223 FMJ designed to tumble (explained)

Originally Posted By: MPFDOriginally Posted By: zillaYou guys are all over the map on this one.. It is not in the Geneva convention. But it is in the Haugue convention of 1907.. and it states:
"…it is especially forbidden -

To employ arms, projectiles, or material{sic} calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;"




So where do the videos floating around on the internet of people being blown to pieces like Praire dogs with a 50BMG in Afganistan fall into that? Video's with arms and legs flying hundreds of feet up in the air and falling back down. Not being disrepectful to the military folks in this thread, just intrested.

Are those the same "Taliban" that are in this video that has circled the web for several years as 50 caliber sniper kills in Afghanistan. They are actually rock chucks being shot.

http://www.notoriouslyconservative.com/2009/04/us-snipers-taking-out-taliban-with-50.html

DAA/RMVS.com has the same video....

http://www.rmvh.com/Movies/ChucksShort3.wmv

-BCB
 
I got that first video in an e mail labeled Afganistan 50BMG kills, with the first 15 seconds cut off. The first shot it showed was the cross hairs and then the "show" Good to know, thanks.
 
Originally Posted By: MPFDOriginally Posted By: zillaYou guys are all over the map on this one.. It is not in the Geneva convention. But it is in the Haugue convention of 1907.. and it states:
"…it is especially forbidden -

To employ arms, projectiles, or material{sic} calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;"




So where do the videos floating around on the internet of people being blown to pieces like Praire dogs with a 50BMG in Afganistan fall into that? Video's with arms and legs flying hundreds of feet up in the air and falling back down. Not being disrepectful to the military folks in this thread, just intrested.
Not xactly sure of the video you are referring to but the one I've seen several times on the internet labeled 'Snipers taking out targets with .50 cal.' was actually a guy shooting rockchucks in Utah with a .338 mag & blowing them to pieces.
I may have the caliber wrong but it was entertaining none the less.
Just my xperiance.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Bob TobergteOriginally Posted By: MPFDOriginally Posted By: zillaYou guys are all over the map on this one.. It is not in the Geneva convention. But it is in the Haugue convention of 1907.. and it states:
"…it is especially forbidden -

To employ arms, projectiles, or material{sic} calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;"




So where do the videos floating around on the internet of people being blown to pieces like Praire dogs with a 50BMG in Afganistan fall into that? Video's with arms and legs flying hundreds of feet up in the air and falling back down. Not being disrepectful to the military folks in this thread, just intrested.
Not xactly sure of the video you are referring to but the one I've seen several times on the internet labeled 'Snipers taking out targets with .50 cal.' was actually a guy shooting rockchucks in Utah with a .338 mag & blowing them to pieces.
Just my xperiance.

IIRC, it was a 6MM PPC. I do remember it was a 6MM bore. The video is actually part of and was a leader for one of DAA's Varmint Safari videos. But a lot of folks got a lot of Taliban mileage out of it...

-BCB
 
The 'internet' is quite a place.
Cant dispute you BCB. Now that you mention the cal. I believe the first time I watched it, was a 6mm sumpin but got bigger as it went on. Very good & I stand corrected.
 
Originally Posted By: ShynlocoSSGTWALSH,
First thank you for your service to our country. Secondly you COMPLETED jumped to an incorrect conclusion in my meaning. I am very familiar with the Geneva Convention and the fact our country lives by and follows those rule. If you read what I wrote, you could see it in plain print. Perhaps my sarcasm may have confused you. My reference was intended for striking conflicts in idelogy.

And as to your suggestion about going down to the Recruiting Station and signing on the dotted line, I did EXACTLY that in August, 1966. And ever heard of a conflict called Vietnam? I left a bunch of my buddies there because Charlie didn't follow the rules of the Geneva Convention. And just for further clarification, I served on active duty for 4 1/2 years. And after I got out, I spent the next 31+ years as a Police Officer. Many of those years I worked as a Homicide Investigator and have seen more than my fair share of death and mangled bodies. So before you try and put me down IN PUBLIC with bold statements on an internet blog, I might suggest you check and see what exactly was said and the background of the person stating his opinion.

Finally, I am extremely pleased you returned home safely. I have two son's who have served in Iraq, one presently in Afghanistan and a son-law- who is about to go to Afghanistan for the first time after two tours of Iraq. You see my entire family has and does serve our country proudly. We always have because this remains to be the finest country on the planet of this earth.

Happy shooting and reloadin!

i did not mean to over-read your statement, was merely trying to clarify. i meant no harm and did not realize that you were leaning toward sarcasm. i as much as anyone can appreciate your contributions to society and appreciate you clarifying it for the rest of us. jsut seems like now days there are so many armchair and internet warriors that it is hard to find out who is real and who is not. didnt know if you were a left wing zealot who wants nothing but peace on earth and thinks the world is nothing but sunshine and lollipops and have never seen what the real world is like. alot of the guys who "think" they know what they are talking about have never left thier home town, much less left to go and fight and possibly die for someone elses reasons. no harm intended, just confusion on my part.
 
a lot of good reading on this one not sure who is right, all i know is that if i was over in the sand box right now , iwould be callin' somebody 2 send me some 55g. nosler ballistic tips please!
 
There are a lot of misconceptions and basic untruths about 5.56 M193 (55 gr FMJ) M855 (62gr. FMJ) ammunition. I’ve lifted some info from the archives of the AR15 Ammo oracle which for those wanting to learn more about military type ammo is a great place to go and read.


“Unlike most FMJ rounds, M193 and M855's primary wounding mechanism is fragmentation. This is a good thing because without fragmentation these rounds otherwise would act like a ice pick and cause very little damage because of their small size. At the proper velocity, both M855 and M193 strike flesh and immediately begin to yaw (tumble). Contrary to rumor and popular media belief, this is not unique to these rounds. All FMJ bullets with tapered noses will tumble in flesh with enough velocity, because their center of gravity is aft of their length center--causing them to want to travel "tail first" in denser mediums (like water and tissue).

If the rounds are moving fast enough when they yaw to about 90 degrees of their original trajectory the stress on the bullet from traveling sideways through a dense medium (tissue) will overcome the structural integrity of the bullet and it will start to break up.

If the velocity is high enough this breaking up is pretty dramatic and causes equally dramatic wounds. This is because the fragments travel rapidly through the temporarily crushed tissue and tear it. Most tissue is very elastic and will stretch quite far before returning to its normal shape (this is called the temporary crush cavity) but the addition of quickly moving fragments makes permanent the cavity that might otherwise have returned after the impact and therefore creates a much larger wound.

The most significant difference between M193 and M855 is that inside 100 meters or so M193 will yaw more quickly and fragment more substantially than M855. M193 also tends to be more accurate under 100 meters or so. M855, by virtue of its greater length, tends to catch up with M193 speed of yaw and degree of fragmentation outside of 100-150 meters or so. Unless you live in an area that is very open, flat, and not populated, the chances are far greater that you'll need effective close-range performance a lot more than the increased long distance performance that M855 is designed for.”


If you'd like more information check this website out:

Ammo Oracle
 
SSGT Walsh,
I apologize for causing such a stir. My wife has told me several times not to stir the pot with sarcasm. Perhaps now you know how I got my Moniker. In fact, one of my partners had a famous saying, "You ain't wired right!" Another partner gave me a sign at my retirement dinner that hangs over my desk today. It reads, "Cowboys are like the weather...nothing can change either one of them!" And the last thing I could ever be is a "bleeding heart liberal." I've even been accused of being related to Atila the Hun. But we do need some liberals (not alot) around just to keep things on an even keel and so everyone has someone to dislike. And by the way, I've not taken offense to any of your statement.
And I seriously thank you for your commitment to serving our nation. I have always been blessed and thankful for my military service, service to the community, and all those years of helping me grow and appreciate life. The United States Army helped me grow up real fast. From a sheltered life as a teenager and joining at age 18, I learned quickly the truth that there are no ribbons for second place either on the battlefield or in a street fight. But a few of those ribbons came with horrors and a reality most couldn't even begin to imagine. In spite of those times, I try to maintain a happy and positive outlook on life.

Finally, I am EXTREMELY proud of all the men and women in our Armed Services and grateful for their commitment.

God Bless my friend and stay safe!
 
Originally Posted By: OKRattlerI heard that the reason the Military uses FMJ bullets is to wound people instead of kill them.If they wound someone it takes two to carry that person off of the battle field.So with that one bullet wound they are basically taking 3 people off of the battle field.I'm sure they do tumble but I did'nt know they were designed to do that.
I dont know if what I just said is true or not but I heard thats the reason the military uses FMJ's.

This is what I heard too. Its not that they dont' want to kill you but it just kills you slower again to take more people out of the fight. A hit with a FMJ may take a while to bleed out, even though the guy probably is no longer fighting his buddy is trying to help. If ya hit someone with a V-max or soft point he'd probably dieing instantly when his guts explode.
 
Originally Posted By: CraigI really doubt that the FMJ used in the military are designed to tumble when they hit flesh.

Can anyone offer an explanation as to how you would make a bullet tumble on contact without making it very inaccurate? I'm not talking about the odd bullet tumbling or doing something weird, we all know that once in a while a bullet will act unpredictably when it strikes a target. I'm talking about how one would make a bullet tumble predictably when it strikes a target, and at the same time be accurate.


Well as I understood it in the army's rifle marksmanship class it goes like this. People tend to think that when we say the M16's bullet was designed to tumble, they think "OMG! it toumbles right out of the barrel! that cant be!" well get that out of your head right now and LISTEN TO WHAT I SAY. Cause I am gona esplain as best as I can with out a picture to show you.
The M16's bullet is pretty much like any of the African Solid big game slugs. Its got a Full Metal jacket and a lead core. It comes out of the barrel spinning for stabilization like any other bullet when properly matched to the rifle. IE WE ARE NOT TUMBLING YET once you under stand that move on, if not go back and try again. No pass, no go here.
The difference *again as I remember it* is that they m16's FMJ has a hallow void and the front and the rear of the bullet. In between is a spherical lead "ball" if you will thats been mashed in there. Get it?
Once the bullet hits some thing of sufficient density *IE A enemy soldier* that LEAD ball will come loose due to inertia. It will come to the very front of the nose cone. Their is now void only behind this lead part, none in front.
The cg is now sufficiently f*ed up that it is ready to tumble. Seeing as its all ready spinning *this is in MY range only experience* the bullet will want to TUMBLE in the direction of the spin. we are now inside said badie and we are TUMBLING now. I repeat, WE ARE TUMBLING NOW NOT BEFORE. Ok?
Now it is barrel rolling, you do know what that maneuver is right? Now I will really blow your mind.
This bullet was actually designed to ricochet off the internals of a person starting at the boiler room and working its way south.
It is said these bullets will often come out at the foot, and not straight into the dirt. These bad boys aint done yet, they will come out parallel to the ground and they will bounce off it untill they run out of steam or hit another person. This is why they are banned from hunting use.
DO NOT USE THEM FOR HUNTING. If they still got some steam in them then then they could come back and bite you in the [beeep] end, LITERALLY!!! OK? /end confusion hopefully.
 
Secondly I just had to correct this.
They Genevia conventions do not say any thing about what the mil. can or can not use in a legal war.
It addresses mainly the treatment of COBS. COBS are Civies On the Battlefield.
In the Hague conventions they outlined weapons that could not be used. Only "1st world" nations pay it any attention though.
Really Hague only really outlines weapons that were inefficient or ineffective and were on their way out any ways.
Nice little trick we played on the Libbies there aint it?

Thanks,
Ze Stallion
 
As I understand the phenomena, a boat-tail bullet "wants" to travel nose first in air (aerodynamics), but wants to travel tail first in denser medium (hydrodynamics). It is the transition from one to the other that causes the "tumbling" effect. This effect comes, not from design, but from experience (boat-tail bullets have been in use for a long time), and accidental discovery of after effects. (Think penicillin)
Mark
 
for those who are to young to remember & for those who are old enuf but weren't paying attention...when the 5.56 was being toted by its supporters it was claimed that this "miracle" cartridge would kill any enemy with any hit any on any body part...even in the hand...to many myths...rumors...and they're still with us.
 
Fisrt, we are not bound to use FMJ and we never signed anything saying we would. Special force teams use hollow points all the time.

As to the 223 tumble. When the first version of the AR came out it had a 1 in 14" twist. At tempuratures aboev 30 degrees the bulle is stable. Below 30 degrees the bullets would keyhole.

Second, anyone that has shot ballistic gel can tell you all bullets regardless os shape or style try to "tumble" as they slow down. Even round balls fired from muzzle loader or cap and ball pistols end up nose pointing down a lot of the time. Many end up nose pointing towards the shooter. The FMJ doesn't have anything up front to resist the tumble so you see it quite often in gel. It is not tumbling as many suppose it is. Often it is only one revolution, as is true with other bullet designs.

As to fragmenting FMJ. There were military FMJ that has air space just under the tip. Hits at high speed cause them to cave in and act as hollow points. Durring one of the wars someone cried foul and quite a bit of research went into finding out why it appeared some groups were using HPs. Most of the very good FMJ available to the public do not have that air space and unless you hit bone they are likely to drill a nice neat hole. If you fine FMJ from a company that does expand buy all of that lot you can.
smile.gif
 
?????? I'm goin to haf to give up this shootin sport stuff. For the life of me, I cant find the top or bottom of my round balls!!!??????
 
There really isn’t any magic involved in the fragmentation of the 55 grain fmj in M193 or the 62grain M855 spec ammo. It really wasn’t planned into the round it simply happened because of the way the bullet handled the stresses of impact, when it hit flesh and yawed, started sideways travel, the structure of the bullet failed and it broke into pieces or fragmented.

Any M193 spec ammo should frag as long as its velocity is above 2700 some fragmentation will occur to 2600 fps.

Distance to 2700 fps 20" Brl 16" Brl 14.5" Brl 11.5" Brl
M193 -- 55 grain 190-200m 140-150m 95-100m 40-45m
M855 -- 62 grain 140-150m 90-95m 45-50m 12-15m

Beyond the fragmentation range the bullet will be much more likely to pencil though the target. So the key to performance is muzzle velocity and the short barrels ie: the M4 cause a decrease in MV and therefore a decrease in the effective fragmentation range.

Not all FMJ ammo will fragment. Anything that is loaded to M193 or M855 specs should fragment as long as there is enough velocity.
 
I don't believe there is anything stated in the Hague or Geneva Conventions that specifically "outlaws" or prohibiits any particular kind of projectile.

BTW, the US is not a signator to the Geneva Convention, FWIW.

Humane bullets is an oxymoron!

Spire point bullets do not need to be "designed" to tumble in flesh. All sharp pointed fmj bullets will lose their forward stability and roll over in flesh. Some immediately, some will take four to six inches of penetration. They lose "stability" in flesh the same way an underspun bullet loses stability in the air. The longer and pointier the bullet the more easily it will "tumble" in flesh.

"Tumble" is not a very good word to describe what happens. It evokes the idea that the bullet is rolling over and over end to end. It does not. It settles immediately into a sideways orientation with the base (the heavy end) forward. An fmj traveling sideways is very destructive!

African big game bullets designed for straight and long penetration are not pointy. They are abruptly round nose or RNFP designs to prevent them from rolling over and to aid in achieving penetration.

The M193 bullet fragments as explained above and at the velocities explained above. It tends to break into pieces from the cannelure forward. When it does not fragment it is not a very good stopper whether it "tumbles" or not!

The brits on the ground are begging for something larger than the 5.56 NATO. Politicians and the brass ignore them! They complain that it is inneffective at the 500 to 900 meter ranges that they are engaging at in Afghanistan.

And, FWIW, the tumbling bullets from the first M16 rifles were real. Twist rates were inadequate. The rifle was thrown into RSVN combat before it was ready.

I packed an M14 then and if I had to go again today I'd want an M14 or AR10 in hand.
 
Longcruise,
African big game bullets are called "solids" not FMJ because they are Solid through and through. No voids with in it at all.
The M16's bullet was as I described it. say what you want but I SAW what it will do when it smacks into some thing of sufficient density.
The great thing about that bullet was that you could shoot both un armored and armored soldiers and could then expect a kill.

To all: while the original M16's rifling may have been inadequate, the A2 and M4 were not. All this gobbelde gook about "I saw a guy empty a whole clip point blank and it did nothing" is just stupid rumor. The bullets work as advertised, and the job they do is good enough.

If this isn't good enough then revel in your ignorance because I am done here. I tried to help and instead some one decided to pop off at the mouth with some hill billy made up bull. Jesshhhhh
 
Back
Top