5.56 NATO penetration

	News As History - January 7, 2009
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement

New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices

1.	Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.	Commander: Napoleon at War
3.	Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.	Gallic Wars
5.	Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History \| How To Make War \| Wars Around the World	Rules of Use
Infantry Discussion Board
Sign In Return to Topic Page

Subject: 5.56 NATO penetration
TRiple_C 7/31/2004 6:45:20 AM

Sources are directly contradictary against each other in regard to the penetration of this round. Many say that the 5.56 is easily "deflected" by branches and that the round loses most of its killing power after hitting something as thin as a plank board. The Army claims that the 5.56 had no problem penetrating steel armor plates. How effective, exactly, is the 5.56 in penetrating an obstacle and killing the enemy behind it?

Quote Reply

Latest
News

Most
Read

Most
Commented

Hot
Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Crosshair RE:5.56 NATO penetration, not so good 7/31/2004 8:22:00 AM

Sure the 5.56 can penitrate a 1/4 inch plate with the right ammo head on. But put that plate at an angle and it bounces right off. But the 5.56 rarely has to penitrate armor plate. In the real world, the 5.56 needs to penitrate concrete, tree's, etc. It fails at this miserably. Here is a video I made with my friend Dan awhile ago of us shooting stuff up. link There is some mild language. Pay atention to the concrete slab we are shooting. That was a 3" chunk of old sidewalk that we "aquired" at a construction site. As you will se in the video I "dislike" the .223. As you can see, compared to the 7.62x54R, the 22-250 (the rifle I have and more powerfull than the 5.56) just digs shallow craters in the concrete, the 7.62 blows it apart. You don't see it in the video (battery died) but we ended up turning the slab into rubble with the 7.62. I was using hollowpoints on the 22-250 and softpoints on the 7.62x54R. The diferances would be much greater with FMJ ammo.

Quote Reply

Ehran RE:5.56 NATO penetration, not so good 7/31/2004 6:08:01 PM

If i was going to war i would be wanting to carry a weapon with a nickname like "cratermaker" or the like. the ability to shoot through cover a 7.62 nato round gives you to my mind is definitely worth the extra weight. the extra effective range is nothing to sneeze at either.

Quote Reply

Kozzy RE:5.56 NATO penetration, not so good 7/31/2004 6:32:46 PM

Thing is, in a war will the enemy really take cover behind a thing concrete slab?

Quote Reply

doggtag on Crosshair's video 7/31/2004 7:37:25 PM

...so about 45 seconds or so into it, I notice a white-colored "object" in the distant background heading off-screen to the right. Crosshair, certainly you and you crew weren't firing in the direction of a highway, were you?.

Quote Reply

Crosshair RE:on Crosshair's video 7/31/2004 7:57:00 PM

Don't worry, the highway is 2+ miles away. it is just so flat that it looks closer. The only way we could get bullets to land there is if we held the rifles at a 40 degree angle and used them like artilary.

Quote Reply

Crosshair RE:5.56 NATO penetration, not so good 7/31/2004 8:01:41 PM

Kozzy 7/31/2004 6:32:46 PM Thing is, in a war will the enemy really take cover behind a thing concrete slab They sure will take cover behind anything they can. Whatever you do to "eliminate" that cover exposes them to your fire. The 22-250 never did any serious damage to the slab, the 7.62 made it really easy to pick up afterwards. Sure it may be 6" of concrete instead of 3" to bust through, but keep shooting it and when bullets start coming through the concrete, they are going to have to move.

Quote Reply

joe6pack RE:5.56 NATO penetration, not so good 7/31/2004 8:21:50 PM

Well a couple points on this - If I remember correctly, a 7.62 round will travel close 4,500 yards from a standard firing position (not using it like a mortar).. You guys should really consider using a serious backstop. Ammunition weight and count does matter. Having the ability to punch through concrete is not always a good thing. The 5.56 vs 7.62 arguement is probably going to go on until the Army decides on another type of round. However, the Army has done a pretty good job of picking Infantry weapons that are well balanced to most combat situations..

Quote Reply

Crosshair RE:5.56 NATO penetration, no danger from misses 8/1/2004 1:11:45 AM

4,500 yds is the range when you DO use it as a mortar. The law of 32 feet per second aplies here like any other bullet. A bullet traveling at 2400 fps would neet to stay airborn for over 7 seconds. You would HAVE to aim it like a mortar to hit that far away. When firing at a target 100 yds away, if you miss, the bullet hits the ground at most 200yds later. When my friend and I are shooting 2 liter pop bottles at 400 yds with the 22-250, we turn around. There it is clear until you get to the airpost 4+ miles away. (You have to watch for the flight school's helicopters when shooting clay's though.) So unless we tried, the people on the highway are in no danger.

Quote Reply

Sam kidding yourself Crosshairs 8/1/2004 10:30:42 AM

Get a backstop. 5.56 max range 3600m. 7.62 max range 3700m Both have enough energy to go further. "You would HAVE to aim it like a mortar to hit that far away. When firing at a target 100 yds away, if you miss, the bullet hits the ground at most 200yds later." Or it ricochets off a rock, goes into your "mortar" mode and pegs a car. I was in Okinawa Japan when 3 7.62 rds ricocheted out of the SDZ at the machine gun range at Camp Hansen and struck a taxi on the Okinawa Expressway. Over 5000 meters away and at almost a 90 deg angle to the direction of fire. Missed the Propane tank in the taxi by less than 2 inches. Rounds would also hit the Kinville water tower more often then we would like to admit. Its like playing Russian Roulette. Theres less than a 17% chance you will get the bullet with a 6 shooter. No one I know thinks those are good odds.

Quote Reply

Bigbro RE:5.56 NATO penetration 8/1/2004 12:17:03 PM

they just closed down our rifle range. A guy built a house a couple of miles down range and ended up with bullet holes in it. Not real smart to build where he did but shooters end up paying the price. With a good expanding bullet a .223 will give a through and through on small mule deer and speed goats on a broad side shot. will also punch clean holes in 1/4 inch mild steel. Do not use one on your steel plates, it makes for a lot of welding. If you want to break up concreat try a .44 mag with 275 gr. hard cast bullets. By the by they will shoot end for end through a big mule deer, an 06 will not, I know this for a fact as have done it.

Quote Reply

doggtag always use backstops 8/1/2004 2:39:09 PM

I whole-heartedly agree: even though you may be certain you aren't "intentionally" shooting in an undesireable direction, backstops are indeed a must. Even the .22 rimfire Lightning rounds I use say "2 1/2 mile range" on the box, if only for safety reasons (and if only in "mortar mode"). There is always the chance you could slip, twitch, or get slightly distracted just before trigger pull, or any other number of variables. And most hunting accidents are just that: unanticipated occurrences that happen to even the best and most qualified people. The shooting range where I used to go was owned by a Sportsmen's Club, and we were firing on a downslope into an old strip mine pit. So we had a very high wall of shale, rock, and dirt to trap our rounds... but the occassional ricochets could and did go everywhere you wouldn't expect them to. Safety first..

Quote Reply

Crosshair Clarification on video. 8/1/2004 11:02:44 PM

Just for the record, my friend and I shoot in the other direction now because there was not enough room for the long range shots(400yds+) that we began shooting. We shot there initaly in that direction, but then switched because of the lack of room. So can we get back on the discusion of 5.56 penitration, (I need to make another video so I don't get this every time I use it.) I sopose the highway is another reason to move. We still shoot clay's in that direction because there is no way the pellets are going that far.

Quote Reply

displacedjim RE:Clarification on video. 8/2/2004 12:48:46 AM

If you or anyone else tries some first-hand comparisons of penetration, may I suggest using ball ammunition? M855/SS109 (green tip) for the 5.56mm too, I might add. Then you can start to make meaningful comparisons. I'm thinking that using hollowpoints or even just soft points is a lot different than FMJ for penetration tests, particularly steel cored projectiles or thick jacketed lead cored projectiles, when you're talking trying to shoot through concrete slabs. Also, to be fair if recommendations are being offered based on results, maybe cartridges should be compared to other cartridges that are similarly employeed (rifle v. rifle, MG v. MG). On the other hand, who am I to try to deprive you of some shooting fun? Blast away, and send in the pictures. Displacedjim

Quote Reply

wagner95696 RE:on Crosshair's video 8/9/2004 12:32:19 PM

"The only way we could get bullets to land there is if we held the rifles at a 40 degree angle and used them like artilary." Not so. Most small arms, including the 7.62, will produce maximum range at elevations below 20 degrees.