Home
Uncategorized
Why Did US Soldiers in Afghanistan Use
Why Did US Soldiers in Afghanistan Use 5.56 Caliber M16, but the Special Forces Prefer Old 7.62 M14
In 1964, the US Army adopted the 5.56x 45mimeter NATO cartridge for the first time. However, 37 years later, seasoned US special forces operators instead of happily running the 5.56 mm in the mountains of Afghanistan began switching back to the old 7.62 mm. Why did they do it? As it turns out, they had as many as eight reasons for making that choice.
Let’s take a look at them. So in the late 1950s, the US Department of Defense’s Project Salvo studies suggested that a small high velocity caliber could be more effective. Shortly afterward, Remington Arms independently developed the 223 Remington cartridge. After several years of testing, the US military decided to adopt it and standardize it as the 5.
56x 45mm NATO, which would later become the primary caliber for assault rifles. The new cartridge had gained many advantages. Its grouping and rate of fire increased while recoil, muzzle rise, and ammunition weight decreased. However, in the war in Afghanistan, special forces preferred the old 7.62 over the 5.56.
Regular soldiers, on the other hand, could not choose. But what advantages did the older caliber have? Firstly, the 7.62 62 NATO round travels more steadily than the 5.56 round. Factors such as wind, rain, or snow affect the trajectory of the 5.56 far more than that of the 7.62. Secondly, the 7.
62 has fewer ricochets than the 5.56. In addition, a heavy 7.62 bullet fired from an M14 or an M240 at extreme distances loses much less energy than a 5.56. Yes, the weight of the 5.56 round is lower. It weighs approximately 12 g compared to the 24 g of the 7.62. But at the same time, the 7.62 is capable of better retaining its lethality throughout its entire trajectory.
It should also be noted that during the war in Afghanistan, there were many types of 7.62 62x 51 mm NATO rounds and special forces could choose the right type for a specific task from standard ammunition to armor-piercing or precision sniper rounds. Meanwhile, for example, subsonic 5.56x 45 mm NATO rounds for use with silencers were uncommon, and the armor-piercing rounds never reached the effectiveness of the 7.
62 against armor or fortified positions. The problem was not only the variety of ammunition, but also of tactical accessories. For the 7.62x 51 caliber, suppressors had long existed and been tested in various operations used, for example, on rifles like the G3 or the modernized versions of the M14. By contrast, weapons using the 5.56×45 round had more difficulty being truly silenced.
The high velocity, low impulse round is harder to suppress, and using a suppressor considerably reduces its combat performance. The 5.56 mm kills through high velocity fragmentation and cavitation. And with a suppressor, its velocity drops, it may not fragment, and it becomes much less lethal. Moreover, the 7.62 had a greater effective range.
For example, when fired from an M14 EBR, it had an effective range of approximately 800 m, which was sometimes simply indispensable because combat in Afghanistan required long range and took place at distances between 400 and 800 m. On the other hand, the 5.56×45 fired from an M4 had an approximate range of only 300 to 500 m.
In this case, the 7.62 62 round was simply indispensable. And of course, one of the main reasons to choose the 7.62 x 51 mm is its greater stopping power. Soldiers and special forces armed with 5.56 mm rifles often noticed the lack of it. The Taliban would keep advancing even after being hit by multiple 5.56 bullets.
Meanwhile, with the 7.62 mm, that simply did not happen. Experienced fighters also chose the 7.6 62 x 51 mm for a very simple reason. They knew that the enemy used AKM and AK-47 rifles in 7.62x 39 mm capable of firing from behind rocks and the 5.56 was not able to force them out of their positions.
Considering all the other advantages of the 7.62x 51 mm, the special forces preferred to use a caliber that could match the enemy’s power and drive them from their positions. and even the low recoil, the 52% lighter ammunition, and the higher magazine capacity were not enough to make them change their minds. Overall, the 5.
56 is not bad and has certain advantages, but in specific combat conditions, such as in Afghanistan, the 7.62 proved to have the upper hand. And that’s all for today. I hope you enjoyed the video.
