen pictures of US soldiers going on patrol in Afghanistan with M-14's.

I think part of the problem is that the Chart People have all sorts of studies showing that Infantry aren't really important anymore, the infantry rifle is nothing but a security blanket, most firefights happen within 50 yards, etc...

I am convinced that the Chart People are wrong, especially in conflicts like that of the present day.

I don't think the US should be changing their rifle if they're keeping the same bullet *and* using the short-barreled version with which the bullet is particularly ineffective.

Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-09-01 7:35:50 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2004-09-01 7:35:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 Sock Puppet: what sort of bullets were these .223 rounds loaded with?

Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-09-01 7:36:51 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2004-09-01 7:36:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 LOL!
Well the 4500 FPS Zircon was a good round but Halibruton kept them all for their security guards. We didn't know about the Frap Ray then or we would have felt worse. Of couse the Zen is in the target. I fired 11004 of Mk 55 ammo at willing civillians, none complained.

Posted by Col Flagg 2004-09-01 7:46:50 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:46:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 One thing to remember when evaluating the .223, is Fire and Manuever! It supports that Fundamental Infantry Maneuver Extremelly Well. For long distance shooting, selective target shooting, it is adequate to good. Stopping power? That all depends on how good a shot you are. Also, remember adrenaline can keep a critter going for along way. I have seen on numerous occasions a deer take four hits in the chest area with a .300 Weatherby Mag. and run another 50-100 yds.

Posted by TomAnon 2004-09-01 7:47:28 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:47:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 This topic was explored quite a bit just a month ago here when the XM-8 was announced.

Posted by .com 2004-09-01 7:47:38 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:47:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Hell this topic has been explored to the point of no return.

Posted by Shipman 2004-09-01 7:50:22 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:50:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 I have fired the M-14 and M-16. I like the M-14.
In the book "Blackhawk Down" the .223 rounds they were using did not immediately knock people. It took quite a few. I don't know what the rounds were made of but they were inadequate.

Posted by Deacon Blues 2004-09-01 7:51:36 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:51:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 In my opinion the 7.62x39 would be a better cartridge thant the 223. It is has a larger diameter, but also has enough powder to keep the kinetic energy up to get range, penetration, as well as being a small enough round to be able to cary a couple of hundred rounds without that much more of a sacrifice. The 7.62x51 NATO round kicks ass, but the weight factor (same as the .308)is the number one problem.

Posted by Anonymous6269 2004-09-01 7:51:49 PM|| 2004-09-01 7:51:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Well, when you get the caliber-thingy figured out - don't stop there! Add a splash of fashion!
White
Blue
Pink

And always pack a pair...

Posted by .AbuSwinger 2004-09-01 8:24:11 PM|| 2004-09-01 8:24:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Shhhhhhh. Don't let PETA hear about the goat.

Posted by Xbalanke 2004-09-01 8:40:47 PM|| 2004-09-01 8:40:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 The 5.56 is the best compromise for the rifle technology of the time.

I'd prefer the caseless H&K 6.5mm stuff - and that H&K rifle with the mega-high cyclic - the 3 round burst cleared the barrel within 0.1 seconds - fast enough to put all 3 rounds in the 10 ring before the muzzle climbed from recoil.

For distance work, the 338 Lapua is King Kong - go look up the ballisitics of that round, its freaken incredible. 600 yard is the zero drop point, and its packing 2200 FPS and 2700Ft-Lbs at that distance! At 1000 yards, its still cooking with 1700 Ft Lbs of energy and 1700 Ft/Sec velocity. And thats with the 300gr Lock FMJ round.

Add some hollowpoint boattail modified and hand loads, and this thing can pop the snot out of anything within about a mile - and is more accurate than a 50BMG, with a hell of a lot less loud and a lot less muzzle flash and kick.

But for common usage, you have to have good ballistics, good penetration/stopping power, good range, and lighter weight.

Those are things that are often opposite each other, so no matter what, you'll end up with a compromise in the design.

The M4 is adequate to the teask for urban warfare - short, easy to handle, carry buttloads of ammo, and can supress an area rapidly. Just intermix that with a squad "marksman" who carries a heavy high velocity, low volume weapon that can be used as a one-shot stopper at range, as well as a penetrator closer in.

So its not so much the weapons as it is the doctrine and tactics. Thats why the Marines are and Cavalry so effective compared to regualr infantry: they are organized along the lines above with a good *mix* of weaponry.

Posted by OldSpook 2004-09-01 11:45:36 PM|| 2004-09-01 11:45:36 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Phil the 222 and 223 I hunted with is not geneva convention legal stuff. I mostly shoot core-lokt in off the shelf stuff. I also have rolled my own 223 with a Corbin swedge from spent 22 rim fire cases with swaged lead cores(very frangable and nasty if you want them to be.) I am now not 222 or 223. I don't think the 1000's of rounds of 7.62x39 holow points I have shot were made for "hunting" like they say on the packages though if you catch my drift. I think all ammo has it's drawbacks. Kalashnikov also said the 223 was a "wrong size" and that 5.45x39mm was all wrong too. He knows a hell of alot more about firearms and ammo than most of us do. I know Stoner thought it was adaquate. But the rifle Stoner designed and the one in use now diverged long ago.
I know with a long enough barrel and the right twist 223 is good in the open.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-02 3:22:22 AM|| 2004-09-02 3:22:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#16 SPoD: I suspected something like that: a longer barrel and hollowpoint bullets.

OldSpook: Isn't that also the doctrine the Soviets used, back in the day? And did you ever see Anthony Swenson's thoughts about a year or two back on using a sort-of pistol caliber carbine (with a hotter round) in place of the M-4?

Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-09-02 8:58:38 AM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com] 2004-09-02 8:58:38 AM|| Front Page Top

21:54 Anonymous6412
16:15 lex
08:58 Phil Fraering
03:22 Sock Puppet of Doom
03:04 tibor
02:03 Asedwich
01:11 Old Patriot
01:04 Anonymous5032
00:25 Mike Sylwester
00:23 .com
00:07 .com
00:03 Dar
00:00 Classical_Liberal
23:53 muck4doo
23:49 OldSpook
23:45 OldSpook
23:42 Brett_the_Quarkian
23:41 .com
23:40 muck4doo
23:39 .com
23:38 anymouse
23:38 Brett_the_Quarkian
23:32 Brett_the_Quarkian
23:29 jn1