DID YOU KNOW? .223 History
Here is an offering from Iconoclast. Thanks Teak!
The Evolutionary History of the 5.56x45 (.223)
The bulk of this information is taken from David Hughes' definitive study of this weapon system (see Bibliography).
This cartridge actually had its genesis before Eugene Stoner's famous work. Army research and analysis of casualties in WW 2 revealed that most small arms wounds were sustained at relatively short range, typically 100 yards or less and becoming negligible at ranges above 300 yards. (ORO T-160, Hitchman, 1952). Additionally, multiple hits had demonstrated a better chance of incapacitating the enemy (surprise!). With 20-20 hindsight, it seems (at least to me) that this has been largely the case since the advent of firearms - few infantry engagements have ever been fought, much less decided, at the 300 plus yard range envisioned in the early 1900s and usually the troops involved in such long range engagements are specially deployed in that role - e.g., individual snipers or Berdan's Sharpshooters.
In any event, Project Salvo, an effort to develop a weapons system more in keeping with the realities of the modern battlefield, was the result of this analysis. The primary focus of Salvo was the development of a multi-projectile loading for the service weapons. Work was conducted on the .30-06, the 7.62x51 and a host of smaller caliber designs. This experimental work was conducted primarily by Frankford Arsenal and Olin (both Winchester & Western loadings were used). As a historical sidebar, multiple projectiles with a single discharge have been a design focus for the US military for roughly two centuries, whether "buck & ball" paper cartridges or the most recent (1988) Colt 5.56 experimentals. None have proved satisfactory, although a later project, the Salvo Squeeze Bore program produced a .50 BMG loading which saw field trials in combat with the riverine patrol craft in Vietnam, as did various flechette loadings, 12 gauge to 155mm Howitzer in the same war.
A few months before the Hitchman report, the ORO had received a report from Donald L. Hall, an engineer at Aberdeen Proving Ground, who had been tasked with evaluating the wound characteristics of smaller (than the .30" standard) caliber projectiles with a significantly higher MV - the .220 Swift being the paradigm. Hall found that in theory, a service weapon firing bullets with a diameter of .21 would inflict 250% of the casualties of the .30-06 or the .30 Light Rifle (which would become the 7.62x51) and their typical 150 - 170gr projectiles. To test this theory, some trials were conducted on clay and ballistic gelatin using .20 caliber bullets. Not only did the results demonstrate superior tissue damage, the researchers discovered the tendency of the light projectiles to tumble, creating a much larger wound channel.
Hall's study truly is the beginning of the 5.56x45. Drawing on this work, there was a second, parallel, line of inquiry under the Salvo umbrella which focused exclusively on the topic of a small caliber HV system rather than a multi-projectile system. This was lower profile and almost exclusively an "in-house" effort by personnel at Aberdeen Proving Ground. APG's Small Arms and Aircraft Weapons Branch Chief, G. A. Gustafson was in charge. His first design was based on
the .30 Carbine, necked to .22 caliber. Loaded with a 41 gr Sisk bullet, this was the .22 APG Carbine cartridge. The 5.7 Johnson Spitfire is far better known - it was the modified, commercial
version of the .22 APG developed by Melvin Johnson (known for the Johnson rifle favored by the 1st Recon of the USMC in WW2). At this time, Johnson was the East Coast representative for a fledgling California company called "Armalite." One series of these Salvo trials involved "homologous" bullets. These were .22 caliber projectiles proportionately the same size as the .30 bullets, but loaded into the original cases. For example, the 51mm case length (i.e., .308)design used a 68gr bullet (supplied by Sierra).
As the Salvo project was winding down in the late 1950's, Gustafson and his team concluded the small caliber / HV system was viable, but the 41 gr bullets too light, the 68gr too heavy. In their final report, they recommended a 55gr bullet as optimal for the system. The Army, however, had been working on a .30 caliber design since 1945, beginning with a .300 Savage and finishing with the 7.62x51 (with many intermediate types), and was firmly wedded to the M14 / 7.62x51 system.
Armalite's AR-10 design was part of the competition from which the M14 was selected. Not all the top brass were convinced the M14 was the greatest thing since sliced bread and Gen. Willard Wyman visited Armalite to discuss the very positive view the Infantry Board at Fort Benning took of the reduced caliber system. His contact was Eugene Stoner. {I cannot find the reference, but I believe Stoner worked on the Salvo Project in its earliest days} Stoner agreed to design a new
rifle & cartridge for evaluation, promising a maximum delivery time of eight months for a prototype system.
Stoner reviewed the Salvo results and concurred with the decision to standardize on the 55gr bullet, which he then personally designed. Sierra developed and produced the projectile based on Stoner's design. The first casings used were .222 Remington in a modified AR-3 rifle. This system was unsatisfactory and Stoner suggested using a scaled-down version of the AR-10. Other Armalite engineers did most of the work on this rifle and we know the result today as the AR-15. Simultaneously, to improve interior ballistics and reduce chamber pressures, Remington proposed a modified case design with the shoulder moved forward about .25" . . . the first lot of prototype cases in 1958 had the original 'REM-UMC 222' headstamp. Subsequent lots in 1958-9 were headstamped 'REM-UMC 222 SPL' . . . from 1959 the headstamp was 'REM-UMC 223' and finally in June 1963 it became the ".223 Remington" officially. Dimensionally all these are the
same, all loaded with the same 55gr bullet.
The Army remained loyal to the M14, but in 1960, in part because of successful Armalite contracts to supply the USAF with AR-5 survival rifles in .22 Hornet, Vice Chief of Staff Curtis LeMay became interested in the AR-15 / .223 system. The initial purchase of 8500 rifles was approved in 1962 and the rest of the history is widely documented.
Since 1963, there have been many modifications to the original designs - notably the shorter barrels, faster twist rates and heavier bullets currently in use. One dramatic result is that the ballistics are much different with today's 5.56x45 than they were when theorized by Hall and realized by Stoner in the 1950s.
Bibliography:
Hackley, Woodin and Scranton, History of Modern U.S. Military Small Arms Ammunition
Hughes, David, The History and Development of the M16 Rifle and Its Cartridge
Huon, Jean, Military Rifle and Machine Gun Cartridges
The Evolutionary History of the 5.56x45 (.223)
The bulk of this information is taken from David Hughes' definitive study of this weapon system (see Bibliography).
This cartridge actually had its genesis before Eugene Stoner's famous work. Army research and analysis of casualties in WW 2 revealed that most small arms wounds were sustained at relatively short range, typically 100 yards or less and becoming negligible at ranges above 300 yards. (ORO T-160, Hitchman, 1952). Additionally, multiple hits had demonstrated a better chance of incapacitating the enemy (surprise!). With 20-20 hindsight, it seems (at least to me) that this has been largely the case since the advent of firearms - few infantry engagements have ever been fought, much less decided, at the 300 plus yard range envisioned in the early 1900s and usually the troops involved in such long range engagements are specially deployed in that role - e.g., individual snipers or Berdan's Sharpshooters.
In any event, Project Salvo, an effort to develop a weapons system more in keeping with the realities of the modern battlefield, was the result of this analysis. The primary focus of Salvo was the development of a multi-projectile loading for the service weapons. Work was conducted on the .30-06, the 7.62x51 and a host of smaller caliber designs. This experimental work was conducted primarily by Frankford Arsenal and Olin (both Winchester & Western loadings were used). As a historical sidebar, multiple projectiles with a single discharge have been a design focus for the US military for roughly two centuries, whether "buck & ball" paper cartridges or the most recent (1988) Colt 5.56 experimentals. None have proved satisfactory, although a later project, the Salvo Squeeze Bore program produced a .50 BMG loading which saw field trials in combat with the riverine patrol craft in Vietnam, as did various flechette loadings, 12 gauge to 155mm Howitzer in the same war.
A few months before the Hitchman report, the ORO had received a report from Donald L. Hall, an engineer at Aberdeen Proving Ground, who had been tasked with evaluating the wound characteristics of smaller (than the .30" standard) caliber projectiles with a significantly higher MV - the .220 Swift being the paradigm. Hall found that in theory, a service weapon firing bullets with a diameter of .21 would inflict 250% of the casualties of the .30-06 or the .30 Light Rifle (which would become the 7.62x51) and their typical 150 - 170gr projectiles. To test this theory, some trials were conducted on clay and ballistic gelatin using .20 caliber bullets. Not only did the results demonstrate superior tissue damage, the researchers discovered the tendency of the light projectiles to tumble, creating a much larger wound channel.
Hall's study truly is the beginning of the 5.56x45. Drawing on this work, there was a second, parallel, line of inquiry under the Salvo umbrella which focused exclusively on the topic of a small caliber HV system rather than a multi-projectile system. This was lower profile and almost exclusively an "in-house" effort by personnel at Aberdeen Proving Ground. APG's Small Arms and Aircraft Weapons Branch Chief, G. A. Gustafson was in charge. His first design was based on
the .30 Carbine, necked to .22 caliber. Loaded with a 41 gr Sisk bullet, this was the .22 APG Carbine cartridge. The 5.7 Johnson Spitfire is far better known - it was the modified, commercial
version of the .22 APG developed by Melvin Johnson (known for the Johnson rifle favored by the 1st Recon of the USMC in WW2). At this time, Johnson was the East Coast representative for a fledgling California company called "Armalite." One series of these Salvo trials involved "homologous" bullets. These were .22 caliber projectiles proportionately the same size as the .30 bullets, but loaded into the original cases. For example, the 51mm case length (i.e., .308)design used a 68gr bullet (supplied by Sierra).
As the Salvo project was winding down in the late 1950's, Gustafson and his team concluded the small caliber / HV system was viable, but the 41 gr bullets too light, the 68gr too heavy. In their final report, they recommended a 55gr bullet as optimal for the system. The Army, however, had been working on a .30 caliber design since 1945, beginning with a .300 Savage and finishing with the 7.62x51 (with many intermediate types), and was firmly wedded to the M14 / 7.62x51 system.
Armalite's AR-10 design was part of the competition from which the M14 was selected. Not all the top brass were convinced the M14 was the greatest thing since sliced bread and Gen. Willard Wyman visited Armalite to discuss the very positive view the Infantry Board at Fort Benning took of the reduced caliber system. His contact was Eugene Stoner. {I cannot find the reference, but I believe Stoner worked on the Salvo Project in its earliest days} Stoner agreed to design a new
rifle & cartridge for evaluation, promising a maximum delivery time of eight months for a prototype system.
Stoner reviewed the Salvo results and concurred with the decision to standardize on the 55gr bullet, which he then personally designed. Sierra developed and produced the projectile based on Stoner's design. The first casings used were .222 Remington in a modified AR-3 rifle. This system was unsatisfactory and Stoner suggested using a scaled-down version of the AR-10. Other Armalite engineers did most of the work on this rifle and we know the result today as the AR-15. Simultaneously, to improve interior ballistics and reduce chamber pressures, Remington proposed a modified case design with the shoulder moved forward about .25" . . . the first lot of prototype cases in 1958 had the original 'REM-UMC 222' headstamp. Subsequent lots in 1958-9 were headstamped 'REM-UMC 222 SPL' . . . from 1959 the headstamp was 'REM-UMC 223' and finally in June 1963 it became the ".223 Remington" officially. Dimensionally all these are the
same, all loaded with the same 55gr bullet.
The Army remained loyal to the M14, but in 1960, in part because of successful Armalite contracts to supply the USAF with AR-5 survival rifles in .22 Hornet, Vice Chief of Staff Curtis LeMay became interested in the AR-15 / .223 system. The initial purchase of 8500 rifles was approved in 1962 and the rest of the history is widely documented.
Since 1963, there have been many modifications to the original designs - notably the shorter barrels, faster twist rates and heavier bullets currently in use. One dramatic result is that the ballistics are much different with today's 5.56x45 than they were when theorized by Hall and realized by Stoner in the 1950s.
Bibliography:
Hackley, Woodin and Scranton, History of Modern U.S. Military Small Arms Ammunition
Hughes, David, The History and Development of the M16 Rifle and Its Cartridge
Huon, Jean, Military Rifle and Machine Gun Cartridges
0
-
what? its not locked?[?] 0 -
10 replies are allowed....Yours is the 1st.........My reply is 2nd....8 more allowed.............
Captain Kirk, Tech Staff0 -
please, let mine go back up too so we can drive someone crazy! or, maybe he'll be man enough to offer corrections in a gentleman way.[:)] 0 -
Thank you He Dog. I like the 5.7 spitfire and the 5.56/.223. I wonder what the difference is between the FN 5.7 and the original. As usual you have done a great job in presenting the information. Thank You. [8D]
Greg
Former Marine
2nd A N G L I C O0 -
This is all the work of Iconoclast, to whom all praise or critique should go. Also, he gets to answer the questions. 0 -
agree... 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
6 comments