SAS to use bigger bullets to kill enemy outright

[JESS1344 508]

GUYS,

FUCKIN'-A-SKIPPY !

KNOCK THEIR LITTLE JIHADI DICKS INNA DIRT.......

NO MORE OF THAT BRITISH SENSE OF "FAIR PLAY" B.S.

"THE LADS", TAKIN' IT TO 'EM, EVERY DAY!

JESS1344

Click here: SAS to use bigger bullets to kill enemy outright after claiming 'shoot-to-wound' policy put their lives at risk |

[Capt Nemo 882]

And they thought that M193 was too inhumane and went to the M855.

 

Who's laughing now! There's a good reason to have ammo that is .22 in, and leaves broadside!

 

M855 is shit!

Edited March 17, 2013 by Capt Nemo

[gunman1 1,753]

Hell yeah

[Jpanzer 1,265]

Nice read. What's old is new again. The Brits should have kept their L1A1"s! The FAL would fit the mold in what they are looking for, but the SCAR 17 is the go to 7.62 x 51 rifle right now.

 

Found this kinda comical: "The MoD said: ‘Our troops in Afghanistan use a variety of highly effective weapons that fire a range of ammunition. They primarily use 5.56 mm rounds fired from the world-class SA80 A2 assault rifle and these have great power and accuracy."

 

World class SA80 A2? The SA80 has been a POS since it was introduced, but the British brass was so in love with it they forced it on their troops anyway...

 

 

[thebuns1 4,323]

I wouldnt trade an FAL for one of those peice of shit L85's.

 

ETA: The A2 variant is supposed to be an improvement over the A1 shit, but I never cared for the platform to begin with.

Edited March 17, 2013 by Captain Hero

[JESS1344 508]

GUYS,

THE COUSINS NEVER COULD GET THAT BULLPUP P.O.S. TO RUN RIGHT, AND IN WHAT HAD TO BE THE GREATEST OF EMBARRASSMENTS, HAD TO GET THE GERMANS (H&K), OF ALL PEOPLE, TO COME IN AND GET IT UNFUCKED.

 

OR AS UNFUCKED AS IT WILL EVER BE.....

 

I WAS THINKING LIKE JPANZER, WHERE-THE-FUCK ARE ALL THEIR OLD FN-FAL's, ARE THEY IN STORAGE, DID THEY CUT 'EM UP, WTF??

 

THE LRDG/SAS USED 'EM IN MANY DESERT CAMPAIGNS LONG BEFORE THE GWOT, SO THEY MUST EAT THE SAND PRETTY WELL.

 

JESS1344

[mancat 2,368]

Isn't it funny that we had the FAL in .280 British - a round that provided similar ballistic performance to 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC - that underwent British and US military trials before the M14 was accepted. It was considered too weak of a cartridge, with 30-06 and .308 WIN being considered the baseline. the rifle was considered too radical of a design when compared to standard long-rifles of the time, and it was assumed that soldiers couldn't adapt to it. the whole thing was dumped until the FAL eventually evolved into a 7.62x51 NATO rifle - at which point it was considered too powerful, too hard to control, and too heavy to carry with a standard ammunition load.

 

imagine that this whole mess would've been avoided if .280 British was accepted as the NATO standard rifle cartridge, and the FAL had been accepted by the US military such as it was by the majority of other western militaries of the time. the blunder of the M16 in Vietnam probably never would've happened, for instance. we probably never would've had to have two classifications of light and heavy mainline rifle cartridges.

 

I like 5.56 but it is definietely at the low-end of what a modern armed conflict requires out of a rifle cartridge.

Edited March 17, 2013 by mancat

[Ronin38 2,117]

The stopping-power issues are the reason the US Secial Forces started looking for alternatives, and came up with the Rem. 6.8 SPC and the 6.5 Grendel.

 

I think it was too "unique" of an idea for them to be put into service, but then the .308's started being reissued.

Edited March 17, 2013 by Ronin38

[Capt Nemo 882]

Well at least the Russians got it right with the 7.62x39.

[scoutjoe 276]

That's it, back to 45-70 Govt, lets just hurl those instead of this 55-62 grain nonsense

[Sdustin 578]

Carry three times as much ammo and just put two more in'em when they fall.

 

And whats this nonsense about lead free. Put lead in that bitch spin it at 1-14" make it a 45-50 grain and watch the red mist.

[timy 1,185]

Isn't it funny that we had the FAL in .280 British - a round that provided similar ballistic performance to 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC - that underwent British and US military trials before the M14 was accepted. It was considered too weak of a cartridge, with 30-06 and .308 WIN being considered the baseline. the rifle was considered too radical of a design when compared to standard long-rifles of the time, and it was assumed that soldiers couldn't adapt to it. the whole thing was dumped until the FAL eventually evolved into a 7.62x51 NATO rifle - at which point it was considered too powerful, too hard to control, and too heavy to carry with a standard ammunition load.

 

imagine that this whole mess would've been avoided if .280 British was accepted as the NATO standard rifle cartridge, and the FAL had been accepted by the US military such as it was by the majority of other western militaries of the time. the blunder of the M16 in Vietnam probably never would've happened, for instance. we probably never would've had to have two classifications of light and heavy mainline rifle cartridges.

 

I like 5.56 but it is definietely at the low-end of what a modern armed conflict requires out of a rifle cartridge.

 

Purdy much right on. The arrogance of the US military establishment precluded adopting something foreign, so the 5.56 was shoved down the throats of both the US military and it's allies. What a shame.

 

As to my own preference, I believe intermediate calibers (6.5 or 6.8) are the best compromise between weight and stopping power.

[raidersfan_5544 57]

^^^ I tend to agree as well. I'm actually in the early stages of putting togther a 6.8 SPCII upper now.

[Sdustin 578]

I don't think 556 is all that bad really. Before they chopped the barrel down by over 25% it was just fine shooting 55 grain from a 1-12". Well here we are today shooting a bullet thats a stop gap measure since they cut the barrels down so much and didn't have as much killing power.

 

But I have to agree that if the trials would have been fair we would have been using the FN-fal. Andthe m14 would have been nevermore as well as the poodle shooting ar15. But I think the light weight bullets in an ar15 with a rifle length barrel are nothing to sneeze at. And it's a long range wonder.

[Shandlanos 1,470]

Isn't it funny that we had the FAL in .280 British - a round that provided similar ballistic performance to 6.5 Grendel and 6.8 SPC - that underwent British and US military trials before the M14 was accepted. It was considered too weak of a cartridge, with 30-06 and .308 WIN being considered the baseline. the rifle was considered too radical of a design when compared to standard long-rifles of the time, and it was assumed that soldiers couldn't adapt to it. the whole thing was dumped until the FAL eventually evolved into a 7.62x51 NATO rifle - at which point it was considered too powerful, too hard to control, and too heavy to carry with a standard ammunition load.

 

imagine that this whole mess would've been avoided if .280 British was accepted as the NATO standard rifle cartridge, and the FAL had been accepted by the US military such as it was by the majority of other western militaries of the time. the blunder of the M16 in Vietnam probably never would've happened, for instance. we probably never would've had to have two classifications of light and heavy mainline rifle cartridges.

 

I like 5.56 but it is definietely at the low-end of what a modern armed conflict requires out of a rifle cartridge.

 

Purdy much right on. The arrogance of the US military establishment precluded adopting something foreign, so the 5.56 was shoved down the throats of both the US military and it's allies. What a shame.

 

As to my own preference, I believe intermediate calibers (6.5 or 6.8) are the best compromise between weight and stopping power.

 

For the medium term, sure - but it makes more sense to me to develop high-pressure loads (small, relatively light casings with a large, possibly compressed powder load) throwing a .30 to .35 caliber bullet, in a platform designed for recoil reduction.

 

Something like one of the WSSM cartridges (but optimized for stopping power/cartridge weight, and designed to feed well from a magazine), out of a rifle designed along the lines of the Kriss Super V concept. Maybe I'm fantasizing - but it seems like it would make a lot more sense than what we're using right now.

[MT Predator 2,294]

"The problem of 5.56 mm rounds lacking killing power in firefights is worse because the Taliban use 7.62 mm rounds in their AK-47 Kalashnikovs and Russian sniper rifles. The SAS’s report said the 7.62 mm rounds flew farther and with greater accuracy – giving the enemy a distinct advantage, especially in long-range engagements".

 

The British media is just as stupid as ours. The Dirkas have been resorting to 7.62x54 beltfeds and SVDs to engage our guys because of the range/velocity issues and our guys are using 7.62x51 for the same reason which is why you now see a M14 variant in the mix as DM rifles. They have been issuing them at squad level for quite some time now. The 5.45/7.62x39 suffers at long range just as bad as 5.56 NATO.

[Ronswin 26]

I can answer where some of the surplus British SLR (inch-pattern FN FAL) eventually went......right here. Before the 1994 Assault Weapon ban took place I found at a local gunshow a FAL parts kit that was fairly mint condition and with compliance parts and a new Entreprise reciever, it made a superb semi-auto inch FAL. It even had an armorer's tag that read something like "81 Signal Squadron, Pre-SA85, ########". Softest shooting .308 rilfe I've ever fired.

[Dunedain 44]

Guess everyone is finally catching on, and I'm sure there are lots of Marines out there that would point out they should have kept the M-14 in the first place and avoided a lot of this. Well, whether they (not just the SAS, us, too) go with more M-14's, HK 417, FAL, SCAR-H, whatever, they need to get more .308 weapons out on the field. They reach far, hit hard and punch through intermediate obstacles far better and take down crazy towel heads very well. The M-14 is highly proven, already in the field in various branches with us and in current production with U.S. companies, an easy choice. The 417 is no doubt excellent, but uses special mags (why couldn't they just make SR-25 compatible mags?), but not a big issue if the military orders millions of them. But those two would be my top picks.

[Ronin38 2,117]

But I have to agree that if the trials would have been fair we would have been using the FN-fal. Andthe m14 would have been nevermore as well as the poodle shooting ar15.

 

Has anyone... anywhere... ever actually shot a poodle with an AR-15?

 

[Capt Nemo 882]

But the M-14 is too heavy and doesn't look as tacticool!

 

Looks like the M-60 will probably make a comeback too.

[Ronin38 2,117]

But the M-14 is too heavy and doesn't look as tacticool!

 

Sez you!

 

[Lone Eagle 839]

I had a 6.8SPCII upper, but $1.25 a round made me get rid of it. It is a .270 bullet, and is a flat shooter. It's the bitch in the middle.

 

 

Left to right: 5.56 Tulammo, 6.8SPC Hornady 115 Vmax, 7.62x39 Yugo M67

[timy 1,185]

I had a 6.8SPCII upper, but $1.25 a round made me get rid of it. It is a .270 bullet, and is a flat shooter. It's the bitch in the middle.

 

 

Left to right: 5.56 Tulammo, 6.8SPC Hornady 115 Vmax, 7.62x39 Yugo M67

 

 

Shoulda kept it. I've seen 223 rounds selling for more than that as of late.

[XD45 7,124]

I think they should switch to the 5.7x28. If the 5.56x45 isn't doing the job, it's not because it's too small. It's because it's not small ENOUGH.

[DLT 1,646]

<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Darth Saigus" data-cid="878025" data-time="1363702158"><p>

I think they should switch to the 5.7x28. If the 5.56x45 isn't doing the job, it's not because it's too small. It's because it's not small ENOUGH.</p></blockquote>

17 hmr!!! Or better yet, .177 pellets!!! Death by a million papercuts!!

[DLT 1,646]

What about the 300AAC? I've got an AR friend who can't stop Cumming over that silly "wish I was a 7.62x39" round.

[Sdustin 578]

300 blk is awesome for inside 200 yards. I don't think that'd the problem cause a 556 at that range from s rifle not an m4 is good to go. If the problem is killing and bit just hitting I can the problems but at 400 yards aren't you just doing good to hit'em? I mean a 556 is good long range just doesnt have the power. Im all for a .308 but like I said if the trials that led to the m14 wouldn't have been rigged we would be using the fal anyway. That would have to be the best choice in thy caliber.

[XD45 7,124]

What about the 300AAC? I've got an AR friend who can't stop Cumming over that silly "wish I was a 7.62x39" round.

I am in the category of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". So I'm the first to scoff at a new cartridge that's better in every way. Yeah right.

 

And so naturally I was immediately unimpressed with the 300 whisper/aac/blackout.

 

But.

 

After seeing it mentioned again and again I decided to see what the fuck was so great about it. I'm not a bandwagon guy (still think the 45ACP is better than any cartridge invented in the last 100 years). But the 300blk really does have some great advantages.

 

30-cal

Works in the existing AR platform with only a barrel change

Works with existing 5.56mm magazines at full capacity

Works with existing 5.56mm bolts

Optimized for sound suppressed use with heavy bullets

Ballistics match 7.62x39 ballistics with lighter bullets

Superior barrier penetration with heavy bullets

Low recoil

Less performance loss in short barrels

Brass can be made by cutting 5.56mm brass

 

OK, so maybe I'm not so unimpressed after all...

Edited March 19, 2013 by Darth Saigus

[MT Predator 2,294]

Looks like the M-60 will probably make a comeback too.

Not likely. It was replaced by the M-240B. There are several M-60Es still serving in Special Operations units though.

[thebuns1 4,323]

Looks like the M-60 will probably make a comeback too.

Not likely. It was replaced by the M-240B. There are several M-60Es still serving in Special Operations units though.

Whats up with the MK48 from FN? Are they being fielded yet?