« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

GREENING OUR MILITARY WITH ECO-FRIENDLY BULLETS

By: longtimeconservative (Diary)  |  June 27th, 2010 at 06:24 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

President Obama’s liberal base should be jubilant over our military’s latest”greening” effort. Yes, the Army will soon be waging eco-friendly warfare in Afghanistan. A key feature of all new small caliper ammunition will be lack of lead.

      The research and development for these new cartridges took place at the Army’s Picatinney Arsenal in New Jersey. The M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round will eliminate up to 2,000 tons of lead from manufacturing process each year. While the new rounds are said to incorporate other features, greening was the main objective. Shipment of these eco-friendly bullets will commence soon to our forces in Afghanistan.

     No doubt, the President is extremely happy, environmentalists are elated and both al-Qaida and Taliban fighters relieved since no longer must they fear lead poisoning if they are shot. While this satisfies Obama supporters, will it encourage radical Muslim forces to incorporate green technology in their roadside bombs and attacks on innocent civilians?

     One can only wonder whether a touch of floral fragrance will be next for Obama’s Army.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

    This is a bit too damn much.

    From The United States Army website:

    Army begins shipping improved 5.56mm cartridge.

    According to Lt. Col. Jeffrey K. Woods, the program’s product manager, the projectile is “the best general purpose 5.56mm round ever produced.” Woods said its fielding represents the most significant advancement in general purpose small caliber ammunition in decades.

    The Enhanced Performance Round contains an environmentally-friendly projectile that eliminates up to 2,000 tons of lead from the manufacturing process each year in direct support of Army commitment to environmental stewardship. Woods said the effort is a clear example of how “greening” a previously hazardous material can also provide extremely beneficial performance improvements.

    — — — — — — —

    Kill people and break things.

    Do it in the most expedient and violent manner possible – a.k.a., “defeat the enemy” to the point they either will not or cannot retaliate or attack again…… ever.

    But don’t forget to hug a tree while you’re doing it all.

    Son of a……….

    • SteveLA

      Kenny

      I’m not a gun guy so I don’t know bupkus about this topic, can you fill us in please? What I would like to know to cut to the chase, does it do the job it’s intended to do, kill people who want to harm this country and do so at least the same as the current round or better?

      • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

        If it matters though, a 5.56 NATO / .223 round is going out per mil spec at approximately 3,580 fps using a 45-50 gr JHP projectile,

        That means it’s fast and it’s gonna hit what you aim at kinda quick-like.

        None of that means a thing though.

        It;s the whole idea of the green nonsense,

        Mark my words…… Do not doubt me on this.

        The introduction of this ‘green’ round will have almost immediate effect on YOUR right to use a firearm.

        Shooting ranges, will very soon be under fire (pun definitely intended) by the green freaks (read that as the anti-gun nuts) to become mandated by local, county, state and maybe even (nudge) Federal regulation…… not law, but a (nudge) regulation…… to require nothing but those rounds to be used at outdoor facilities.

        Nobody here has thought of that, right ? Why am I even mentioning it here on a open forum ?

        I thought about it and I saw it coming years ago, I even say stuff about it to few friends at ranges that some lunatic has got to be designing some sort of biodegradable round (at least the projectile itself) and it’s gonna be a mandate to use ‘em or you no can shootski anywhereness.

        This whole thing stinks to high heaven of that ICLEI organization and their sustainable development nonsense, along with IC2RP and their ‘get all guns away from everyone’ bent through the UN.

        It’s coming and it’s going to get much worse.

        Guaranteed.

        Put on your tin-foil hat and think.

        Oh wait……. nobody needs a tin-foil hat anymore……. We’re all living it now just like some of us have been talking for years about what’s coming…..and called crazy.

        But think……. If it sounds nuts to you, then multiply it by ten and you’ll get close.

        • The_Rebel

          What really bothers me is the time and effort expended by the US Army in cozying up to these environmental fruitcakes. Their time would be better spent on finding more effective conventional weapons to kill the enemy, such as better bunker-busting bombs, for example. The Army is no place for social experimentation, but it seems that is a dead issue now, what with women in combat, gays in the military, women on submarines, and now tree hugger ammunition.

          • Achance

            on “cleaning up” military bases and especially artillery and bombing ranges.

          • The_Rebel

            n/t

        • Achance

          “remediated” because of lead. It was in the basement of the downtown middle school and somebody got a wild hair that it was causing lead poisoning in all the kiddies. We wouldn’t want a bunch of downtown lefties little crumbsnatchers to get any crazier, so we closed it down. Never did establish that there was any airborn lead or that any was getting into they school but it was truthy or something and shooting is bad.

          Are steel shot required for water fowl everywhere or is that an Alaska requirement too? And it is only a matter of time before they get the lead weights used in fishing; they’ve already become hideously expensive.

          • snowshooze

            I think it is just required for wetlands.
            Is that the Palmer indoor range closed?
            I thought when we lost the Anchorage one, it was due to the cost of insurance.

          • Achance

            now out in the Mendenhall Valley, the part of Juneau that is actually in Alaska. But it had to be done with no involvement from our ever-so politically correct city government. Even then the Greenies bitched about lead flying through the air near the glacier. I’d like to show them some lead flying through the air.

    • eastbaylarry

      This article speaks in glowing terms about all the research and testing, but does not mention what this new ammo uses for metal.

      I hope it’s depleted uranium…

      • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

        But it can’t be all that difficult for a halfway decent metalurgist to work up with a partner into composites and synthetics. I’ll get hold of two guys I know who do that kind of thing and ask ‘em.

        However, considering where the initial shipments are going, I think the projectile should be made out of bacon and heavily advertised as such.

        • jimmyg

          http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=129512&sectionid=351020601The British MOD found that lead bullets went through and through in 5.65 bullets and went to lead free in that it has more stopping power.

          • strategerist

            No offense, but that article is confused.

            First, if they are not using lead (and presumably not gold or depleted uranium either), then the bullets are going to be lighter. for a given volume.

            Now they seem to have accounted for that by saying they are making the bullets “longer” but you can’t just make a cartridge longer and expect it to function in the same weapons.

            As far as the existing bullets not being “deadly” enough, there are different theories on bullet design and function. Either you design the bullet to penetrate by making it pointy and rigid or you design the bullet to flatten and deliver it’s kinetic energy into the target.

            Bullets that offer high penetration tend to do less damage to soft tissue compared to bullets that flatten and deform (like a hollow point pistol round or a soft tip hunting round). These bullets create high cavitation wounds that do more damage and more hydrostatic shock which is more likely to reduce the targets capacity to respond.

            In war, you typically want more penetration as your targets may be armored or behind cover and concealment. It is well known among shooters that if you use high penetration rounds, shot placement becomes even more important.

            Maybe the Brits just need more time on the range?

          • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

            One thing though. This round is designed for none of that.

            It’s designed to specs by the same people who shut off the water in The San Joaquin Valley to protect The Delta Smelt.

            They ‘care about the environment’ much more than they care about the safety and protection of our military forces – who they think are all evil killers anyway.

          • SteveLA

            Kenny

            As I said above, I’m not a gun guy, so show me some test data where the new bullet is not effective, then I’ll agree. If the bullet is no good, you got a point, but where’s the data?

            Green is not necessarily bad, given the costs to clean up military installations due to being stupid in the past on environmental stuff. That clean up stuff costs real money that can be used to fighting, not cleaning up messes made.

          • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

            …..and the numbers are fudged by teh gubmint to force their point and they make a big spectacle of it all…………..that data ain’t gonna see the public light of day.

            No way.

            No how.

            It’s green.

            It’s now.

            It’s wow.

            “It;’s for the children.”

          • SteveLA

            Kenny

            Leaks on this sort of stuff happen all the time, far as test data. If this round is a bum, then word would get out. Too darn many people involved for it not too.

            Green is not a bad word always, now you want to talk cost, and what the cost metrics are for this new green round on a per round basis, you might have a point. Green ain’t cheap.

          • Achance

            to wound and incapacitate rather than kill? It was of vital interest to me at the time because I had flunked out of school and was 1-A and there was all this controversy about the new M-16. I know there was a lot of theorizing about how wounding a guy took three or four guys off the front line whereas just killing him took one guy off the front line.

            I understand that theory when you’re dealing with real live, state organized military units, but it doesn’t work well with guerillas and it doesn’t work at all with Muslim fanatics. When dealing with crazy people, I’m a real fan of one shot, dead!

            I have a .223 because it is a handy personal defense weapon and ammunition is relatively cheap and readily available. If I ever had a band of zombies coming down my street, I’d reach for it, but if they got close, I’d reach for my Mossberg. And I would keep my .58 Enfield musket loaded too; its a pretty sure kill at a couple of hundred yards with anything like a good shot. He might take a while to die, but he wouldn’t get up under his own power.

        • eastbaylarry

          Lead ‘polution’ on the battlefiend is not a significant problem. Even the longest, most intense battles won’t cause a significant increase in the lead content of the neighborhood.
          Practice ranges where hundreds of thousands of rounds will be used call for ‘green’, i.e. lead-free rounds, but on the battlefield effectiveness is the only consideration.

          But maybe a ‘bacon grease’ based gun lube or ammo preservative would be a good idea.

          • JSobieski

            Might make fewer Jihadists willing to oppose the US military.

  • oblio

    it might cost more, and war is about economics as well as strategy and tactics. Where shall we stop, missile propellants that cost more so they don’t pollute, hybrid tanks, windmill powered tactical aircraft? Kill them fast, and economically.

    • Achance

      was in large measure caused by the brittleness and fragility of the insulating foam on the fuel tank. The original formula had to be abandoned because it used CFCs and the new green foam isn’t nearly as strong; that’s why chunks fly off and knock holes in the Space Shuttle.

      • SteveLA

        Art

        It was actually the O rings on the SRB that brought down Challenger. The O rings got cold, lost sealing capabilities and did not seal the SRB properly, happened on the launch before Challenger too (Discovery STS 51C), but not bad enough to cause the damage that took out Challenger.

        Columbia’s loss was the result of tank debris hitting the tiles.

        • Achance

          Yeah, the foam was the deal with Columbia, not Challenger. Had the misfortune of seeing them both live; having breakfast in a hotel restaurant in Sitka when somebody yelled “Oh, S&*t” and turned to watch CNN when Challenger exploded. Just happened to have the TV on with Columbia.

  • http://www.800cart.com Ron Robinson

    …that should tell you something important. The Marines are going with what they call a ‘more deadly’ round named SOST.

    I was in the Army and will always make fun of Jarheads, but one thing I know the Marines have always done better than the army is take care of the troops better with certain critical combat equipment/supplies. This may be one of those.

    The article Kenny links is just a bunch of feelgood happytalk issued by the Picatinny Public Affairs Office (the lab that tested the round)

    More balanced discussion begins here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=510226
    and here:
    http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/20100601.aspx

    Apparently the new green round is all copper with a steel tip and while it looks like a bonded hunting-typew round, it apparently is not.

    The new SOST round *is* a bonded core hunting type bullet (where a polymer tip expands the bullet into a big mushroom on contact) and is reportedly more accurate and more deadly than either of the other two M855 rounds.

    Looks like what will happen is that combat reports will reveal that this round is just as bad as the one before and everyone will finally get the SOST (Special Ops Science & Technology) round.

    • http://www.dcworksforus.com Kenny Solomon

      Frangible garbage for a full combat round.

      Figures.

      That kind of thing is for my non-rifled-bore Remington 12-ga Tactical and the HD shells…… and they’re fantastic in the shotty.

      But that’s not for combat over any kind of distance over 50 ft.

      The Teams better turn down that round too.

      Watch every mil unit get ordered to……… nah, this administration can’t be THAT hell-bent on starting “it”, can they ?

  • snowshooze

    Heavier than lead..
    carries energy to more distant ranges..
    Hey, if you are on the job to kill someone, why even try to pretend to be nice?
    THEIR IS NO SECOND PLACE WINNER IN A GUNFIGHT.
    Just sayin…

  • http://www.800cart.com Ron Robinson

    …and if Picatinny really wanted to convince the troops (or us) that this is a really effective round, they should have done the press release with a pic of what happens to the bullet in ballistics gel (hell even Mythbusters can document tests with ballistics gel).

    Since it’s steel and copper, I think we are going to hear a lot more reports of thru-and-thru hits that barely slow the enemy down…. Besides, what good does the round do if you finally get it thru the windshield, but it still doesn’t have enough energy left to cause a good wound?

    They should just go with the 7.62/.308 – it’s a very good round!

    …and that depleted uranium… as much as I love it, only causes claims at the VA hospital years after the war, so it’s not worth it. No sense in taking a chance on killing our vets years later.

  • cactusjack

    there is a bigger problem here that doesn’t get mentioned. Readers not familiar with guns need to understand, a 5.56mm round, is bascially a .22 caliber – that’s right, it’s the diameter of a training rifle for your 13 year old, a target rifle. Yes, yes, I know all about NATO standardization, volume of fire, etc., etc., but ask any veteran from Iraq (and I think Afghanistan), when the going gets tough in shoot outs in certain places, what does our infantry fall back on? You see, the 5.56mm just doesn’t have kick through power on cinderblocks or other common building material over there, which the bad guys hide behind. Our guys call on “MaDeuce,” the venerable .50 caliber heavy machine gun, and if they’re lucky enough to have one in the squad, an M14 rifle. What do those two have in common? they are both WW2 technology, essentially. The .50 cal dates almost back to WW1, in fact, and the M14 is an automatic version of the famous M1 30.06 Garand rifle. My son, in a unit I shall not name, which may soon be deployed, has told me he does not have to use the standard issue M-16 (or what they cal it now), he can take his own, meaning an M-14. I have told him I’ll pay for it, it he is good at using it, dad will sleep better. Because of all the above, I been suspicious of the military requisitioning process for some years now when it comes to a main battle rifle. Some would even argue, once upon a time 5.56mm cost us a war when the enemy stayed with the harder hitting 7.62mm (.30 cal).

  • indccc

    is that the shell casings can not be reloaded. The used shells of conventional ammo from training ranges is usually collected (range clean-up duty was sometimes used as punishment) and sold to those who want to load their own ammo. Since that will no longer be possible there will likely be a shortage of ammo which will raise the price.

    It’s all about making it harder to defend ourselves.

    Also, I”ve been told by parents of deployed soldiers that they have been using green ammo in Iraq and Afghanistan for several months, at least. Not sure why they are just now getting around to announcing it.