Military Rifle Effectiveness from John Farnam
January 28th, 2007 by Syd
28 Jan 07
Military Rifle Effectiveness
In an article in the current issue of Infantry Magazine, authors were assigned the task of articulating the current party-line with regard to continued lack of confidence in the military’s M855 “62gr green-tip” 223 round, still being issued.
We are assured that extensive re-testing had been done in response to chronic complaints from the field. However, most such complaints are quickly dismissed as resulting from “inexperience” and “hazy recollections.”
We are then told that all resultant testing only addressed close-range, exposed human targets (fifty meters maximum) that are unprotected by cover, ignoring the 223’s (1) lack of acceptable terminal effect beyond 150m and (2) chronic lack of ability to penetrate commonly-used objects (like car doors) that the enemy uses for cover- the twin issues that are at the heart of complaints about this caliber and have for the past forty years. Government “studies” are all alike!
Authors went on to admonish us all that we need to be accurate shooters. No problem with that, but they then advocated “controlled-pairs? for engaging enemy soldiers. Funny, no one ever suggested the necessity of any such multiple-shot technique when we were using M14s, did they? Routinely firing “controlled-pairs” reduces a 28-round magazine to a 14-round one and effectively halves one’s ammunition supply.
In conclusion, we are assured that inveterate complaints about the 223 round’ s dismal failure as a main, battle caliber are merely “myth and superstition.” The Stoner rifle in 223 caliber is the “best… available” we are told. Then, almost as an aside, it is sheepishly admitted that ineffectiveness and long range and second-rate penetration really are problems with this combination and that “something even better” may come along soon.
Well, it can hardly come too soon! The replacement forty years ago of heavy-caliber, main-battle-rifles, like the M14 and FAL, with light rifles in varmint calibers was, among other things, an attempt by “just-tech” types to degrade the importance and potency of the individual soldier and Marine, when it has been the heroism and gritty determination of the individual soldier and Marine that has consistently turned the tide of battle since this nation began! It is a forty-year old, procurement mistake, and all the trumped-up ??studies” in the world will fail to convince soldiers and Marines in the field who are obliged to believe their own eyes!
The 223 round may be adequate for domestic, personal defense and domestic policing. A convincing argument could even me made for its military suitability in rear-area defense. But, as a main-battle-caliber, its glaring inadequacy is obvious to all but a few, party-lines and party-liners notwithstanding!
/John Farnam