11-13-2011, 09:25 PM
montana Wrote:The book the Falkland war was written by a on sight journalist. The SAS were disgusted with what they then called the 5.56 Armalite rifle. The 5.56 bullet is so small that it literally disintegrates upon impact on a windshield. Try stopping a determined suicide bomber driving towards you with a 5.56 weapon. I'll take a Grendel any day.The 6.8 was developed because of the 5.56 short comings.Yes there are other heavier weapons that could be used but why handicap our soldiers when there is a better cartridge to be had. Afghanistan has has proven the need for a more effective long range caliber. The Grendel is more effective at all ranges. Yes training, logistics, barrel life mag capacity, etc. are important but for the argument of this subject the Grendel is a better trade off in almost every account. The 5.56 will kill you dead with good shot placement , but for long range, short range, barrier penetration, terminal effects in a AR- type platform the Grendel rules. The 5.56 is slightly lighter and a little better mag capacity. That's it. The Russians wanted to increase their range and accuracy more than anything else when they developed the 5.45. This they did with a cartridge that uses less powder,less recoil and more reliable terminal performance than the 5.56.This is why we have been pulling out old M-14's in the war on terror because they needed a harder hitting rifle at longer ranges. The 5.56 is considered a superior police weapon because it will not over penetrate when entering a building.I don't think it matters what I or anyone else thinks in this forum when it comes to what the military will do. But don't tell me the military always chooses the best rifle or caliber for its soldiers.That could take up another long discussion.Use what you like and so will I.The Russians developed the AL-107 assault rifle which proved to be superior to the AK-74 and the AN-94 but they couldn't afford it.
If the SAS were so disgusted with 5.56, maybe someone can explain to me why they continue to use it, and why the rest of the British Army & Marines (who actually did use L1A1's in the Falklands) adopted the 5.56 NATO as the primary service rifle cartridge right after the Falkland's War....?
After following this debate since I was a kid, and thinking that 7.62 was a superior rifle cartridge, my position changed the moment I saw what 5.56 does to human targets the first time, and every time since then it never failed to impress me. I used to buy into that claim that the M14 is a "real man's rifle", and that 5.56 is for shooting varmints, until I saw it take half a guy's head off.
Yes, the ranges in Afghanistan are typically longer due to the terrain, and one of the most effective weapons the enemy uses is the PKM, along with RPG's. Giving Grendels to every swinging private will not equal extended practical range of the rifleman, since riflemen are not trained to make shots at those distances anyway, so they will be carrying extra weight, less mag capacity, with more recoil for nothing.
M14's were not pulled from inventory to fill the void that 5.56 leaves in people's minds. They were re-issued to be used as Designated Marksman Rifles, and they failed terribly, especially in units without the armorer support it takes to keep an M14 barely functional.
Look at Plaster's interviews with snipers who have participated in both these theaters, often with multiple tours. The consensus among them all was surprising to many when asked what their most preferred sniper weapon was, even with Barrett's, M24's, and other systems in their units. Instead of listing some high-speed uber sniper rifle, they all said that the M4, not SPR, but M4 with optics and Mk262 was the go-to gun, and many made 800m+ kills with it. They like the SPR, but didn't see the need for it given the inability to really distinguish the difference downrange.
If you want to argue with dudes who have done the deed multiple times over, who have seen the performance of 5.56, and choose it over other calibers as not only an assault rifle cartridge, let alone sniper cartridge, you're whistling in the wind. I was surprised when I saw Tier 1 Sniper Sections all mostly carrying suppressed Colt 727 Carbines with Red Dots, and maybe one or two guys with SR25's, but practical realities of combat highly favor lightweight carbines that shoot flat, and have high mag capacities.
The Grendel offers another great cartridge in the AR15 platform that a shooter can use for the same purposes, with more retained energy downrange, but it is no reason to cheat soldiers out of mag capacity in carbines and rifle, wile stacking more weight on them. It would be great to have a Grendel LMG that could eliminate 7.62 belt-fed guns, since they are the weak link when it comes to maneuverability in the Infantry Platoon and Squad+.
Believe none of what you read in the trash magazines, unless it is bona fide first-hand accounts from guys who are in combat arms positions, not some REMF who says the M14 is what he would take to combat, if given the chance.