My best pal is with 2 para in the Brit Para regiment, and often works with the 22nd guys, and he told me most of them and most of his unit are using M4's built either by Demaco in Canada, or Saber in the UK.
The 5.56 round mentioned above used in Somalia was the SS109 round, which is basically an FMJ round with a steel penetrator inside it. Works fairly well for piercing light armour worn by troops, but tends to not create a large enough temporary stretch category when passing through tissue, hence the lack of knockdown power.
The 7.62x51mm round is still far superior to the 5.56 IMO in all departments, and I've got about 100,000 rounds of it through various M14's, National Match M1A's, HK's, and FNFAL's. 175 gr hollow point boat tail will ruin anyones day out to 800 yards and further, while the 5.56 loses the majority of its punch around the 500/600 yard mark.
I will say that the 5.56 round can be extremely lethal if the right load is used. The stuff that most tactical units buy from us is Hornady TAP rounds, which are nasty with a capitol N. Anything in the T line from about 300 yards in is going down and staying down, period.
As for the M4 discussion, I've got a 14.5" colt M4 as my primary service rifle gun at the moment, and I've whipped guys shooting Match 20" guns in 600 yard run downs, and I find its accuracy within about a half minute of what a 20" rifles is. 62 grain hollow point boat tail rounds are very lethal, and 77 gr even more so, however 14.5" guns have issues with stabilization with the 77's in my experience.
As for the M4 having lethality problems, this is sovled by ammunition selection, although since many regular line units in the USA are getting it, I'm not sure if this is possible for them. Since most infantry shots are 100 yards or less with a main battle rifle statistically, I'm sure troops love it compared to an M16a2 since it's lighter and a hell of a lot handier.
I'd still prefer a good M14/M1A if I had a choice over any rifle, I've yet to find something so easy to shoot and maintain, with such good accuracy. I'll scan in some 1000 meter targets I've shot with my national match.
Was this the same Canadian armed forces group that was deemed unsuitable for combat at the beginning of Desert Storm?
Don't know where this comes from, the troops at Canada dry 1 and 2 were more than capable, and if the PPCLI's performance in Afganistan is any indicator, the US command's praise and their rescuing of US troops and taking on tasks that caused the 10th moutain troops to get 35% casualties from exhaustion while not having a man go down would rectify any past rumours and bs. Not to mention that a Canuck holds the record for longest battlefield killshot (with 50 cal AMAX rounds from my company's inventory btw,
). Sorry to go off, I just hate the dissing of Canadian troops when they outperform all other NATO nations in every theater they've operated in historically (Vimy ridge in WW1, Juno beach in WW2, recent actions in Afganistan etc etc).
At the time of Desert Storm, the Canadian brigade in Germany was considered one of THE best, if not THE best units in Nato, and I've got 3 sources, all Amercian that state this, one being the AGW Desert Shield/Storm fact book. Political reasons are mostly to blame for our lack of participation in the actual ground fighting, but our CF18's flew tons of sorties in support of Coalition forces, and dropped a lot of unguided bombs.
Also, the rifle that Canadians use is the C7, which is manufactured in Canada by Demaco. It's a M16 variant with a hammer forged barrel and flat top mounting a 3.5 combat optic called the Elcan. Early Elcans tended to not be very precise, and some even flopped off their mounts, but the latest generations work well, and we mount them on the C6/M249 as well. Our C8 barrels are VERY sought after, being hammer forged as well, and I got my colt M4 upper from a guy in 5th SF group in FT Lewis for a single barrel (well, a Pal got it from me while shooting there with them anyhow).
