Over 60 years later, is the "Assault Rifle" concept still viable in modern combat?

[HorseSoldier]

Awhile back I watched the helmet camera footage of a squad of Marines trying to take out a sniper whose only cover was the crenelations on a building rooftop. Their 5.56 couldn't penetrate and ever time someone tried to get a headshot he'd shoot first.
A Marine brought up a SMAW and as he was drawing a bead the sniper nailed his SMAW's optical sight, luckily the bullet fragmented and didn't drill through his head.

They finally got him but he had an entire squad pinned for along time, and a WW2 BAR would have smoked him in seconds without having to take time trying for a headshot, same for a squad armed with FN FAL with AP rounds for that matter. They'd have chewed through his cover so quick he'd have had no time to move out.

The main point of this story seems to be that there were three Marines in that squad who should have been docked half a month's pay for forgetting what that big 40mm tube underneath their rifles was there for.

 

[Evil Monkey]

You know what's funny? I heard the same story but the end result was lobbing a 40mm into building and ceasing the snipers attack. So who's telling the truth?

 

[Tony Williams]

Some of the .30/06 AP I've fired came from Foreign sources. This bullet had two crimping Rings , one for use in .30/06 loads and the other for loading in NATO cases. The Bullet was as far as I could tell Identical to the WW2 AP.
I was told it was in limited use by the French until they phased out remaining .30/06 machine guns left over from WW2.
I think the Israelis made ammo of this general type for .30/06, 7.62 NATO, and possibly for use in captured 7.62X54 weapons. Possibly this was the same ammo as sold to the French at one time.

I think it's worth adding that the US Army made a decision to concentrate on .30 AP production later in the war, because it didn't cost much more than ball ammo, was more effective, a bit more accurate and didn't increase barrel wear by much. By the end of the war, 80% of .30 ammo used by the Army was AP.

 

[PercyShelley]

How well would .308 diameter AP bullets work in 7.62x54R weapons? Don't those have a .311 bore diameter?

 

[Roswell 1847]

You know what's funny? I heard the same story but the end result was lobbing a 40mm into building and ceasing the snipers attack. So who's telling the truth?

The helmet cam footage and interview with the trooper whose SMAW sight got shot off has been on TV. Probably a video of it floating around the net if you want to look, you seem very familar with Youtube.

Also if it hasn't occurred to you there were probably dozens of similar Sniper incidents during the Fallujah campaign and dozens more throughout Iraq during the same time frame.

PS
Grow up.

 

[Roswell 1847]

Finnish 7.62X54 bores are as small as .309 in some of their rebarreled models, others are .311 and some Russian bores are .314.

The same sort of AP bullet has been observed in 7.62X54 ammo of uncertain manufactre, the bullet dia wasn't noted, possibly sized for the Russian bore, possibly undersized.
I've hanloaded .30/30 bullets in 7.65X54 and they worked fine, softer slug of course so it would upset to fill the grooves.

Some Finnish .30/06 and .308 match bullets actually measure .309 or larger, I've heard they are quiet accurate and are probably the same as once used in the Finnish Nagants with undersized bores.

 

[Old Guy]

With the advance in modern mortars, GPS etc, laser range finders, a good spotter could drop a chunk of shrapnel breeding high explosive down on a sniper on a roof in no time flat, yes?

 

[Evil Monkey]

The helmet cam footage and interview with the trooper whose SMAW sight got shot off has been on TV. Probably a video of it floating around the net if you want to look, you seem very familar with Youtube.

Also if it hasn't occurred to you there were probably dozens of similar Sniper incidents during the Fallujah campaign and dozens more throughout Iraq during the same time frame.

The story I heard had a soldier with a rocket launcher too(AT4 or SMAW? Don't remember). But another soldier launched a 40mm into the balcony the sniper was on. I'm just saying they sounded too similar but with different endings.

Now to change topics........

I just had an epiphany.

I see that the 5.56mm M855 weighs 62grs
The M995 AP is 52grs......because of the tungsten core right?

I see that 7.62 Nato ball ammo is around 147-150grs
The M993 AP version is 125grs

Now these lighter AP loadings presumably have a higher velocity.
What if we were to take the 7.62x39mm Soviet and give it a tungsten carbide core!? Wouldn't this result in a bullet that would weigh between 100-110grs? Thus, increasing the effective range and accuracy of the 7.62x39mm!?!?

 

[HorseSoldier]

A lighter AK bullet would give it a better trajectory. I'm not sure about an increase in range, though -- I think the AK is more limited by the poor sights and the reliability-enhancing slop in its mechanicals than the 7.62x39 round. 7.62x39 has a trajectory that makes accurately estimating/knowing range more important at longer ranges than, say, 5.56mm or 7.62x51, but the difference is much less pronounced at practical, normal combat ranges.

 

[Old Guy]

Combat/Security

Let us for a moment go to modern (Civilian/Security) style Rifles, as a Security Officer in Florida I carry a 9mm Pistol when working, the minute I step outside into the front, and especially the back parking lot (I have assigned tasks that cause me to have to do that) my range for possible threats is extended, to plus 50m. Now I am an excellent pistol shot, night sights are alive and well on my Glock 19, but with the trend in bad guy weapons sliding toward Rifles, AK 47s single shot (Semi Auto), 30 round magazine fed weapons, I am out gunned.

As air strikes/tanks/claymore mines etc; are not at this time envisaged as a near future threat, just playing catch up, AR15/AK47/Mini14s/Ruger Ranch Rifles in 762X39 come to mind. Shotguns are as close as the Security Company's are at this time. Hope that can change in the near future, mayhap we, the industry, could be pro active for once, simple rules, must be signed off by a K Licensed Instructor, must be G Licensed to get the training and sign off in the first place.

As well as being in uniform the magazine or stock could have a 2" tall white lettering on it, that could be seen from several yards away, something simple, and easily discernible, PATROL or PROTECTION or whatever, some name that would cause anyone viewing the Security Officer (OFFICER not Guard in Florida) to not have a conniption on sighting this long gun.

Hollow points loaded up, AP as the second magazine, on belt, or vest mounted. Hope this is the future of short rifles in Security.

 

[Roswell 1847]

Now these lighter AP loadings presumably have a higher velocity.
What if we were to take the 7.62x39mm Soviet and give it a tungsten carbide core!? Wouldn't this result in a bullet that would weigh between 100-110grs? Thus, increasing the effective range and accuracy of the 7.62x39mm!?!?

Possibly, though these effects would be minimal at AK velocities. Most AK ammo I've fired was Steel core, in the days when that was about all you could find, the bullets weren't any lighter.
Though the 39mm casing has such a short neck that the slamfeed of the AK does more to reduce accuracy than other factors.
The AK bullets aren't held in the neck that well either, and Combloc AK casings are notably poor quality.

 

[jpwilly]

The answer is Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes all you have to do is look at what is being issued and you already have your answer.

 

[Tony Williams]

I see that the 5.56mm M855 weighs 62grs
The M995 AP is 52grs......because of the tungsten core right?

I see that 7.62 Nato ball ammo is around 147-150grs
The M993 AP version is 125grs

Now these lighter AP loadings presumably have a higher velocity.
What if we were to take the 7.62x39mm Soviet and give it a tungsten carbide core!? Wouldn't this result in a bullet that would weigh between 100-110grs? Thus, increasing the effective range and accuracy of the 7.62x39mm!?!?

In a word, no!

Tungsten carbide is heavier than steel and even lead: it weighs 15.8 g/cc, compared with 11.3 for lead and 7.8 for steel.

The reason that the tungsten-cored AP bullets in 5.56mm and 7.62mm are lighter is simply that they are shorter. The motive in making them lighter is to increase the muzzle velocity, in order to improve the armour penetration.

However, the problem with light bullets is that they lose velocity, and therefore effectiveness, more quickly than heavy ones (other things being equal) so have a shorter effective range.

 

[Roswell 1847]

Tungsten 19.25
Tungsten carbide 14.29

Guess it depends on the alloy.
I knew Tungsten Carbide was lighter than pure Tungsten, but its not as light as I thought.
The Tungsten Steel Alloy in the AP M2 bit had me confused also.


A Steel core bullet otherwise dimensionally the same as a Lead core bullet would be lighter. A Steel core bullet of the same weight would be longer and perhaps could be made more aerodynamic (if thats the proper term here)for the weight.

Using Soviet 7.62X54R Steel Core bullets in my .303 handloads showed them to be extremely accurate at less than max loadings. Had to seat them below the canelure to fit the mag and feed though.

 

[PercyShelley]

A lighter AK bullet would give it a better trajectory. I'm not sure about an increase in range, though -- I think the AK is more limited by the poor sights and the reliability-enhancing slop in its mechanicals than the 7.62x39 round. 7.62x39 has a trajectory that makes accurately estimating/knowing range more important at longer ranges than, say, 5.56mm or 7.62x51, but the difference is much less pronounced at practical, normal combat ranges.

I suspect that the M43 has a lot to do with the AK's reliability. It has an extremely pronounced taper, and with a bullet up top the whole round is basically wedge-shaped. The extractor groove and rim area are beefy as all get up, and the mild steel the rounds are made out of can take some rough handling. The round runs are low pressure, and the bullet it of generous diameter, the better to resist getting shaken about in the magazine.

The wisdom of benchrest shooting is that case taper, and shallow shoulders do not contribute to accuracy, although I would expect that the statistical effects of sub-optimal case geometry would be vastly subsumed by poor ammunition consistency and the weapon itself. Just more proof, if any was needed, that reliability and not accuracy was the primary concern.

Thanks for the scoop on barrel diameters, Roswell 1847. What sort of variances are observed in the factory ammunition?

 

[DeadLiver]

I've followed the 5.56 vs 7.62 debate for a while now. Unfortunately in 2004 while I was on inactive reserve waiting for my slot in basic I had a liver transplant and was subsequently rejected for military service, so I do not have the benefit of that training or experience.

That being said, I'm surprised not to have seen much in the way of discussion about using a cartridge between 5.56 and 7.62. Specifically what comes to mind is the 6.5 Grendel. I'm no expert so correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that 6.5 Grendel carries similar trajectories to 7.62 NATO with some loads even delivering a slightly flatter trajectory out to 1000 yds. Also, it's supposed to deliver about 90% of the energy of current issue 7.62 NATO. Recoil, while an increase from 5.56 ammo is significantly reduced from 7.62.

So, you have a cartridge that could be used in in the M16/M4 platform by replacing the upper receiver, and in the M249 by re-chambering current stock weapons. This could on paper at least greatly increase the per shot lethality and range of a rifle squad while mostly retaining the already mentioned benefits of the 5.56 cartridge. In a squad you still retain the full intercompatibility of ammunition between Rifles, Carbines, LMGs, and Designated Marksmen; giving what could be the best compromise.

I'm the first to admit that I'm no expert, but on an intellectual level 6.5 Grendel seems to be a logical choice if the military brass really were to decide to replace 5.56.

 

[PandaBearBG]

Dead Liver - your arguement is more of a technical level, on paper and stats the 6.5 looks great so does, chambering everything in .308, 338, etc. Technically you talking a numbers game, compare and the best numbers win. On an intellectual level, replacing the hundreds of thousands of uppers of M16/M4 platforms and 249 SAW's, is essentially impossible and unimaginable. The cost of replacing/upgrading all those rifles along with replacing the millions of rounds of ammunition, the cost of transporting, reconfiguring ammo and weapons would be a logistics nightmare. Also redesigning and restructuring the military doctrines and learning disciplines of all our armed forces, whether new troops or current active troops to learn a new caliber/ballistics is too much for even the military to take on. (they are slow as it is, have you ever tried to request anything in the military? It takes WEEKS just for the slow paper work to get done) On an intellectual level you have to figure in the technical data (better ballistics w/ the 6.5) along with the all the real world problems and the realistic practicality of introducing a new caliber for that weapon. I'm not slamming you, just letting you know this argument has been rehashed a million times, and there is a reason why 5.56 is the standard today. It used to be .308 back in the day but the 5.56 has proved itself time and time again. Ask the real world soilders and marines what they trust in combat. I trusted it and it has NEVER let me down.

By the way they have been trying the 6.8 in an M4 platform (I think....it's been a while) as a specific round for the rifleman of a fire team that allows the fireteam to have a hybrid rifleman/sniper. Read it a while back so I am not 100% sure. So you do have a something to back up the idea of using a 6.5

 

[John Parker]

Security Officer (OFFICER not Guard in Florida)

Seriously? Wow!

 

[Art Eatman]

This has wandered way away from the OP...