US Marines to get new "deadlier" bullets

[TxD]

Open tip not hollow point.

"The Marine Corps is dropping its conventional 5.56mm ammunition in Afghanistan in favor of new deadlier, more accurate rifle rounds, and could field them at any time."

http://www.navytimes.com/news/2010/02/m ... o_021510w/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[grad_Student]

Pretty cool, here's an image

[The Annoyed Man]

Open tip not hollow point.

Not sure what the difference is, other than semantics.

[MoJo]

Open tip not hollow point.

Very fine line between the two. I applaud the USMC for fielding a more effective round. The M855 works just not as well as we'd like it was designed to penetrate hard barriers and in that role it shines.

[TxD]

Open tip not hollow point.

Not sure what the difference is, other than semantics.

I don't know the difference either but it is a very important difference.

From the article:
"Open-tip bullets have been approved for use by U.S. forces for decades, but are sometimes confused with hollow-point rounds, which expand in human tissue after impact, causing unnecessary suffering, according to widely accepted international treaties signed following the Hague peace conventions held in the Netherlands in 1899 and 1907."

“We need to be very clear in drawing this distinction: This is not a hollow-point round, which is not permitted,” Brogan said. “It has been through law of land warfare review and has passed that review so that it meets the criteria of not causing unnecessary pain and suffering.”

[joe817]

I don't know the difference either but it is a very important difference.

Unless I'm missing something the difference is pretty obvious. Opened tip is exactly that. The very tip top of the bullet is still conical in shape, but the tip of the lead core is exposed...still in the conical configuration.

Hollow point: imagine the tip of a FMJ bullet, and slice about 1/8" or 1/4" off the top of the bullet perpendicular to the axis, exposing the lead. Then drill a hole in the center of lead of the bullet, straight down the center axis of the bullet a little ways. Thus making the point of the bullet somewhat hollow.

A crude description, but this is how I envision it.

[WildBill]

Here are some illustrations of the "open tip" bullet. The lead core is solid, but the copper jacket, with or without the polymer insert retains the contour of the spitzer tip. http://www.locusmedius.com/2006/01/open_point_bull.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TxD]

Thanks for the link, WildBill.

[The Annoyed Man]

I don't know the difference either but it is a very important difference.

Unless I'm missing something the difference is pretty obvious. Opened tip is exactly that. The very tip top of the bullet is still conical in shape, but the tip of the lead core is exposed...still in the conical configuration.

Hollow point: imagine the tip of a FMJ bullet, and slice about 1/8" or 1/4" off the top of the bullet perpendicular to the axis, exposing the lead. Then drill a hole in the center of lead of the bullet, straight down the center axis of the bullet a little ways. Thus making the point of the bullet somewhat hollow.

A crude description, but this is how I envision it.

Understood, and I'm not arguing the effectiveness of the new round, nor the necessity of it. I think it's a good choice. I just think that it is really a matter of semantics, because anybody can look at the new bullet and see that it will expand just like any hollow point. I like the 165 grain Federal Fusion ammo for my .308 rifles in a hunting application.

In any case, the Fusion hunting bullet matches your description, and here's what it looks like after use, on the left, with the above provided picture of the new military bullet on the right:


That's what I meant by "semantics."

[joe817]

Understand TAM. Please don't think my comment was meant as condescending, as it certainly wasn't meant to be. Apologies if it appeared to be so.

Looking at the cross section, it STILL does not resemble a hollow point bullet, although the expansion characteristic of the other picture appears to be that of a hollow point bullet. Sooooo.....I dunno.

Then again, I'm no ballistics expert by any means. Heck, I barely know even how to spell it!

[The Annoyed Man]

Understand TAM. Please don't think my comment was meant as condescending, as it certainly wasn't meant to be. Apologies if it appeared to be so.

Looking at the cross section, it STILL does not resemble a hollow point bullet, although the expansion characteristic of the other picture appears to be that of a hollow point bullet. Sooooo.....I dunno.

Then again, I'm no ballistics expert by any means. Heck, I barely know even how to spell it!

Joe, no offense taken. I was just pointing out that A) the terminal ballistics appear to be the same as any hunting bullet; and that B) it in fact closely resembles an actual hunting bullet produced by Federal.

One thing I am curious about is the significance of this bullet design with regard to the Hague Convention, to which I believe the U.S. to be a signatory. Declaration III of the Hague Convention of 1899 says:

"The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions."

I don't give a rip about the Hague Convention, but I am curious as to how the JAG Corps arrived at the decision that this particular bullet design was acceptable under the Hague strictures, which we agreed to as a nation, given that it is a bullet "with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core..."

[flintknapper]

No more "Mr. Nice Guy".



Works...for me.

[The Annoyed Man]

No more "Mr. Nice Guy".



Works...for me.

Agreed.

[mbw]

There is a good detailed explanation of how the round meets the requirements of the Geneva Convention in the original article. Follow the link-

Military snipers have been using the Sierra Match King for a long time, it also is an open tip bullet. It is not a bullet that is designed to explosively expand like a regular hollow point round you might use in a pistol. The open tip is for downrange ballistics, it flies better that a closed tip. Don't ask me how, it just does.

[MoJo]

There is a good detailed explanation of how the round meets the requirements of the Geneva Convention in the original article. Follow the link-

Military snipers have been using the Sierra Match King for a long time, it also is an open tip bullet. It is not a bullet that is designed to explosively expand like a regular hollow point round you might use in a pistol. The open tip is for downrange ballistics, it flies better that a closed tip. Don't ask me how, it just does.

Long streamlined bullets shoot more accurately at long range than short blunt ones. The Sierra Match King bullet, in it's first generation, was called the International. It showed exceptional accuracy over other bullets of the same weight because the bullet was longer than conventional bullets because of the open tip. This had another benefit it caused the bullet to be slightly base heavy adding to the high accuracy potential. The bullets were never designed to be expanding bullets some hunters tried them with dismal results. If you note in the "Navy Times" article it mentions "fragmentation." Any Spitzer (pointed) bullet, if traveling fast enough, will tumble in the target. The longer and more weight to the rear a bullet has the more likely it is to tumble and break up causing multiple wound channels. The 55gr M193 bullet for the 5.56 round is famous for tumbling and fragmenting. There are a lot of factors that enter into terminal ballistics other than open or closed tip.