According to a study the M855 bullets (5.56×45mm NATO) being used by US soldiers in Iraq are a weak spot in the American arsenal as they are not lethal enough to bring down an enemy decisively, and that puts troops at risk.
Designed decades ago to puncture a Soviet soldier’s helmet hundreds of yards away, the M855 rounds are being used for very different targets in Iraq and Afghanistan.
These bullets are used in M4 carbines and M16 rifles that most soldiers carry. On the other hand the M14 uses larger bullets and has proved to be more deadly. According to Sgt. Joe Higgins who has M14:
Having a heavy cartridge in an urban environment like that was definitely a good choice. It just has more stopping power.
The study says much of today’s fighting takes place in close quarters; narrow streets, stairways and rooftops are today’s battlefield which is why M855 has proved to be ineffective in certain situations. Fired at short range, the M855 round is prone to pass through a body like a needle through fabric. That does not mean being shot is a pain-free experience. But unless the bullet strikes a vital organ or the spine, the adrenaline-fueled enemy may have the strength to keep on fighting and even live to fight another day.
Don Alexander, a retired Army chief warrant officer with combat tours in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Somalia isn’t surprised:
The bullet does exactly what it was designed to do. It just doesn’t do very well at close ranges against smaller-statured people that are lightly equipped and clothed.
With the M855, troops have to hit their targets with more rounds. That can be tough to do under high-stress conditions when one shot is all a soldier might get.
The army says aim better instead of asking for bigger bullets.
Maj. Thomas Henthorn, chief of the small arms division at Fort Benning, Ga., home to the Army’s infantry school said:
If you hit a guy in the right spot, it doesn’t matter what you shoot him with.
The M855 costs 33 cents each and it do not get a lot of public attention in Washington, where the size of the debate is usually measured by how much a piece of equipment costs.
In 2006, the Army asked a private research organization to survey 2,600 soldiers who had served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nearly one-fifth of those who used the M4 and M16 rifles wanted larger caliber bullets.
4 responses so far
1 bulletsize ~ May 27, 2008 at 4:17 am
Actually the 5.56 rounds are doing exactly what they are supposed to do. If you hit someone with one of these it will cause serious damage and be very painful but is not always lethal. It now takes at least two other enemy to carry the injured person, drivers, medics, doctors to treat them. Basically you have taken a half dozen people out of the fight with one bullet and not had to kill anyone. Modern warfare is not about killing as many people as fast as possible.
2 Kiyani ~ May 27, 2008 at 9:15 am
Not denying every thing you said but those fighting are in a better position to tell as to what kind of ammo is required.
3 Karmakaze ~ May 30, 2008 at 1:02 am
Kiyani - actually, as is far too common nowadays, the story is NOT backed up by proof. For example a survey is pointed out that found that NEARLY 20% of soldiers who used the M4 and M16 wanted larger bullets. Of course that also means OVER 80% of soldiers who used the M4 and M16 were satisfied with the current round.
Of course pointing that out would have ruined the premise of the article, and as such is left for the reader to realise. As far as I am concerned an 80%+ approval rating is pretty good considering the range of situations such a large percentage would have faced in combat.
4 Kiyani ~ May 30, 2008 at 3:37 am
When it’s a matter of life and death sometimes even 20% mean you have to act. Statistics is tricky, just because 20% say something doesn’t mean the other 80% are against it.
I appreciate you took the time to comment.
You must log in to post a comment.