Platoon Weapons

[120mm]

1.) C.R.I.S.A.T = Collaborative Research Into Small Arms Technology. CRISAT is a research analogue based on the requirement that a small arms round has to be able to do more than merely create large wounds. Very useful if it can go through car doors for example, and it has to do it for quite low cost because armies buy millions and millions of rounds. To anyone who criticises CRISAT I say come up with a better test analogue.

2.) How do soldiers perceive the power of a round, when only a very tiny proportion ever see their rounds hit a target? The highest rates of fire are used for suppression, where they can rarely, if ever, see an effect.

In terms of gun culture it is interesting to note that the perceived lack of effectiveness of 5.56mm is a mostly a unique US issue. I have asked every Israeli, UK and even South African combat experienced soldier I have interviewed in the last three years, and none of them have said its an issue.
Only one of the 14 SOG veterans I talked to ever raised it, and the IDF guys only pointed out that they liked 7.62mm for GPMGs because it went through walls better than 5.56mm SAWs - as did the US OIF guys I talked to.

The value of big, relatively slow bullets is not just a cultural thing. And it IS a cultural thing. Fast and relatively light bullets tend to shed energy quickly on barrier materials. Large and relatively slow bullets tend to penetrate everything BUT body armor better. Most 5.56 rounds will not penetrate as well as .40 or even 9mm ball ammo, for instance, except against body armor.

What I am suggesting is that instead of optimizing bullets to poke little tiny holes in a type of armor, that we optimize bullets to do damage on human flesh and general barrier material, and supply a saboted round for specialized use on armor. With the bottle-necked pistol rounds currently the rage as PDWs, you are optimizing to penetrate body armor and suboptimizing for general barrier penetration and flesh.

The weight penalty would only be the additional projectile weight, as both rounds would be approximately the same size. The saboted rounds would be around the same weight as the current PDW rounds, with a slight tradeoff in armor penetration due to the pressure effects of using the larger bore.

[William F. Owen]

1. Most 5.56 rounds will not penetrate as well as .40 or even 9mm ball ammo, for instance, except against body armor.

2. What I am suggesting is that instead of optimizing bullets to poke little tiny holes in a type of armor, that we optimize bullets to do damage on human flesh and general barrier material, and supply a saboted round for specialized use on armor.

1. I am not sure I can agree with that statement. I've seen 5.56mm round go through material at 300m, when 9mm was dropping out of the air. Give me a range, some specific rounds and a specific material. 9mm DM11-A1B2 performs very differently from 2Z. (speaking as a former body armour tester.)

2. So what criteria do you suggest, that can be usefully measured? What you are asking for is the holy grail of bullet design. The NATO working groups long ago decided the optimum round had to be able to do both. If you were planning to fight US equipped troops, wouldn't you want a round that could defeat the PASGT helmet?

...and yes, we don't want to tailor weapons potential to the base-rats and REMFs.

[Uboat509]

What I am suggesting is that instead of optimizing bullets to poke little tiny holes in a type of armor, that we optimize bullets to do damage on human flesh and general barrier material, and supply a saboted round for specialized use on armor. With the bottle-necked pistol rounds currently the rage as PDWs, you are optimizing to penetrate body armor and suboptimizing for general barrier penetration and flesh.

The weight penalty would only be the additional projectile weight, as both rounds would be approximately the same size. The saboted rounds would be around the same weight as the current PDW rounds, with a slight tradeoff in armor penetration due to the pressure effects of using the larger bore.

Some are already doing something similar to this. Some of my buddies carried mostly mags of 5.56LR but also carried a mag or two of green tip if they needed penetration. I was not blessed with as much LR so I alternated LR and green tip in my carry mags. 5.56 is not as effective as 7.62 but it is still better than green tip in terms of wound characteristics.

SFC W