Prev: Re: [GZG] Slightly OT - Hypothetical weapon question Next: Re: [GZG] gross counting was weights

Re: [GZG] Slightly OT - Hypothetical weapon question

From: "Bill Brush" <bbrush@g...>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:21:55 -0500
Subject: Re: [GZG] Slightly OT - Hypothetical weapon question

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com>
wrote:
> At 11:40 PM +0100 10/28/08, Oerjan Ariander wrote:
>>
>>entering the water. (OK, the Mythbusters didn't include a .50 HMG, but
they
>
> the sniper rifles can only really fire ball. They
> can't fire the SLAP rounds. Were they testing the
> API or AP rounds? Ap is going to have a lower
> sectional density and WILL yaw when it strikes
> the water BUT it's not going to break up very
> well.

As I recall they were using civilian standard full-metal jacket
rounds.  Copper by appearance.

On that myth they were testing to see how far under water you needed
to be to be "safe" from being shot at.	Essentially all the
high-velocity modern rifles disintegrated on impact with the water.
Special use military rounds may hold together better but I suspect
that a great deal of their kinetic energy is going to be spent in a
very short distance.

Bill

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l


Prev: Re: [GZG] Slightly OT - Hypothetical weapon question Next: Re: [GZG] gross counting was weights