Hokkmike
Member
low intensity combat
This is a new term for me. How would you define it? Seems paradoxical to use the words low intensity + combat togther.
low intensity combat
No, but the 5.56 is a poor penetrator through many typical non-armored barriers you find in urban environments compared to AP 7.62 M43.
Yes, there may be some barriers the 7.62mm M43 with more mass may penetrate that 5.56mm may not, but is that the majority of the barriers encountered or just some?
But, I never read of heard about 5.56mm penetrating less than 7.62mm M43 rising as a major complaint, or contributing to any significant amount ot US casualties.
I and other company commanders filed repeated complaints, citing actual incidents. I even included photographs.
Yep. We found both 7.62 X 39 and 7.62 X 54R cases.were they firing on you with 7.62 soviet rounds?
Soft armor, even 3a, isn't doing anything to stop 5.56.once again bringing back to the point about how 5.56 would have much luck against a good vest compared to the 7.62. If a 5.56 will deflect from glass, then whats to say that it wont fold and begin to yaw and fragment too soon to get through a vest?
vern's story makes it look like the 223 is inadequate, but times have changed.
Today, every soldier is capable of having a underbarrel grenade launcher. There's also revolving grenade launchers should there be a need for more firepower on target. These weapons take away the need for a bullet from an infantry rifle to penetrate many barriers that a 223 could not do very well.
With that and new tactics, equipment, new weapons, I think it may be a non issue.