• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: The Russian Invasion of Ukraine part 9

Dr.Sid said:
It's not really incompetence. It's their style. They will suffocate you with their corpses. It has its limits, but it has worked many times in the past.
Click to expand...
Meat waves backed by drones and artillery can take ground, but you get to a point with any tactic where you're just throwing lives away for literally no benefit, and it seems russia reached that point and then some in Lyman towards the end.
 
Safe-Keeper said:
Meat waves backed by drones and artillery can take ground, but you get to a point with any tactic where you're just throwing lives away for literally no benefit, and it seems russia reached that point and then some in Lyman towards the end.
Click to expand...
No benefit is not an issue. You just keep throwing. Eventually benefit will be achieved. Running out of men is an issue though, which most likely happened.
 
Safe-Keeper said:
Meat waves backed by drones and artillery can take ground, but you get to a point with any tactic where you're just throwing lives away for literally no benefit, and it seems russia reached that point and then some in Lyman towards the end.
Click to expand...
Lyman's been a Russian possession for months now. They haven't been throwing meat waves at it; they've been using it as a base of operations for throwing meatwaves further forward. Now the Ukrainians have reversed all that momentum. And they've done it without using meatwaves, even though the Russians still have drones and artillery, and are on defense.

Whatever's going on, I think it's more complex and nuanced than just "Moscow ran out of meatwaves."
 
Andy_Ross said:
oops yes.

or .223 Remington* as it was known before NATO adopted it and made it metric.

*actually there are some subtle differences that can cause problems if .223 is used in a 5.56 chambered gun but not vice versa.
Click to expand...
Actually *yes im.being that guy*, feeding 5.56 Nato rounds into a rifle chambered for 223 Remington is a good way to destroy your gun and possibly injure your face.
 
lobosrul5 said:
Actually *yes im.being that guy*, feeding 5.56 Nato rounds into a rifle chambered for 223 Remington is a good way to destroy your gun and possibly injure your face.
Click to expand...
What about vice-versa?

More on topic, Denys Davydov's analysis of the recent successes in the Lyman direction:


ETA: And even more recent developments:
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
What about vice-versa?
Click to expand...
.223 works fine in a 5.56 chamber

Per the internet and personal experience:

The primary difference between .223 Remington and 5.56 NATO is that 5.56 is loaded to higher chamber pressures (~58,000–62,000 psi) and features a longer throat (freebore) than the .223 Remington (~55,000 psi). Because of these dimensional and pressure differences, you can safely fire .223 ammo in a rifle chambered for 5.56, but firing 5.56 in a strict .223 chamber is unsafe due to potential pressure spikes
 
Safe-Keeper said:
I'll need confirmation from someone else than the orange habitual liar. Also, knowing russia, it remains to be seen how long the agreement will last, if it even exists.

Also, while I get it'll help Ukrainian civilians enormously, it'll also let the russian oil industry recover, so really bittersweet news.
Click to expand...
Yup.

And there would be a massive attack at the end of the ceasefire
 
azazal said:
.223 works fine in a 5.56 chamber

Per the internet and personal experience:

The primary difference between .223 Remington and 5.56 NATO is that 5.56 is loaded to higher chamber pressures (~58,000–62,000 psi) and features a longer throat (freebore) than the .223 Remington (~55,000 psi). Because of these dimensional and pressure differences, you can safely fire .223 ammo in a rifle chambered for 5.56, but firing 5.56 in a strict .223 chamber is unsafe due to potential pressure spikes
Click to expand...
Safe, but may have jamming problems in a magazine fed rifle. Some AR-15's are designed to shoot both.

To the on topic subject:

I suspect Ukraine has developed a new tactic or technology to advance in the face of drone warfare. They've been super careful with opsec over the past month or so in the Lyman area, and I think thats why. This is the only operational level success either army has had in the ground campaign this year AFAIK.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
Actually *yes im.being that guy*, feeding 5.56 Nato rounds into a rifle chambered for 223 Remington is a good way to destroy your gun and possibly injure your face.
Click to expand...

.223 and 5.56 are dimensionally exactly the same specification.

A .223 chambered gun is quite happy with 5.56. NATO loadings. Some very old guns proofed for the 1950s SAMI standard might have problems with 5.56 pressures which wasn't standardised until the 1960s but nothing is going to blow up.

There could at one time be problems the other way though 'Hot' (over NATO spec) loaded .223 rounds could cause extraction problems in a 5.56 as the military chamber usually has slightly 'tweaked' dimensions by a few thou to ensure easy extraction when it's fouled or dirty and to allow for slight variations in ammo tolerance (they have to be able to swallow ammo made anywhere in NATO and possibly in stores for up to 20 years)
A hot loaded .223 case could over expand and require excessive extraction force, this could result in a failure to extract but more usually prolonged use caused excessive wear on the chamber and extractor.

A .223 gun usually has a chamber that conforms to the SAMI standard dimensions and will be a bolt action rifle so it's not a problem. Modern .223 hunting rounds tend to have hotter loading than NATO standard ammunition.

Actual problems were rare and any gun made in the last 30 years is completely safe for either.223 or 5.56.
There is massive exaggerated among the online 'gun community ' who like to pass on and amplify half remembered mythology.

I think a lot of the 'lore' stems from 7.62 NATO and .308 being virtually identical but with some actual subtle dimensional differences that make a big difference.
308 has a marginally shorter headspace and thinner case walls than 7.62 NATO.
This allows 7.62 NATO ammunition to feed reliably and be used in rifles chambered for .308, but can cause .308 Winchester ammunition cases to rupture if used in a rifle chambered for 7.62 NATO.

That's my understanding anyway.
5.56 was just coming in to general issue when I left the Navy. I went on a level one armourer course for the SA80 but never had to work on any.
Most of my experience is with 7.62 .303 and 9mm Para.
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
Not at all. .223 and 5.56 are dimensionally exactly the same specification.

A .223 chambered gun is quite happy with 5.56. NATO loadings. Some very old guns proofed for the 1950s SAMI standard might have problems with 5.56 pressures which wasn't standardised until the 1960s but nothing is going to blow up.

There could at one time be problems the other way though 'Hot' (over NATO spec) loaded .223 rounds could cause extraction problems in a 5.56 as the military chamber usually has slightly 'tweaked' dimensions by a few thou to ensure easy extraction when it's fouled or dirty and to allow for slight variations in ammo tolerance (they have to be able to swallow ammo made anywhere in NATO and possibly in stores for up to 20 years)
A hot loaded .223 case could over expand and require excessive extraction force, this could result in a failure to extract but more usually prolonged use caused excessive wear on the chamber and extractor.

A .223 gun usually has a chamber that conforms to the SAMI standard dimensions and will be a bolt action rifle so it's not a problem. Modern .223 hunting rounds tend to have hotter loading than NATO standard ammunition.

Actual problems were rare and any gun made in the last 30 years is completely safe for either.223 or 5.56.
There is massive exaggerated among the online 'gun community ' who like to pass on and amplify half remembered mythology.
Click to expand...
If your gun barrel is stamped 223 Remington on it, its only for sure built to SAMI standards for 223 Remington, not 5.56x45mm. It could be fine, or it could cause a catastrophic failure, or it could just wear your gun out quicker than otherwise.
If you bought an AR-15 made in the 21st century, it very likely is designed to work with either cartridge. This is a bit like saying go ahead and load up your 38 Special cartridges to 357 Magnum pressures... fine for a newer gun, probably.

Also the internet is telling me that American miliary 5.56 NATO cartridges are loaded hotter than European ones... but that could be a bunch of BS for all I know.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
If your gun barrel is stamped 223 Remington on it, its only for sure built to SAMI standards for 223 Remington, not 5.56x45mm. It could be fine, or it could cause a catastrophic failure, or it could just wear your gun out quicker than otherwise.
If you bought an AR-15 made in the 21st century, it very likely is designed to work with either cartridge. This is a bit like saying go ahead and load up your 38 Special cartridges to 357 Magnum pressures... fine for a newer gun, probably.

Also the internet is telling me that American miliary 5.56 NATO cartridges are loaded hotter than European ones... but that could be a bunch of BS for all I know.
Click to expand...

Rubbish The spec documents say it's wrong
People who don’t understand that NATO and SAAMI use different methods to test pressure are very confident that 5.56x45mm is a higher pressure cartridge than .223 Remington

1789506342074.png


Public link to Bloke On The Range's collection of ammunition spec documents.

.223 Rem vs 5.56 - Google Drive

drive.google.com drive.google.com
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

Ukraine has agreed not to hit Russian Energy targets. Russia has agreed to do, likewise! The World’s Diesel price rise is mostly caused by the Russia/Ukraine War, not Iran. President DJT
Click to expand...
If only someone had ended the war in a day.
 
SpuriusMaximus said:
It's been said before, but can we please just skip to the part where Putin shoots himself in his Führerbunker?
Click to expand...
No matter how bad it gets Putin will be fine with it. He misses the goods old days of the USSR when it was ◊◊◊◊◊◊ and dysfunctional. A return to that would be a real MRGA moment for him.
 
Trebuchet said:
No doubt ninja'd, but a FoP (Friend of Putin) just funded Don Junior's wedding to the tune of six figures*. With Jared and Ivanka in attendance. All of them visible in a single photo. They aren't even trying to deny it.
Click to expand...
Well that's simply not true! Don Jr absolutely tried to deny it ... said he didn't know who the guy was!
Then his wife kindly did a long instagram post admitting it and describing Umar (Kremlev) as a dear friend
 
Andy_Ross said:
Rubbish The spec documents say it's wrong
People who don’t understand that NATO and SAAMI use different methods to test pressure are very confident that 5.56x45mm is a higher pressure cartridge than .223 Remington

View attachment 75805


Public link to Bloke On The Range's collection of ammunition spec documents.

.223 Rem vs 5.56 - Google Drive

drive.google.com drive.google.com
Click to expand...
Well, you'll have to explain it to me please. I'm not contesting it, but just pleading ignorance. In that table it seems to show higher pressure numbers for 5.56 rounds than .223 rounds. If they're in different units, you'll have to tell me what the units actually are for the two, before I can make an informed comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom