Report of US Army Going to JHP Handgun Ammunition.

[sqlbullet]

223 beats the five-seven when going against armor.  And a soldier wearning a plate isn't gonna be phased by five-seven to the chest.  Head though....

[chucky2]

But what would be carried in .223 for a handgun?

[sqlbullet]

Who goes into battle against regular army forces with a handgun?

A handgun is a last ditch weapon that is used to fight your way to the nearest rifle.  I personally have never seen the allure of the fiveSeven and still don't.  If you want a handgun that has the velocity to punch through cheap armor, I would suggest a 9X25 here in the 10mm forum.  Same velocity, almost twice the sectional density.

Granted it isn't a mainstream cartridge, but if I am picking one that would be my edict.

[chucky2]

Um, people that carry handguns in country?  It might not be their primary weapon, but they'd have it.

The allure of the five.seven isn't that it can go through armor, it's that it can wound as well as 9mm, AND go through armor, is good out to distances a handgun round could in any reasonable way be expected to hit at (where .45 is not), AND can be fired by women and less beefy armed soldiers.  That the same round can be used in a P90 like weapon, which is perfect for those whose MOS is putting them primarily in tanks, trucks, airframes, etc. and it just gets beter.

The question is:  What do other handgun rounds do that five.seven doesn't with the requirement they must be at least as effective as the current 9mm ball AND be able to be fired effectively by women and less large soldiers given the same training levels (because we know the Gov isn't going to spend more, they're looking to save $ not spend more)?

It's not 9x25, or 10mm, or .45.  I don't even own a five.seven, probably never will, and even I can admit the round solves pretty much all the Mil's concerns - with PERHAPS the exception of suppression and flash blindness at night, along with loudness of report, especially in rooms instead of out in the open.  They'd have to test that out and see what the detriments are...

[Pinsnscrews]

The question that really needs to be asked is:

"What has changed behind the scenes that the US Military no longer wants to share or rely on NATO ammunition supplies?"

Back when the US switched from the .45 to 9mm it was due MORE to all of the joint training and operations being performed with other NATO forces. The US was having to bring in all of it's .45 ammo rather than being able to share supplies with the Local force they were training with. Since so many joint forces and UN Peacekeeping operations were happening, by utilizing the 9mm, available ammo was now prevalent in any operation. The US could tap Euro ammo suppliers for that they could not previously use because the .45 was not a round those factories produced.

So what has changed?

Another thing has dawned on me that I hadn't latched onto previously. Several NATO countries who were signatories of the Conventions banning AP ammo in handguns are utilizing the 5.7 round. The Military version of which has a steel penetrator that the civilian round does not. That makes the round an intended AP design. They are therefore in violation of the Conventions when loading it in the FiveseveN. It could be that since AP rounds like the 5.7 are only AP against armor, but act like an FMJ on soft targets, it is beleived that the technology advances in ammo have surpassed the intent of the Conventions.

[Buckeye 50]

The idea that FMJ's being more "humane" has always left me scratching my head!?  Isn't the point of shooting at an enemy to kill or mame?


This sound like an idea born in the bowels of lunatic liberals? 


Pat

[Pinsnscrews]

The idea that FMJ's being more "humane" has always left me scratching my head!?  Isn't the point of shooting at an enemy to kill or mame?

You have to think back to the types of bullets available at the times of the Conventions. You also have to consider their thought process as the ban relates to pistol ammo. Pistols were more likely going to be found in and around Officers and Rear Echelon types. By Banning AP ammo, it would help cut down on Officer Fatalities.  Shooting an Officer in a rear echelon position was considered disgraceful. They didn't want someone walking up to an Officer's Command car with a pistol and being able to shoot him through the door.

[Dave84]

I Think .40 loaded with Federals 165 grain HST would be a great load for the army. I of course would love it if they used 10mm but that seems more like a dream than a reality. Lol, Federals 180 grain JSP 10mm would be a beast. That's the one they should use.