Issue 5 April 2012 - Clyde Valley Pistol Club

CLYDE VALLEY PISTOL
CLUB
NEWSLETTER
Secretary’s Welcome
Well its mid April which means that the AGM is only weeks away.
The committee have set a date of the 21st of May for the AGM,
7.30pm as usual. Invites and notices will be sent out in due course
The clubs finances continue to improve, however as advised last
month we are still facing a £2000+ bill for water rates. Our
treasurer is doing his best to try and resolve that problem but it is
looking less and less likely that we will get a reprieve.
In addition to the above potential bill we have just renewed our NRA
membership (which we must hold by law) and buildings insurance
which come to a combined total of a little over £1400.00.
It is not cheap running a club like ours so if you are still to amend
your Standing Order or square up your fees, please do so ASAP.
AGM 2011/2012
The Clubs AGM will take place on the evening of the 21st of May at
7.30pm prompt.
All members are welcome to attend but please note that only full
members are eligible to vote.
If you have anything you would like raised at the AGM please Email
the details to the secretary no later than 7 days before the date
Issue No: 5 April 2012
Official notices will be sent out in due course.
Up and Coming Club Courses and Events
Work Party
No Work Parties Currently Schedules
Competition
The clubs own internal leagues are now underway. All members are
welcome to join in on this.
Courses
Date to be set
Full Bore Shoots
Blair Adam:
24th March 200 yards
21st April 200/500 yards
19th May 500 yards
23rd June 200 yards
21st July 200/500 yards
25th August 500 yards
22nd September 200yards
27th October 200/500 yards
24th November 500 yards
09.00 to
15.00winter/16.00summer
Faslane:
8th April (Change to the original
date.
14th April
20th May
16th June
15th July
18th August
15th September
14th October
17th November
9th December
All Noon to 1500/1600
There are no fees to either of the above for CVPC members.
Non CVPC members pay £10 at Blair Adam and £5 at Faslane.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
Treasurers Report
As mentioned above we are still attempting to get 100% relief from
the Scottish Water bill. This is proving to be a difficult and length
process but we are doing what we can to make it happen. If we are
unable to get a relief then this will be reflected in any increase in
annual fees.
Coaches Reports
There has been a change in coach, so no report this month
Club Membership
With numbers continuing to increase we have decided to open up on
a Monday night for a trial period from the 16th April for firearms and
airguns.
Initially this will be on an Informal bases to see what kind of
response we can get. If it proves successful then we will extend it
for a longer period, opening the books for non FAC holders etc.
One thing to remember the 2nd Monday of each month is when the
committee meet so there will be no shooting that night.
Work Party Report
No Work Party this month.
Range Report
The first of our own bookings at Blair Adam was an un-resounding
failure! Although it was basically a beautiful day the hill and field
were covered in fog the whole day (well almost – read on!).
Turn out was very good with about 20 present and another few
waiting in the car park to see if the weather would change.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
Unfortunately it didn’t and at 1.00pm instructions were given to put
the targets away and clear up.
Sadly just as the last butts party was walking down the range the
fog cleared to expose a beautiful day and the hill – Doh!!!!
There was no point however, in setting back up as our booking for
the day was almost over and putting one round down range would
have meant we pay for the entire day, so we all headed home
somewhat dejected.
Our second date could not have been more different. With 25
people in attendance the weather in the morning was great and we
kicked off at 200 yards about 9.30am.
With 5 lanes open target 1 was initially set up for probationers
training and lane 5 for a precision comp. Lanes 2-4 were available
for zeroing, practice and plinking. By late morning lane 1 was
changed to a McQueens target.
Both competitions were well shot and I think enjoyed by all who
took part and everyone had an enjoyable day out.
Well done to Bobby Robertson and Mike Barton for their scores on
the Precision and McQueens and to our youngest shooter (12 year
old Murray) who can second equal on the McQueens (and didn’t do
to bad on the precision either). I think we will all have to keep an
eye on him, especially me!
Shooters Odd Box
Dots & Dashes
Introducing another way of range-finding, using a zoom
’scope. FRANK BERRY explains
IF YOU USE A ZOOM SCOPE, the chances are its reticule will be on the
second focal plane, which means that as you increase the
magnification, the dots, dashes, or whatever reference marks it
incorporates, will remain unaltered while the target image grows
larger.
Besides giving the shooter a less obstructed view of his target, it is
possible to employ this effect as a method to establish how far away
the target is.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
The formula for this is : R  SxMxC , where
( D  1)
R equals the Range
S equals the Size of the Target
M equals the Magnification Setting
C equals the Constant of the Scope
D equals the number of Dots (or Dashes) used to bracket the
target.
Finding the constant for your scope
This is the factor tied in to the scope at some point in its
construction. To be honest, I did not know what else to call it, but
once you know what it is for your scope, you apply it every time you
want to estimate the range of a given object. Here is how to
calculate it.
Start with a target whose size you know, place it at a known
distance, and turn the zoom on your scope until you bracket your
target between two (or more) dots. Then, modify the above
formula to read C  Rx(D 1) and substitute the known values.
SxM
For example, at 25 yards (900 inches), my Zero Option scope
brackets a one inch target between two dots at a magnification of 9.
My formulalooked like this: C  900 x(2  1) . It follows therefore, that
1x9
the constant for my Zero Option scope is 100.
On the other hand, I have a Simmons model that brackets a oneinch mark at the same distance when on 18X; the value of its
Constant is 50.
So, how does this work in the real world? A while ago, I was at
the edge of a field that contained a water trough. I knew the height
of the trough was 30 inches, so to work out how far away it was I
turned the scope until I had it bracketed between 9 dots at a
magnification of 14.5.
The sum read as follows R  30x14.5x100 or, R  43500 or, R=5437.5
(9 1)
8
inches, which is 151 yards.
A laser range finder set the distance at 147 yards.
This may seem likean awful lot of maths, but I’ve used an extreme
example to illustrate the principle.
By manipulating the equation, you can also use it to generate a
reference point for distances other than your current zero. For
example, if you know the distance to a target is 200 yards, and that
at its current setting your rifle will shoot 10 inches low at that
range, you can calculate the amount of dots to hold over at your
chosen magnification.
Assume you are using a 16X setting on a scope with a constant of
50 (like my Simmons). How many dots make 10 inches?
Issue No: 5 April 2012
( D  1) 
SxMxC
R
or,
( D  1) 
10 x16 x50
7200
or,
( D  1) 
8000
7200
or D=1 +1.1, or just over
2 dots, which is how much holdover you should need.
Laser rangefinders are very precise and, in most circumstances,
easy to use. They have certain drawbacks, however: such as
targeting small objects, which tend not to reflect well, and they
don’t let you measure anything except distance. The formula above
has various functions, which I hope would make it—if not a
replacement to a dedicated rangefinder—a potentially helpful
addition.
The measurements given here are Imperial, but the formula also
works with metric values.
Top Tips
Website Time
If anyone has a useful or favourite website this is the place to share
it with other members
For the AR15/M16 lovers amongst us have a look at these:www.Ar15.com
www.M4carbine.net
www.lannertactical.com
For those that like Tactical long arms (and superior accuracy):www.deserttacticalarms.com
www.youtube.com/user/DesertTacticalArmsUT?blend=2&ob=videomustangbase
www.accuracyinternational.com
For the accuracy nuts amongst us, try these:www.accurateshooter.com
www.6mmbr.com
Handy Suppliers:-
www.rimfiremagic.co.uk
www.voodootactical.com (or .net)
www.valleyarmsscotland.co.uk
Anyone for Reloading Data:www.hodgdon.com (check out their reloading data centre)
Issue No: 5 April 2012
The others:www.sportingservices.co.uk/aics.asp
www.silencertalk.com
http://www.702shooter.com
I will try and update the above list each month with useful websites.
If you have a favourite site, let me have the details and I will add it
to the list.
M16
Part 3
M16 adoption
Curtis LeMay viewed a demonstration of the AR-15 in July 1960. In the summer of
1961, General LeMay had been promoted to the position of USAF Chief of Staff, and
requested an order of 80,000 AR-15s for the U.S. Air Force.[22] However under the
recommendation of General Maxwell D. Taylor, who advised the Commander in
Chief that having two different calibers within the military system at the same time
would be problematic, President Kennedy turned down the request.[22] However,
Advanced Research Projects Agency, which had been created in 1958 in response to
the Soviet Sputnik program, embarked on project AGILE in the spring of 1961.
AGILE's priority mission was to devise inventive fixes to the communist problem in
South Vietnam. In October 1961, William Godel, a senior man at ARPA, sent 10 AR15s to South Vietnam to let the allies test them. The reception was enthusiastic, and in
1962 another 1,000 AR-15s were sent to South Vietnam.[23] Special Operations units
and advisers working with the South Vietnamese troops filed battlefield reports
lavishly praising the AR-15 and the stopping effectiveness of the 5.56 mm cartridge,
and pressed for its adoption. However, what no one knew, except the men directly
using the AR-15s in Vietnam, were the devastating kills[24] made by the new rifle,
photographs of which, showing enemy casualties made by the .223 (5.56 mm) bullet
remained classified into the 1980s.[24]
The damage caused by the .223 (5.56mm) "varmint"[24] bullet was observed and
originally believed to be caused by "tumbling" due to the slow 1 in 14-inch (360 mm)
rifling twist rate.[25] However, this twist rate only made the bullet less stable in air.[25]
Any pointed lead core bullet will turn base over point ("tumble") after penetration in
flesh, because the center of gravity is aft of the center of the projectile.[25] The large
wounds observed by soldiers in Vietnam were actually caused by projectile
Issue No: 5 April 2012
fragmentation, which was created by a combination of the projectile's velocity and
construction.[25]
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara now had two conflicting views: the
ARPA report favoring the AR-15 and the Pentagon's position on the M14. Even
President John F. Kennedy expressed concern, so McNamara ordered Secretary of the
Army Cyrus Vance to test the M14, the AR-15 and the AK-47. The Army's test report
stated only the M14 was suitable for Army use, but Vance wondered about the
impartiality of those conducting the tests. He ordered the Army Inspector General to
investigate the testing methods used, who reported that the testers showed favor to the
M14.
U.S. Soldier cleans his XM16E1 during the Vietnam War in 1966.
Secretary Robert McNamara ordered a halt to M14 production in January 1963, after
receiving reports that M14 production was insufficient to meet the needs of the armed
forces. Secretary McNamara had long been a proponent of weapons program
consolidation among the armed services. At the time, the AR-15 was the only rifle
that could fulfill a requirement of a "universal" infantry weapon for issue to all
services. McNamara ordered the weapon be adopted unmodified, in its current
configuration, for immediate issue to all services, despite receiving reports noting
several deficiencies with the M16 as a service rifle, including the lack of a chromelined bore and chamber, the 5.56 mm projectile's instability under arctic
conditions,[citation needed] and the fact that large quantities of 5.56 mm ammunition
required for immediate service were not available.[citation needed] In addition, the Army
insisted on the inclusion of a forward assist to help push the bolt into battery in the
event that a cartridge failed to seat in the chamber through fouling or corrosion. Colt
had argued the rifle was a self-cleaning design, requiring little or no maintenance.
Colt, Eugene Stoner, and the U.S. Air Force believed that a forward assist needlessly
complicated the rifle, adding about $4.50 to its procurement cost with no real benefit.
As a result, the design was split into two variants: the Air Force's M16 without the
forward assist, and for the other service branches, the XM16E1 with the forward
assist.
In November 1963, McNamara approved the Army's order of 85,000 XM16E1s for
jungle warfare operations;[26] and to appease General LeMay, the Air Force was
granted an order for another 19,000 M16s.[16][27] Meanwhile, the Army carried out
another project, the Small Arms Weapons Systems, on general infantry firearm needs
in the immediate future. They recommended the immediate adoption of the weapon.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
Later that year the Air Force officially accepted their first batch as the United States
Rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm, M16.
The Army immediately began to issue the XM16E1 to infantry units but the rifle was
initially delivered without adequate cleaning supplies or instructions. When the M16
reached Vietnam with U.S. troops in March 1965, reports of stoppages in combat
began to surface. Often the gun suffered from a stoppage known as “failure to
extract,” which meant that a spent cartridge case remained lodged in the chamber after
a bullet flew out the muzzle.[28] Although the M14 featured a chrome-lined barrel and
chamber to resist corrosion in combat conditions, neither the bore nor the chamber of
the M16/XM16E1 was chrome-lined. Several documented accounts of troops killed
by enemy fire with inoperable rifles broken-down for cleaning eventually brought a
Congressional investigation.[29]
“
We left with 72 men in our platoon and came back with 19, Believe it or
not, you know what killed most of us? Our own rifle. Practically every one
of our dead was found with his [M16] torn down next to him where he had
been trying to fix it.
- Marine Corps Rifleman, Vietnam.[29]
”
The root cause of the stoppages turned out to be a problem with the powder for the
ammunition. In 1964 when the Army was informed that DuPont could not massproduce the nitrocellulose-based powder to the specifications demanded by the M16,
the Olin Mathieson Company provided a high-performance ball propellant of
nitrocellulose and nitroglycerin. While the Olin WC 846 powder was capable of firing
an M16 5.56 mm round at the desired 3,300 ft (1,000 m) per second, it had the
unintended consequence of increasing the automatic rate of fire from 850 to 1000
rounds per minute. This would leave behind dirty residue, making the M16 more
likely to have a stoppage. The problem was resolved by fitting the M16 with a buffer
system, slowing the rate of fire back down to 650 to 850 rounds per minute and
outfitting all newly produced M16s with an anti corrosive chrome-plated chamber.[30]
On February 28, 1967, the XM16E1 was standardized as the M16A1. Major revisions
to the design followed. The rifle was given a chrome-lined chamber (and later, the
entire bore) to eliminate corrosion and stuck cartridges, and the rifle's recoil
mechanism was re-designed to accommodate Army-issued 5.56 mm ammunition.
Rifle cleaning tools and powder solvents/lubricants were issued. Intensive training
programs in weapons cleaning were instituted, and a comic book style manual was
circulated among the troops to demonstrate proper maintenance.[16] The reliability
problems of the M16 diminished quickly, although the rifle's reputation continued to
suffer.[16]
According to a February 1968 Department of Defense report the M16 rifle achieved
widespread acceptance by U.S. troops in Vietnam. Only 38 of 2100 individuals
queried wanted to replace the M16 with another weapon. Of those 38, 35 wanted the
CAR-15 (a shorter version of the M16) instead.[31]
Issue No: 5 April 2012
[edit] NATO standards
German Army soldiers of the 13th Panzergrenadier Division qualify with the M16A2 at
Würzburg, as part of a partnership range with the U.S. 1st Infantry Division.
Vietnam era 20-round magazine (left) and Current issue NATO STANAG 30-round
magazine (right).
In March 1970, the U.S. stated that all NATO forces should eventually adopt the
5.56x45mm cartridge. This shift represented a change in the philosophy of the
military's long-held position about caliber size. By the middle of the 1970s, other
armies were also looking at M16-style weapons. A NATO standardization effort soon
started, and tests of various rounds were carried out starting in 1977. The U.S. offered
their original 5.56x45mm design, the M193, with no modifications, but there were
concerns about its penetration in the face of the wider introduction of body armor. In
the end the Belgian 5.56x45mm SS109 round was chosen (STANAG 4172). Their
round was based on the U.S. cartridge but included a new 62 grain bullet design with
a small steel tip added to improve penetration. The U.S. Marine Corps was first to
adopt the round with the M16A2, introduced in 1982. This was to become the
standard U.S. military rifle. The NATO 5.56x45mm standard ammunition produced
for U.S. forces is designated M855.
Shortly after NATO's acceptance of the 5.56x45mm NATO rifle cartridge in October
1980.[32] Draft Standardization Agreement 4179 (STANAG 4179) was proposed in
order to allow the military services of member nations easily to share rifle
ammunition and magazines during operations, at the individual soldier level, in the
interest of easing logistical concerns. The magazine chosen to become the STANAG
magazine was originally designed for the U.S. M16 rifle. Many NATO member
nations, but not all, subsequently developed or purchased rifles with the ability to
accept this type of magazine. However the standard was never ratified and remains a
'Draft STANAG'[33]
Issue No: 5 April 2012
The NATO Accessory Rail STANAG 4694, or Picatinny rail STANAG 2324, or a
"Tactical Rail" is a bracket used on M16 type rifles in order to provide a standardized
mounting platform. The rail comprises a series of ridges with a T-shaped cross-section
interspersed with flat "spacing slots". Scopes are mounted either by sliding them on
from one end or the other; by means of a "rail-grabber" which is clamped to the rail
with bolts, thumbscrews or levers; or onto the slots between the raised sections. The
rail was originally for scopes. However, once established, the use of the system was
expanded to other accessories, such as tactical lights, laser aiming modules, night
vision devices, reflex sights, foregrips, bipods, and bayonets.
All current M16 type rifles are capable of launching NATO STANAG type 22mm
rifle grenades from their integral flash hiders without the use of an adapter. These 22
mm grenade types range from powerful anti-tank rounds to simple finned tubes with a
fragmentation hand grenade attached to the end. They come in the "standard" type
which are propelled by a blank cartridge inserted into the chamber of the rifle. They
also come in the "bullet trap" and "shoot through" types, as their names imply use live
ammunition. The U.S. military does not generally use rifle grenades, however they are
used by other Nations.
Currently, the M16 is in use by 15 NATO countries and more than 80 countries world
wide.
Loading an M203 40 mm grenade launcher attached to an M16 rifle with a practice
round.
[edit] Grenade launcher
The M203 40 mm grenade launcher was originally designed to be mounted on the
M16 and its variants. It uses the same rounds as the older M79 "shotgun"-type
grenade launcher, which utilize High-Low Propulsion System to keep recoil forces
low. The M203 is versatile and compatible with many rifle models. It is widely used
by the U.S. Military and is routinely seen on the M4 Carbine. The launcher can also
be mounted onto the Canadian made C7, and requires the bottom handguard on the
rifle to be removed in order to mount the launcher.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
[edit] Design
Top drawing is of an A2-style rifle; bottom drawing is of an A2-style rifle with A1 rear
sights (as with the C7)
The M16's receivers are made of 7075 aluminum alloy, its barrel, bolt, and bolt carrier
of steel, and its handguards, pistol grip, and buttstock of plastics. Early models were
especially lightweight at 6.5 pounds (2.9 kg) without magazine and sling. This was
significantly less than older 7.62 mm "battle rifles" of the 1950s and 1960s. It also
compares with the 6.5 pounds (2.9 kg) AKM without magazine.[34] M16A2 and later
variants (A3 & A4) weigh more (8.5 lb (3.9 kg) loaded) because of the adoption of a
thicker barrel profile. The thicker barrel is more resistant to damage when handled
roughly and is also slower to overheat during sustained fire. Unlike a traditional "bull"
barrel that is thick its entire length, the M16A2's barrel is only thick forward of the
handguards. The barrel profile under the handguards remained the same as the
M16A1 for compatibility with the M203 grenade launcher. The rifle is the same
length as the M16A2.
The M16 rifle fires the 5.56x45mm cartridge and can produce massive wounding
effects when the bullet impacts at high velocity and yaws in tissue leading to
fragmentation and rapid transfer of energy.[35][36][37] This produces wounds that were
so devastating that the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)[38] and many
countries (Austria, Argentina, Belgium, Bolivia, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia,
Cyprus, Germany, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Mauritius, Mexico,
Romania, Samoa, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, etc.)[39] considered the M16 to be
an inhumane weapon.[40][41]
One distinctive ergonomic feature is a plastic or metal stock directly behind the
action, which contains a recoil spring.[42] This serves the dual function of operating
spring and recoil buffer.[42] The stock being in line with the bore reduces muzzle rise,
especially during automatic fire. Because recoil does not significantly shift the point
of aim, faster follow-up shots are possible and user fatigue is reduced.
Another distinctive ergonomic feature is a carrying handle on top of the receiver, with
an integrated rear sight assembly and charging handle. This design is a by-product of
the original design where the carry handle served to protect the charging handle and
mount a scope.[42] In practice, the handle is rarely used to carry the weapon and doing
so is expressly prohibited in many military organizations, as it is considered
unsafe.[citation needed] Holding the weapon by the pistol grip provides quicker response
time and better "muzzle awareness," while a shoulder sling provides a more
convenient option when response time is not a concern.[citation needed] The "accessory
rail" is also considered unsafe to use after the weapon has been fired for prolonged
periods as enough heat, to melt flesh, will transfer from the receiver to the handle.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
More importantly, with the sight plane 2.5 in (63.5 mm) over the bore, the M16 has an
inherent parallax problem that can be confounding to shooters. At closer ranges
(typically inside 15–20 meters), the shooter must aim high in order to place shots
where desired.
Newer models have a "flattop" upper receiver with a Picatinny rail, to which the user
can attach either a conventional sighting system or numerous optical devices such as
night vision scopes.
The M16 utilizes direct impingement gas operation; energy from high-pressure gas
tapped from a non-adjustable port built into the front sight assembly actuates the
moving parts in the weapon. Combustion gases travel via a gas tube above the barrel
directly into a chamber in the bolt carrier behind the bolt itself, pushing the carrier
away from the bolt. This reduces the number of moving parts by eliminating the need
for a separate piston and cylinder and it provides better performance in rapid fire by
keeping reciprocating masses on the same axis as the bore.[citation needed]
The primary criticism of direct impingement is that fouling and debris from expended
gunpowder is blown directly into the breech. As the superheated combustion gas
travels down the tube, it expands and cools. This cooling causes vaporized matter to
condense as it cools depositing a much greater volume of solids into the operating
components of the action. The increased fouling can cause malfunctions if the rifle is
not cleaned as frequently as should be. The amount of sooting deposits tends to vary
with powder specification, caliber, and gas port design.
In April 2010 TACOM Life Cycle Management Command issued permission for
soldiers to camouflage M4/M16 weapons with paint if given command approval.
Final Part next issue
Footnotes
No Footnotes this months
Picture Spot
Blair Adam 21st April:
Issue No: 5 April 2012
Issue No: 5 April 2012
If anyone has shooting any related pictures that they would like to
share with other members then this is the place to do that.
Issue No: 5 April 2012
PETITION TO FORCE A RETURN TO
22 PISTOL SHOOTOING
Many of you will have seen this already and Im sure have signed it.
For those that haven’t I strongly recommend that you sign onto the
Epetition (link below) for a return of .22 pistols. It may not do any
good but it may just get a result. In any case it takes 2 minutes and
can’t hurt!
https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/360
Thats it for issue 4 If anyone would like something included in the
next issue please send me the details to:
[email protected]
Please note if you do have something you would like included please
don’t send it as a PDF. Word or Excel documents are ideal.
Until next time, keep yer powder dry!