(Marine Corps Times) Backtalk: Ammunition alternatives

Ammunition alternatives
By Lewis W. Worrell - Special to the Times

The military spent four years and $33 million developing and testing the XM8 carbine. It beat every competitor in an Army-conducted test. Now, we’re starting over, so we will need another four years and tens of millions of dollars to develop another rifle that may or may not be better than the XM8.

What everyone needs to understand is that a new rifle in 5.56mm will not fix the lethality and range problems that spur most complaints against the M4 rifle. We need either to improve the current 5.56mm ammo or to develop a new caliber that addresses the lethality issue.

The simplest solution has been overlooked. There are three types of ammunition available through the supply system in 5.56mm:

• The original 55-grain bullet — in use from the early 1960s until it was replaced by the NATO-standard 62-grain bullet in the 1980s — was designed to destabilize rapidly and tumble upon impact, causing massive tissue damage. The tumbling effect also led to its downfall in the 1980s because the bullet could not penetrate Soviet-style body armor, and the low weight of the bullet greatly reduced its effective range to about 300 meters.

• The 62-grain “green tip” M855 round, along with an improved barrel on the M16A2, increased the effective range of the bullet from 300 to about 550 meters, and the bullet was stabilized to penetrate body armor. This, however, would eventually become the weak point, because of a lack of effectiveness at close range and against targets that do not wear body armor.


Rest of article at: http://marinecorpstimes.com/community/opinion/marine_backtalk_answer_021609/%2e