5.56mm "Training Ammo"

#1
I've been offered some 5.56mm ammo which appears to be "Training Ammo" - it has a snub-nose and is marked RORG (Royal Ordnance Radway Green).

From what I can research and surmise it's a low power round made of sintered metals bound in a composite. There's a picture of one here http://home.wanadoo.nl/cartridges/brittish%20images/rifle/223/223_rota.jpg

Does anyone know if this stuff of any use - I presume that it would travel at least a 100m to a target but if the ballistics are way off the normal stuff then I suppose there's no great practice value to be had from it (but it's quite a bit cheaper than FMJ or soft-point).

Although being frangible it might be quite fun for bunnies etc as long as you're not planning to eat them...
 
#2
Isn't RG the accepted marking for Radway Green on 5.56?
 
#3
chocolate_frog said:
Isn't RG the accepted marking for Radway Green?
Yup, it is indeed.

Perhaps it's the boxes he means?
 
#4
Looks a bit dodgey to me...never seen that type of round before. Check the cases haven't been re-used and filled with something else.

Have you got a photo of the base and box?

S_R
 
#5
No, it's kosher stuff. I've seen it up at Radway Green. It's a lightweight frangible round that RG market for CQB training. The frangible bullet eliminates the risk of ricochet and splashback at short range. Also, there's no lead in the bullet which reduces any health risks. I'm not sure if UK has ever bought it though - no doubt one of our friendly AT/ATOs from the RLC board will know.
 
#6
Okay, I was never a small arms person when I was at RO. I could ask some contacts I have there if you want... does it have a part number?

S_R
 
#7
Thanks guys for the quick reply. It's not boxed so I don't have any more markings - came in those quick-load clips.

Markings on the round base are "RORG 88" and the NATO circle+ symbol.

I guess the exam question is: does travel any sort of distance and have any terminal effect? If it does 100yds then might be quite useful for farmyard foxing - won't trash the buildings etc.

Guess I'll have to try some and see. Think I've read that bars of soap have a similar resistance to penetration as flesh & bone.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#8
theinventor said:
Thanks guys for the quick reply. It's not boxed so I don't have any more markings - came in those quick-load clips.

Markings on the round base are "RORG 88" and the NATO circle+ symbol.

I guess the exam question is: does travel any sort of distance and have any terminal effect? If it does 100yds then might be quite useful for farmyard foxing - won't trash the buildings etc.

Guess I'll have to try some and see. Think I've read that bars of soap have a similar resistance to penetration as flesh & bone.
You'll find cabinet ministers are more useful for this purpose, in fact it is the only useful purpose they serve.

Not only will you get realistic data on the performance of your rds, but you'll be an asset to the country and the world in general by getting rid of this toxic waste.
 
#9
I could be pissing up the wrong tree here......but, when I was a crab and the sa80 firstcame out we were taught that there were 4 different types of round.

Ball
Tracer
Blank

and

LPTR which stood for Low Power Training Round.Is htat what this is ? I have never seen or heard of the LPTR been taught since waaaaaaaaaaaaay back in the day.
 
#10
polar69 said:
I could be pissing up the wrong tree here......but, when I was a crab and the sa80 firstcame out we were taught that there were 4 different types of round.

Ball
Tracer
Blank

and

LPTR which stood for Low Power Training Round.Is htat what this is ? I have never seen or heard of the LPTR been taught since waaaaaaaaaaaaay back in the day.
There are also Drill Rounds, Inspection Rounds and Armour Piercing Rounds.

RG is the standard marking for Radway Green.

It is indeed a frangible round but I don't remember seeing any in-Service ammuntion although some were purchased for trials. Lead-free is the way ahead and if anybody has sizeable quantities of tungsten lying around in their back gardens the Chinese and the Us will buy it off you as that is now what they are starting to manufacture bullets from.

I would imagine the ballistics on this round will be sh1te :(
 
#11
could we get a few MP's to try it on at 100 metres + if not lethal bound to hurt and everybody gets a go :twisted:
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#12
Bring it to my wood, we'll test it and video the results for arrsers!
 
#13
Whats the difference between Inspection Rounds and Drill Rounds?
 
#14
frogit5 said:
Whats the difference between Inspection Rounds and Drill Rounds?
Drill rounds - used to practice your drills und skills
Inspection rounds - used by Armourer types for function tests and the like.
 
#15
Inspection rounds often have a soft matte coating that is easily marked by the action of the rifle, and which the armourer can use to detect defects - e.g. scratches in the chamber, problems with the extractor, etc.
 
#16
Cheers
 
#17
Yup, low powered training rounds. I used some whilst I was with the New Zealand Territorial Force about 11 years ago. we used them in a tyre house for FISH CQB and they didn't penetrate the walls.
I think it was due to less powder in them and a lighter projectile.

On the same note, has anybody used the 5.56 marking rounds that seem to fire a little paint pellet? I think they might be for CP training??
 
#18
Skimmod said:
Yup, low powered training rounds. I used some whilst I was with the New Zealand Territorial Force about 11 years ago. we used them in a tyre house for FISH CQB and they didn't penetrate the walls.
I think it was due to less powder in them and a lighter projectile.

On the same note, has anybody used the 5.56 marking rounds that seem to fire a little paint pellet? I think they might be for CP training??
Sim rounds by all account very painful by all accounts .Training becomes
very realistic as no one wants to get shot! I know someone who wants to meet a minimi gunner who shot him in both legs with a burst of sim rounds
:D .
 
#19
Skimmod said:
Yup, low powered training rounds. I used some whilst I was with the New Zealand Territorial Force about 11 years ago. we used them in a tyre house for FISH CQB and they didn't penetrate the walls.
I think it was due to less powder in them and a lighter projectile.

On the same note, has anybody used the 5.56 marking rounds that seem to fire a little paint pellet? I think they might be for CP training??
In Magiligan a few years back whilst RUC were using 9mm painty/waxy type rounds. Did my good deed for the year and fix one of the coppers MP5s - all done, it even looked like it would work - I told him you'd best test fire it before you get back to your training, I went to put my tools away when there was a mahooosive pain in my arrse cheek followed by; "that's seems to be fine - cheers!"

To be fair, he could hardly miss.

Not used the 5.56mm or had them used on me.
 
#20
If the rds (both trg and sim) are lighter, how are they keeping the port pressure up to make the workey bits go and yet keep the MV down? Serious question, since I'd like to develop some low-power .223 Rem that still will work the AR-15... Simunition uses different workey bits, but I assume this stuff works the normal innards.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads