New Army "Caliber Configuration Study"

[stanc]

Maybe you're confusing mild-steel cores, which I would guess is a lead-preserving, cost-saving measure (unless mild steel flies and penetrates better than lead FMJs?), and Armor Piercing steel cores, instituted for the specific purpose of gaining a tactical military advantage through superior penetration.

No, I'm not confusing the two types of steel-core bullets.

Yes, use of steel for bullet cores is a lead-conserving measure, but everything I've read says that because construction of steel-core bullets is more complex, they cost more to manufacture than lead-core projectiles. Cost differential of the raw materials is reportedly quite small.

Not sure what you mean by "flies better." According to what I've read, steel-core bullets typically are less accurate, but also have higher BC, than lead-core bullets of the same weight.

And yes, mild steel-core FMJs generally have measurably better penetration than lead-core FMJs of the same caliber and weight.

So, to the point, we've agreed the Russians were seeking either a tactical edge via AP or a strategic resources edge via cheap mild steel. Now, is the U.S. military going lead-free because they're coldly seeking a tactical or strategic edge or because they want to be environmentally sensitive? I think I know the answer.

Are you sure?

[COLOR="darkgreen"]...there were three sets of competing requirements.

The Infantry Center expressed a number of performance goals compared to M855:
Improved soft target lethality over M855;
Improved accuracy over M855;
General purpose capability;
Ballistic similarity to M855;
Similar hard target performance to M855;
Optimized for the M4 carbine; and
Reduced flash.

SOCOM was most interested in finding a round that would have significantly better accuracy than Mk262 and be available at lower cost – best, in fact, if one of the other services adopted it, as a SOF-specific round would be purchased out of SOCOM budgets rather than provided by the big Green Army. Other concerns were secondary provided the round could be optimized for the shorter barreled weapons SOF operators were using.

The program manager (PM-MAS) needed to find a solution that was “environmentally friendly” (defined as a lead-free projectile, no tungsten) to meet the Green Ammunition mandate for which they were already funded.

Ultimately, the team came up with a plan that would meet most of the requirements of most of the parties. The design effort would work to the Infantry Center’s basic requirement, with the understanding that SOCOM could take or leave the solution depending on its performance. The solution would have to be “green”, which would justify using the available funding and existing program to do the work, rather than having to go back and justify and fund a new ammunition development program.[/COLOR]

I don't know how to copy the link for the whole article. If you wish to read the complete text, Google "m855a1 development" and it should be at the top of the list. It's an RTF file and the title shows on screen as "In Search of Lethality: Green Ammo and the Developmen..."