Note from JWR:

Three days left! The special 33% off sale on the “Rawles Gets You Ready” preparedness course, from Arbogast Publishing is ending soon. To get the special sale price, all orders must be placed online or postmarked by November 30th. Get a copy for yourself, or one or more to give as Christmas gifts for your relatives that have their heads in the sand.

Letter Re: Detecting the Presence or Absence of Grid Power

Editor:
If your retreat is isolated and you can not see any of your neighbors buildings, then how do you know when the power grid is back on (re-energized)? That might not be clear, so this is what happens: We have many power outages per year, which can last from hours to days, last year power was out for (9) nine days. So I disconnect from the grid, and start the generator. I have no way to know when the line is fixed. And with the price of fuel; I am wondering is there some do-dad, thing-a-ma-gig, like a light I could mount in a tree near the main line that would pick up electromagnetic energy when the line is hot. Or some trick one of your readers may know about. Thank you, – D.V.

JWR Replies: Here are a few possible solutions for you:

1.) Most of the common transfer switches for home generator sets (“gensets”) do not disconnect the grid power. Instead, the switch is in a sub-panel box with breakers for several circuits that you want energized all the time. It acts as a “mains” disconnect for that sub-panel only. Unless you have a large genset capable of powering everything in your house, then that is typically just your refrigerator-freezer and a few lights. Therefore, any electrical devices or lights that are on the other circuits will be energized when the grid power is restored. You can simply leave a table lamp and a radio on one of these circuits, both switched in the “on” position. The light and radio will come on when the grid power is restored. This of course won’t be possible if you have one of the very basic “Wylie E. Coyote” or “Disaster Cord” type system without a dedicated sub-panel. (I DO NOT recommend this type of arrangement!)

Important Safety Note: As previously mentioned in SurvivalBlog, it is absolutely essential that you do not inadvertently “back feed” the grid power line, or you might accidentally fry the hapless utility employee that is working on restoring your power!

2.) Many power meters have a status light, showing that the incoming grid power line is “hot.” The easiest solution is to ask your local utility if they have any meter boxes available with status lights. They may be able to install one of these for you free of charge or at nominal cost.

3.) If your utility can’t or won’t install a meter panel with a status light, then any qualified journeyman-level electrician could rig a status light the meter box that should meet the approval of your local power utility. (Of course be sure to ask, first, since utilities have a long tradition of suspicion of any modifications to meter panels. They don’t like giving power away!)

4.) If your utility doesn’t allow an indicator light at the meter panel, then you can have one rigged at your indoor breaker panel to show the presence of “mains”external power. It can be something as simple as a small neon tube. No muss, no fuss. Again, any electrician can do this for you in just a few minutes if you let them know what you need in advance of when they come to your house.

For those if us that live in the boonies that have photovoltaics or other alternate power sources, there is also an inverse corollary to your question: detecting when the grid power goes off. (Many of us wouldn’t notice, otherwise.) I found a web site with a fairly simple power failure alarm circuit diagram and assembly instructions. (This is a little more complicated than just showing the presence of grid power. To announce the loss of grid power requires a relay and a battery, as well as a lamp or some sort of alarm horn/buzzer/annunciator.)

I should mention that there is nothing like the joy of watching a power meter run backwards–knowing that for more than half of of each year that the power company will be paying you for power. Selling power back to power utility is possible throughout the United States. However, most pay you only the “avoided cost” rate–typically 2 or 3 cents per kilowatt hour–rather than at the same rate that you buy it from them. The latter is called “net metering” or “net billing.” The utilities that presently pay at the net metering rate are in the minority, but I predict that it will be legislatively mandated within a few years.

There are essentially three types of photovoltaic (PV) power systems: 1.) Stand-alone, 2.) Grid-tied, and 3.) Grid-connected but stand-alone capable. Of the three, the only type that I do not recommend is grid-tied. These systems–typically without a battery bank–leave you vulnerable whenever the power grid goes down. If you want to sell power back to your utility, yet still be self-sufficient, then I recommend that you install “grid-connected but stand-alone capable” system. (The same would apply to wind power and micro-hydro systems.) For details on alternate energy system hardware, siting/exposure, and system sizing, contact Ready Made Resources. They graciously offer alternate energy system consulting free of charge.

Letter Re: Locations of Costco and Other “Big Box” Membership Stores

Jim,
I often see references [in SurvivalBlog] to Costco [stores]. I have never seen one of their stores. Are they in Canada? I did a search, that was the only place within 50 miles of here that they have a store. – Sid, near Niagara Falls

JWR Replies: There are now Costco stores throughout the United States and selected locations in Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Taiwan, and the UK. Here is a locator web page for Costco stores. Another “big box” membership store chain with a very similar product selection are the Sam’s Club stores. Here is a locator map for Sam’s Club stores. (They seem to have more locations in upstate New York than Costco.)

OBTW, I describe shopping at “Big Box’ stores for storage foods, cleaning supplies, and other retreat logistics essentials in my “Rawles Gets You Ready” preparedness course

Letter Re: The Upright Spike in Technology Dependence–Changing “Grid-Down” from an Inconvenience to TEOTWAWKI

Jim:
I had to laugh when I read this in your recent SurvivalBlog article: “Well, let’s just hope that Boise, Idaho is not a nuclear target. That way, presumably Micron Technology can re-seed the world with chips. (That is, if they will still have a fab facility in Boise. Most chip makers are in the process of outsourcing their fabs. Many of them are being offshored to China .)”

I’m a mid-level manager in the computer industry. In the past month we have interviewed two engineers currently employed by Micron Technology. They are looking for jobs because “the place is getting ready to send most of their production overseas.” I asked how soon. “Two years at the latest, then they will no longer be profitable with 200mm wafers and will need to switch over to 300mm wafers. Which means a new production facility and the old one can’t be reused. Even the buildings are too short to work with the new wafer [production] design.” So a whole new plant needs to be built and they are already talking about how Micron needs to be “closer to the customer to compete.” Most of their customers are in China and Asia. Best Regards,- B.

Odds ‘n Sods:

When banking is in crisis, no one wants to be parted from their cash

   o o o

RBS sent us this: Banks Gone Wild by Paul Krugman of The New York Times. And for even more financial gloom and doom, see: “A Generalized Meltdown of Financial Institutions” But wait, there’s more, courtesy of reader SJC: Investors fear new turmoil

   o o o

Both Markus and Carl suggested a link to an article on the 100 things that disappeared in Sarajevo during the war. Carl’s comment: “It is a great list for beginning preps and a gut check for everyone else.” Coincidentally, RBS sent us these two links: A Cookbook for War and The Sarajevo Survival Guide.

   o o o

Safecastle is having a 45% off closeout sale (for Safecastle Royal buyer’s club members) on all Maxpedition gear presently in stock.

Jim’s Quote of the Day:

"I, however, place economy among the first and most important republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared." – Thomas Jefferson

Note from JWR:

The 33% off sale for the “Rawles Gets You Ready” preparedness course ends in just four days. Be sure to place your order online, or have it postmarked no later than Friday, November 30th.

The Upright Spike in Technology Dependence–Changing “Grid-Down” from an Inconvenience to TEOTWAWKI

If someone were to construct a chart showing human dependence on technology, it would portray an essentially a flat line from Biblical Times to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. From there, there the line would curve upward slightly until the 1890s, when the line would tilt up to perhaps a 10 degree slope. The curve would further steepen in the 1950s (with the advent of computers). The line would then turn into an almost upright spike, starting in the 1990s.

In this new era, with each passing year, our dependence of electronic technologies grows greater and greater. Some technologies, such as microcircuit (“chip”) design and fabrication require not only electricity, but dozens of foundational technologies to keep them operational. In effect, it now takes countless thousands of existing microcircuits to make other microcircuits. That leads me to wonder: If there were a full scale nuclear exchange with large EMP effective radius “footprints” in populated regions, how would the chip industry ever recover? Even if the chip fabrication facilities (“fabs”) avoided physical destruction from nuclear blasts, how would they get all of their computer-controlled machinery back on line? Well, let’s just hope that Boise, Idaho is not a nuclear target. That way, presumably Micron Technology can re-seed the world with chips. (That is, if they will still have a fab facility in Boise. Most chip makers are in the process of outsourcing their fabs. Many of them are being offshored to China.)

Beyond these “worst-case scenario” imaginings, let’s consider something much more likely: extended power failures in North America, caused by severe weather, an oil embargo, or civil disruption. Given our current level of technological dependence, what would life be like in a “Grid Down” America? If the power grid goes down for a period of more than a week, all bets are off. Consider the following:

If “grid down” most towns and cities will be without municipal (utility) drinking water.
If “grid down” for more than a month there will likely be huge outflows of refugees from cities.
If “grid down” there will possibly be mass prison escapes.
If “grid down”, virtually all communications will go down. Telephone company central offices (COs) do have battery back-up. These are huge banks of 2-volt deep cycle floating batteries. But those batteries will only last about a week. Backup generators were not installed at most COs, because no situation that would take the power grid down for more than 72 hours was ever anticipated. (Bad planning, Ma Bell!) Thus, if and when the grid goes down then hard-wire phones, cell phones, and the Internet will all go down. When both the power grid and phone systems goes down, law and order will likely disintegrate. There will be no burglar alarms, no security lighting or cameras, and no reliable way to contact police or fire departments, and so forth.
If “grid down” for an extended period anyone with a chronic health problem may die. There will be no power for kidney dialysis machines or breathing machines for respiratory patients, no re-supply of oxygen bottles for people with chronic lung conditions, no re-supply of insulin for diabetics, et cetera.
If “grid down”, most heaters with fans won’t work, even if you can bypass the thermostat. And pellet stoves won’t work at all!
If “grid down”, then “seasonal affected disorder” will seem mild compared to the depressing effects of spending 13+ hours a day in the dark during winter months—especially at latitudes north of the 45th Parallel.
If “grid down”, there will be no 911 to call—no back-up—no “cavalry coming over the hill” in the nick of time. You, your family, and your contiguous neighbors will have to independently handle any lawlessness that comes your way.
If “grid down,” sanitation will be problematic in any large town or city. Virtually everyone will be forced to draw water from open sources, and meanwhile their neighbors will be inadvertently fouling those same sources. I heard one survivalist lecturer state that a grid down situation would “almost immediately reduce sanitation in the U.S. to Third World standards.” I think that he underestimated the impact of an extended power grid failure. At least in the Third World they are accustomed to living with poor water and sanitation. Here in the U.S., we don’t even have Third World facilities or folkways. With the grid down and city water disrupted, toilets won’t flush and most urbanites and suburbanites will not dig outhouse or garbage pits! Furthermore, the long-standing Third World village norm of “Draw your drinking water upstream and wash your clothes downstream” will be ignored. A “grid down” condition could be a public health nightmare within a week in metropolitan regions.

Lastly, consider one implication that most people have never heard of: even residential piped (utility) natural gas service is dependent on the power grid. To push gas through the many miles of pipeline, gas companies depend on electrically-powered compressor stations to pressurize the distribution pipelines. It is important to distinguish between local (natural) compression versus long distance grid-powered compression. People living right near gas fields will benefit from the natural wellhead compression and thus will probably have continuing gas service in a long term grid-down situation, whereas those living farther away will not.

In the 1950s, a power failure was essentially an inconvenience for most businesses. They used manual adding machines, typewriters, and cash registers. They did their accounting in big bound paper books. But now, the majority of manufacturers, distributors, and retailers cannot function at all without grid power. I predict that they will send their employees home. If the grid stays down for more than 10 days, there will be either “unpaid holidays” declared, or good old-fashioned layoffs.

Commerce will grind almost to a halt, because cash registers won’t work, and computerized “Just in Time” (JIT) inventory control systems will be offline. Some enterprising small businesses will keep their doors open, but they will be in the minority. Most of the major retailers will not be able to cope. Have you noticed that most of the big retail stores built since the 1980s are essentially windowless? Their corporate management succumbed to the promised “efficiency” and “economy” of the concrete slab tilt-up architecture that has become ubiquitous in the United States. Without power, these big windowless boxes won’t even have enough light for anyone to see the shelves! Surely, most of them will have to lock their doors.

The bottom line? Be prepared. Avoid urban areas and the suburbs. That is where most of the trouble will be. To avoid the social upheaval, ideally, you should live year-round at a well-stocked retreat farm or ranch with plentiful water that is in a sparsely-populated region that is well-removed from major metropolitan areas. If the grid goes down for more than a week, expect riots and looting. If it is more than a month, you can expect total anarchy. Be prepared to live self-sufficiently. Get your food and fuel storage squared away. Fence a large garden plot and practice gardening and canning each summer.

Be prepared to defend your retreat. To be practical, this will necessitate doubling-up or tripling up with neighbor to provide round-the-clock security. (Much as I described in my novel “Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse.”

Keep some extra items on hand for barter and charity. If the grid goes down, you may be surprised how quickly your barter goods come into play.

Letter Re: Advice in Investing in a Belt-Fed Semi-Auto 7.62mm NATO

Mr. Rawles:
I am interested in diversifying out of the dollar and was thinking of buying a belt-fed semi auto [as a “tangible” investment.] (I already have the rest of my gear, guns, and food storage well squared away.) Since 7.62 [mm NATO military surplus ammunition] is less expensive than [commercially loaded] .308 [Winchester], can you recommend a belt fed 7.62 semiautomatic? Any that you would avoid? Thanks! – S.

JWR Replies: I would recommend buying a semiauto-only Browning Model 1919A4, since they have legendary “bomb proof” robustness, great versatility in mounting, and broad chambering convertability. I recommend that you buy one that is already set up primarily for 7.62mm NATO, with a spare .30-06 barrel and perhaps also a spare barrel for 8×57 Mauser. (Although the supply of cheap surplus 8mm ammo has dried up, at least for the time being.) Cartridge conversion requires different feed mechanism parts, a different booster (nosepiece), and of course a different barrel. If you are planning to ser up your gun for multiple calibers, then buy all Israeli surplus links, since they are the most versatile. (The less expensive .30-06 links work only with that particular cartridge.)

The TNW, Cole Distributing, and Ohio RapidFire (“ORF”) brand guns all work fine. There are several other M1919 makers, but I cannot vouch for any them. The M1919A4s presently on the market typically use ex-Israeli parts kits. The Cadillac of the breed (pardon the mixed metaphor) is the Valkyrie Arms 1919A4. That is the brand that I once owned, as the”accessory” for the turret on my Ferret scout car. (Well, actually it was more the other way around: The Ferret was the armored platform for transporting the M1919.) However, I’ve heard that they are no longer being produced by Valkyrie.

I consider semi-auto M1919A4s a very good investment, since the supply of available parts kits is definitely drying up. Once those are gone, the prices will doubtless escalate rapidly. (The same thing happened with the semi-auto Browning M2 HB .50 caliber belt-feds. They now fetch $10,000 to $14,000 each, and just a complete M2HB BMG parts kit (sans side plate) can cost $7,000. I also recently saw just a Stellite M2 .50 barrel offered for sale for $1,200!) Since the law of supply and demand is inescapable, I’ve concluded that a semi-auto .50 Browning would be a “sure bet” as an even better investment than a M1919.

For versatility, you might also get an “A6” (buttstock and bipod) conversion kit. Original US military tripods are getting scarce and very expensive, so if you aren’t a purist, then get an German MG-42 tripod and M1919 pintle adapter.

To read umpteen details and user comments on Model 1919 Browning-family belt-fed guns, spare parts, headspacing adjustment, manuals, tripods, T&E mechanisms, canvas, and other accessories, see: www.1919A4.com

In answer to your question about what models to avoid: I would not recommend buying any of the semi-auto M60 variants, since they are too prone to breakage.

OBTW, if there is a SurvivalBlog reader that would like to invest a bigger semiauto-only belt fed, I have a friend that is selling a TNW-built M2 HB .50 Browning with several barrels, tripod, links, and ammo as a package for around $12,000. It would be a “private party” sale only if the buyer lives in Idaho. (If outside of Idaho, the transfer would have to be shipped to an FFL holder.) Contact me via e-mail if you are a serious cash buyer and I will forward your e-mail to the seller. Since this a sale intended to generate needed cash, no trades will be considered.

Odds ‘n Sods:

From those Enlightened Social Engineers that run San Francisco: Should fireplace fires be banned? Well, there goes your last hope of self-sufficiency. (Not that “Babylon By The Bay” would be very survivable WTSHTF, anyway.)

   o o o

Trading in derivatives slows to a trickle

   o o o

RBS spotted this one: Dallas-Fort Worth food pantries facing shortage

   o o o

A fascinating video clip from a 2002 TED conference: Stephen Petranek: 10 ways the world could end

Letter Re: Updated Nuclear Targets in the United States

Jim,
In support of some research on retreat locations, I wanted to learn more about the locations in the CONUS of our strategic nuclear weapons. Guesswork at best, but the older FEMA maps are certainly obsolete, or wrong.

A link from late 2006 describes the probable locations and density of the current nuclear arsenal. It is thought that the sites in California, South Dakota, and Virginia have been eliminated, and that the ballistic missile submarine base in Bangor, Washington has been expanded significantly.

The next link describes the stockpile (and its reduction) and illustrates the probable nature of the projected (2007-2012) US nuclear arsenal. Given these estimates of the types and quantities, one can generate some forward-looking scenarios that may offer insight into CONUS “storage” locations.

This is interesting information, and it appears that any resultant fallout pattern from a coordinated attack on these facilities would be substantially different than the older FEMA maps might have one imagine (e.g. FEMA 196). While there is obviously no “safe” or “perfect” retreat location, one can learn, prepare and be ready to take action.

Jim, thanks again for your hard work, – DFer

JWR Replies: Every family should have a fallout shelter, even if they live on the southern Oregon coast. (Which is ostensibly the safest fallout-free zone in the continental United States.) Anyone living within 50 miles of a nuclear target should have a combination blast and fallout shelter.

By comparing the aforementioned strategic target maps with population density maps (for likely civilian targets), the global prevailing winds map (and regional prevailing wind descriptions), it becomes immediately apparent a that living upwind is best. Yes, there are seasonal variations, but because of the Coriolis effect (driving mid-latitude westerly winds) the odds are in your favor if you go west!

Six Letters Re: New-Found Respect for .223 as a Potential Man Stopper

Jim-
I couldn’t help but respond to the blast of letters re: “.223 as Man Stopper”, as most of my time in the employ of our Uncle Sam was engaged in the testing and evaluation of small arms, OPFOR and NATO. (As a matter of full disclosure, I did not offer any opinions or make decisions regarding their respective performances; rather, I merely conducted the tests and recorded the results. Therefore my opinions were/are not colored by the political intrigues of small arms procurement procedures). The trap we, as survivalists/retreaters fall into when looking at our weaponry is to look to the military. Survivalists are not infantrymen!!! Military doctrine is based on large numbers of well-armed, well supplied men engaging in unit activities to accomplish a specific mission within the parameters of acceptable losses. Survivalist do not operate in the same world. Who in your group is an “acceptable loss”? Your wife, husband, son, daughter, neighbor?

The best lens to focus your preparations through is that of the early settlers in the Old West. Constantly at risk from hostile natives and marauding bandits, they stocked their homesteads high with arms and ammo, and always carried at least two guns in every foray away from the home. The ones that made it also planned retreats, escapes, and hideouts, equally stocked, around frequently visited locations on their homesteads.

So, what is the best caliber? The 7.62mm NATO is an excellent (but heavy) man stopper, and the 7.63×39 is a decent (200 meter) cartridge, the ballistic twin of a .32 Special or moderate .30-30. The 5.56×45 is currently in use by all NATO countries, save Turkey and Greece (they’re soldiering on with their [Heckler & Koch] G3 variants). Its limitations are well known but the body count continues to rack up, and has for the last forty years. Very accurate, easily controllable (especially in full auto) and light weight (read: easy to carry a lot of; see full auto mention). It’s like the Aussies say about beer: “The best beer in the world is the one in your hand!” Pick your poison, but remember the Five Rules of Gunplay that my Grandpa taught me: 1) Shot placement; 2) shot placement; 3) shot placement; 4) always shoot enough gun; 5) never get shot for lack of shooting back! Something to consider, thinking like a farmer rather than a commando.
As always, keep the Faith, – Bonehead

 

Jim-
Scientific evidence supports Martin’s observations of the .223 Remington as a man stopper.
There is a substantial body of academic forensic analysis of the .223s terminal performance. This includes extensive autopsy work, as well as prolonged accumulation of wound and mortality data from battlefield and law enforcement encounters.
The United States Department of Defense studied terminal performance of the 5.56 NATO round during the initial deployment of that round to Southeast Asia. Setting aside the later problems that would tarnish the M16 reputation, and unfortunately taint the round by association, the terminal performance of the round itself was deemed to be excellent.
The most documented encounter involving the .223 is the infamous FBI Miami shootout. With the exception of several presidential assassinations and attempts, this is the most carefully, forensically analyzed gunfight in history. In that fight, five FBI agents were hit with a .223 round fired from a Ruger Mini-14: Head (1), neck (1), arm (1) and torso (2). All four of the men hit in the torso, head and neck were immediately removed from the fight. The man hit in the arm was unable to operate that limb.
You suggest that slow expansion soft points are needed for the .223 to be potent. [JWR Adds: I think that you misunderstood my statements. I stated that fast-expanding soft-nose .223 varmint bullets would not stop an armored opponent at long range.] The .223 FMJ was developed specifically to remove that need. At appropriate weight, velocity, and stabilization, the .223 was designed to overcome the disadvantages of internationally mandated military FMJ ammunition. It yaws upon entry into flesh, tumbling and travelling sideways to create a large wound channel, coming apart during the process.
Yes, .30 cal rifles have superior penetration performance against targets behind cover, and in the case of rounds like the .308 Win., will carry more energy at very long ranges. But they don’t necessarily have better terminal performance than the .223 at the ranges at which most people are capable of
accurate fire.
Factor in the number of platforms available, the ubiquity of the ammo, the low recoil, the cost, the ability to store and carry more rounds: The .223 is a very good choice in a main defensive weapon.
Regards, – Rich S.

 

Jim & Co.,
I hadn’t had much time to read the blog in the last few weeks (maybe months) but was greeted with another discussion of caliber selection, and thought I would throw my hat into the ring. Of all the ammo out there, some of the worst you can chose is SS109, unless you are trying to shoot long distances for area effect with an M249. That steel they put in the nose is only there so that the nose wouldn’t be too heavy, not so it would “penetrate” better.
While I don’t disagree with the opinions of some of our men and women in uniform about caliber selection (mostly because it’s their a** on the line), combat is a numbers game, and everything comes with trade-offs. For your MBR you have to choose between weight, round count, penetration, range and knock-down power. When we fought the last two world wars 60 rounds was considered a combat load, and any of those rifles could punch through several concrete houses before they stop. The .308 is a little bit lighter,
and has a little bit less punch, but is deadly accurate past 1000 yards, but still suffers from the same inherent drawback; weight.
The .223 (5.56x45mm) has an advantage in this arena, it’s fired from a lightweight gun (nominally 8 pounds) it has low recoil and high second follow up shot potential (in full auto mode) and the ammo weighs about 1/3 of the .308. Playing this strictly as a numbers game, you can now carry three times as much ammo for the same given weight. Would you rather: land one round of .223 causing a serious wound, or take the chance of missing and not hurting your assailant at all?
Another point that is often forgotten, people are really not all that big. Typically we are thin skinned, and are maybe 8-18″ thick from front to back, side to side. Thus any kind of “penetrator” round will simply punch a clean hole right through, and not do very much damage (arguably the biggest issue with the .223 vs .308). As a follow up, it bears repeating, any wound over 2″ deep has a very high likelihood of being fatal. With this in mind, even explosive varmint bullets will penetrate this deep, most likely tearing through soft body armor up to 500 yards.
The main kill method for bullets, clubs, and rocks is not penetration, it’s energy transfer. It’s how much blunt force trauma you can inflict on your enemy. To this end a bullet which penetrates will not transfer much of this energy, but a hollow point, or frangible bullet will.
In my opinion, those varmint bullets, or frangible bullets are the way to go for putting your enemy in the ground. Both of these will give higher rates of energy transfer, destroy more tissue, and based on the guaranteed fragmentation at long range are likely to cause very high bleed rates in whatever you decide to put them into.
Also, some of the other letters referenced military development pushing back towards larger caliber rifles such as 6.8 SPC and others. This is utter garbage, as the military is still buying more 5.56 rifles, as well as putting out further competitive bids for 5.56 caliber weapons. While it’s nice to see the 6.8 out there, and I am always impressed with it’s performance, will it be replacing the 5.56 any time soon? I really really doubt it. However, it looks like the Brits are dropping the .308 as being too small for sniper purposes, and are rolling out a few new variants in .338 Lapua.
Some links for people to digest:
Tavor21 rifle headed into service with Indian special forces
The USA’s M4 Carbine Controversy
-AVL

 

Dear Jim,
Once again I feel called to step in and provide some info on 5.56 ammo.
First, as I’ve said before, for long-term situations I’d prefer a bolt action rifle in a common game caliber of the area (8mm, .30-06, 7.62×54, .308). This gives ultimate reliability for best cost.
However, there are times when high output is necessary. At those times, you need a fast firing weapon in the standard caliber of the area. In just about the entire civilized world, that caliber is 5.56mm. There is no point in stocking a “wildcat” caliber, and little in stocking a non-standard round. I love the .45 ACP, but 9mm and .40 are far more common in official supply chains, which will have ammo long after .45 ACP is exhausted in stores. Actually, I prefer .45 Long Colt, but it’s no longer US issue and a bit hard to find in strategic quantity.
As far as rifles, .308 is getting very pricey, very fast. It also means a heavier weapon, heavier ammo and more recoil. In a G.O.O.D. situation, all these are relevant.
In such a situation, I don’t plan on stopping for long. I don’t plan to hang around to find out if my rounds killed or merely wounded a goblin, and I don’t expect most goblins, rioters, etc, will act like hardened combat vets and stick around for an extended fight.
My sources (beyond my own decades of experience) include a Navy combat medic who has treated more than 400 casualties in our current nastiness. In his words, he’s never seen a serious torso or head hit with 5.56 that was not incapacitating or lethal. I can testify firsthand from running a training range that most troops do not shoot exceptionally well. Add in the fog of war and a natural fear reaction, and, with no disrespect intended, I’ll bet any amount of money that most of the “multiple torso hits” that didn’t take a bad guy down were probably multiple torso misses. We’ve all been positive that we hit a target that didn’t react, and must be defective. Or else the weapon is. It’s human nature to trust ourselves, if we are healthy. But it doesn’t matter what you miss with. It won’t work.
Did some hits fail to stop the bad guy? Certainly. Bob Dole took multiple German 8mm hits in WWII. Should we assume 8mm is an inadequate stopper and go back to .45-70?
For information and reassurance I offer the following links:
An extensive, official analysis of wounding mechanisms in small arms projectiles.
An Army LTC’s take on matters.
A ballistics tutorial.
Also, one cannot equate “.308 or 7.62 Soviet.” Apart from a similar diameter, the two rounds have nothing in common. This is the “bigger is better” school, which taken to its extreme would equate 9mm and .375H&H. Both are “Big.” The question is, do they have enough power to penetrate, and do they terminate in a fashion that will cause sufficient wounding? At 400 yards, the 5.56 is comparable in power to a .45 ACP at the muzzle. Is that the definition of “inadequate”? Especially since the odds of any one of us engaging a hostile target at that range, and hitting, are very close to zero (and I speak as someone with military match trophies on the shelf behind me, using a standard H&R contract M16A1 at 400 yards).
5.56mm causes greater wounds than 7.62X39. This has been demonstrated and documented hundreds of thousands of times since Vietnam. It is also a more effective round in terms of rounds per pound for transport. See Dr. Fackler’s documentation above, among others. For example:
5.56mm will go through at least 12″ of pine…and keep going.
Neither 7.62 NATO nor 5.56 will penetrate a 6″ sandbag.
5.56 will penetrate two Level IIIA vests with hard trauma plates.
SS109 spec 5.56 has better armor penetration than some 7.62 NATO loads. (This site has lots of useful info, but is starting to decay. I’ve sent a reminder to the hosts.)
As far as I’m aware, the myth of the US military “returning” to .30 caliber has been around for 40 years, ever since 5.56 was adopted. For a variety of reasons, not the least of which is number of rounds per pound for logistical supply, this is never going to happen. If you run out of ammo, it doesn’t matter what you could have shot the bad guy with. Even if it were inadequate, I’d rather have half a 210 round loadout of 5.56 than none [remaining] of a 100 round loadout of 7.62.
By the way, I’ve been performing a dirt test on one of my AR-15s. 2000 rounds over a year so far with no cleaning. The only failures have been due to $3 used sold-as-parts Israeli surplus Orlite magazines.

I should also mention the following data that I found at AR15.com

“Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance deficiencies with 5.56x45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite their being hit multiple times by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting. This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short barrel weapons or when the range increases. It can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the chest of a thin, malnourished individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. In addition, bullets of the SS109/M855 type are manufactured by many countries in numerous production plants. Although all SS109/M855 types must be 62 gr. FMJ bullets constructed with a steel penetrator in the nose, the composition, thickness, and relative weights of the jackets, penetrators, and cores are quite variable, as are the types and position of the cannelures. Because of the significant differences in construction between bullets within the SS109/M855 category, terminal performance is quite variable—with differences noted in yaw, fragmentation, and penetration depths. Luke Haag’s papers in the AFTE Journal (33(1):11-28, Winter 2001) describe this problem.”

So obviously one also must consider the construction of the projectile. With that in mind, and the wonderful mass of data available here, I’m still very happy with 5.56, with the right ammo selection (as with any caliber). – Michael Z. Williamson

 

Mr. Rawles,
The posts about the .223 on your web site reminded me of an article I recently read [At Michael Yon’s web site] and thought you would be interested.

The takeaway line from the article: “Prosser shot the man at least four times with his M4 rifle. But the American M4 rifle [cartridge]s are weak – after Prosser landed three nearly point blank shots in the man’s abdomen, splattering a testicle with a fourth, the man just staggered back, regrouped and tried to shoot Prosser.”

Keep up the good work, – Jack

 

Jim:
Okay! Hold on a minute, I did not say that I preferred the .223, I just said I found a new found respect for the .223. I have seen what it can do. I was only comparing chest size and penetration. In the right hands the .223 is a very formidable weapon. If all I can see is the boot or hand or leg or arm it will have serious hole in it and the varmint will be out of the game along with the two it takes to haul them out of the line of fire, and I may get them too with my .308.
The .223 68 grain is not extra heavy by any means when you consider the available bullet weight spectrum. The various arms conventions re hollow points will not apply as society breaks down. The dead never complain.

To Stephen in Iraq, CDR, Clyde, Jack, and all the readers of the blog. My favorite .308 cal shoots a solid 168 grain boat tail crimped molly bullet. These are not super hot hand loads. They are loaded to the same specs as standard mil spec .308s. They are just faster because of the moly. Faster gives me a longer battlefield zero.

For all you new readers I fully support Jim’s position regarding the .308 as the primary battle weapon. I personally hold that our primary survival caliber is a .308 in a semi auto, backed up with other common calibers like .30-06, 7.62×39, and .223.

Here we use mil spec .223 and .308 ammo. However, Jim is very right in developing ballistically matched rounds for each weapon. We have done this. In my bolt gun I prefer to use 168 grain
bullets but will use mil spec as well. Now I am a older fart, can’t run a long distance, but can walk all day with short breaks. Will defend my home and will seek out varmints using the shoot
and scoot principal. For me accuracy and long range is more important than firepower, however we have both.
So for all you .308 buffs, “I are one” too. My favorite hunting caliber is a .300 Weatherby magnum, and yes, I shoot 168 grain boat tail bullets in it as well. – Martin

JWR Replies: Thanks to all of those that commented. There is certainly no lack of controversy on this topic!

One important point of clarification: I specifically mentioned that current fast-expanding .223 soft nose “varmint” ammunition lacks penetration against armored opponents at long range. It works fairly well “up close and personal”, or against someone that is not wearing body armor. But even then, it may take several shots to put Mr. Bad Guy out of the fight, during which time he very well might still be launching lead at you. So once again, if I have the choice, I will grab a .308. It has often and rightly been said that in gun fights there are no second place winners.

Odds ‘n Sods:

Courtesy of CS in Wisconsin comes a couple of articles about former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan “Mr. Magoo” Greenspan: from Bloomburg.com: Greenspan Says U.S. House Prices Keep Falling After `Shocker’ and Greenspan Has No `Regrets’ as Housing Slump Deepens. CS’s comment: “If I set up the housing bubble don’t blame me now, I’m writing down my memoirs!”

   o o o

RBS suggested this article over at 321Gold.com by Bill Bonner: Subprime–The Ultimate Financial Accident

   o o o

The 33% off sale for the “Rawles Gets You Ready” preparedness course ends in just five days. (November 30th.) Place your order soon!

   o o o

I wouldn’t finding one of these under my Christmas tree! (Thanks to H.K. for sending us that link.)