250,000 rounds per insurgent?

#1
The Independant.
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington. Published: 25 September 2005

Full article here: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article314944.ece

US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed
US forces have fired so many bullets in Iraq and Afghanistan - an estimated 250,000 for every insurgent killed - that American ammunition-makers cannot keep up with demand. As a result the US is having to import supplies from Israel.

And I thought I was a crap shot.

Question: Is that 250,000 rounds fired by each septic?
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#4

Bits

War Hero
#5
Cuts - Thankyou.

Rajaz - You are either a bit dim, or very intelligent doing a good job of pretending to be a bit dim.

A standard cyclic rate of automatic fire for an infantry rifle would be about 300rds/min. However, that doesn't take account of the need to change magazine, or the fact that, contrary to popular belief, even the American's do not spend all day long firing on automatic. Even if they did, they could not reasonably be expected to fire more than say 100rds/min for very long, and at this rate of fire it would take them 2500 minutes (or 41 hours 40 minutes) of continual firing to get through this many rounds. And this, then, takes no account of the weapon overheating, needing cleaning, or the fact that unless the insurgents are big fans of the film Zulu and really can't wait to get their hands on 70 virgins, the soldier will at some point have to move and go and find some more insurgents somewhere else.

Given the statistics, which do you think is the correct answer?
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#6
Well, as long as they are firing them at the insurgents.........they're not firing them at us.
 
#7
Bits

I choose "very intelligent doing a good job of pretending to be a bit dim".

However, although I was attempting a bit of levity after a fine Sunday lunch and a few beers, I obviously accept your superior knowlege in these matters.
 
#8
... and they said that the A Team were crap shots!
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#9
I think this measures up pretty well with the normal rate of rounds expended per hit.

The concept of aimed shots is pretty tricky in a firefight, let alone accurately aimed ones. Also, most ammo goes on 'keeping heads down' rather than being fired at anyone directly.

Typical cheap shot by the Independent, which knows sod all about these matters.

And which employs that cnut Fisk.
 
#10
Rajaz said:
The Independant.
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington. Published: 25 September 2005

Full article here: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article314944.ece

US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed...

Question: Is that 250,000 rounds fired by each septic?
There's lies, damn lies, statistics, and a wah in there somewhere.

Since that'd be 1/4 million expended by all septics per insurgent - wah confirmed!

Another lazy Sunday afternoon thought: are kosher bullets rimless or full jacket?
 
#11
Playing on the dcct last week ( a gucci sat range ) fired 700 rounds got 7 kills maybe i should think about sniper training :lol:
 
#12
Coffee on monitor - Well in Woody :D

Is that 250,000 rounds of 5.56 , or 7.62 or 20mm etc? That's a lot of rounds, Iraqi scrappies must be driving around in Mercedes.
 
#15
I can't remember where I read it and I can't find it any more on the Internet, but I distinctly recall seeing somewhere that there was a total expenditure of 90,000 rounds per insurgent. That's why I'm a bit surprised at the sudden leap to 250,000 rounds.
The figure stuck in my mind because I also wondered if they meant ALL rounds, i.e. 9 mm, 5.56 mm, 7.62 mm, 50 BMG etc, since there was no calibre breakdown in the report.
If I can find it again, I'll post it.

MsG
 
#16
This isnt at all surprising, I cant remember the exact figures for rounds fired per casualty, but they go something like this:-

WW1 - 2000
WW2 - 20000
Vietnam - 200000

The tempo of combat has increased dramatically in the last 100 years, and the general use of suppressive fire and recce by fire accounts for the vast majority of rounds expended.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#17
sandmanfez said:
This isnt at all surprising, I cant remember the exact figures for rounds fired per casualty, but they go something like this:-

WW1 - 2000
WW2 - 20000
Vietnam - 200000

The tempo of combat has increased dramatically in the last 100 years, and the general use of suppressive fire and recce by fire accounts for the vast majority of rounds expended.
Marksmanship is no longer considered as important as prior to the Great War, could this have some effect on the figures ?
 
#18
Dear Woody,

I was also playing with DCCT last weekend. We had a bunch of cadets there, you sound like you would fit right in. Can you also wear a hoodie and look sullen at the same time? If so come and join us, you would be the perfect compliment for our Detachment.
 
#20
Cutaway said:
sandmanfez said:
This isnt at all surprising, I cant remember the exact figures for rounds fired per casualty, but they go something like this:-

WW1 - 2000
WW2 - 20000
Vietnam - 200000

The tempo of combat has increased dramatically in the last 100 years, and the general use of suppressive fire and recce by fire accounts for the vast majority of rounds expended.
Marksmanship is no longer considered as important as prior to the Great War, could this have some effect on the figures ?
Good point Cuts. Marksmanship probably peaked in the early 20th century, looking back to the Napoleonic wars, redcoats didnt even use sights, just form a nice smart line and fire volleys at johnny frenchman.
After the horrors of the largely static trench warfare of WW1, forward thinking commanders where determined to adopt more fluid tactics in WW2, and the expenditure of ammunition rose accordingly.
 

Latest Threads

Top