That real shooting war we were involved in went on for 10 years, and no shortages of components...ever, that I experienced...so we don't have a "complete story " as to what's going on...
Well, you've given your own answer here in this statement. The USA was involved in a lengthy 'hot' medium size war (Vietnam) and was half way through a much longer 'cold' war with the Soviet bloc. The West, particularly the US, was permanently on a semi-war footing. The US and UK particularly were resourced to produce large quantities of the principal (conventional) munitions used by their armies and huge stocks of smallarms ammunition were held that could be drawn on should things go down the plughole in Germany with a Soviet invasion. As I noted in an earlier post, that's why we had so much cheap surplus 7.62 available - if you hold strategic stocks that are many times larger than annual consumption, and you have an assigned 'storage life' of 12 or 15 years, then you have huge stocks of 'out of date' cartridges to dispose of each year through the commercial international arms trade. What percentage of civilian recreational shooting was resourced from those cheap military surplus cartridges? A damn big one! What we also had was the manufacturing capacity to produce and maintain these ongoing production levels - plus a substantial strategic reserve capacity that could be called on to increase supply quickly and substantially in the event of 'the balloon going up'.
That was then ......... then in 1984, the Soviet bloc imploded, the Berlin Wall was torn down and we'd never see another major war. (So 'people' said.) Vietnam was long finished, we Brits started dismantling BAOR (British Army of the Rhine); the US started the long slow process of doing the same to whatever it called its equivalent contingent in Europe, not just in Germany but in the UK too (mostly USAF bases and squadrons, every one now long gone).
Here's an excerpt from a 1970 UK Parliament debate:
ARMY ESTIMATES, 1970–71, VOTE A
HC Deb 12 March 1970 vol 797 cc1576-695
1576
§3.59 p.m.
§The Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army (Mr. Ivor Richard)
I beg to move, That a number of Land Forces not exceeding 201,600, all ranks, be maintained for the safety of the United Kingdom and the defence of the possessions of Her Majesty's Crown, and that a number not exceeding 55,000, be maintained in the Regular Reserve, that a number not exceeding 80,000 be maintained in the Territorial and Army Volunteer Reserve, and that a number not exceeding 6,000 be maintained in the Ulster Defence Regiment, during the year ending on 31st March 1971.
Land Forces = Army only in Britspeak, not RN or RAF.
So that's 351,000 regular and reserve uniformed British Army personnel (excludes civilian support staff).
Today, the British Army has just over 80,000 'regulars' plus the Territorial Army part-timers (= US National Guard units), around a quarter of the '71 figure, and using a lot less ammo per head than back then. Moreover, the infantry is probably proportionately smaller now and in terms of weapons, vehicles and systems spend gets a much smaller share of the overall cake because of the ballooning cost of fancy high-tech weapons systems. (Before we - and you - pulled out of Afghanistan, British squaddies talked irreverently of
shooting a Porsche at Taliban HMG or mortar crews sniping at British positions from outside of 5.56 effective range. Before snipers and their kit were enhanced and a $2.50 (?) 338LM round or two took the other side's effectives out, it was an airstrike, or artillery fire mission or a Javelin missile which in round figures cost the same as a Porsche!)
With the partial exception of the US, the West hasn't just taken advantage of the so-called 'peace dividend', many countries have milked it to the near destruction of their armed forces' effectiveness - eg Germany!
Ammunition and components production facilities were closed or sold off to the private sector which has shareholders to answer to, a burgeoning health & safety 'industry' on its back in any facility that makes, stores, or uses explosives and in the case of explosives plants (ie powders and primers) public hostility and encroaching residential developments that ever more onerous safety regs then force the factories to close. (I've never understood why the houses shouldn't be torn down instead if the plant had been there for decades beforehand.)
Long periods of reduced orders are historically not at all uncommon in these industries. What is different now is that whilst key plants were all government owned in previous generations, they've now been sold to the private sector which simply cannot afford to have expensive plants and capacity sitting idle for years, especially with ever-rising environmental and health & safety demands not only affecting running costs, but often requiring complete rebuilds ang megabuck investment (as in ADI, Mulwala). As a result, production capacity has severely declined across the sector. As I also said in an earlier post, with a few honourable exceptions such as the Australian government which part-funded the Mulwala ADI powder factory modernisation to keep it in business, most countries simply have no interest in supporting a now mostly privately owned sector in the interests of national security. Also, I don't think the senior soldiers have helped much either - they've fallen head over heels in love with high-tech Star Wars technology, so a few Javelin missiles replace millions of rifle cartridges in budgets.
In the civilian sector, these factors have reduced sources of supply massively over the years starting with the loss of surplus ammo, despite ongoing growth in shooting and large increases in per capita annual ammunition and components consumption. How many powders are listed in Hodgdon's burn rate chart? 163 in the newest one I can find. How many factories in the West provide those pistol and rifle handloading powders? A mere 9 that I can think of (General Dynamics Valleyfield + St. Marks; Eurenco P.B. Clermont + Bofors; Explosia; Thales / ADI; Nitrochemie Wimmins a.g.; Nammo Vihtavuori Oy; and someone at Radford Va (New Rivers Energetics?). Primer manufacture is worse with a smaller number of producers, all tied to ammunition factories, so that application gets priority. Note too, that only two plants are in the USA, and for rifle powders only one (St. Marks in Florida). You in the US are shipping most of your handloading powders thousands of miles .......... and we now have post-Covid international shipping capacity crisis ............ and ships' masters who have the right to say 'accept' or 'reject' to any shipment to be put on their vessels are wary of propellants, and many will reject primers out of hand. .... AND, this is peacetime, so very limited US military demand.
As far as I can see, there are NO conspiracies out there causing shortages, no UFOs, NO secret warehouses full of government stashed primers (OMG - I wish there were, just in case we ever have to fight somebody bigger than the Taliban. I doubt if we could source the Vietnam war's demand for smallarms ammo now!) It's a simple case of supply and demand being out of balance, and given the vast restraints on manufacturing, storing, or transporting explosives these days, there are no simple answers to the supply side of the seesaw, even less so any quick ones.
AND .... IF we do get into even a 'modest' war, forget recreational ammo and handloading supplies. Governments will ruthlessly seize production assets within their own jurisdictions and switch everything to military supplies and / or outbid us in the world markets for the outputs of the independent producers.