Mister Frag 0 Posted January 23, 2003 The 5.56mm can be made slightly heavier without switching to different metals for the bullet material. You can either change the bullet shape slightly, or you can seat them more deeply in the case. One of the most popular and accurate loads for service rifle shoots is the Federal 69gr. JHP. If not for the cavity at the top of the bullet, it would be even heavier. It would lose a small degree of accuracy by filling it in, but it would be heavier and retain more energy downrange. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paratrooper 0 Posted January 23, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Mister Frag @ Jan. 23 2003,09:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 5.56mm can be made slightly heavier without switching to different metals for the bullet material. You can either change the bullet shape slightly, or you can seat them more deeply in the case. One of the most popular and accurate loads for service rifle shoots is the Federal 69gr. JHP. If not for the cavity at the top of the bullet, it would be even heavier. It would lose a small degree of accuracy by filling it in, but it would be heavier and retain more energy downrange.<span id='postcolor'> Well good luck loading them into an SA80! I jammed one up using training ammo, during my annual proviciency test as well! However, it wasn't my fault as the magasine lips were bent. Thats why the SA80 A2 has a new Mag, one that is alot better than the flimsy current one. I don't think new ammo for longer ranges is needed at all. I really can't see how you would lay effective fire at 500m, the enemy would be able to move away before youstatrted to register kills. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mr. Duck 0 Posted January 23, 2003 About the marine training thing. Do you guys shoot at static targets or moving ones? Does it happen under stress (is anybody shooting at you?). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
red oct 2 Posted January 23, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (mr. Duck @ Jan. 23 2003,22:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">About the marine training thing. Do you guys shoot at static targets or moving ones? Does it happen under stress (is anybody shooting at you?).<span id='postcolor'> both i would think, the australian army basicly has a giant duck hunt sim only w/ soldiers and tanks as the targets and shoot w/ modified rifles that are like those arcade guns. i think the U.S. uses something similar like that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
E6Hotel 0 Posted January 23, 2003 The basic USMC rifle qualification course (known distance, or “KDâ€) has 5 stages of fire: -- 200 yard slow fire: 5 rounds sitting, 5 rounds kneeling, 5 rounds offhand (standing) in 15 minutes. The stationary silhouette target approximates a human head and shoulders (i.e., a prone enemy). 1 point for hitting black, 2 points for hitting a 12†circle in the center of the target. -- 200 yard rapid fire: Moving from standing to kneeling, 10 rounds from 2 magazines in 70 seconds. Same target, each hit = 1 point (no 2 point hits). -- 300 yard slow fire: 5 rounds kneeling in 5 minutes. Same target; each hit = 1 point. -- 300 yard rapid fire: Moving from standing to prone, 10 rounds from 2 magazines in 60 seconds. Same target; each hit = 1 point. -- 500 yard slow fire: 10 rounds prone in 10 minutes. Target approximates a human head and torso; each hit = 1 point. Hasty slings are used in all stages except the 500 yard line, where loop slings are used. The final day of qual week includes field firing, with moving targets, multiple targets, quick reaction drills, gas masks, etc. <25 points = unqualified 25-34 = Marksman (lowest rating, characterized by bullseye shooting badge known as the “pizza boxâ€) 35-39 = Sharpshooter 40-65 (max score) = Expert No one is shooting at you on the KD. The stress level probably depends more on the shooter’s confidence level than anything else (high score = increased chance of promotion, unqualified or “unk†= bad ju-ju.) We do have indoor simulators but they’re used mainly for diagnosing problems with shooter technique. They’re not involved in qualifying. Semper Fi Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jinef 2 Posted January 24, 2003 I haven't even fired the SA80 A2 yet. I can't remeber when i last fired an SA80 - guns are not really my field. It's a bullet - it's a little metal thing that goes into people and we manage to give them 200 character designations and categorise them! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
madmedic 0 Posted January 24, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ Jan. 23 2003,09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Sheesh, alot of people in this forum have bad memory. Â <!--emo& About heavier bullets: Short of using heavier metals, there is no way you can make the current 5.56 NATO round for the M-16 any heavier. If anyone here besides myself have used issued 5.56 NATO ammo in a standard 30 round M-16 mag, you will know that the round just barely fits in. It cant be made any longer (ie: longer=heavier). <span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'> Actually, there are alot of different bullet weights for 5.56 ammo, including 75gr, and even 80 gr for match use. There is also an ammunition manufacturer experimenting with a 100gr round right now. Here: ammoman sells everything from 40gr, to 80gr ammoman ...click on 223 at the top. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tex -USMC- 0 Posted January 24, 2003 It warms my heart to see that high-velocity pain comes in so many flavors Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mister Frag 0 Posted January 24, 2003 Except the 80gr bullets are too long to be fed by magazine -- they are hand-loaded into the chamber one at a time. Same thing for some 75gr bullets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
madmedic 0 Posted January 24, 2003 Yes, they are designed for throated match rifles. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stgn 39 Posted January 26, 2003 Some things that i deient saw mention the M16A4 comes whir the MWS it is like a long RIS/RAS els it would just be a A3 whit 3 round burst and when you are talking about A4 it also have standard has Laser and Aimpoint. The M4A1 is not the counter part to the A4 but to the A3. The picture of the M4 was the SOPMOD M4 not to be confused whit the M4 several improvemnts. Ive also read somwhere that officers should have M4A1 not M16A4. STGN Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cloney 0 Posted January 26, 2003 I don't see why officers should get carbines and the grunts should get the full rifles. They both participate in combat at the same ranges and in the same conditions I don't see why their weapons should be any different. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
madmedic 0 Posted January 26, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Cloney @ Jan. 26 2003,06:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't see why officers should get carbines and the grunts should get the full rifles. They both participate in combat at the same ranges and in the same conditions I don't see why their weapons should be any different.<span id='postcolor'> Because, In most situations an officer should be doing more delegating, and communicating than fighing. He has to pay attention to the overall situation, rather than concentrate on personally engaging individual soft targets at long distances. In WWII, officers often carried M1 cabines, or Thompsons...while the grunts carried Garands. Also,...Officers do not always carry a carbine, and often they have a choice in the matter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Assault (CAN) 1 Posted January 26, 2003 Exactly. An officer should never have to use his weapon, by the time he needs a full length rifle or machine gun there will be plenty of them lying on the ground. I imagine most officers carry grunt-like weapons today for fear of being singled out by a sniper. It helps to look inconspicuous to a sniper when he has plenty of targets and little ammo. Tyler Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tex -USMC- 0 Posted January 26, 2003 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ Jan. 26 2003,08:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I imagine most officers carry grunt-like weapons today for fear of being singled out by a sniper. It helps to look inconspicuous to a sniper when he has plenty of targets and little ammo.<span id='postcolor'> Guy with the little gun and/or funny hat sitting next to the radioman, then the radioman, then anyone else who sticks his head up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pzvg 0 Posted January 28, 2003 except for informal units with a history of casual dress,lack of discipline, and battlefield screwups that should have gotten them canned instead of deified <why thank you Hollywood, ya chumps> No one I know likes a carbine, especially not a lousy-POS-I-jam-at-the-mention-of-dirt-but-got-purchased-by-a-bought-GAOpac M4. That said,functionally, there isn't that much of a difference between either of them, personally I think we should go back to a heavier round like 7.62, being able to carry more ammo is not quite the benefit if you get killed before running through 1 magazine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
