www.spacewar.com/2005/050106095659.qo2jdpbs.html

US seeks to buy ammunition from Taiwan as stocks run low after Iraq: report
TAIPEI (AFP) Jan 06, 2005
The United States is planning to buy hundreds of millions of bullets from Taiwan in the first such deal as its supplies are running low after wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, a report said Thursday.

Citing Taiwanese military sources, the United Evening News said Washington had made the request to acquire some 300 million 5.56-millimeter bullets for rifles for an estimated two billion Taiwan dollars (62.5 million US).

The deal was yet to be finalized pending price negotiations, it said.

An unnamed general quoted by the paper said it would be the first time for Washington, Taiwan's leading arms supplier, to acquire arms from the island.

In line with its usual practice, Taiwan's defense ministry declined to comment on the report.

Taiwan produces some 400 million such bullets annually, according to the paper. It added most rifle bullets were manufactured by an arsenal in southern Kaohsiung which has storage problems due to declining demand in the absence of any military conflict across the Taiwan Strait.

The paper also said Taiwan had exported T-91 rifles to several countries in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

Washington Wednesday agreed to sell air-to-ground Hellfire missiles worth 50 million US dollars to Taiwan to help the island defend itself against threats from rival China.

"The US Army has executed a letter of agreement with Taiwan, setting the stage for the sale of more than 400 AGM-114M blast-fragmentation Hellfire rounds under a foreign military sales contract," US defense giant Lockheed Martin Corporation said.

It would take the company about six months to make the Hellfire missiles ordered by Taiwan.

The missiles will be mounted on Taiwan's Super Cobra AH-1W attack and OH-58D Kiowa Warrior scout helicopters.

Quoted: Citing Taiwanese military sources, the United Evening News said Washington had made the request to acquire some 300 million 5.56-millimeter bullets for rifles for an estimated two billion Taiwan dollars (62.5 million US).

$62,500,000 / 300,000,000 bullets, is $ 0.21 per round.



Those had better be some damned nice bullets for them to be paying RETAIL prices for small quantities.  

Is the .gov going to issue contracts to Remington, Federal, Winchester, etc. to produce 5.56 and/or 7.62 ammo?  If not, why not rather than going and buying it from other countries?

english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D7F24758-F512-4E94-AFD2-0898FA33448B.htm

Here's another link.

Remember though that the US dollar stinks right now. ~$4 per 20 rounds is not that bad of a price, assuming that includes shipping and what not. There also may be a time issue involved as well. We obviously need it right away.

themao

Quoted: english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D7F24758-F512-4E94-AFD2-0898FA33448B.htm Here's another link. Remember though that the US dollar stinks right now. ~$4 per 20 rounds is not that bad of a price, assuming that includes shipping and what not. There also may be a time issue involved as well. We obviously need it right away. themao

Yea, but we got a group buy together and bought 300,000,000 rounds, I would EXPECT better prices then $4/20.  I agree, this really sucks if it is true.  Nothing like supporting the US economy and creating jobs to help with the war effort.

Oh, and if this is the case, why can't we use the ammo we have bought from IMI for combat??  I have read that the IMI ammo we buy is shipped stateside for training while our ammo is shipped across seas for combat.  Real good tactic for reducing the deficit.

Is there a reason all of this extra demand for new ammo is starting all at once. LC and IMI dropping civi M193 at about the same time to send more to the military, now this?

Did the high-ups just decide that a critical minimum amount of ammo reserves had been reached and they won't deplete them any further?

It just seems that all this demand is spiking very suddenly.

Quoted: Quoted: english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D7F24758-F512-4E94-AFD2-0898FA33448B.htm Here's another link. Remember though that the US dollar stinks right now. ~$4 per 20 rounds is not that bad of a price, assuming that includes shipping and what not. There also may be a time issue involved as well. We obviously need it right away. themao Yea, but we got a group buy together and bought 300,000,000 rounds, I would EXPECT better prices then $4/20.  I agree, this really sucks if it is true.  Nothing like supporting the US economy and creating jobs to help with the war effort. Oh, and if this is the case, why can't we use the ammo we have bought from IMI for combat??  I have read that the IMI ammo we buy is shipped stateside for training while our ammo is shipped across seas for combat.  Real good tactic for reducing the deficit.

Because the State Department decided the terrorists would get upset getting killed by ammo made in Israel.

dupe dupe

Quoted: dupe dupe

Read the time stamps.  That OTHER thread is the dupe.  

Related article from the AlJazeera one linked above  Seems like more PC bs.  The U.S. ought to quit catering to the appearance crowd and tell the Arab world that we will use whatever ammo we have wherever.  As a matter of fact we ought to tell them that all our ammo is dipped in pig blood.  A little psychological carrot and stick.  Trying to make the distinction that the IMI ammo will only be used stateside is a distinction that will be ignored by the Muslim hatemongers anyway.

english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/334751F5-7080-4D3B-9C73-1FD124D81390.htm

Does US army use Israeli bullets?

Friday 25 June 2004, 2:58 Makka Time, 23:58 GMT  

US generals have been cautioned against use of Israeli rounds
Related:
Iraqi cities ablaze in run-up to handover
US troops 'suffocated' Iraqi general
Day of resistance attacks

Tools:
  Email Article
  Print Article
  Send Your Feedback

Israeli-made bullets bought by the US Army should be used for training only, not for combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, US lawmakers have told army generals.

Since the army has other stockpiled ammunition, "by no means, under any circumstances should a round (from Israel) be utilised", said Representative Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii on Thursday - the top Democrat on a House of Representatives Armed Services subcommittee with jurisdiction over land forces.

The US Army contracted with Israel Military Industries Ltd. in December for $70 million in small-calibre ammunition.

It is unclear whether Abercrombie was addressing the possibility of Israeli bullets having US been used in current Iraq and Afghanistan combat operations or simply suggesting future engagement rules.

Two possible suppliers

The Israeli firm was one of only two worldwide that could meet US technical specifications and delivery needs, said Brigadier General Paul Izzo, the army's programme executive officer for  ammunition.

The other was East Alton, Illinois-based Winchester Ammunition, which also received a $70 million contract.

"There's a sensitivity that I think all of us recognise," Representative Curt Weldon told the army witnesses, including Major General Buford Blount, who led US troops that captured Baghdad in April 2003.

"There's a sensitivity that I think all of us recognise"

Curt Weldon,
US House Representative

Blount, now the army's assistant deputy chief of staff, said they had sufficient small calibre ammunition - 5.56mm, 7.62mm and .50 calibre - to conduct current operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Inventory strained

But taken together with training needs, the US had strained its production facilities, he testified.

"To fight a major combat operation in another theatre will require the army to impose restrictions on training expenditures and to focus current inventory and new production on combat operations," Blount said.

He also said that the army's needs will grow to about 1.5 billion to 1.7 billion rounds a year in coming years.

"In the near-term, balancing training requirements with current operational needs is a manageable risk-mitigation strategy," Blount said.

The Army does not want to repeat its history of building capacity during wartime "only to dismantle it in peacetime", Blount added.

Someone please put me in charge.

IMI ammo dipped in pig fat/pig shit would be issued immediately.

And field expedient corrections on all existing ammo stock to bring it up to "spec".

Quoted: Quoted: dupe dupe Read the time stamps.  That OTHER thread is the dupe.

I didn't say which one was the dupe !

Gotta wonder if we sold it to them first, and for how much if we did!

Isn't the math above backwards, or is it just me after a long day at work?

Wouldn't you divide the number of bullets, by the cost, not the other way around?





Never mind, it was a long day, and yep, he is right. Dang that is kinda high.

Sounds like the new acquisition strategy of using a lead systems integrator for small arms ammunition procurement is kicking in.........

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2004/Sep/US_Army_Considers.htm

Quoted: Gotta wonder if we sold it to them first, and for how much if we did!

It's made at a plant in Khaoshiang. I think it may even say in the article...

M1A: Easy way to figure out division order is to look at your units. You want to know dollars per round, right? "Dollars per round" means "dollars/round". Divide dollars by rounds.

Is this all M855?  Also, if we're worried about sensitivity, why don't we contract out with France to produce all our ammo?  Then when we nail Haji we just tell him that Jacque Chirac himself assembled that round.  He'll feel much better at that point.

                 Jacques Chirac      

This is both an ammo strategy and a defense industry "off-set" or counter-purchase. We'll buy your stuff if you buy our stuff.

We get $70 million in small arms ammunition (we can use it given the current enviroment) and they buy our Hellfire Missles. That way when the politicos scream about purchasing military goods overseas the .gov (or .gov.tw) can say " No jobs were lost. They bought XXXX in return so it's all equal". Notice how the press release paired the two purchases even though they have almost nothing in common.

Hopefully jihadists don't object to being killed by Taiwanese bullets.

$4, for 20 rounds I'll sell them what I got at that price

Quoted: Quoted: Citing Taiwanese military sources, the United Evening News said Washington had made the request to acquire some 300 million 5.56-millimeter bullets for rifles for an estimated two billion Taiwan dollars (62.5 million US). $62,500,000 / 300,000,000 bullets, is $ 0.21 per round. Those had better be some damned nice bullets for them to be paying RETAIL prices for small quantities.

There is manufacturing capacity in Taiwan...it makes sense to order it from them.

After all, our own manufacturing capacity has all but been outsourced to China or Mexico.

We' reaping what we sow ...at least the Taiwanese are stepping up to the plate to help out. It's not like anyone else in the world is willing to or really should  help us out in the most unpopular/unjust war in history.

Is the supply getting that low?

Quoted: Is the supply getting that low?

I think thier current production is maxed.

Sly2fun, your comments on an unjust war indicate a total ignorance of history, not to mention an understanding of the international arms market.  If offered the chance, the French, Russians, Chinese, etc. who were more than happy to sell Saddam everything from small arms to nuclear reactors would love to sell us small arms ammunition.

The fact that we are bogged down in Iraq now is the result of our weakness in 1991 in acting through the mirage of the "international system" instead of doing what had to be done and getting rid of a murderous, dangerous regime.  We then compounded the stupidity by encouraging them to rise up and got 100,000+ of the ballsiest Iraqis killed when we failed to support them.  We are now paying the price for our stupidity then.

I was in a tank in the first Gulf War.  I felt exactly the same way then.

Quoted: Quoted: Is the .gov going to issue contracts to Remington, Federal, Winchester, etc. to produce 5.56 and/or 7.62 ammo?  If not, why not rather than going and buying it from other countries? Of these, only Winchester has the proper machines to make ammo that will pass Mil-Spec.  Commercial ammo is produced on lower-volume machines, often isn't sealed (at least, not per Mil-Spec), isn't crimped, and the brass is often of lower quality.  It isn't financially viable for these companies to purchase new high-speed military loading machines for a short-term contract. Other than Winchester, the only other machines are at Lake City, and Lake City is running full out trying to keep up. -Troy

Ah, makes sense.

Is there any reason that the US HAS to have mil spec ammo for state side training?  If we are in that big of a pinch, why can't we just buy ammo from US companies that is 223 strength and use the good ole LC ammo for the combat missions?

I still think that it would be a good idea to keep our money fueling our economy.  I still think that we should go back to the way it was in WWII, where we had several different ammunition makers around the US.

Check out this very interesting presentation on the Ammo situation.


 Ammo Production Outline


Interesting to note that the outline identifies primer production as a choke point.  

Another good paper although a bit dated. Worth skimming just for the quotes.

Ammo production past, present and future.

One reason for mil-spec ammo is that you want to zero your weapon and practice on the training range with the same ammo you will use in combat to maintain a consistent point of impact.  I suspect many members of this board spend a lot more time on the range than active duty soldiers do - the last thing they need with the few training rounds they get is another variable affecting point of impact.

I read an article somewhere about military commanders in Iraq not allowing Israeli made ammo to be used there.

The reasoning was not to give Iraqis fuel for propaganda or conspiracies about the invasion and subsequent occupation. Imagine the insurgents finding out and using it as another recruitment tool. " The Americans are killing Iraqis with Jewish bullets". That would go over great, wouldn't it ?

I think the article was in SOF Magazine or possibly Newsweek, maybe it was neither ,I can't remember. This may even be old news or B.S. I'll try to find the article and update.    

"It's not like anyone else in the world is willing to or really should help us out in the most unpopular/unjust war in history. " -Justin

Quoted: One reason for mil-spec ammo is that you want to zero your weapon and practice on the training range with the same ammo you will use in combat to maintain a consistent point of impact.  I suspect many members of this board spend a lot more time on the range than active duty soldiers do - the last thing they need with the few training rounds they get is another variable affecting point of impact.

Rezeroing with "combat-rated" ammunition on arrival in theater would (_should_) be a trivial issue.

Just about any ammunition could be used for the bulk of live-fire training prior to deployment.

The single biggest problem would be overcoming the DoD's bureaucracy.  Ever notice how the military can make something as simple and fun as shooting a machinegun, with free ammunition, into a pain in the ass?  Any changes---from something as simple as zeroing rifles in a commonsense manner all the way up to buying ammunition "off the shelf" rather than through the labyrinth of Federal contracting rules---require endless conferences, reams of paperwork, input from dozens of committees and multiple Federal agencies...

Quoted: Quoted: Is the .gov going to issue contracts to Remington, Federal, Winchester, etc. to produce 5.56 and/or 7.62 ammo?  If not, why not rather than going and buying it from other countries? Of these, only Winchester has the proper machines to make ammo that will pass Mil-Spec.  Commercial ammo is produced on lower-volume machines, often isn't sealed (at least, not per Mil-Spec), isn't crimped, and the brass is often of lower quality.  It isn't financially viable for these companies to purchase new high-speed military loading machines for a short-term contract. Other than Winchester, the only other machines are at Lake City, and Lake City is running full out trying to keep up. -Troy

And thus we reap part of the "peace dividend" and savor some of the "savings" provided by the Base Realignment and Closure Act...

The US could produce almost 2 _billion_ rounds per month during WW II, and now we are straining to produce less than a billion in an entire year.  We've gone from over a dozen small arms ammunition plants to a single plant, vulnerable to disruption by weather, accident or sabotage.

The "good" news is that we're realizing this, at least to some degree, in a situation well short of total war.  Better now than if/when North Korea goes nuts, or China finds enough rowboats to repo Taiwan.

We clearly need at least one additional military SAA plant in service.  The problem being, of course, that the military doesn't want to fund something as boring/non-sexy---and lacking in very well-paying post-retirement job opportunities---as an SAA plant.  

But what if the _Civilian Marksmanship Program_ were to be in charge of such a plant?

Run it at a reduced production rate, enough to keep machinery and facilities operational; with a reduced staff, enough to keep a skilled cadre on hand.  And sell the production through the CMP, at cost.

It would seem to be a win-win solution: a self-supporting reserve AAP that would require no government funding once set up, and that could even save the government money by performing the repacking and tear-down operations that are being contracted out currently.  While providing good quality mil-spec ammunition for CMP shooters at a reasonable cost.  Especially if they were to restart production of .30 caliber ball for sale to Garand owners; the .30 caliber production line could be quickly converted to 7.62mm NATO production if/when necessary.

This is, of course, unlikely to ever happen.  For reasons of both politics and private greed.  Plenty of politicians hate the thought of mere civilians being allowed to own guns, let alone military-caliber guns, let alone guns loaded with military ammunition.  And then there's the Army bureaucracy, unlikely to think highly of anything that would horn in on their monopoly of military ammunition production/contracting.  And let's not forget the "sporting arms" manufacturers, who will think only "every cartridge they sell is one less we sell," just as they supported the Gun Control Act in 1968 to shut out competition from imported military surplus.

But if a few Congressmen and Senators could be found, with an inactive AAP in their backyard, the old fashioned lust for Congressional pork might just be enough to get the ball rolling...