Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

AR-15/M-16: Percent of Enemy Casualties

Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by CEF1959, Jul 17, 2009.

  1. CEF1959

    CEF1959 Willamette Valley, Oregon New Member

    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    14
    Does anyone have reliable info on the percentage of enemy casualties that were caused by US forces in recent conflicts using the AR-15/M-16 series rifle? As opposed to other US weapons, I mean. I'm wondering, of the enemy casualties we scored since those rifles were put in service 40+ years ago, how many enemy were shot by those rifles, as opposed to (say) aerial bombardment or M60 thrashings.
     
  2. The Duck

    The Duck Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    556
    Likes Received:
    109
    The nicest way I can put it:

    That is a very strange question...
     
  3. ironhead

    ironhead East of the liberal masses in Oregon Member

    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    0
    That would be pretty hard to find out. I have carried a M16 while in the service and always felt undergunned. Have a AR15 now for fun but my SHTF weapon is a HK91. Is this what you were thinking? Not meaning to offend all you .223 fans out there, but I want to punch a bigger hole in whatever is coming after me. JMHO
     
  4. CEF1959

    CEF1959 Willamette Valley, Oregon New Member

    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    14
    No, it's not. It's a question about how much impact that rifle had, relative to other weapons being used at the same time. I think the impact of a particular weapon in combat is useful information.
     
  5. jordanvraptor

    jordanvraptor Oregon City, Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,666
    Likes Received:
    361
    I think the predator and smart bombs kill the most enemy in our current wars.

    Except for the urban warfare that took place during the initial invasion of Iraq, there has not really been a lot of opportunities for infantry v infantry combat. Even when it does occur, the whole point of a fight is to win it, so to peck away at each other with small arms is pointless when we have machine guns, cannons, mortars, anti tank weapons, artillery, and air support. We did a raid on a drug lords compound in Afghanistan where we had 2 Dutch F-16's circling overhead just waiting for a call for fire. Turns out we never used them except for reconnaissance. Their FLIR capabilities are amazing.:)

    Sorry about the rant but the point of being a superpower is Super Power. Or as Samuel L Jackson quaintly put it in "Rules of Engagement," "Waste the Mother Gumballers!" :)
     
  6. tionico

    tionico Thurston County Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,218
    Likes Received:
    127
    Or, as someone on here used to say as his signature: "if you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck".
     
  7. terrylf72

    terrylf72 Portland, Oregon, United States Member

    Messages:
    641
    Likes Received:
    3

    Im sure if you look on line you can find the information about the balistics, penitraion and impact trauma. and compare the two..
     
  8. terrylf72

    terrylf72 Portland, Oregon, United States Member

    Messages:
    641
    Likes Received:
    3
    +1



    I think they aught to turn the Hubble around,open up the backend and use it like a giant magnifying glass and start frying some country side, hillsidesfrom space. Start using the SDI (Star Wars Defence Initiative) tech that we have and is suppose to be a secreat. And bring our people home.
     
  9. The Duck

    The Duck Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    556
    Likes Received:
    109
    I meant that it is very strange because it would be hard to find hard-lined answers to the question. The only thing that is really recorded is causalities and those numbers can be obscure due to many enemies pulling bodies off the "fields"...
     
  10. Oro

    Oro Western WA Active Member

    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    43
    From WWI forward, infantry rifles resulted in less than 30% of battlefield casualties from most reliable studies that I have seen. Artillery, whether organic, airborne, or naval is the primary killer (air dropped munitions are just a more sophisticated system or artillery in the bigger picture).

    These numbers will vary by the type of encounter or conflict - a conflict marked by substantial numbers of small-scale encounters in urban areas, where the effectiveness of artillery is greatly diminished, will see more casualties from small caliber weapons. This would be akin to Stalingrad in '42 or Iraq recently after the cessation of major hostilities. The tactics of the enemy will also greatly shift the balance of the figures.

    In an overall percentage of casualties inflicted, the "caliber" of the rifle is almost meaningless as the major components are other classes or arms, and the type of conflict. So, if you are looking for comparative data on the effectiveness of different cartridges, looking to battlefield data is going to be more confusing than helpful because so many other variables are at play.