Balistik, kaliber och knallfall effekt.

[jofredes]

Det har varit en lång debatt om 5.56 och 5,45 mm kalibrarnas vara och inte vara se nedan.

http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/howtom ... get=htweap

WEAPONS OF THE WORLD: Which Bullet is Best?



September 15, 2003: Ever since the Vietnam war, there has been an ongoing debate over the stopping power of the 5.56mm round used in the M-16. During the Vietnam war, there were reports of enemy troops not going down when hit with a 5.56mm bullet, while troops using rifles with the larger 7.62mm round reported far fewer problems. Keep in mind that many of the NCOs in Vietnam had fought in Korea and World War II, using the M-1 rifle (and it's 7.62mm, or .30 caliber, round) and had lots of opportunity to compare the "stopping power" of the two different bullets. But there was also a lot of support for the lighter M-16, with it's lighter (especially to carry) ammo and flatter trajectory (because of its higher speed). The Vietnam war ended without any pressure building to go back to a larger cartridge.

On paper, the standard measure of "stopping power" is measured in joules (or foot pounds, where 1000 joules equals 737.6 foot pounds). We'll use joules, which is a measure of energy (the weight of the bullet times the velocity as it comes out of the barrel.) On the low end, we have the .22 caliber long rifle, with 190 joules of hitting power. This is enough to snag squirrels and rabbits. A .22 can kill people, but only if they are hit in the right place. For serious killing, the most widely used rounds up through World War II were the 7.92mm (4670 joules), the .303 caliber (or 7.7mm with 3320 joules), the .30-06 (7.62mm with 3660 joules), 6.5mm (various models, 2300-2700 joules) and .30 caliber US Carbine (1070 joules). That period also saw widespread use of submachineguns (automatic weapons using pistol rounds.) The most widely used of these were the 9mm Parabellum (583 joules), 7.62mm Tokarev (499 joules) and .45 ACP (11.4mm with 450 joules). After World War II came two new cartridges that have dominated military rifle use, the Russian 7.62mm M1943 (1890 joules) and the 5.56mm (1780 joules).

But there's a major problem in just using joules, and that is how much of that energy is actually applied to the person being hit. A smaller, faster bullet has a tendency to just go through someone. This does damage, often fatal damage, but if often does not slow down a highly energized soldier. A larger bullet, especially a blunt one, will be more effective at "stopping" someone. Thus the popularity of the U.S. .45 caliber pistol round. Although it has less energy than the 9mm round (450 joules compared to 583), those who have used both insist that the .45 is far more effective than the smaller and faster 9mm. Part of this has to do with the fact that the .45 (11.4mm) bullet hits with a 60 percent larger (as seen head on) area, thus it applied more of that energy to the target. This explains the greater likelihood of the .45 caliber bullet "knocking down" whoever it hits. The same physics applies to rifle bullets (although they tend to have pointy tips, unlike the blunter ones for pistol pullets.) A 7.62mm bullet is 88 percent larger (head on) than a 5.56mm one.

Another problem is that rounds that depend on smaller, but faster, bullets for their joules, tend to lose speed very quickly and have less stopping power a couple of hundred meters out. This was seen by many American troops in Afghanistan recently. The larger 7.62mm rounds (which are about the same as the World War II .30-06) still have lots of joules left 500 meters out. Indeed, one thing that made the World War II German MG-42 machine-gun so lethal was the 7.92mm rifle round it used. This beast had about 30 percent more joules than the 7.62mm rifle rounds allied troops used. The MG-42 also had a higher rate of fire than most other light machine-guns, creating a very fatal combination.

At the moment, the round with the most stopping power (on paper and witnessed in action) is the .50 caliber (12.7mm) round used in heavy sniper rifles and heavy machine-guns. This bullet generates 16,914 joules. Guaranteed to stop anyone, or just about anything, it hits.

Much experimentation has taken place to develop the "perfect bullet" and at present it appears to be something between 6mm and 7mm. But the only time you get to see what really works is when there is a war. But even then a lot depends on where you are fighting, and who you are fighting with. If combat is in the wide open spaces, the fast, light 5.56mm rounds are at a disadvantage. But in jungles and cities, the 5.56mm is very effective. If you are fighting fanatical type opponents (like the Japanese in World War II, or Islamic radicals today), you want as many joules as possible. It was in the Pacific during World War II that the lightweight U.S. .30 caliber carbine got its bad reputation. The bullet fired from the carbine only had 1070 joules, less than a third of the joules generated by the more powerful .30-06 of the M1. In Europe, where most combatants were only too happy to get wounded and evacuated to the rear, a hit from carbine bullet would drop most people it hit.

So which kind of round is best? Well, it really depends.



September 13, 2003: Without gathering much attention, China has been introducing a new assault rifle for its infantry. The QBZ-95 is unusual in several respects. It's a Bullpup design, meaning the 30 round magazine is behind the trigger and overall length is 30 inches (compared to 34.2 inches for the AK-47 and 38.8 inches for the M-16). But even more unusual is the cartridge, it's a 5.8mm round developed in China. The Chinese experimented a lot during the 1980s, with new cartridges of different calibers (from 5.5mm to 6mm) and settled on the 5.8mm round in 1989 and introduced the QBZ-95, in small quantities, in 1995. The QBZ-95 weighs 8.3 pounds loaded. There is a light machine-gun version that uses a longer barrel and a drum magazine. This weapon weighs 11 pounds loaded, but is awkward to use because of the heavy ammo drum sitting behind the trigger. There is also a "carbine" version with a shorter barrel. The QBZ-95 is also a complicated piece of machinery, with, as some users have reported, "too many parts" (especially compared to the AK-47.) The 30 round magazine, sitting behind the trigger, makes it awkward to fire from the prone position. The new 5.8mm cartridge does not appear to be much more effective than the short 7.62mm used in the AK-47, or the 5.56 round used in the M-16. So why is China creating an enormous problem of shifting from it's current arsenal of AK-47s to a new caliber? The Chinese aren't saying. There is an export version of the QBZ-95 (the QBZ-97) that uses the same ammunition as the M-16. But the QBZ-97 is not selling well.


September 11, 2003: U.S. Army weapons designers are seriously looking into adopting a new cartridge for their rifles and light machine-guns. Experts are looking at replacing the current 5.56mm round with something between 6mm and 7mm. This search for the perfect caliber, is something that has been going on for over a century, since modern bullet propellants ("smokeless powder") was developed in the late 19th century. Back then, most nations quickly settled on calibers between 7.5mm and 8mm (or .30 and .31 caliber as the U.S. and Britain put it.) The Japanese and some European nations selected the 6.5mm cartridge. While not as powerful as the larger cartridges, the 6.5mm was easier on the troops (less recoil and lighter to carry) and, as far as anyone could tell, just as lethal. During World War II, when the Germans developed the first assault rifle (the SG-44), the developers concluded that the optimal bullet size would be 7mm. But this would have required too much new manufacturing equipment, so a "short" version of the standard 7.92mm rifle cartridge was adopted instead. The Russians, who designed their AK-47 right after the war, used their "short" 7.62mm round. This cartridge had been developed during the war for the SKS carbine. When the United States reacted to the AK-47 in the late 1950s, they adopted a military version of the civilian .223 Remington (a high powered .22 caliber round used by hunters for small game.)

This 5.56mm round created some controversy regarding it's ability to stop enemy troops. But against the smaller Vietnamese troops, the 5.56mm seemed to knock the enemy soldiers down quite effectively. Reports kept coming in that against determined men of larger stature, the 5.56mm did not "drop" them as effectively as the older 7.62mm rifle round. Keep in mind that, on the battlefield, the main idea is not to kill the enemy, but to take the fight out of him. Thus the term, "knock them down" is often used by combat veterans. If the downed enemy trooper is only wounded, but no longer fighting and maybe making a lot of agonized noises to unnerve his fellow, all the better. In Afghanistan and Iraq, troops had plenty of opportunities to see how effective 5.56mm and 7.62mm bullets were against enemy troops,. While all American assault rifles and light machine-gun are 5.56mm, sniper rifles and medium machine-guns use the older, and more powerful, 7.62mm round.

For the past ten years, there has been some pressure, mostly from the troops, to adopt a somewhat larger round. A major consideration for the troops, in addition to the better combat performance of the larger round, is weight. The older 7.62mm rounds weighed 6.1 pounds per hundred rounds. The U.S. 5.56mm round weighed only 3.5 pounds. This makes a difference for infantry troops who have to lug around a lot of ammo. A 6mm or 7mm round would weigh in at between 4-5 pounds per hundred rounds, depending on the design of the cartridge. If the larger bullet was noticeably more effective on the battlefield, troops would not be too upset at hauling heavier ammo. The rumored favorite in the U.S. Army experiments is a 6.8mm round. In experiments going back half a century, there have been cases of higher speed 6.5mm rounds performing nearly as effectively as 7.62mm rifle rounds. So the 6.8mm may be a lighter bullet that does not generate heavy recoil (which makes aimed automatic fire difficult) and still "knocks them down" like the 7.62mm bullet.

[Svempa]

Ja...vad säger man?

Att byta standard på ammo är dyrt och omständigt. Så det vill till att den nya kalibern kan visa sig värd alla kostnader...

Frågan är om detta är något vi borde bry oss om i Sverige?

Vi använder ju i alla fall AK 5 mest till "självförsvar". Skall det skjutas folk på avstånd har vi PSG 90 eller kanon.

Jag har lite svårt att se några övervägande fördelar med en större kaliber kontra kostnad och vikt.

Vad tycker ni?
/S

[Backis]

Ja...vad säger man?

Att byta standard på ammo är dyrt och omständigt. Så det vill till att den nya kalibern kan visa sig värd alla kostnader...

Frågan är om detta är något vi borde bry oss om i Sverige?

Vi använder ju i alla fall AK 5 mest till "självförsvar". Skall det skjutas folk på avstånd har vi PSG 90 eller kanon.

Jag har lite svårt att se några övervägande fördelar med en större kaliber kontra kostnad och vikt.

Vad tycker ni?
/S

Personligen tycker jag den här diskussionen mestadels verkar ha dykt upp igen för att Jänkarna haft problem med sin nya 5.56, som ju är "pansarbrytande", dvs att den har extra tjock mantel och hård kärna. alltså splittras den inte vid träff och har mindre effekt i målet om det är oskyddat.

5.56x45mmN har mer än nog energi för att oskadliggöra en människa.

Jag tror att liknelsen är att en AK4 med 120 patroner väger lika mycket som en AK5 med 300.

Det är lite skillnad det.