Ah, the semi-annual AK or AR, 5.56 or 7.62, etc. debate. BOLAND, "no other NATO country color-codes their SS-109". I'm looking at some Greek green-tip SS109. Pretty sure Greece is still in NATO. ANYONE, show me documentation of anyone other than Howe, who complained about M16 being ineffective. ANYONE, have you ever SEEN a human hit by it? I don't think so.

Good grief! The myths are propagating! Get the elephant gun Mabel! Release the hounds! Some of you guys are seriously misinformed and it would take a damned book to counter all the bullshit I just read. It's late and I'm tired so here's just a few facts to chew on...

ALL spitzer type rifle bullets tumble in flesh. I repeat... ALL. Tumbling as a wounding mechanism is old school and not a major factor. Fragmentation is a major factor as a wounding mechanism. M855 is ball ammo and it fragments much like M193 ball ammo. 5.45 Russian does not fragment. 7.62 NATO does not fragment (except for the German variety). "Energy dump" is highly overrated as a wounding mechanism. It is not now nor has it ever been US military strategy or "conventional wisdom" to wound but not kill the enemy. There's no fucking magic bullet. I'm going to quit now and hit the submit button before my head explodes.

Big_Bear, I see that you have never experimented with 5.45mm.  Many people crap on it, yet most everyone whose tried it is amazed.  Yes you are right that all spitzer bullets tumble, but only the 5.45 tumbles wildy almost immediately after entering tissue.  It  utilizes an exceedingly long bullet to cut a nasty wound.  My experience and the experience of others is that anything you shoot with 5.45 gets torn to pieces.  People can't agree on anything in the high velocity vs large projectile and fragmentation vs weight retention debates.  I just work from my personal experimentation which indicates that 5.45 is the caliber of choice.  Now calm down...

Quoted: The Russian engineers designed the round with an air pocket in the tip so that the round will yaw violently when it hits a target creating visious wound cavities.

I have read that the Russians did not intend to create the air pocket, that it was merely a flaw in production that they never bothered to fix.  While it makes the 5.45 a little more effecitve, this was as unintentional as the 5.56's fragmentation.

For all this talk of 5.45 being so effective, I wonder what you guys are shooting at to get these horrible wounds you describe.  I assume not people.  You would need a similary sized target to get reliable results.  Fackler indicates the 5.45 is no death ray, certainly not as good as 5.56.  The Russians apparently have mixed feelings about the 5.45 (as many Americans do with the 5.56).

I swear to Fucking God, what is it with you people who swear 5.56 is the shit.  Some of you people act like someone is taking shots at your children when anyone questions the performance of 5.56.  That round will never and can never out perform 7.62/.308/ 30-06 in it's wounding capabilities, energy it retains the longer the range gets, or penatration.  It might be able to be made more accurate for high power shooting, but how do you explain what the Rangers incountered in somalia then.  5.56 will do the job just like most high powered rifle rounds will but it is by no means the round some of you blow it up to be, like it's the only round that exists.  The original question was if it was true what happened in blackhawk down, and the answer is YES.  BTW how do you people explain how 7.62/.308 and 30-06 can penatrate bigger trees than 5.56 and 7.62x39.  I'm sure some of you will come up with numbers and graph's and other shit to swear by 5.56 but the fact remains it is true I've done it.

                                                          YES WHAT HAPPENED IN BLACKHAWK DOWN WAS TRUE, THE SUPER BULLET 5.56 WAS NOT PERFORMING THE WAY THE RANGERS IN THE WAR ZONE WOULD HAVE LIKED IT TO!


                          ROCK ON!  

From what I can remember from the book the Delta guy was using armour piercing ammo. Other desc. in the book of the Rangers detailed very devastating wounds ie heads exploding, bodies being ripped apart...I think the armour piercing ammo was just making a very clean wound no fragmentation or tumbling.

sk8brdnick, you're right, I have not experimented with 5.45mm Russian. All I can go by is what I read. Mucho depends on what part of the body is hit. 5.45mm Russian yaws very early as you noted, and causes marked disruption in some tissue and far less effect in others. It is arguably more effective in extremity hits (arms, lower legs) than 5.56mm due to this yawing effect.



OTOH, 5.56mm causes (comparatively) little damage at shallow depths but markedly significant damage at a depth of 15-25cm due to bullet fragmentation.



This ain't rocket science but like Troy said, it is complex, bringing in many many variables, and alot of misconceptions abound. And like I said, there ain't no magic bullet. I suggest reading this article for a good overview on terminal ballistics.

rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html

...and this one debunks some of the myths surrounding .223 penetration and its viability for CQB. Some good info on choice of barrel length too.

www.olyarms.com/223cqb.html

Okay, I simmah dahn nah! ;-)

I told you! GRAPHES and CHARTS.  I don't see in that chart what barrel those bullets were fired from.  From my understanding when the M-16 was being put through trials the first ones had 1:14 barrels, which created very serious wounds but failed the Army's Artic accuracy tests.  So they went to 1:12.  What barrel were these rounds fired from?  Look I own an AR-15 and I like 5.56 and would not be afraid to carry it in combat, but I don't see why some of you continue to hold on to the notion that it is far and away better than any other rifle round.  Remember the Ranger on TV said from his own mouth that they would shoot these little bastards multiple times and they would continue to fight.

Quoted: From what I can remember from the book the Delta guy was using armour piercing ammo. Other desc. in the book of the Rangers detailed very devastating wounds ie heads exploding, bodies being ripped apart...I think the armour piercing ammo was just making a very clean wound no fragmentation or tumbling.

Sometimes i really wonder if people bother to read the text, obviously not.

It has been stated in this thread and about a gazillion previous ones that the ammo was standard M855 ball and the M955 AP round was not in even in use in 1993.

The only person complaing in the book was SFC Howe since he was the only operator cleared to talk, so the views of other operators were not seen.

The Army Rangers didn´t complain about not being able to kill the enemy since they were using 20" barreled M16A2 which provide a longer fragmentation range for the projectile.

And the only thing that day ripping apart bodies were the Mk19 and M203 grenadelaunchers, AH-6 Little Birds and the M134s on the Blackhawks.

Quoted: Quoted: From what I can remember from the book the Delta guy was using armour piercing ammo. Other desc. in the book of the Rangers detailed very devastating wounds ie heads exploding, bodies being ripped apart...I think the armour piercing ammo was just making a very clean wound no fragmentation or tumbling. Sometimes i really wonder if people bother to read the text, obviously not. It has been stated in this thread and about a gazillion previous ones that the ammo was standard M855 ball and the M955 AP round was not in even in use in 1993. The only person complaing in the book was SFC Howe since he was the only operator cleared to talk, so the views of other operators were not seen. The Army Rangers didn´t complain about not being able to kill the enemy since they were using 20" barreled M16A2 which provide a longer fragmentation range for the projectile. And the only thing that day ripping apart bodies were the Mk19 and M203 grenadelaunchers, AH-6 Little Birds and the M134s on the Blackhawks.

Bullshit dude, I sat right there and watched several ex-rangers talk about this very thing.  As stated in my previous posts, on the Discoverery channel or one of those.

Facklers data is pure BS.  I'm a scientist and I know bad science when I see it.  For starters, tissue is not just tissue.  It is bones, muscles, fat, fluid filled cavities etc.  So assume 5.56 fragments after 15cm (6inches) of passage through muscle.  What about a softer medium such as a chest cavity.  Most of that is simply water and air.  Perhaps in that medium it would take 8" or 12".  What of lower velocities, it would take longer or not even occur.  Also would anyone care to tell me how fackler examined wounds with a depth of 52cm (that is almost 2 ft) or how he observed combat wounds from 5.45 at all.  Start to finish it sounds like crap to me.  If you do buy into his report, my understanding is that Fackler's later work praises the effectiveness of the 5.45 round.  Also, it is my understanding that the russian design of the 5.45 with airpocket was anything but accidental.  Given the secrecy of their weapons design programs I imagine we can only speculate what their thinking was.

Anyway, I'm not saying that 7.62 or 5.56 don't work, just that the 5.45mm platform is my favorite.  Seriously, if you haven't tried this round, you should.  It makes believers out of most people and is a pleasure to shoot.  My SAR-2 was the best 250 bucks I ever spent...

They also had a hard time dropping one guy with an M-60 in Blackhawk Down, so their difficulties were not solely related to 5.56.  I think the M-60 was shooting some kind of AP round, but this just goes to show that big bullets and a .30 caliber cartridge do not automatically result in instant drops.

The whole 1:14 v. 1:12 argument has been thoroughly debunked.  Velocity, not rifle twist, is the key to fragmentation for FMJ.

No doubt 7.62 has better penetration than 5.56.  It is better at getting targets under cover.  But the argument is that the 5.56 will make a wider wound - because it fragments - than the 7.62 - which will not fragment.  But that will be cold comfort if your M16 fails to penetrate the cover.

I do not think anyone is saying that 7.62 is better than 5.56.  The 5.56 might, given the right circumstances, make a larger wound than 7.62 FMJ at less than 200 yards or so, depending upon barrel length.  The 7.62 will penetrate cover better at all ranges.  The 7.62 will make a bigger wound at beyond 200 yards or so.  So there are tradeoffs for each rounds, especially considering recoil and weight.  Note that 308 soft points will make a bigger wound than 5.56 at all ranges.  Weigh the factors, and make your choice.

Quoted: Facklers data is pure BS.  I'm a scientist and I know bad science when I see it.  For starters, tissue is not just tissue.  It is bones, muscles, fat, fluid filled cavities etc.  So assume 5.56 fragments after 15cm (6inches) of passage through muscle.  What about a softer medium such as a chest cavity.  Most of that is simply water and air.  Perhaps in that medium it would take 8" or 12".  What of lower velocities, it would take longer or not even occur.  Also would anyone care to tell me how fackler examined wounds with a depth of 52cm (that is almost 2 ft) or how he observed combat wounds from 5.45 at all.  Start to finish it sounds like crap to me.  If you do buy into his report, my understanding is that Fackler's later work praises the effectiveness of the 5.45 round.  Also, it is my understanding that the russian design of the 5.45 with airpocket was anything but accidental.  Given the secrecy of their weapons design programs I imagine we can only speculate what their thinking was. Anyway, I'm not saying that 7.62 or 5.56 don't work, just that the 5.45mm platform is my favorite.  Seriously, if you haven't tried this round, you should.  It makes believers out of most people and is a pleasure to shoot.  My SAR-2 was the best 250 bucks I ever spent...

I agree, it was no accident designing that air pocket in there.  That crap about it being an accident is for shit.  They had years to study the 5.56 before they decided on the current design of the 5.45x39.  They're no dummies!

Quoted: I told you! GRAPHES and CHARTS.  I don't see in that chart what barrel those bullets were fired from.  From my understanding when the M-16 was being put through trials the first ones had 1:14 barrels, which created very serious wounds but failed the Army's Artic accuracy tests.  So they went to 1:12.  What barrel were these rounds fired from?  Look I own an AR-15 and I like 5.56 and would not be afraid to carry it in combat, but I don't see why some of you continue to hold on to the notion that it is far and away better than any other rifle round.  Remember the Ranger on TV said from his own mouth that they would shoot these little bastards multiple times and they would continue to fight.

And you are going to base your entire argument over what ONE ranger said, in ONE battle?

Quoted: I'm a scientist and I know bad science when I see it.

It really does leave a lot to be desired, but I am waiting for something better.  Until then, I am not going to be changing to 5.45 because it is your "favorite", because a couple guys are guessing that the Russians intentionally put the airbubble of death in the bullets tip, or other anecdotal evidence.  Fackler was a combat surgeon in Vietnam.  He saw the holes produced by 5.56, and tried to figure out why it was outperforming 7.62x39 and 7.62x51.  While maybe he does not have the whole story, there was at least enough there to make him curious.

What about a softer medium such as a chest cavity.  Most of that is simply water and air.

Actually, Fackler as a combat surgeon noted that the 5.56 would make huge holes in the (air filled) intestines.

Use the 5.45 or 7.62, more power to you.  I am definately not sure that 5.56 is more effective, but what little unreliable evidence there is tends to indicate the 5.56 has some nice attributes as a wound producer.  But I know from big game hunting that 308 soft points are lethal as hell, so that is probably a good way to go if you want to carry a 10 pound rifle and suffer the recoil.  That is as sure a bet to kill as anything you do not have to pull with a truck.  As to 5.45, all I hear is anectodatally that it is wonderful.  I assume these folks talking it up are not shooting big game or humans to test it out.  But more power to you.

No, but there were also several other Rangers saying the same thing.  BTW they were acutally shooting real people with 5.56 and I would take their advice and beleive them over anyone who quotes graphes and charts and has this crazy idea that 5.56 is the be-all end-all.  These Rangers also witnessed 7.62 perform in real life combat and in their opinion they seemed to prefer it.

7_62gunner, i was talking about the book, NOT A SINGLE RANGER HAD DIFFICULTIES DROPPING THE SOMALIS.

Go to www.cinemayhem.com/blackhawkdown/index.htm look up the BHD board and ask Raleigh Cash, Steve Andersson or the other Task Force Ranger veterans if they had trouble nailing the enemy.

In the book the Delta shooter is using the Army's new (then) Green Tip 5.56 ammo designed for higher penetration of armor. The problem was that the somalis (whose idea of body armor is a plaid shirt) were not stopped instantly because the rounds passed through without creating much of a shock cavity and thereby transferring very little of their energy.
Also, many of the Somalis were high on "Khat" which is some kind of drug they chew on to get high.(as of yet undiscovered by American high school students)
In addition Dleta trooper Randy Shugart who won the CMOH along with SFC Gary Gordon for rappelling into the second crash site to protect the downed crew was said to have preferred the M14 due to it's increased knock down power.
I highly reccomend the book Blackhawk Down if you have not yet read it.

All,

Well, here's my first post, & I have a statement to make on this subject.  If I may be so bold... Have none of you killed anything with your .223's (5.56 for those who fret over miniscule variances)?  

I've not found 1 post on this thread re: killing w/ your prized 223's. No offense here, but frankly, I'm disappointed.  

To my point, I have killed lots of things w/ my .223--more Coyotes than anything.  Now before you scoff, let me say that while they're not humans, they're live, extremely tough & superb hunters.  

Yes, they're lighter than humans, and have thick fur, but I'll bet they'll outlast anybody on this board in taking rounds and continuing to function.

I've killed lots of 'em, using .22rf to -'06, Personally, I've found the .223 w/ 55grain fmj to be devasating.  

Case in point.  The 1st Coyote I shot w/ .223 was a dog I called in after 3 hrs work.  I was about to leave the side of a large hill when right after I stood & turned, I saw three dogs at 30 yds headed single file in my direction.  I slowly & quietly sat & waited.

A few moments passed when they slow trotted just to my left w/ the sun opposite, shining directly in my eyes.  They were around 25' away.  I let the first dog pass.  As the 2nd dog appeared in my sights (A Mini 14-don't laugh) I nailed my trigger.  

Unfortunately, that bullet tore into the back of the dog. That dog, yipping loudly, attempted to bite whatever had ahold of it. I immediately triggered my 2nd rd. & nailed him just aft the right shoulder.  That 2nd rd. sent the dog down like a steel plate-without another yip.

I stood & found the 3rd dog in my sights, I could have shot 1st & 3rd, but stopped.  (I think they were all siblings).  After realizing their assess were being hunted, those two sped down the hill to a ravine below, where they stood for several moments trying to assess what just happened.  

I then walked to my kill to assess the damage.  I then noticed that there was a fine blood splatter, a mist really, covering an area of 12'x6'.  Blood on the prickly pear, blood on the rocks & brush.  Fur was floating near the ground.

I looked at the dog's right shoulder to see the kill shot, but my eyes were drawn to the huge chunk missing from the dogs back, just above the shoulder.  It was BIG, 3" deep & 4 to 5" wide.  Shaped like a flattened "U"  

I turned the dog upright to look closer.  The spine was completely gone from the wound area.  I examined the shoulder wound noticing a small entry point, but an exit the diameter of a silver dollar.  

The dogs eyes were still open & if a Coyote could ever have a "Oh, Shit" look on its face then this one did.  He suffered a moment, but that 2nd rd. put his lights out-Immediately.

That was the 1st Coyote I killed WITH A .223.  I've killed many since w/ my Mini (at 5 to 250+ yds) & results are always similar.  Hit'em right & they go down like a steel plate.  

.223 exit wounds are smaller at distance.  Coyotes also sort of "lay down" fall over at extreme range.  The .223 certainly uses velocity as an edge.

Calibers like .308 offer excellent results;  however, I'll say that I've never seen flesh removed to the extent a .223 does on occasion.  .30 cals sorta "punch" them down, but the wounds are never as gory.

BTW, note to PETA members, don't bother flaming.  I'll just ignore.  I've appreciated this board & its members for over a year now.  I'm glad I joined.

MH

Quoted: In the book he mentioned that one of the D-boys that was killed used an M14 because he felt more confident in the 30-06.

The M14 was .308 not .30-06.

Troy, I had lost the link with the info I got about green tips designating frangible, but I just found that page has been moved here. The info about bullet tip colors is about 1/3 of the way down:

members.shaw.ca/cstein0/uscenter.htm

Some General US Military Bullet Bullet Tip Identificartions (Mainly 30-06 and 308 up to the year 1960. Some colors may still be the same) [emphasis added]

Red Tip Bullet: Tracer
Orange Tip Bullet: Day Tracer
Black Tip Bullet: Armor Piercing
Silver Tip Bullet: Armor piercing Incendiary
Green Tip Bullet: Frangible
Green Tip over White/Gray Tip Bullet:Frangible
Yellow Tip Bullet, red annulus: Spotter Tracer
Yellow Tip Bullet: Hi Pressure Test
Purple Tip Bullet: Incendiary
Blue Tip Bullet: Incendiary

Now I realize these are general markings and not universal, and I had forgotten about the part that said these markings were mainly .308 and 30-06 up to 1960. Thanks for giving the correct info.

I personally like BOTH rounds (.308,.223)
5.56mm I shot,(standard ball)was penatrating
1/2" plate at 200yrds with authority,no frag,
no tumble.not scientific,jus' practical..308
of course did the same @ same  range.Dope/
adreniline could possibly account for more than
1 shot having to be used (on "skinnies").