SOCOM And Marines Adopt Hollow Point

[roo_ster]

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20150416.aspx#startofcomments

April 16, 2015: The U.S. Marine Corps is going to switch to hollow point rifle and pistol ammunition. Actually SOCOM (Special Operations Command) and the Marines have been using hollow tip bullets for over a decade, mostly in Afghanistan and, for SOCOM, worldwide.

It was long known that hollow point does more damage but lots of battlefield experience since September 11, 2001 made it clear that hollow point ammo was a key tool in limiting the effectiveness of Islamic terrorists.

Shortly after 2001 SOCOM and the marines, responding to complaints from troops that the standard 5.56 and 9mm full metal jacket bullets were not doing enough damage to stop fanatical Taliban fighters, began issuing hollow point bullets and troops were satisfied with the improved stopping power. As a result the Marines are going to switch over to the MK318 hollow point (or “open tip”) round for its assault rifles and machine-guns. The existing M855 full metal jacket rounds will be used up in training exercises. SOCOM has also switched to hollow point for pistols (9mm and 11.4mm) and rifles. The army is watching all this carefully.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO#Mk318

The design of the bullet was called the Open Tip Match Rear Penetrator (OTMRP). The front of it is an open tip backed up by a lead core, while the rear half is solid brass. When the bullet hits a hard barrier, the front half of the bullet smooshes against the barrier, breaking it so the penetrating half of the bullet can go through and hit the target. With the lead section penetrating the target and the brass section following, it was referred to as a "barrier blind" bullet

I was unaware of the USMC adopting this round.  I had encountered HP ammo way back when I was in the service, but it was not general issue.

[Nick1911]

I thought this was against the Hague convention?

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/dec99-03.asp

[roo_ster]

I thought this was against the Hague convention?

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/dec99-03.asp

USA never signed it.

[zxcvbob]

I thought this was against the Hague convention?

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/dec99-03.asp

I don't think we ever signed that one.

(dang it, roo_ster beat me by 29 seconds)

[brimic]

About time we stop playing silly games with silly rules.
Its not like Marines are going to be treated any worse if they are captured with expanding bullets.

[vaskidmark]

I don't think we ever signed that one.

(dang it, roo_ster beat me by 29 seconds)

https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_NORMStatesParties&xp_treatySelected=195

State party as of Oct 18, 1907, acceded to it on Nov 27, 1909 but not a signatory state. https://www.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/States.xsp?xp_viewStates=XPages_NORMStatesSign&xp_treatySelected=195

So for all intents and purposes the US has pleged to adhere to the convention.

Given the world political scene at this time the US deciding to now go back on the accession and become a world pariah does not seem to bother anybody very much.  Given that the US does not recognize the World Court (except when it is to our advantage thru a ruling against someone else) there again does not seem to be any real downside to becoming more effective in killing non-state belligerants.  Should thhe US become involved in armed combat against state belliferants I don't think anybody in American politics cares if we become world pariahs.

stay safe.

[Scout26]

We already are the Pariah's of the World.  Might as well earn the title. 

(And the whole thing was about the Brits using "Dum-Dum" bullets in the Boer War. )

[zxcvbob]

We already are the Pariahs of the World.  Might as well earn the title. 

Hell, yeah!  'Murica!  (I borrowed your extraneous apostrophe and put it to good use)

[dogmush]

As much fun as it is to seemingly give the world the finger and trash the conventions, these aren't hollowpoints. Our lawyers have held for some time now sincenter the open tip of the Open Tip Match bullets are a by product of manufacturing and not a design element they are not "designed to expand" and don't fall under the conventions.

We didn't grow a set all of a sudden, calm down.

[Blakenzy]

These topics always reveal the hypocrisy and illogical reasoning of rules applied to war. So... no problem tearing them apart with a 30mm chaingun, just don't use a 9mm JHP up close. Oh the huge manatee!

[vaskidmark]

As much fun as it is to seemingly give the world the finger and trash the conventions, these aren't hollowpoints. Our lawyers have held for some time now sincenter the open tip of the Open Tip Match bullets are a by product of manufacturing and not a design element they are not "designed to expand" and don't fall under the conventions.

We didn't grow a set all of a sudden, calm down.

Just like a Drill Sergeant to crush my dreams like a beer can at steak night.

I hope you have to sit through one more Power Point presentation.

stay safe.

[Marnoot]

Sir John Ardagh, who during the Hague Convention of 1899 was arguing against the banning of expanding bullets, made some salient points as to the need for them:

"The civilized soldier when shot recognizes that he is wounded and knows that the sooner he is attended to the sooner he will recover. He lies down on his stretcher and is taken off the field to his ambulance, where he is dressed or bandaged. Your fanatical barbarian, similarly wounded, continues to rush on, spear or sword in hand; and before you have the time to represent to him that his conduct is in flagrant violation of the understanding relative to the proper course for the wounded man to follow—he may have cut off your head"

[cordex]

Our lawyers have held for some time now sincenter the open tip of the Open Tip Match bullets are a by product of manufacturing and not a design element they are not "designed to expand" and don't fall under the conventions.

The quoted material references hollow-point 9mm and .45ACP as well.  I'm not aware of any OTM pistol bullets.

[brimic]

The quoted material references hollow-point 9mm and .45ACP as well.  I'm not aware of any OTM pistol bullets.

speer gold dots? Well, one could only hope.

[Hawkmoon]

There are actually two Hague conventions applying to military ammunition. The first, from 1899, says

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

The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.

It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.

The United States did not sign that one, but we have more or less agreed to abide by it without signing it.

The second Hague convention is from 1907, and we did sign that one. It says

…it is especially forbidden -

        To employ arms, projectiles, or material{sic} calculated to cause unnecessary suffering;

So it's not the phsical characteristics of the projectile that count, so much as whether or not it is intended to "cause unnecessary suffering."

See more complete discussion here: http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html

[Jamisjockey]

The argument could easily be made that considering the highly urban nature of modern combat, that overpenetration is a concern.  HP ammo is designed to not pass through the target.

[MechAg94]

The argument could easily be made that considering the highly urban nature of modern combat, that overpenetration is a concern.  HP ammo is designed to not pass through the target.

I always figured they would still pass through, but be much less dangerous on the other side. 

[Jamisjockey]

I always figured they would still pass through, but be much less dangerous on the other side. 

Always a possibility.  HP ammo is designed to transfer energy immediately after impact.  FMJ is not.

[230RN]

The design of the bullet was called the Open Tip Match Rear Penetrator (OTMRP). The front of it is an open tip backed up by a lead core, while the rear half is solid brass.

Sounds like the old Zipedo bullet.  (Damned things ricocheted like mad in varmint shooting with a .243.)

Our lawyers have held for some time now since [edited] the open tip of the Open Tip Match bullets are a by product of manufacturing and not a design element they are not "designed to expand" and don't fall under the conventions.

Yeah, 'cause a perfect bullet base is more important than the nose in accuracy.  Pretty well-known fact, I think.

Terry

[Firethorn]

Yeah, 'cause a perfect bullet base is more important than the nose in accuracy.  Pretty well-known fact, I think.

I remember reading about the test trials.  They did a lot of testing, and I'll try to boil it down to the semi-legaleze I read.  This involved, I believe, 7.62x51 'sniper' rounds.

1.  In accuracy trials, the OT bullet 'won' by a statistically clear margin.  It won over other tip shapes, when the tip was filled after creation, a plastic piece was put in, etc...  In short, the hollow opening improves accuracy.
1a.  It's theorized that the 'hollow point' actually creates a sort of 'pseudo-point' in the air that is more regular than having an actual point.  see things like wingtips on planes actually improving fuel economy.  People get their doctorates trying to explain this stuff.
2.  In various trials by ballistic gelatin and other means, it was found that the round didn't expand any more than the competition, wounding behavior was pretty much identical.
3.  Given that wound characteristics were the same, but accuracy improved, the round passes the 'unnecessary cruelness' because it won't, on average, increase the difficulty of treating said wounds but due to the increased accuracy will actually reduce 'unnecessary' suffering by requiring fewer rounds to be shot that 'might' hit an unintended party, or even fail to kill or cause a non-disabling wound, reducing the need to shoot the target again. 

Similar trials have been done with hollowpoint handgun rounds - turns out people go down faster to hollowpoints, so they tend to be shot fewer times, and on average, 2 hollowpoints is more survivable than 3 FMJ rounds. 

[Blakenzy]

The design of the bullet was called the Open Tip Match Rear Penetrator (OTMRP). The front of it is an open tip backed up by a lead core, while the rear half is solid brass.

Rear Penetrator 

It had to be the Marines 

[230RN]

@Firethorn

good info, but:

Similar trials have been done with hollowpoint handgun rounds - turns out people go down faster to hollowpoints, so they tend to be shot fewer times, and on average, 2 hollowpoints is more survivable than 3 FMJ rounds.

Did you mean less survivable?  Or more deadly?

Indeed, some pix of bullets in flight do show the shock wave forming slightly in front of the bullet tip.  No information is usually given on whether these particular pictures were of HPs or not.  (Or whether it's an artifact of the photographic process.)

[Blakenzy]

Considering handgun rounds, I wonder how much incapacitation is derived from the psychological factor of "feeling" the shot... I would assume that hollow points do "feel" different, deliver a greater sense of impact due to all the energy being dumped into the body. So maybe it's not that you bleed out faster, just that you really felt the impact and it defeated you psychologically. Bleeding faster may be a benefit of the slightly larger and more irregular wound channel of hollow points, but it will not be more "instantaneous" unless something central of major importance is hit, in which case a FMJ may very well have the same effect, granted a certain minimum threshold of damage is attained.