British bullets too small to fell 'high' Taliban

[m24]

A report in today's Times Of India:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 182212.cms

The bullets used by British forces to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan has been dubbed too small, because soldiers claim that it requires at least five direct hits to bring down the militants who are high on opium.

According to a report, British soldiers in Afghanistan use small 5.56mm calibre rounds also tail off after 300 metres and can easily be blown off the target. Half of all fire fights in Helmand are fought between 300 and 900 metres.

Meanwhile, Taliban marksmen use powerful 7.62mm ammunition for their AK47 machine guns, the Sun reports.The report calls for guns that take larger ammunition to replace all standard-issue SA80 rifles — which many believe were exposed as inadequate in Iraq in 2003.

Report co-author Nicholas Drummond, a strategy consultant and ex-Welsh Guards officer, secretly questioned more than 50 soldiers who have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“A British soldier’s rifle is not much more useful than a peashooter. He can’t attack with any certainty that if he hits the enemy he will kill or incapacitate him,” he said.

One soldier in 2nd Battalion, the Rifles in Helmand, shot a Taliban fighter five times and he still got up to dive for cover, researchers were told.

The study claims car doors easily stop the ammunition. It added that Javelin anti-tank missiles — at £100,000 apiece are often fired at lone gunmen. Just one in four British, US and German troops has been issued with guns using 7.62mm ammo.

[MoA]

All bullets get blown around in the winds. The 5.56 has been well documented as being a little light. The 7.62x39 is marginally better at those ranges and is out performed by the .308 or 7.62 NATO.

At ranges beyond 500 meters most calibers loose a lot of potency including the 7.62x39 and most definetely the 5.56, The difference between them is the typical 50 ish grain bullet wersus the most common 123 grain bullets for the 7.62x39.

[Risala]

They should just stick to .50 BMG....at the ranges they are trying to engage the Taliban....

[hvj1]

This is precisely the results obtained by our forces against the Terrorists in J&K. I have discussed this very issue with an officer who was with the commandos and he categorically preferred the AK 47 or better still, the 7.62 in tackling terrorsts at long ranges. This particular gentleman has personally taken out 17 terrorists and his favourite was the AK 47. In his words' when a guy gets hit by a 7.62 bullet, he stays hit!". Unfortunately he found the 7.62 SLR too heavy to lug around and hence preferred the AK in both variants -47/56.

[snIPer]

There you have it mate. Proof - Size does matter
/s/

[m24]

In his words' when a guy gets hit by a 7.62 bullet, he stays hit!.

Nice...That's the way it should remain, especially dealing with terrorists.

Regards

[fantumfan2003]

5.56mm NATO ammo is known for its inadequate stopping power.

During the American op in Somalia on the day they lost two Blackhawks, the American rangers were also frustrated by their 5.56 ammo. One of the Delta boys, who dropped in from a chopper (not sure if it was Shugart or Gordon) was using an M14 7.62x51 semi auto sniper rifle which was much more effective than the M16s.

Very likely in view of this the SCAR weapon system has three base models chambered for 5.56x45, 7.62x51 AND 7.62x39.

http://defense-update.com/products/s/scar.htm

M.

[nagarifle]

this we discussed something like that and it was a heated one to so we had to give up before Johna and I started fireing long range ammo.

on an older thread by Johna

http://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php ... 2&start=60

[CZHarry]

by m24 » Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:06 am

A report in today's Times Of India:

The bullets used by British forces to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan has been dubbed too small, because soldiers claim that it requires at least five direct hits to bring down the militants who are high on opium.

According to a report,...........

I thought we were going to provide a 'notification' or a URL link to quoted atricles. This isn't anything against you, but if someone uses this info elsewhere, it is always proper to provide the source of the article.

[Vikram]

CZHarry is right. Not criticising in anyway.But, in order not to violate copyrights, we must provide the source in our posts.

Harry, thanks for the caution.

Best-
Vikram

[m24]

Folks, my mistake. Will take care now onwards.

Regards

[nagarifle]

forgiven, maybe not

[eljefe]

Mehul,Mark and I were talking about this a long time ago, and i jokingly said the same thing about getting a bigger 500-476 service round ...

[Mark]

To put it visually, which round would you rather use in a firefight?

5.56Nato, 6.8SPC(similar to a 7.62X39 AK round), 276 Pederson, 7mm British experimental, 7.62Nato(308), 30-06

In regards to the article, this debate has been going on here in the US since Vietnam, so I suspect there is some new weapon contract coming up for consideration in the UK.

[fantumfan2003]

Second from right....

The SA80 has been around for a VERRRRYYYYY long time....its about time its replaced....British SFs and even their police are using the HK G36 which is currently known to be the most reliable 5.56 AR. A variant of the G36, G36C fired 25000 rounds without jamming.

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=c ... s&Itemid=5

M.

To put it visually, which round would you rather use in a firefight?

5.56Nato, 6.8SPC(similar to a 7.62X39 AK round), 276 Pederson, 7mm British experimental, 7.62Nato(308), 30-06

In regards to the article, this debate has been going on here in the US since Vietnam, so I suspect there is some new weapon contract coming up for consideration in the UK.