I'm not a military expert and I don't play one on TV, but when it comes to this sort of thing, isn't listening to the troops on the ground the thing to do? If they don't like the stopping power of this round, shouldn't the military do something other than a research paper? I look forward to hearing the Marines report because if there is a serious tactical issue, they'll call it.
The one argument that I've heard for the smaller rounds is that it allows you to carry more and getting lots of lead down-range has long been the preferred tactical approach. Maybe this is changing?
Sunday, June 25, 2006
Army Says 5.56mm is Adequate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't get this. The aim of the lighter round is to carry more for the spraying tactic, but they blame the troops for poor shooting practices in not shooting the bad guy in the right area. Isn't this the 9mm vs .45 argument again? or the 5.56 vs 7.62?
If the idea is to hit the enemy in the right area, that would be marksmanship that the appears to be less desired in the modern military.
And if the lighter round is a realistic argument, why is the battle pack still at 70 lbs? Wouldn't it be wiser to lighten that load to help the amount of needed ammunition.
The battle pack has been about 70 pounds since the hoplites, I don't see it changing any time soon. That said, it does sound a bit like they can't make up their minds. Maybe there's a dichotomy developing between the idea of the professional army (aimed shots) vs. the citizen soldier (spray & pray).
Post a Comment