GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-19-2010, 18:08   #1
ssfeldjager
Senior Member
 
ssfeldjager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 966
USMC dropping its conventional 5.56mm ammunition?

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news..._ammo_021510w/

Corps to use more lethal ammo in Afghanistan

By Dan Lamothe - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Feb 16, 2010 9:29:10 EST

The Marine Corps is dropping its conventional 5.56mm ammunition in Afghanistan in favor of new deadlier, more accurate rifle rounds, and could field them at any time.

The open-tipped rounds until now have been available only to Special Operations Command troops. The first 200,000 5.56mm Special Operations Science and Technology rounds are already downrange with Marine Expeditionary Brigade-Afghanistan, said Brig. Gen. Michael Brogan, commander of Marine Corps Systems Command. Commonly known as “SOST” rounds, they were legally cleared for Marine use by the Pentagon in late January, according to Navy Department documents obtained by Marine Corps Times.

SOCom developed the new rounds for use with the Special Operations Force Combat Assault Rifle, or SCAR, which needed a more accurate bullet because its short barrel, at 13.8 inches, is less than an inch shorter than the M4 carbine’s. Using an open-tip match round design common with some sniper ammunition, SOST rounds are designed to be “barrier blind,” meaning they stay on target better than existing M855 rounds after penetrating windshields, car doors and other objects.

Compared to the M855, SOST rounds also stay on target longer in open air and have increased stopping power through “consistent, rapid fragmentation which shortens the time required to cause incapacitation of enemy combatants,” according to Navy Department documents. At 62 grains, they weigh about the same as most NATO rounds, have a typical lead core with a solid copper shank and are considered a variation of Federal Cartridge Co.’s Federal Trophy Bonded Bear Claw round, which was developed for big-game hunting and is touted in a company news release for its ability to crush bone.

The Corps purchased a “couple million” SOST rounds as part of a joint $6 million, 10.4-million-round buy in September — enough to last the service several months in Afghanistan, Brogan said. Navy Department documents say the Pentagon will launch a competition worth up to $400 million this spring for more SOST ammunition.

“This round was really intended to be used in a weapon with a shorter barrel, their SCAR carbines,” Brogan said. “But because of its blind-to-barrier performance, its accuracy improvements and its reduced muzzle flash, those are attractive things that make it also useful to general purpose forces like the Marine Corps and Army.”

M855 problems
The standard Marine round, the M855, was developed in the 1970s and approved as an official NATO round in 1980. In recent years, however, it has been the subject of widespread criticism from troops, who question whether it has enough punch to stop oncoming enemies.

In 2002, shortcomings in the M855’s performance were detailed in a report by Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane, Ind., according to Navy Department documents. Additional testing in 2005 showed shortcomings. The Pentagon issued a request to industry for improved ammunition the following year. Federal Cartridge was the only company to respond.

Brogan said the Corps has no plans to remove the M855 from the service’s inventory at this time. However, the service has determined it “does not meet USMC performance requirements” in an operational environment in which insurgents often lack personal body armor, but engage troops through “intermediate barriers” such as windshields and car doors at security checkpoints, according to a Jan. 25 Navy Department document clearing Marines to use the SOST round.

The document, signed by J.R. Crisfield, director of the Navy Department International and Operational Law Division, is clear on the recommended course of action for the 5.56mm SOST round, formally known as MK318 MOD 0 enhanced 5.56mm ammunition.

“Based on the significantly improved performance of the MK318 MOD 0 over the M855 against virtually every anticipated target array in Afghanistan and similar combat environments where increased accuracy, better effects behind automobile glass and doors, consistent terminal performance and reduced muzzle flash are critical to mission accomplishment, USMC would treat the MK318 MOD 0 as its new 5.56mm standard issue cartridge,” Crisfield wrote.

The original plan called for the SOST round to be used specifically within the M4 carbine, which has a 14½-inch barrel and is used by tens of thousands of Marines in military occupational specialties such as motor vehicle operator where the M16A4’s longer barrel can be cumbersome. Given its benefits, however, Marine officials decided also to adopt SOST for the M16A4, which has a 20-inch barrel and is used by most of the infantry.

Incorporating SOST
In addition to operational benefits, SOST rounds have similar ballistics to the M855 round, meaning Marines will not have to adjust to using the new ammo, even though it is more accurate.

“It does not require us to change our training,” Brogan said. “We don’t have to change our aim points or modify our training curriculum. We can train just as we have always trained with the 855 round, so right now, there is no plan to completely remove the 855 from inventory.”

Marine officials in Afghanistan could not be reached for comment, but Brogan said commanders with MEB-A are authorized to issue SOST ammo to any subordinate command. Only one major Marine 5.56mm weapon system downrange will not use SOST: the M249 squad automatic weapon. Though the new rounds fit the SAW, they are not currently produced in the linked fashion commonly employed with the light machine gun, Brogan said.

SOCom first fielded the SOST round in April, said Air Force Maj. Wesley Ticer, a spokesman for the command. It also fielded a cousin — MK319 MOD 0 enhanced 7.62mm SOST ammo — designed for use with the SCAR-Heavy, a powerful 7.62mm battle rifle. SOCom uses both kinds of ammunition in all of its geographic combatant commands, Ticer said.

The Corps has no plans to buy 7.62mm SOST ammunition, but that could change if operational commanders or infantry requirements officers call for it in the future, Brogan said.

It is uncertain how long the Corps will field the SOST round. Marine officials said last summer that they took interest in it after the M855A1 lead-free slug in development by the Army experienced problems during testing, but Brogan said the service is still interested in the environmentally friendly round if it is effective. Marine officials also want to see if the price of the SOST round drops once in mass production. The price of an individual round was not available, but Brogan said SOST ammo is more expensive than current M855 rounds.

“We have to wait and see what happens with the Army’s 855LFS round,” he said. “We also have to get very good cost estimates of where these [SOST] rounds end up in full-rate, or serial production. Because if it truly is going to remain more expensive, then we would not want to buy that round for all of our training applications.”

Legal concerns
Before the SOST round could be fielded by the Corps, it had to clear a legal hurdle: approval that it met international law of war standards.

The process is standard for new weapons and weapons systems, but it took on added significance because of the bullet’s design. Open-tip bullets have been approved for use by U.S. forces for decades, but are sometimes confused with hollow-point rounds, which expand in human tissue after impact, causing unnecessary suffering, according to widely accepted international treaties signed following the Hague peace conventions held in the Netherlands in 1899 and 1907.

“We need to be very clear in drawing this distinction: This is not a hollow-point round, which is not permitted,” Brogan said. “It has been through law of land warfare review and has passed that review so that it meets the criteria of not causing unnecessary pain and suffering.”

The open-tip/hollow-point dilemma has been addressed several times by the military, including in 1990, when the chief of the Judge Advocate General International Law Branch, now-retired Marine Col. W. Hays Parks, advised that the open-tip M852 Sierra MatchKing round preferred by snipers met international law requirements. The round was kept in the field.

In a 3,000-word memorandum to Army Special Operations Command, Parks said “unnecessary suffering” and “superfluous injury” have not been formally defined, leaving the U.S. with a “balancing test” it must conduct to assess whether the usage of each kind of rifle round is justified.

“The test is not easily applied,” Parks said. “For this reason, the degree of ‘superfluous injury’ must … outweigh substantially the military necessity for the weapon system or projectile.”

John Cerone, an expert in the law of armed conflict and professor at the New England School of Law, said the military’s interpretation of international law is widely accepted. It is understood that weapons cause pain in war, and as long as there is a strategic military reason for their employment, they typically meet international guidelines, he said.

“In order to fall within the prohibition, a weapon has to be designed to cause unnecessary suffering,” he said.

Sixteen years after Parks issued his memo, an Army unit in Iraq temporarily banned the open-tip M118 long-range used by snipers after a JAG officer mistook it for hollow-tip ammunition, according to a 2006 Washington Times report. The decision was overturned when other Army officials were alerted.
__________________
SS-Feldjager
"... a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
--Gerald Ford - August 12, 1974.
ssfeldjager is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2010, 18:17   #2
javelinadave
Hebrew Hammer
 
javelinadave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 1,171
Quote:
In a 3,000-word memorandum to Army Special Operations Command, Parks said “unnecessary suffering” and “superfluous injury” have not been formally defined, leaving the U.S. with a “balancing test” it must conduct to assess whether the usage of each kind of rifle round is justified.
Are the roadside bombs that these clowns use against us and their own tested as to not cause "unnecessary suffering” and “superfluous injury"? Black Jack Pershing had it right as to how to deal with this.
__________________
NRA Life Member
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE
"Never Again" means NEVER AGAIN!
javelinadave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2010, 18:19   #3
RedHaze
Handgunner
 
RedHaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: SE WA
Posts: 2,382
We'll test it on pigs, just like we test everything else...
__________________
I MAY DIE IN A DITCH, BUT I'LL BE LYING IN A BED A BRASS
*SHEEPLE: SHEEP LIKE PEOPLE, MANY OF WHOM DENY THE EXISTENCE OF WOLVES, AND VOTE TO PULL THE TEETH OF THE SHEEPDOGS WHO PROTECT THE FLOCK
RedHaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2010, 20:56   #4
Reb 56
Senior Member
 
Reb 56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,681
I don't think we signed the Hague Convention treaty, and war has changed since then. If the Police can use JHP against their own citizens then it seems foolish to use less effective FMJ against terrorists.
__________________
Carlos
Reb 56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2010, 22:43   #5
WarMachine
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 61
Getting shot by any rifle round is going to be an awful experience. I don't understand why there's regulation attempting to control what that level of "awfulness" is.

How will a hollowpoint round cause more suffering than FMJ? I'd be interested in any links explaining the rationale behind this idea.
WarMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 15:13   #6
RMTactical
CLM Number
www.AR15pro.net
 
RMTactical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Behind an AR-15
Posts: 29,789


Sounds interesting. I am eager to hear how this works out for them. Hopefully it goes well.
__________________
http://www.rockymountaintactical.net/

Due to inflation, my $.02 no longer matters.
RMTactical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 15:21   #7
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarMachine View Post
Getting shot by any rifle round is going to be an awful experience. I don't understand why there's regulation attempting to control what that level of "awfulness" is.

How will a hollowpoint round cause more suffering than FMJ? I'd be interested in any links explaining the rationale behind this idea.
Just use a 10mm, instant disintegration of all living things within a 5 mile radius and fallout guaranteed to kill those within 20 miles of the wind pattern.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 15:29   #8
Max1775
Marine Infidel
 
Max1775's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Helotes, Texas
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawman800 View Post
Just use a 10mm, instant disintegration of all living things within a 5 mile radius and fallout guaranteed to kill those within 20 miles of the wind pattern.



In all seriousness though, the military is in desperate need of a more lethal round. I hope this is it. I still am a huge fan of the 7.62. Extra weight is worth it in my opinion.
__________________
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
"Words don't storm beaches, liberate countries, decimate enemies, or die for freedom. Marines do."
Big Dawg #1775
Max1775 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 20:24   #9
Reb 56
Senior Member
 
Reb 56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Texas
Posts: 1,681
5.56 is not a very good man stopper out of the short barreled M4. 5.56 main strong point was velocity in a 20" 1/12 twist.
I think 7.62 would be more effective at longer range and through barriers. I know the common wisdom is being able to hump more ammo and with the M4 or M16 and you need it.
The M14 was a great weapon in semi-auto in my opinion was phased out of service too soon.
__________________
Carlos
Reb 56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 20:38   #10
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Here's a thought... why settle for the 5.56x45mm or go with the too big and heavy 7.62x51mm? The perfect compromise round has been in use for a long time... ready?

7.62x39mm

Been in use for over 70 years, everyone can carry copious amounts of it, even little VC fighters wearing tire carcass sandals in the jungle, not that accurate, but neither are most soldiers, not much recoil, very lethal compared to a 5.56 and easier to shoot than the 7.62Nato.

Just get over the fact that it's invented by a commie and that every bad nation is using it and we'll be just fine. Also, imagine how much easier it is for our soldiers to scavenge supplies abroad now that we can take them off the foreign fighters anytime we kill one.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 20:43   #11
GIockGuy24
Bring M&M's
 
GIockGuy24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: With Amber Lamps
Posts: 3,969
That's only in Afghanistan, not overall.
GIockGuy24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 20:58   #12
NEOH212
Diesel Girl
 
NEOH212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: North East Ohio
Posts: 8,801
If they stayed with the 7.62X51 cartridge, we wouldn't be discussing ammunition effectiveness. The military needs to go back to it.
__________________
When we do hit it we hit it out of the park and send it over to China as quickly as possible to cheapen it and sell it.
NEOH212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 21:46   #13
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by GIockGuy24 View Post
That's only in Afghanistan, not overall.
Pretty much every bad nation uses the 7.62x39 cartridge, we can keep our 50BMG and 7.62NATO for our LMG and sniper applications but go to the proven killer for infantry.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2010, 21:57   #14
Scott_F
Senior Member
 
Scott_F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: CSTX
Posts: 1,360
I'm glad they're giving our guys any advantage we can find.
Scott_F is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 05:43   #15
RM
Senior Member
 
RM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Deployed
Posts: 3,746


Quote:
Originally Posted by NEOH212 View Post
If they stayed with the 7.62X51 cartridge, we wouldn't be discussing ammunition effectiveness. The military needs to go back to it.
I have actually seen more guys shot with 7.62x51, since 240s are one of the primary killing tools out there, and it doesn't really do much more than a 5.56 hit.
__________________
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimum food and water, in the worst of conditions, day or night. The only thing clean on him is his weapon. The True Believer doesn’t care how hard it is. He knows he either wins or he dies. He doesn’t go home at 1600. He knows only his CAUSE.
RM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 10:20   #16
Max1775
Marine Infidel
 
Max1775's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Helotes, Texas
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by RM View Post
I have actually seen more guys shot with 7.62x51, since 240s are one of the primary killing tools out there, and it doesn't really do much more than a 5.56 hit.

I know you have been in the middle of it and glad you're still in one piece, but I have to disagree. Having the unfortunate circumstance of having used both, I would take the 7.62 over the 5.56 any day. FMJ rounds act similarly when hitting flesh, but it is the weight and ability to penetrate that makes the 7.62 a superior round in my opinion.
__________________
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
"Words don't storm beaches, liberate countries, decimate enemies, or die for freedom. Marines do."
Big Dawg #1775
Max1775 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 10:52   #17
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Like I say... 10mm FTW!!!11!1!!111!!! ZOMG!!!!1111!1
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 13:15   #18
KalashniKEV
Senior Member
 
KalashniKEV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NoVA
Posts: 4,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawman800 View Post
not that accurate, but neither are most soldiers, not much recoil, very lethal compared to a 5.56 and easier to shoot than the 7.62Nato.
It's not that "the round isn't that accurate" in it's dimensions, it's that the factories that make it don't have tight QC. If we made 7.62x39mm ammunition to the same standard we make 5.56, it would be very accurate. Just look at the Lapua stuff (or not, b/c there isn't any around). The stuff we do make in 7.62x39mm for the commercial market usually has a .308 bullet as well rather than the correct .311.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawman800 View Post
Just get over the fact that it's invented by a commie and that every bad nation is using it and we'll be just fine.
All nations coming out of WWII knew that a .30 intermediate cartridge was "the answer."

We prefer to remake it a bit in the form of 6.8x43mm, but this is still closer to optimal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawman800 View Post
Also, imagine how much easier it is for our soldiers to scavenge supplies abroad now that we can take them off the foreign fighters anytime we kill one.
Are we talking about the GWOT or Mad Max here?
KalashniKEV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 14:04   #19
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by KalashniKEV View Post
Are we talking about the GWOT or Mad Max here?
Does it matter at that point?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 15:12   #20
RM
Senior Member
 
RM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Deployed
Posts: 3,746


Quote:
Originally Posted by Max1775 View Post
I know you have been in the middle of it and glad you're still in one piece, but I have to disagree. Having the unfortunate circumstance of having used both, I would take the 7.62 over the 5.56 any day. FMJ rounds act similarly when hitting flesh, but it is the weight and ability to penetrate that makes the 7.62 a superior round in my opinion.
True that 7.62 has better penetration on cars. But barrier material you see in AFG and IZ, generally is too thick to make much of a difference. In AFG the houses and compound walls are often 4 or more feet thick and they can shrug off SMAW rounds.

There were numerous cases in IZ, of 25mm bushmasters not giving adequate penetration.
__________________
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimum food and water, in the worst of conditions, day or night. The only thing clean on him is his weapon. The True Believer doesn’t care how hard it is. He knows he either wins or he dies. He doesn’t go home at 1600. He knows only his CAUSE.
RM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 15:39   #21
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RM View Post
True that 7.62 has better penetration on cars. But barrier material you see in AFG and IZ, generally is too thick to make much of a difference. In AFG the houses and compound walls are often 4 or more feet thick and they can shrug off SMAW rounds.

There were numerous cases in IZ, of 25mm bushmasters not giving adequate penetration.
Isn't that what mortars, arty, and air strikes are for?

There is no such thing as overkill, just kill or be killed.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 15:58   #22
Max1775
Marine Infidel
 
Max1775's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Helotes, Texas
Posts: 610
Quote:
Originally Posted by RM View Post
True that 7.62 has better penetration on cars. But barrier material you see in AFG and IZ, generally is too thick to make much of a difference. In AFG the houses and compound walls are often 4 or more feet thick and they can shrug off SMAW rounds.

There were numerous cases in IZ, of 25mm bushmasters not giving adequate penetration.

I understand your point now on barrier material. Unfortunately I don't think there is an easy solution to that with a shoulder-fired weapon that can be used for CQC. We need a damn Star-Wars weapon for that.
__________________
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
"Words don't storm beaches, liberate countries, decimate enemies, or die for freedom. Marines do."
Big Dawg #1775
Max1775 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 16:09   #23
CW Mock
Senior Member
 
CW Mock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,869
The answer lies in 10mm explosive tipped caseless.

M41A and M56A2 platforms should do. If that can't cut it, nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
CW Mock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2010, 18:47   #24
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,144
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawman800 View Post
Pretty much every bad nation uses the 7.62x39 cartridge, we can keep our 50BMG and 7.62NATO for our LMG and sniper applications but go to the proven killer for infantry.

I've seen WAY more wounded and live with 7.62x39mm than I have with 5.56.

7.62x39 tends to just make little holes and not much else. 5.56 will reliably tumble, unless you're shooting WAY out there.

7.62x39 also tends to have the trajectory of a rainbow, and a accuracy from it is all but unheard of. Pretty much every person I've seen hit COM with 5.56 balled up and died within a few feet of getting hit.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2010, 04:12   #25
lawman800
Juris Glocktor
 
lawman800's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Out the frying pan & into the fire!
Posts: 37,302
Blog Entries: 1
Rainbows are cool. So are unicorns.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueiron:
I've said it before and I'll say it here: they'd look better with lividity.
lawman800 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 14:14.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,346
376 Members
970 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42