Military Review

IMI improves the performance of ammunition caliber 5,56 mm

58
IMI improves the performance of ammunition caliber 5,56 mm



The Israeli military industry (Israel Military Industries, IMI) has announced the release of a new 5,56-mm cartridge, which has increased performance and is called the Razor Core (core shaver). According to the vice-president and managing director of the IMI small-caliber ammunition department, Yitzhak Shmilovich, the new cartridge provides higher accuracy and an effective stopping effect at an increased distance to 600 meters.

Shmilovich said that these characteristics of Razor Core make it attractive for use in special operations. “Razor Core provides excellent performance at a very competitive price.”

Shmilovich confirmed that the new cartridge is already in production and was successfully tested in battle by an unnamed client. The cartridge with 77 grains is intended for use in weapons with a barrel with a standard 1: 7 rifle, both with a shortened and a long barrel, such as on the M4 and M16. The bullet trajectory almost corresponds to standard ammunition, and, therefore, there is no need for gun sighting when switching from one type of ammunition to another. According to IMI, the Razor Core cartridge was originally intended for use by the military and law enforcement agencies, but its accuracy and accessibility make it also suitable for the commercial market and sports shooting.

The IMI small-caliber ammunition department was chosen by the Israeli Ministry of Defense as the main supplier of small-caliber ammunition for the Israel Defense Forces. The department produces a full range of ammunition calibers from 5,56 mm to 12,7 mm, including a wide range of armor-piercing, sniper and training ammunition. IMI BALL NATO ammunition 5,56 mm and 9 mm were officially qualified by NATO.
Author:
Originator:
http://defense-update.com/20140108_razor_core.html?goback=.gde_2316049_member_5827044098061660162#!
58 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. makarov
    makarov 17 January 2014 07: 17
    +2
    Ordinary advertising blizzard.
    I foresee the indignation of other comments, they say here it is an image with accuracy, and they say it's cool !!
    Therefore, it is immediately necessary to clarify that, in accordance with the methodology and requirement of the modern BATTLE automatic small arms, dispersion during firing should be MANDATORY, which is due to the dispersion coefficient formula.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 17 January 2014 08: 31
      +2
      Quote: makarov
      Ordinary advertising blizzard.
      I foresee the indignation of other comments, they say here it is an image with accuracy, and they say it's cool !!
      Therefore, it is immediately necessary to clarify that in accordance with the methodology and requirement for modern BATTLE automatic small arms ...

      In accordance with whose methodology and whose requirements?
      Wouldn't it be difficult for you to lay out that notorious "methodology and requirements"?

      Ps - sighting weapons visible to increase dispersion exist? I don’t know where you got this, but I personally prefer that the bullets hit exactly where I am aiming, without unnecessary "dispersion".
      1. makarov
        makarov 17 January 2014 08: 41
        +1
        SW S.A.M ..
        And where did you get the idea that I would defend my words by pounding myself in the chest, then in mudia, with foam at the mouth ?? You are interested, type in the search engine the words dispersion coefficient designing small arms, and all business. tea is not talking with a young man illiterate
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 17 January 2014 09: 51
          +5
          Then you should know that "mandatory dispersion" is applicable to anti-aircraft and aircraft guns - in order to increase the chance of hitting fast-moving targets, but not to personal small arms, where they try to reduce the dispersion with each new generation of developments, who need dispersion - takes a shotgun.
          1. makarov
            makarov 17 January 2014 12: 11
            +3
            SW S.A.M ..
            I am not going to discuss with you the well-known scientific definitions, and your personal formulations that contradict the works of famous and recognized gunsmiths. You there in your homeland develop and implement your statements, the Arabs will say "thank you".
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 17 January 2014 12: 21
              0
              Quote: makarov
              SW S.A.M ..
              I am not going to discuss with you the well-known scientific definitions, and your personal formulations that contradict the works of famous and recognized gunsmiths. You there at home develop and implement your statements, the Arabs will say "thank you"

              Where are they famous? You put forward a controversial thesis. Support your controversial thesis with two authoritative sources - and then you will have no questions.
              Oh, although I know what you are targeting. Read the article Catch, huh?
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 17 January 2014 12: 13
          +2
          Quote: makarov
          SW S.A.M ..
          And where did you get the idea that I would defend my words by pounding myself in the chest, then in mudia, with foam at the mouth ?? You are interested, type in the search engine the words dispersion coefficient designing small arms, and all business. tea is not talking with a young man illiterate

          You put forward a thesis, right? So please, justify it, so that we really see that we are not dealing with an illiterate young man.
  2. ReifA
    ReifA 17 January 2014 07: 33
    +3
    It simply cannot be a blizzard, otherwise, at the first test purchase, the company will be dishonored all over the world.
  3. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 17 January 2014 07: 40
    +1
    Best the enemy of the good. The note provides two examples of target damage. So let's draw a circle along the radius of expansion. Now imagine a battle, in a battle a soldier usually does not aim intently as a sniper. Usually they shoot a line at the side of the target. So that's what I mean, in the first case, when the target moves, all the bullets go by. A lot and so beautiful, but by. In the second case, at least one bullet will capture the target. So that’s what’s best for ordinary ordinary infantry. If we are preparing a sniper division, then here we need another weapon, specialized. So, why create the best if the benefits of it are dubious.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 17 January 2014 08: 42
      +1
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Best the enemy of the good. The note provides two examples of target damage. So let's draw a circle along the radius of expansion. Now imagine a battle, in a battle a soldier usually does not aim intently as a sniper. Usually they shoot a line at the side of the target.

      Why imagine, from personal experience - quick aiming through a collimator and
      single shooting aiming at a target, no bad lines from behind a fence on outstretched arms, in the style of the Papuan armies. To suppress machine guns, there are still a bunch of different means.
      For highly professional fighters, this cartridge is just a fairy tale, but it is not offered to the Papuans.
      1. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 17 January 2014 09: 12
        +3
        How many highly professional soldiers are there in the army? I’m not against precision weapons, I’m for the fact that for ordinary units there would be one thing, for special forces another. But I see no reason to equip ordinary motorized rifles with weapons.
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 17 January 2014 09: 59
          +2
          Quote: vladsolo56
          How many highly professional soldiers are there in the army?

          I don’t know what in other countries, but all of us, without exception, combat soldiers are taught to shoot accurately and hit, even while standing, even crawling, even on the run, the average rate of our "ordinary motorized rifleman" is about 8-9 months, of which they are present almost every day practical shooting exercises. I generally keep quiet about the specialist. Even the rear personnel, for their unfortunate 4 weeks of the young soldier's course, shoot 200-300 rounds of rounds. Draw conclusions.
          1. Professor
            17 January 2014 18: 14
            +1
            Quote: vladsolo56
            How many highly professional soldiers are there in the army?

            My 5 cents. In Tsakhal, they strive to equip everyone with automatic devices with a collimator sight. Thus, + new cartridges makes sense.
    2. Professor
      17 January 2014 08: 51
      +5
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Usually shoot a turn in the side of the target

      In Tsakhal it is forbidden to shoot in bursts (of course, this is not about machine gunners).

      Quote: vladsolo56
      So that’s what’s best for ordinary ordinary infantry.

      In your opinion, the greater the dispersion and less accuracy the better? lol Well then, everything is in order, stock up on Chinese ammunition and go. I am more impressed by the ammunition that hits where I aim, and not "near".
      1. makarov
        makarov 17 January 2014 09: 00
        +2
        "In your opinion, the greater the dispersion and the lower the accuracy, the better?"

        SW Oleg. Do not cast a shadow over the wattle fence. The point is that in combat weapons the dispersion coefficient is necessary in tolerances and must comply with the design techniques. Or do you consider yourself to be superior in knowledge and experience to Blagonravov, Fedorov and other eminent historical men?
        1. Professor
          17 January 2014 09: 11
          +4
          Quote: makarov
          Fedorov and other eminent historical husbands?

          Where do I go to them. I am only a humble scribbler. However, from my not rich combat experience I really wanted to get as quickly as possible (or better from the first shot) at the one who fired at me. I have good eyesight, the gun was American, and as a child in DOSAF I was engaged in shooting for a couple of years. Therefore, nafig to me this dispersion ... That's something like that.

          PS
          This cartridge was developed by your former compatriot from Ukraine.
          1. makarov
            makarov 17 January 2014 09: 26
            0
            "Where am I to them. I'm just a humble hack."

            So I'm just a modest senior citizen, so I try to be careful about all kinds of opuses.
        2. Yves762
          Yves762 17 January 2014 09: 26
          +3
          makarov, why the hell did Ours and the Americans, among other things, switch to smaller calibers for machine guns?
          Scatter required? At least your heartbeat and breathing will perfectly give you it, especially in battle conditions.
          1. makarov
            makarov 17 January 2014 09: 39
            0
            in the specifics of military weapons, there is no use of the words "scatter", "misfire", and others like that. there are words refusal, delay, dispersal !!!
            What else can I talk with you ??????
            1. Yves762
              Yves762 17 January 2014 10: 04
              +1
              You are distorting.
              Essentially better details with the transition to low-pulse intermediate cartridges 5.45x39 and 5.56x45.
              1. makarov
                makarov 17 January 2014 12: 07
                0
                Is it really lazy for you to find an explanation in the materials posted on the network? Pay attention to the destination, the real range methodology for a single shooter and firing unit by area. the flatness of both calibers, the difference in momenta, which subsequently makes it possible to reduce the mass of the firing device.
                All of the listed info is available in open form. She is not classified. Or do you want to argue about something meaningless? So this is not for me.
                1. Yves762
                  Yves762 17 January 2014 12: 57
                  +1
                  Я I ask you in order to more fully and unambiguously understand your position and arguments.
                  If you still remember where We started ... So, the transition to low-pulse cartridges in automatic rifles, among other things, was aimed at increasing the accuracy of fire () fire
                  1. Yves762
                    Yves762 17 January 2014 13: 40
                    +1
                    If you deign yourself, go "where did you send me", ie "google" but development history, for example, AK-74; "One hundred series"; and especially, AK-107; FN SCAR; HK G36 ... etc. There is a clear tendency to increase the accuracy of fire of both single and automatic fire, moreover, as a requirement of the customer (including state)!!!
                    So
                    firing dispersion
                    which you are here as not only I understood, imagine and which
                    must be MANDATORY
                    , poorly correlated with modern requirements...
                    Enough said.
                    1. makarov
                      makarov 17 January 2014 14: 35
                      -1
                      What modernity do you still need ?? perhaps the one that was developed by me 15 years ago, and was introduced in the Russian Federation only in 2011, or one that you can’t even imagine, and never even hear about, will come up ...
            2. VADEL
              VADEL 17 January 2014 10: 12
              0
              With regards to gamma cartridges, there are also the concepts of "sticking" and "skewing". In particular, this applies to the 9 mm PPO cartridge for PM.
      2. vladsolo56
        vladsolo56 17 January 2014 09: 14
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        In Tsakhal it is forbidden to shoot in bursts (of course, this is not about machine gunners).

        Tzahal has not fought in real wars for a long time; skirmishes with terrorists cannot be compared with military operations. so the comparison is not convincing
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 17 January 2014 09: 45
          -1
          Quote: vladsolo56
          Quote: Professor
          In Tsakhal it is forbidden to shoot in bursts (of course, this is not about machine gunners).

          Tzahal has not fought in real wars for a long time; skirmishes with terrorists cannot be compared with military operations. so the comparison is not convincing

          Well, in that case, NOBODY has long been fighting in real wars, since even Afghan can be written down against skirmishes with terrorists - there was no regular army in the opponents, only gangsters of dushmans.
          1. vladsolo56
            vladsolo56 17 January 2014 13: 48
            +3
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Well, in that case, NOBODY has long been fighting in real wars, since even Afghan can be written down against skirmishes with terrorists - there was no regular army in the opponents, only gangsters of dushmans.

            So you are right, I personally never claimed that there was a war in Afghanistan. Although for someone this could be just a war. Any conflict can be called a war. But for example, the 2008 War was real, there was an enemy, all kinds of troops were used.
            1. Jin
              Jin 17 January 2014 16: 22
              +2
              Quote: vladsolo56
              I personally never claimed that there was a war in Afghanistan. Although for someone this could be just a war. Any conflict can be called a war. But for example, the 2008 War was real, there was an enemy, all kinds of troops were used.


              Somehow I didn’t understand you ... Well, there was no war in Chechnya, right? By the way, due to the fact that this the war Thanks to some politicians, some do not get the full money status of CTOs, but what about saving, right?
              This can be a war for someone who fought there, shed blood and lost friends, for parents and wives who received zinc with a load of 200 ... For those who were tortured and executed ... no, they were brutally killed in captivity and cynically, for reporting or foreclosure, filmed on camera ...
              That is, in 2008 the war was real, there was an ENEMY (this is your pearl, no more vyser, killed completely), but in Afghanistan and Chechnya, no? There were friends and their "friendly fire"? Yes, the logic is just reinforced concrete, and the arguments are truly deadly ...
              About all kinds of troops is this where? Believe me, you don’t care who kills you (God forbid), the spirit with a knife or an attack aircraft with high-precision ammunition, which is even worse than the big question. Nothing more to say, period ...
              1. Hug
                Hug 21 January 2014 06: 49
                -2
                Re .: Jin

                Somehow I did not understand you ...

                ... Believe me, it will not matter to you who (God forbid) kills you, the spirit with a knife or an attack aircraft with high-precision ammunition, which is even worse than the big question. Nothing more to say, period ...


                You guy wait, do not get excited - this is not about that. No one belittles the courage of the guys in Chechnya and Afghanistan. This is not about the concepts of CTO and combined arms combat, but about comparing the intensity of firing and the results of shooting from small arms in general and automatic, in particular, about new ammunition and the dispute about the knowledge of the subtleties of the theory of shooting training by opponents.

                I am not a combined arms officer, but it seems to me that "And Nas Rat", "Iv762" and their comrades look more convincing in this dispute than "makarov" and his associates. But this is only my IMHO.
                1. Jin
                  Jin 21 January 2014 11: 59
                  -1
                  Quote: Kram
                  but it seems to me that "And Nas Rat", "Iv762" and his comrades look more convincing in this dispute than "makarov" and his associates.


                  And it seems to me the same.
            2. atalef
              atalef 17 January 2014 16: 45
              +1
              Quote: vladsolo56
              But for example, the 2008 War was real, there was an enemy, all kinds of troops were used.

              080808- war? Be ashamed. no more than a military operation. What a war it is.
              1. Jin
                Jin 17 January 2014 16: 51
                +2
                Quote: atalef
                Be ashamed. no more military operations. What a war it is.


                I also did not understand my colleague, he is either confusing something or confusing something. He just killed ...
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 17 January 2014 12: 17
          -1
          Quote: vladsolo56
          Tzahal has not fought in real wars for a long time; skirmishes with terrorists cannot be compared with military operations. so the comparison is not convincing

          Justify what is the critical difference here? Bursts were canceled just after the real war, in 1973, when they calculated how much ammunition was spent on one enemy
          1. nerd.su
            nerd.su 18 January 2014 02: 06
            0
            Quote: Pimply
            when they calculated how much ammunition goes to one enemy

            I thought the Israelis from the humanism inherent in educated people, the Palestinians have not yet been shot. But, it turns out, it became a pity for the cartridges ...
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 24
              +2
              Quote: bot.su
              I thought the Israelis from the humanism inherent in educated people, the Palestinians have not yet been shot. But, it turns out, it became a pity for the cartridges ...

              It was about the Syrians. Everyone knows that Palestinians are only crushed by tanks
              1. nerd.su
                nerd.su 18 January 2014 03: 45
                +1
                Quote: Pimply
                It was about the Syrians.

                Yes I understand. But then you mess with the Palestinians. After calculating the consumption of cartridges.
        3. atalef
          atalef 17 January 2014 16: 44
          +2
          Quote: vladsolo56
          Tzahal has not fought in real wars for a long time; skirmishes with terrorists cannot be compared with military operations. so the comparison is not convincing

          And then who is fighting in real wars?
        4. Professor
          17 January 2014 18: 20
          +2
          Quote: vladsolo56
          Tzahal has not fought in real wars for a long time; skirmishes with terrorists cannot be compared with military operations. so the comparison is not convincing

          Hezbollah, of course, is terrorists, but VERY well organized and armed. Fought with Syria in 1982, will it do?

          PS
          In your USSR / Russia, too, have not fought since 1945?
    3. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 17 January 2014 09: 57
      +4
      In turn, you can get so many outfits at KMB that it’s not only for the entire urgent, but also to the end of the reservist service, all desire will be beaten off.
    4. Pimply
      Pimply 17 January 2014 12: 14
      0
      Quote: vladsolo56
      Best the enemy of the good. The note provides two examples of target damage. So let's draw a circle along the radius of expansion. Now imagine a battle, in a battle a soldier usually does not aim intently as a sniper. Usually they shoot a line at the side of the target. So that's what I mean, in the first case, when the target moves, all the bullets go by. A lot and so beautiful, but by. In the second case, at least one bullet will capture the target. So that’s what’s best for ordinary ordinary infantry. If we are preparing a sniper division, then here we need another weapon, specialized. So, why create the best if the benefits of it are dubious.

      In the Israeli army, shooting in bursts is strictly prohibited
      1. ed65b
        ed65b 17 January 2014 17: 42
        +1
        Quote: Pimply
        In the Israeli army, shooting in bursts is strictly prohibited

        Zheka, in Grozny, the Czechs would tear your army to pieces.
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 17 January 2014 18: 47
          +1
          Quote: ed65b
          Quote: Pimply
          In the Israeli army, shooting in bursts is strictly prohibited

          Zheka, in Grozny, the Czechs would tear your army to pieces.

          They didn’t tear to pieces in Shekham, they didn’t tear to pieces in Jenin, they did not tear to pieces in Bet Jabel, but in Grozny would they tear to pieces?
          1. ed65b
            ed65b 17 January 2014 19: 02
            +3
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            They didn’t tear to pieces in Shekham, they didn’t tear to pieces in Jenin, they did not tear to pieces in Bet Jabel, but in Grozny would they tear to pieces?

            like two fingers on the asphalt and they would have picked up slaves, although no, they immediately finished the Jews in a cruel way.
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 17 January 2014 20: 18
              +2
              Quote: ed65b
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              They didn’t tear to pieces in Shekham, they didn’t tear to pieces in Jenin, they did not tear to pieces in Bet Jabel, but in Grozny would they tear to pieces?

              like two fingers on the asphalt and they would have picked up slaves, although no, they immediately finished the Jews in a cruel way.

              Well what can I say? "Blessed is he who believes."
            2. Pimply
              Pimply 18 January 2014 00: 47
              +2
              Quote: ed65b
              like two fingers on the asphalt and they would have picked up slaves, although no, they immediately finished the Jews in a cruel way.

              Do you think in Grozny the conditions were much more complicated than in Gaza or Scheme? Or are there fewer weapons? We took Scheme with a loss of 4 dead and several wounded, with thousands of militants inside. The streets were mined - we punched through the walls and walked through the houses. Among my company there were zero casualties. And this is during the shelling, RPG and other garbage. The largest losses were in Jenin - due to crowding and attempts to protect the civilian population. Cast lead - several hundred killed militants with 10 killed soldiers. And this despite the fact that Hamas is being trained by the guys from Ksir, there were numerous concrete fortifications in the enclave, and the use of force was limited by the presence of civilians
        2. alone
          alone 17 January 2014 20: 35
          +4
          Eduard, I dare to assure you 100% that no one would have attacked Grozny with Tsakhal’s tank columns.
        3. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 17 January 2014 23: 30
          +1
          Quote: ed65b
          Quote: Pimply
          In the Israeli army, shooting in bursts is strictly prohibited

          Zheka, in Grozny, the Czechs would tear your army to pieces.

          Rather, on the contrary, we would have surrounded the city with an airtight blockade, they would have jammed them tightly, tracked the positions from drones, then we would have carried out all their command posts and large clusters of militants with high-precision bombs, then, at night, armed with hackers and thermal imagers, we would have carried out the remaining positions, methodically and systematically cutting off a piece of the city from the city under his control - until there would be a single bearded man left.
        4. atalef
          atalef 18 January 2014 00: 34
          +2
          Quote: ed65b
          Quote: Pimply
          In the Israeli army, shooting in bursts is strictly prohibited

          Zheka, in Grozny, the Czechs would tear your army to pieces.

          Why? Justify or consider that in Gaza or Lebanon less trained than Chechens?
        5. Pimply
          Pimply 18 January 2014 00: 39
          +1
          Quote: ed65b
          Zheka, in Grozny, the Czechs would tear your army to pieces.

          You’re talking nonsense, I'm sorry. Do you think the Czechs are stern professionals steeper than those animals with which Israel has fought for decades? What the hell are you talking about. In 1982, the PLO was armed as a good army — with tanks, navy, and more. How quickly did they roll out to tell? Or maybe Hezbollah and Hamas are worse prepared or armed? It's better. Less fanatical? I'm sorry, but you're talking nonsense
          1. ed65b
            ed65b 18 January 2014 01: 11
            -2
            Well, of course, where are we to you, you are covered by a beard of God. In general, the polemic is empty, and the Czechs are fighting better than your rams. In spirituality will be. Well, the situation was different. And time. And the balance of power is not in our favor. But the boys are 18 years old - in general, your Tzahal rests in the spirit and will to win.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 18 January 2014 01: 23
              +1
              Quote: ed65b
              Well, of course, where are we to you, you are covered by a beard of God. In general, the polemic is empty, and the Czechs are fighting better than your rams. In spirituality will be. Well, the situation was different. And time. And the balance of power is not in our favor. But the boys are 18 years old - in general, your Tzahal rests in the spirit and will to win.

              You're laughing? What is more spiritual? What is the other situation? The fact that the Russian army at that time was not ready for a local war? What was not in favor of Russia the situation? A huge country with huge resources against Chechnya. The internal collapse is something else. But that's where the experience of 9 years in Afghanistan has gone. And I'm sorry - in the Israeli army, what, all the harsh 30-year-old men are fighting?

              Are you talking nonsense. What was the real level of preparation for the Czechs compared to the Palestinians? Palestinians were trained by military instructors from dozens of countries, including the USSR. In 1982, the PLO had an ARMY - with tanks and other garbage. Or maybe the guys from the IRGC are bad at preparing Hezbollah and Hamas, or are they badly arming them? You are talking nonsense. Can you recall who the majority of Chechen field commanders were? Umarov is an engineer, Basaev is a controller on a bus, Zakayev is an actor, Gelaev is a builder. Is it a super warrior? Can you compare with the Palestinians with dozens of years of terrorist experience?
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 18 January 2014 01: 26
                +3
                Zhen's elementary lack of maps, reconnaissance, military rallying unit, underestimation of the enemy, not established interaction. And you can continue to infinity.
                1. Pimply
                  Pimply 18 January 2014 01: 31
                  +1
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  Zhen's elementary lack of maps, reconnaissance, military rallying unit, underestimation of the enemy, not established interaction. And you can continue to infinity.

                  About that and speech. But admitting such a shame is why the Czechs grow into mythical super-warriors. And they just have a partisan war, and knowledge of the area.
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 18 January 2014 01: 35
                    +1
                    Zhen you know yourself, there is a whole tangle of contradictions + politicking, because they were "crushed" almost in the first Chechen war, and then there was Khasavyurt!
                    1. Pimply
                      Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 09
                      +2
                      Quote: Alex 241
                      Zhen you know yourself, there is a whole tangle of contradictions + politicking, because they were "crushed" almost in the first Chechen war, and then there was Khasavyurt!

                      I understand perfectly
            2. Jin
              Jin 18 January 2014 01: 56
              +3
              Quote: ed65b
              In spirituality will be. Well, the situation was different. And time. And the balance of power is not in our favor. But the boys are 18 years old - in general, your Tsahal rests in the spirit and will to win


              You are not a stupid person, judging by the comments, on different branches of the VO, on this, doing something garbage ... With any of your statements, from what I quoted, I bet. Do you know where it is good? That's right, where we are not (((
        6. Jin
          Jin 18 January 2014 01: 09
          +5
          Quote: ed65b
          Zheka, in Grozny, the Czechs would tear your army to pieces.


          Colleague, with all due respect, let me disagree ... In Israel, fortunately, there was no EBN, Grachev and Co. This time. Secondly, where did you get such strong immunity to single-player shooting? After all, it is this type of fire that allows you to effectively hit the enemy, forgive me for the stereotyped phrases))) When I served a conscription, I don’t know about you, but we were also not allowed automatic fire during firing. At what deliberately limiting in cartridges. In short, in the end, 15 pieces were enough for me, to fill up "my" near-height, "machine-gun calculation" and long-range ones, then I put everything at my neighbor's directive (he did not hit any of his own, this is a separate whole story smile He’s a grenade launcher, shoots from an RPG like God, but, I think, anyone should be able to shoot from an assault rifle, regardless of specialty, this is, stupidly, a question of survival !!! sad ), I let the rest of the store "into milk" ... "Well done, sergeant!" The battalion commander told me then. It is simply unrealistic to achieve such a result in queues!
          I am fond of shooting and I love weapons, I love this topic, I completely understand the adequacy of the position prohibiting firing in bursts, anyone will understand who at least shot a little.
          Automatic fire, like suppression fire, is relevant in case of fire contact "point-blank", during assault and cleaning of buildings, for example ... Grenade, turn from behind cover, not protruding too much, entrance, "look at the corners", "clean", dispersed, we control the sectors ... So from room to room ...
          Sincerely.
          1. Alex 241
            Alex 241 18 January 2014 01: 14
            +5
            I welcome Zhenya, on the contrary, we didn’t set it off, if during the exercise instead of the line we shot single, by the end of the study they got so bad that even when shooting in automatic mode, they could shoot single.
            1. Jin
              Jin 18 January 2014 01: 21
              +4
              Sanka, hello! No, we had it as I wrote above ... Probably "methods were adopted", "advanced part" laughing
              To be honest, a single one is much more targeted, more efficient and more economical. There is one BUT of course! This is true when you see the goal. But here there is a rule: I don't see, I don't shoot, that's why you can shit-shit in bursts "in the direction of" the enemy, but what about efficiency? It certainly gets on the nerves. No more...
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 18 January 2014 01: 23
                +2
                Quote: Jin
                To be honest, a single is much more targeted, more efficient and more economical.

                Zhenya, I’m not arguing here!
              2. Pimply
                Pimply 18 January 2014 01: 52
                +2
                Quote: Jin
                Sanka, hello! No, we had it as I wrote above ... Probably "methods were adopted", "advanced part"

                In Israel, the standards changed after the Doomsday War. Shooting single became law in the army. They just calculated that 15000 rounds of ammunition per killed enemy is a bit much. And now all Western armies are moving on this subject
                1. Jin
                  Jin 18 January 2014 02: 11
                  +3
                  Quote: Pimply
                  They just thought that 15000 rounds per killed enemy would be too much. And now all Western armies are moving on this subject


                  It is completely logical and justified. The rate of fire single, (I do not explain, but share), with my, for example, preparation, allows you to conduct quite intense, at the same time very aimed fire (this is if density is needed, while I put them in the "apple", and not in " that direction "). And this is many times more effective than shooting in bursts "without looking, from outstretched hands, from behind cover" - in fact, shooting nowhere. And "index finger fatigue" is a matter of training)))
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 18 January 2014 02: 17
                    +2
                    Zhen will say even more, shooting single, or better "two" on one enemy allows you to control the consumption of ammunition.
                    1. Pimply
                      Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 24
                      +3
                      Exactly. The queue makes you turn off the brain, you control the situation worse
                  2. Pimply
                    Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 23
                    -1
                    Quote: Jin
                    The rate of fire single, (I do not explain, but share), with my, for example, preparation, allows you to conduct quite intense, at the same time very aimed fire (this is if density is needed, while I put them in the "apple", and not in " that direction ")

                    Exactly. At 25 meters, usually - a centimeter three-four circle shop.

                    Quote: Jin
                    And "index finger fatigue" is a question of training)))

                    I haven’t heard about it at all. With a standard consumption of no more than 5 stores per battle, especially
                    1. Jin
                      Jin 18 January 2014 02: 37
                      +2
                      Quote: Pimply

                      I haven’t heard about it at all. With a standard consumption of no more than 5 stores per battle, especially


                      Do not pay attention.
          2. Pimply
            Pimply 18 January 2014 01: 26
            +4
            Now all Western armies, including the American ones, are switching to single shooting. Because runaway fire alone is not much lower in intensity than the line, but much more effective. You aim every time - and control the situation.
            Quote: Jin
            Automatic fire, like suppressive fire, is relevant for "point-blank" fire contact, for example, when storming and clearing buildings.

            All right. And then, basically - in short bursts.
            1. Jin
              Jin 18 January 2014 01: 42
              +3
              Quote: Pimply
              And then, basically - in short bursts.


              Of course, Zhen! In addition to all the minuses of the "machine" (fire), there is also, his mother, so forgettable by all "specialists" for some reason, ricochet (especially in buildings), and the longer the queue, the more iron flies "in different directions" completely without control, to the heap ... Who needs it ...
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 18 January 2014 01: 43
                +2
                Zhen was ahead, only wanted to write about the lead "fog" good
                1. Jin
                  Jin 18 January 2014 02: 19
                  +2
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  Zhen was ahead, only wanted to write about the lead "fog"


                  How is it in that song? smile ".... fog looks like deception, looks like deception, ... fog, ... fog" This is the kind of fog, kill me I don't remember) Isn't it lead?
                  1. Alex 241
                    Alex 241 18 January 2014 02: 21
                    +2
                    It seems like blue zhen laughing
                    1. Jin
                      Jin 20 January 2014 20: 53
                      0
                      Quote: Alex 241
                      It seems like blue zhen


                      Exactly blue !!! smile Count, really forgot)
              2. Pimply
                Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 16
                +4
                Quote: Jin
                his mother, so forgotten by all "specialists" for some reason, ricochet (especially in buildings)


                Namely, we were the first to pass it - the fathers-commanders spoke about him first of all
              3. Pimply
                Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 28
                +4
                Most of all in today's discussion I liked how it was proved here that the dispersion at the machine is good, and it should be big 8)))
                1. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 18 January 2014 02: 29
                  +4
                  Quote: Pimply
                  dispersion at the machine is good, and

                  Like in that bike: So that the molten lead would not drip on the official boots.
                  1. Pimply
                    Pimply 18 January 2014 02: 32
                    +2
                    Yes, yes, yes, exactly.

                    In fact, now the Americans are moving to a new, more accurate cartridge. And to new stores.

                    It was from the stores and cartridges that most of the jambs on the m-ka were. Israel, too, new stores adopted the NATO standard
                    1. Alex 241
                      Alex 241 18 January 2014 02: 35
                      0
                      Zhenya 6.5, but as far as I remember there is a large range of cartridges of this caliber.
                      1. Pimply
                        Pimply 18 January 2014 03: 10
                        0
                        Quote: Alex 241
                        Zhenya 6.5, but as far as I remember there is a large range of cartridges of this caliber.
                        No, I’m talking about 5.56, more precisely, about replacing the M855A1 with the M855A2. 6.5 is very controversial and so far in testing
                    2. Jin
                      Jin 18 January 2014 03: 12
                      +2
                      Quote: Pimply
                      It was from the stores and cartridges that most of the jambs on the m-ka were.


                      Poorly. Decades to understand this fact and only now eliminate it. And a little strange. With the cartridge it’s clear, but with the store ... Zhenya, with such an automation system as on shops, stores are only a treatment for the investigation, not the disease.
                      1. Pimply
                        Pimply 18 January 2014 03: 27
                        +1
                        No, the elimination has been going on for a very long time and successfully. It's just that no one is standing still and everyone is going forward. And I'm talking about old shops that we used: there were jambs there, but very rarely, precisely for this reason. The Israeli army didn’t use new stores, not very new MKIs and .223 remington: all this out of economy. Well, there were failures at the shooting due to this. The first thing the people shot at shops was to check how their spring was. The slightest doubt - changed.

                        In AK, most of the jambs are also from cartridges and magazines: this is generally typical for machine guns
            2. ed65b
              ed65b 18 January 2014 11: 31
              +1
              Quote: Pimply
              Now all Western armies, including the American ones, are switching to single shooting. Because runaway fire alone is not much lower in intensity than the line, but much more effective. You aim every time - and control the situation.
              Quote: Jin
              Automatic fire, like suppressive fire, is relevant for "point-blank" fire contact, for example, when storming and clearing buildings.

              All right. And then, basically - in short bursts.

              but what about the video where 4 or 5 courageous Americans are scorching from all trunks because of blowing somewhere far into the village, they only have time to change stores and this is in Afghanistan .. so it’s not necessary.
              1. Pimply
                Pimply 18 January 2014 23: 18
                -1
                Quote: ed65b
                but what about the video where 4 or 5 courageous Americans are scorching from all trunks because of blowing somewhere far into the village, they only have time to change stores and this is in Afghanistan .. so it’s not necessary.

                To start the video, plz
              2. Jin
                Jin 20 January 2014 20: 52
                +1
                Quote: ed65b
                but what about the video where 4 or 5 courageous Americans are scorching from all trunks because of blowing somewhere far into the village, they only have time to change stores and this is in Afghanistan .. so it’s not necessary.


                Well? The guys filmed so many videos with firing in Chechnya that there is enough for 10 Hollywood action films ... There and so and so, and sideways and cancer, and from a PC, from the hands from the belly, with a ribbon dangling to the knees, the trunks were already floating " So what? And this is in "free", so to speak, time. And you can't judge by some kind of video about what we are talking about. Who knows why and where they (the Americans in the video) "fired" ??? But you never know what task the dudes have, you never know what order, setting, etc., etc.
  4. VADEL
    VADEL 17 January 2014 08: 36
    +4
    however, its accuracy and availability make it suitable also for the commercial market and shooting sports.

    Oh sports you are the world. At a pistol shooting competition, my friend drove 9mm PPO cartridges to a pharmacy and weighed them on electronic scales, selecting them by weight for greater accuracy. Our biathletes use cartridges of foreign companies as more hefty. Article +.
  5. Omskgasmyas
    Omskgasmyas 17 January 2014 08: 50
    +2
    According to the meaning of the article, I understand that these cartridges are designed for sniper and sport shooting. Well, anyone who has unnecessary extra money can play it off with bursts.
    1. Genry
      Genry 17 January 2014 09: 12
      +3
      A couple of horns of "target" cartridges, for single shooting, will not hurt.
  6. ed65b
    ed65b 17 January 2014 09: 47
    +3
    Yesterday, in an article, scouts of the airborne special forces worked only with a caliber of 7.62 - I, too, am not enthusiastic about the small caliber. When the Chechens broke out from Komsomol 5.45, they did not stop the stoned spirits. I stitched but did not stop, which negatively affected the psychological state of the fighter, in contrast to 7.62. he felled completely.
    Hi to the professor. Something was not visible for a long time. hi
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 17 January 2014 12: 19
      0
      The small caliber is more than good in a number of ways.
      1. ed65b
        ed65b 17 January 2014 17: 38
        +1
        Quote: Pimply
        The small caliber is more than good in a number of ways.

        I do not argue Zhenya. hi just gave an example of why it is bad.
    2. Professor
      17 January 2014 18: 28
      0
      Quote: ed65b
      Hi to the professor. Something was not visible for a long time.

      The Chinese rejected the project, raking. hi
      1. atalef
        atalef 17 January 2014 18: 31
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        Quote: ed65b
        Hi to the professor. Something was not visible for a long time.

        The Chinese rejected the project, raking. hi

        Hi Oleg !!!
        They reject before. how to copy or after? laughing hi
    3. Pimply
      Pimply 18 January 2014 00: 56
      +1
      Quote: ed65b
      When the Chechens broke out from Komsomol 5.45, they did not stop the stoned spirits. I stitched but did not stop, which negatively affected the psychological state of the fighter, in contrast to 7.62. he felled completely.

      No need to repeat fairy tales. You saw what 5.56 and 5.45 do when entering the human body. In terms of destructive effects on a living organism, it exceeds 7.62, I’m telling you as a physician, we studied types of wounds, and in practice it also happened. A small hole in one place - the outlet in another. How did you see a bullet in your body? Have you seen the wound channel 5.45 and 5.56 compared to 7.62?
      1. ed65b
        ed65b 18 January 2014 01: 06
        +1
        It’s not me who is telling tales, but the special forces of the Federal Penitentiary Service, but you know, I believe him a little more.
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 18 January 2014 01: 29
          +2
          Quote: ed65b
          It’s not me who is telling tales, but the special forces of the Federal Penitentiary Service, but you know, I believe him a little more.

          But somehow I’m not really. Because he saw the stopping effect of bullets. Live. Because most of the stories about stoned and full-length stories reveal the fact that no one got into stoned people, or the effect of shock affects. A person often does not immediately feel the impact of a bullet. Have you ever seen what wound channels 5,45 and 7,62 leave? Talk to doctors, take an interest. You learn a lot of new things, and about the impact, and about 7,62
          1. ed65b
            ed65b 18 January 2014 11: 47
            +2
            I will answer you in 87 in the city of Samarkand in a military hospital seen enough and mine explosive and bullet. so don’t make yourself a pirogov. I'm not a doctor but there are eyes.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 18 January 2014 23: 19
              -1
              Quote: ed65b
              I will answer you in 87 in the city of Samarkand in a military hospital seen enough and mine explosive and bullet. so don’t make yourself a pirogov. I'm not a doctor but there are eyes.

              Yeah. So what? How does this relate to 5.45 or 7.62?
      2. Jin
        Jin 18 January 2014 02: 59
        +2
        Quote: Pimply
        You saw what 5.56 and 5.45 do when entering the human body


        Zhen, I am an eyewitness to the 5,45 wounded in the "flexors" (hip), as a doctor, you must understand, the dude was given leave later, he limped all his life until the Lord took his soul, but there the hole (weekend) was not even close what's in the photo. It flew from what distance, up to 300m, I think?
        1. Pimply
          Pimply 18 January 2014 03: 11
          0
          This wound is near. But really, if 5.56, and even from the old ones, the bone fails badly, there can be a wound from the fist.
          1. Jin
            Jin 18 January 2014 03: 26
            +2
            Quote: Pimply
            the bone fails badly, there can be a wound with the cam exit.


            About bone is a completely different joke ... I'm talking about flesh, all the more so because both (the man in the photo and my friend) were disabled ...

            In short, I have not seen such wounds (as in the photo), but "mine" was lucky, caught a draft at the end of the flight. (The checkpoint was fired upon) The meat at the exit was torn off, part of the muscle. But the input was several times less. Here I am looking at THIS and on this question I ask about the distance ...
  7. kelevra
    kelevra 17 January 2014 11: 39
    0
    In this case, ours should be returned to 7,62 by AKM. There was a good cartridge, powerful and killer!
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 17 January 2014 12: 20
      +1
      Quote: kelevra
      In this case, ours should be returned to 7,62 by AKM. There was a good cartridge, powerful and killer!

      Do you live in the illusion that 7.62 is more lethal than 5.56?
    2. makarov
      makarov 17 January 2014 14: 53
      +3
      Why was it? He is still in service.
    3. Jin
      Jin 17 January 2014 16: 33
      +5
      Quote: kelevra
      In this case, ours needs to be returned 7,62


      They did not go anywhere, they release 5,45 and 7,62, as well as weapons under them. Both calibers are good in their own way and riveting only 7.62 is not reasonable and not advisable ...
  8. alex-cn
    alex-cn 17 January 2014 18: 34
    -1
    I didn’t understand something - is there a shadow on the nose of the bullet, or is it still a hole? If the hole is an expansive bullet, and their use in the army is prohibited by the Geneva Convention, as an option doom-doom.
    1. Hug
      Hug 21 January 2014 07: 21
      -1
      Re .: alex-sp

      I didn’t understand something - is there a shadow on the nose of the bullet, or is it still a hole?


      For a bullet with an expansive cavity, what looks like a hole is not enough. Rather a shadow.
    2. CHILD
      CHILD 24 January 2014 14: 23
      0
      there’s probably no hole there ...... but not closing the shirt on the tip, it’s very similar)))))
  9. CHILD
    CHILD 24 January 2014 14: 27
    +1
    what is the dispute .... if the stated indicators are true, an excellent cartridge)))) you can only envy ...