USAAF/RAF aircrew survival rifle .22?

Dear All,

thanks for your comments – yes the rifle was used for hunting game etc – I have a BRNO .22 silenced and scoped B/A rifle which is very effective at pest control and has an excellent range – I use .22 hollow point subsonic rounds, rabbits stand little chance but they are no good for the pot after being hit!

In conclusion I will refer the comments to the museum as to whether we want to add it to the collection – it is post ’73 and not noted as RAF issue (I’d never heard of a RAF issue survival rifle before, only a US one) we may pass…

Just as a coda – having read Black 6 recently – following another thread, there was provision in the rear fuselage for a Kar.98 rifle behind the radio trays – indeed there were cut-outs in the ribs to accept it…

Thanks guys

TT

.308

Moggy

Oops club fingers strike again!!. 😀 😀

Regards,

John.

I think that whilst it says on the box of a .22 LR,” dangerous up to 1 mile” it doesn’t mean deadly ; whilst on the face of it there dosen’t seem much difference between a .22 and a .223, the actual shell case on the later is about 4 times the size of the former, essentially 4X the powder charge.

the other thing to consider is that the sa80, is semi automatic, the fire rate is much higher with a short cartridge ,rather than a long one (.30 cal), as the loading cycle is quicker for the shorter round; in modern warfare, fire rate is probably seen as more advantageous than accuracy over a long distance.

Correct me if I am wrong but dont all the NATO forces use the 5.56mm (.223) cartridge with the exception of snipers that use the 7.62mm (.303) cartridge?.

.308

Moggy

It is interesting to note that the British Army goes into combat with the SA80 which is just .223 calibre, and this against slightly more aggressive targets than bunnies.

Mind you, as it frequently fails to go ‘bang’ anyway it doesn’t make a lot of difference.

Moggy

I’m no balistics expert but I believe the small calibre rounds of the SA80 and M16 are effective because they have less rifling-induced ‘spin’ applied to them. This means that upon hitting a target they have much less of a tendancy to want to keep going through it and will start to ‘tumble’ almost immediately, thereby delivery all their kinetic energy to the target (and doing damage due to the tumble) rather than using the energy trying to keep ‘drilling’ through. The downside is that if the round hits something during its flight, like bushes or leaves etc., it is much more likely to tumble and go off target.

Having been a marksman on .22 and 7.62 weapons, and having fired 9mm and .303 on many occasions, it is much easier to be consistent with the smaller calibre, as you don’t have to re-position after the recoil of each shot.
The aircrew issue 9mm Browning was/is pretty useless at actually hitting anything beyond a 10 yard range, it makes a great noise and scares people, but that is the extent of it’s abilities (if it actually fires that is…)

My favourite competition rifle was a .22 Kalishnikov, I could put 5 rounds down 25 yards with only 2 holes in the target….(well once anyway… 😀 )

The .22 could (apparently) kill at 1 mile, but couldn’t penetrate any hard material, such as brick, whereas the 7.62 SLR could easily penetrate brick/breeze block, car doors, etc.

On an ATC summer camp at Binbrook in ’83 a cadet decided to hold the 7.62 SLR stock an inch from his shoulder (air resistance to absorb the recoil!!) not only did he dislocate his shoulder, he fired over the range and hit a Policwoman in the leg 5 miles away….

No mistaking .223!!!!

(in response to Chinaclipper’s post)

I found out the difference in a very unsavoury way once when after using a .22LR rifle for rabbitting for a long time I was introduced to a .223 for larger game/vermin.

While out one day a rabbit went hopping past and instinct brought the rifle to my shoulder and crack!!! 😮 result: one fluffy tail and half the countryside left a deeper shade of red!!!, a wholey embarrasing and educating experience.

Regards,

John.

It was really only the context in which the word “survival” was being used,that I was questioning; if by that it meant evading capture, then .22 is a strange calibre, if it is taken to mean a means of providing food (meat) then it is not.

As a former staff member of the USAF Survival School I can assure you the rifle was designed for shooting small game…not as a defense weapon. In combat situations arcrew carried .38 or 45 cal (now 9mm) pistols for defense.
Why not anything more powerful? Ever try to put an M-16 into a fighter cockpit? 😀

BTW: The .22s are sturdy. The School taining lab had one one display that came from the seat kit of a F-89 WSO (as I recall) whose plane disappeared in the Washington mountains in the mid-50s. Unfortunatly, his chute did not open and his remains weren’t found until the mid-70s. The rifle…and his other gear were still in good shape.

.22 and .223/M16

I hope you know the .22 rimfire cited as a survival rifle ain’t the same as the .223… duh. LOL

The M16 problems of VietNam were caused by using the wrong powder from what was specified, causing bad fouling… That is not an issue any more. Fixed long ago, but after a bad time for the GIs using the bad ammo. !!!!!!

Someone in the Pentagon must have tried to save money by using different powder than specified… I forgot the whole old story.

In WW2 some survival arms were in fighter aircraft perhaps and payload was an issue. so .22’s were perfect.

It is interesting to note that the British Army goes into combat with the SA80 which is just .223 calibre, and this against slightly more aggressive targets than bunnies.

Mind you, as it frequently fails to go ‘bang’ anyway it doesn’t make a lot of difference.

Moggy

Correct me if I am wrong but dont all the NATO forces use the 5.56mm (.223) cartridge with the exception of snipers that use the 7.62mm (.303) cartridge?.

The reason for such a small round I believe is that if you wound someone then it takes up more resources to save an injured soldier, also an infantryman can carry more rounds into battle.

The 5.56mm round was first tried in the battle arena at Vetnam when the Americans used the M16 which was an even bigger disaster than the SA80, it was useless in the jungle where small branches would deflect bullets and it would jam so bad that some would claim an AK47 from a deceased VC and use that instead as it was indestructable and would take down trees!!.

John.

Dear all,

need your help – we have been offered a .22 Charter Arms survival rifle (from a legitimate and legal source, it will be de-ac’d before we receive it) which was apparently issued to aircrew during WW2 and after.

I vaguely remember hearing something about this in the past but dont know whether this is correct – 682al and others- does this ring any bells?

The cost of deactivation will be borne by the Museum but we dont want to pay for something which is not ‘relevant’ to aircrew etc – (deact cost about £60)

anyone have any knowledge on this?

TT

Hi TT

On a recent investigation of a WB-29 crash site (44-61600 crashed 25.10.1955), we were surprised to find approximately twenty rounds of small calibre Ammunition, still in the remains of their cardboard carton, jammed underneath the rebuilt dry-stone wall that the WB-29 had ploughed through. Each cartridge bore the headstamp “WRA” indicating manufacture by the Winchester Repeating Arms Co. New Haven, Connecticut and the date 1944. By checking the cartridge dimensions these proved to be .30 calibre ammunition for the US M1 Carbine. Due to their small size and light weight they were carried in wartime B-29s as part of the survival kit and it seems that this provision was maintained on the WB-29s. Hope this helps.

It is interesting to note that the British Army goes into combat with the SA80 which is just .223 calibre, and this against slightly more aggressive targets than bunnies.

Mind you, as it frequently fails to go ‘bang’ anyway it doesn’t make a lot of difference.

Moggy

Charter Arms? check out their website… I did not think they go back to WW2. They don’t. They were founded in 1964. So … it can’t be WW2 vintage.

charterfirearms.com

i have one of their basic snubnose .38s.

There were lots of survival rifles, some were a combo .410 and .22 or .22 magnum, etc. I don’t know anything about WW2 survival rifles but knew Charter Arms was a relative newcomer to the firearms business.

As FMK.6John says these were common in North America in the late 50s and 60s. I would not want to tackle a moose with one!

Well a .22 wouldn,t be too great against things like salt and freshwater crocs,feral pigs,wild camels,water buffalo,wild brumbies and some species of Aussie sandflies.That,s where you need the hitting power of something like a .303.

It was really only the context in which the word “survival” was being used,that I was questioning; if by that it meant evading capture, then .22 is a strange calibre, if it is taken to mean a means of providing food (meat) then it is not. It would also make more sense if it were (as previously stated) a take down weapon, where concealment would also be an issue.

Strange calibre for a survival rifle, if by survival you take it to mean defence, although it might be for shooting something to eat, like an apple!!(only kidding) the .22 being a relatively quite firearm would atract less attention than a .577 !!

Actually in a survival situation a .22 cal rifle is rather more use than a 9mm pistol, though the aviator will likely have one of those too (unless they are american in which case they will have a .45 pistol).
A .22 cal rifle is much more useful at shooting small game because the ammo is compact and light and easy to carry. You can get 50 rounds in a box not much bigger than a matchbox. With a silencer fitted the target will not know what hit them. In fact the Russians have issued a .22LR sniper rifle for urban combat due to its quietness and close range accuracy. ( Do a search on the SV-99 ).
It also destroys less meat than a larger cartridge and is accurate enough to kill rabbits and possums out to 50-70m.
I own a silenced .22LR rifle and the first time I took it out to hunt it had not been zeroed when I spotted a rabbit sitting out in the open. I dropped down amongst the long grass and placed the crosshairs right on his head and fired. There was a puff of dust about 30cm above his head and the rabbit leaped into the air and dashed 2m and then stopped with its ears up trying to work out what had happened. I swore quietly and adjusted the sights half a dozen clicks and fired again and my bullet hit the dirt about 30cm below the rabbits head… it jumped up and dashed back to where it was before… probably wondering why the ground kept exploding around it. So I adjusted the scope three clicks up and fired at the rabbit that was sitting on its hind legs with its ears up trying to work out what was happening. The third shot went straight through its head… it didn’t know what hit it.
Without a silencer that rabbit would have gone at the first shot. (Of course with a properly zeroed rifle it also would have been dead after the first shot too).
With proper training you can take animals up to goat size with a well placed .22 shot. I prefer the 7.62 x 39mm round for goat sized targets, but then taking such large animals in a survival situation makes no sense as you have to be able to carry your food and you cant really store all the meat from a goat, unless there is a group of you.

On a side note TT it depends which site you look at for info on this rifle, some say it was adopted and some say that a few were purchased for trials but it was not adopted.

Also I can not find any suporting information that the RAF may have used or considered this rifle for aircrews.

Regards,

John.

TT I have fond memories of this rifle, if I am thinking of the same it is a ‘takedown’ that is stored in the stock and is ideal for taking on hiking/camping/survival trips.

It was adopted by the U.S. Airforce in 1956 as a survival aid for downed aircrews that needed to forage for small game, folow this link for more info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-7

It was first made by Armalite and if yours is a Charter Arms then it was made after 1973 when they bought out Armalite, I myself have used one for pest control and rabbiting but is not very practicle or acurate past 150ft.

Regards,

John.

Strange calibre for a survival rifle, if by survival you take it to mean defence, although it might be for shooting something to eat, like an apple!!(only kidding) the .22 being a relatively quite firearm would atract less attention than a .577 !!