Army decides to put environment first, dead soldiers second

[baldeagle]

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/07/army-gi ... z2aYINi49R" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Absolute insanity.

[GlockDude26]

well they've already bought up most of the effective ammo and are saving that for us when they come knocking on the door

[gthaustex]

I wonder if all the alphabet soup federal agencies are going to switch as well??

[E.Marquez]

Army decides to put environment first, dead soldiers second

Hogwash..

But hey, it's on the internet, so it must be true.

If you would be so kind as part of your response.. please cite the data and testing you base your post on.. the number of live humans you have shot with both the old M855 and the newer M8551A1 as well as the human casualties you have seen shot with both..

That way readers can judge the posted content more fully and with understanding of the background the poster has.

Thanks

[bdickens]

In military engagements, it is more tactically desired to wound the enemy rather than kill him.

THAT is why they use ball ammo rather than hollow points in the first place.

[baldeagle]

Army decides to put environment first, dead soldiers second

Hogwash..

But hey, it's on the internet, so it must be true.

If you would be so kind as part of your response.. please cite the data and testing you base your post on.. the number of live humans you have shot with both the old M855 and the newer M8551A1 as well as the human casualties you have seen shot with both..

That way readers can judge the posted content more fully and with understanding of the background the poster has.

Thanks

You know how to use Google. Go for it.

[E.Marquez]

Army decides to put environment first, dead soldiers second

Hogwash..

But hey, it's on the internet, so it must be true.

If you would be so kind as part of your response.. please cite the data and testing you base your post on.. the number of live humans you have shot with both the old M855 and the newer M8551A1 as well as the human casualties you have seen shot with both..

That way readers can judge the posted content more fully and with understanding of the background the poster has.

Thanks

You know how to use Google. Go for it.

Yup, thats what i thought.... nothing to see here, just hyperbole in the thread title.

If anyone is willing to cite their data and personal experiences, this would be an interesting discussion... but so far it's just MSNBC type stories or a Brady Campaign type "report"

[baldeagle]

Since I know 99.9% of people won't bother to Google anyway, here's some links to more comprehensive reviews on these worthless rounds.

http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/03/07/m ... d-marines/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

But no amount of tuning is going to alter the fact that the EPR has a 5.5 MOA accuracy standard. 5.5 MOA? Seriously? The Mk 318 SOST round that the USMC has fielded in Afghanistan is held to a 2 MOA standard, but the latest and greatest round that it’s being replaced by is held to a 5.5 MOA standard? Additionally, the Mk 318 has better terminal ballistics against soft targets, holds together better through intermediate barriers and costs half what the M855A1 costs. In this era of dramatic cost-cutting, it is absolutely mind-boggling as to why they are insisting on fielding a round so inferior in just about every aspect to one that’s already in theater — and pay twice as much for it!

http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php? ... NSFW/page3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Army does NOT want the truth revealed about several areas of M855A1:

–– The true per cartridge cost of M855A1, as well as the full cost of the Army “green” ammo program.
–– How the Army misappropriated the patent protected M855A1 design from an outside vendor and what that act of malfeasance has cost taxpayers.
–– That M855A1 has so far only successfully been manufactured on the old inefficient, costly BAM and not on the SCAMP line.
–– How the increased chamber pressure of M855A1 contributes to premature bolt and other part failures, including decreased barrel life/increased port erosion, as well as issues with damaged flash hiders.
–– There is increased fouling from the dirty propellant used with M855A1.
–– That the M855A1 accuracy standard is over twice as large as the Mk318 contract requirement.
–– The different trajectory of M855A1 compared to M855 and M856.
–– That M855A1 is NOT blind to common barriers.

Note that M855A1 is an ATK/Lake City design, while Mk318 Mod0 is an ATK/Federal Cartridge design—either way ATK will be making a profit.

The M855A1 program is a damning indictment of the utter FAILURE of the Army procurement system to rapidly and effectively respond to the needs of our Nation’s troops—especially in time of war. Why has it taken over a decade and hundreds of millions of tax payer funds to develop what is essentially a product improved 1960’s era Bronze Tip bullet? How come M855A1 costs twice as much as Mk318 and is also more expensive than the COTS Mk262 and 70 gr Optimal “browntip”? Why does the Army need a lead free combat round? If one is truly needed, then the already approved, safety certified, in service COTS 70 gr Optimal "browntip" seems to be a more viable solution for carbines and rifles than the problematic M855A1.

While M855A1 does have better accuracy, more consistent terminal performance, and better barrier capability than M855 "green tip", in a military setting I would currently prefer Mk318 Mod0 or 70 gr "brown tip" for carbine use over M855A1. LE agencies and civilians have even better choices.

[baldeagle]

In case those two articles don't convince you, perhaps this will.

http://www.armytimes.com/article/201111 ... ne-bidding" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The official said he was not surprised because the propellant in green ammo is "so filthy" some manufacturers have needed an ultrasonic cleaner and rubber mallet to get a bolt out after firing only a few thousand rounds.

Just what you want in the field. A weapon that requires more cleaning and parts replacement just to maintain functionality. Now each soldier will need two weapons; one to shoot with and one down for maintenance - and a mallet and an ultrasonic cleaner too - solar powered I suppose. And with 62,000 - 67,000 psi rounds, barrels will have to be replaced more often as well, bolts will break more often, firing pins will wear out prematurely, pistons will clog with filthy ammo gasses and bullet setback will lead to catastrophic failures, meaning they need to train more armorers to keep up with the demand for parts replacement - while slogging through the Afghani deserts miles from a shop. Great job, Army!

So, Marquez, wanna tout how great a round the M855A1 is now?

[baldeagle]

If anyone is willing to cite their data and personal experiences, this would be an interesting discussion...

I found this particularly humorous since only the Army has access to these rounds so no one can cite any personal experience unless they're actually in the Army. And we all know how the Army will make sure the truth gets out about how great a round this is.

[DocV]

Interesting. TM42-001-27 specifies WC 844 for both M193 and M855. Not sure what M855A1 uses. One reference says SMP-842.

[Texasrpbrock]

Those look like Sinex cold and flu soft gel capsules... If so, may I may buy a box and load a few rounds to test their performance... If they don't work at least I can take them to clear my allergies... Those boys in Washington are getting slicker by the minute.

[Dadtodabone]

Dueling websites,

•After being issued the round, testing it on ranges and finally taking it into combat, not a single negative review has followed
•Soldiers rave about it—its “stopping power” is amazing say most soldiers

http://www.guns.com/2012/09/06/new-m855 ... abn-video/

Not only is this performance much better than the M855's with its smaller steel penetrator, it is vastly better than the M80 7.62mm round.

http://www.army.mil/article/48657/

And since E. Marquez has in fact used this round in combat, seen the results from this round, dealt with the maintenance issues in the field under combat conditions, all while relying on it to preserve his life and the lives of the troops he trained and led, I for one will be looking to his opinion to inform my own on this issue of that you can be sure.

[E.Marquez]

In case those two articles don't convince you, perhaps this will.

http://www.armytimes.com/article/201111 ... ne-bidding" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The official said he was not surprised because the propellant in green ammo is "so filthy" some manufacturers have needed an ultrasonic cleaner and rubber mallet to get a bolt out after firing only a few thousand rounds.

Just what you want in the field. A weapon that requires more cleaning and parts replacement just to maintain functionality. Now each soldier will need two weapons; one to shoot with and one down for maintenance - and a mallet and an ultrasonic cleaner too - solar powered I suppose. And with 62,000 - 67,000 psi rounds, barrels will have to be replaced more often as well, bolts will break more often, firing pins will wear out prematurely, pistons will clog with filthy ammo gasses and bullet setback will lead to catastrophic failures, meaning they need to train more armorers to keep up with the demand for parts replacement - while slogging through the Afghani deserts miles from a shop. Great job, Army!

So, Marquez, wanna tout how great a round the M855A1 is now?

Army decides to put environment first, dead soldiers second

Again, Hyperbole..Still.

Feel free to recount the fire fight you were involved in or read about where an M4 user fired a few thousand M855A1 rounds?

Since that is not reality,, the truth is even basic user level cleaning of the weapon after real typical use makes this mythical rubber mallet needed to get the bolt group out,, wait for it...Hyperbole.. just like the made up headline you added to this thread..not even a quote from the nonsense article you posted it from.

It's nonsense, made up from folks that have NO experience, but claim expertise by way of second or third hand reports.

As for your false assertion that I claimed the M855A1 was "great " please point to where I said that in anything I have ever posted here, or anywhere. I have three user names since the mid 80's bronco78, bigbronco78, E.marquez .. Please copy and paste, then highlight where I said what you stated I did..
Thanks

[Shoot_First]

We get lead out of the ground, refine it, and put it into bullets which soldiers shoot back into the ground. Sounds like no impact on the environment to me. Are people eating spent bullets?