FMJ yaw and upset performance

[LR1955]

I have read similar complaints about barrier (in general) and windscreen (in particular) penetration from a study of combat experience carried out by the Royal Marines last year (which included the SBS - their SEALS). This study showed that only about half of the Marines consulted felt that the 5.56mm ammo was "fit for purpose"; there was a majority view that an intermediate round could solve these problems; and that if that wasn't possible, they tended towards entirely replacing 5.56mm with 7.62mm.

Tony:

And I would say well over 90% of this is anecdotal and pure opinion. Lets see the empirical studies.

A Soldier will always opt for what looks cool but when you run them through the simplest of evaluations you find that the chances of them actually hitting anything is small and gets smaller as the recoil and blast increases.

You will find that in most cases a Soldier will get the notion a cartridge sucks because he isn't hitting anything and blames the cartridge when he probably never even zeroed his carbine (happens more often than you may think) and otherwise is a lousy shot. Another one is that Soldiers will tend to believe that just because a cartridge is bigger such as 7.62 vs 5.56, that it must be better.

In the case of intermediate penetration and terminal effects, I tend towards scientifically run experiments more than a Joe's opinion. I have seen way too much over the years to trust the opinions of most (not all) military folks when it comes to small arms capabilities. There are some I do trust -- but most I don't.

Bottom line is that one has to prove a quantum leap in hit and kill probability before anyone will take a new cartridge seriously.

So, what would define a quantum leap in hit and kill probability?

LR1955