Russia claims their new future body armour will stop a .50 cal
I cannot neigh-say that.
I cannot speak to the various mathematical calculations made here, but I have seen some fairly practical applications of big calibre weapons. I am a recreational shooter and hunter and my round of choice is the 338 Lapua Magnum. It is simply devastating - it has a speed advantage over the .50 cal but the fifty has the weight. A quick search on YouTube will bring up several videos of big game, deer etc dropping dead as they were shot with a .50 cal. This might sound unsurprising , but in every case the round missed. The animals were not hit. The shockwave killed them - eyes ruptured and lungs trashed.
I cannot say unequivocally that this armor won’t stop a .50 cal as I have not seen it, but I would be absolutely amazed.
I cannot say unequivocally that this armor won’t stop a .50 cal as I have not seen it, but I would be absolutely amazed.
I cannot say unequivocally that this armor won’t stop a .50 cal as I have not seen it, but I would be absolutely amazed
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK202251/
It was said the Erebus DC-10 crash folk were all killed by the shock wave of impact being transmitted from the floor up through their legs, noting that they wouldn't have felt a thing as the internals turned to mush before the nervous system could send a message to the brain. Go to 5:55.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot speak to the various mathematical calculations made here, but I have seen some fairly practical applications of big calibre weapons. I am a recreational shooter and hunter and my round of choice is the 338 Lapua Magnum. It is simply devastating - it has a speed advantage over the .50 cal but the fifty has the weight. A quick search on YouTube will bring up several videos of big game, deer etc dropping dead as they were shot with a .50 cal. This might sound unsurprising , but in every case the round missed. The animals were not hit. The shockwave killed them - eyes ruptured and lungs trashed.
I cannot say unequivocally that this armor won’t stop a .50 cal as I have not seen it, but I would be absolutely amazed.
I cannot say unequivocally that this armor won’t stop a .50 cal as I have not seen it, but I would be absolutely amazed.
The shooter says that the projectile passing close to the deer’s head “sucked its eyes out”. It would take a great deal of energy to generate a vacuum strong enough to do that even in a stationary spot, let alone for the entire distance between the gun and the target.
I’m no gun expert or mathematician, just making an observation. Amazing if true.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. A lifetime and highly experienced PROFESSIONAL hunter shoots a deer from 50m.
2. He has a scope, bipod and a rifle on a steady platform.
3. The professional hunter then MISSES?!
4. You see the puff of debris when the round ACTUALLY hits
5. The round hits in the eye and passes straight through the other eye and creates very little damage, because.... physics.
I have stood 3 ft from 105mm Howitzers going off, my arms are still attached.
I have had 7.62mm whizz past my head at close range, no pressure wave of even the remotest of significance felt.
Had an IED blast go off 100 ft away, limbs still attached.
122mm mortar land 50ft other side of a blast wall, no lost limbs.
Seen numerous gunshot, blast injuries. 100% involved a direct hit.
To have sufficient shockwave you would need a HUGE pressure wave caused by insanely fast projectiles traveling WAY faster than a .50 cal.
Also, a point to consider, a .50 has a similar fps as most normal hunting rounds, which means a broadly similar shockwave. The power of a .50 comes from E=mc2.
It is the rapid stop at the end that does the damage, not the pressure wave.
Mythbusters experiment results
Last edited by heights good; 16th Feb 2021 at 03:11.
Lets look at the facts from your video.
1. A lifetime and highly experienced PROFESSIONAL hunter shoots a deer from 50m.
2. He has a scope, bipod and a rifle on a steady platform.
3. The professional hunter then MISSES?!
4. You see the puff of debris when the round ACTUALLY hits
5. The round hits in the eye and passes straight through the other eye and creates very little damage, because.... physics.
It is the rapid stop at the end that does the damage, not the pressure wave.
1. A lifetime and highly experienced PROFESSIONAL hunter shoots a deer from 50m.
2. He has a scope, bipod and a rifle on a steady platform.
3. The professional hunter then MISSES?!
4. You see the puff of debris when the round ACTUALLY hits
5. The round hits in the eye and passes straight through the other eye and creates very little damage, because.... physics.
It is the rapid stop at the end that does the damage, not the pressure wave.
It looks like he missed slightly high - easy to do if you're closer to the target than you estimated.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The puff is from the tree that the bullet hit right behind the deer. A 50 cal slug is a half inch in diameter - if it went in one eye and out the other, would the eyes still be there? I think not...
It looks like he missed slightly high - easy to do if you're closer to the target than you estimated.
It looks like he missed slightly high - easy to do if you're closer to the target than you estimated.
Large rounds like .50 have a significant shockwave which contributes a lot of energy in wounding but I'd be surprised by the near-miss death. Would like to see better quality evidence as I'm always happy to be educated. I suspect the round went through the deer but not encountering anything solid enough to trouble it drilled a neat round hole and went through, causing a lot of shockwave damage in doing so.
Once a round hits the victim, the shockwave it transfers in to the body dumps energy at tissue margins (eg bone-muscle, lung-fluid where there's a change in density) and can cause injury quite a long way from the wound track and cavity. SO we might see a nerve injury on the right when the gunshot wound is on the left, for example.
Once a round hits the victim, the shockwave it transfers in to the body dumps energy at tissue margins (eg bone-muscle, lung-fluid where there's a change in density) and can cause injury quite a long way from the wound track and cavity. SO we might see a nerve injury on the right when the gunshot wound is on the left, for example.
I'll echo the call for BS, there's no way even a .50 will kill unless it hits, been tested time and time again and there's not even near the energy required from a close pass.
The Mythbusters test was from memory using wine glasses places within cm's of the bullets path and there wasn't even enough energy transfer to make the glasses move.
Best guess for the doe would be the difference between temporary wound cavity vs permenent, Didn't say in the video what round he used but I'd hazard a guess that it had enough zip to not even start deforming or fragment in the few inches of head it passed through leaving mostly a temporary cavity. Bet if they had taken the time to clean that skull off they would of found a near .50 cal hole from one side to the next with a few surrounding fractures.
Same goes for the "knock you on your ass" idea, can't conjure up more energy in the bullet than what the shooter is subjected to when firing it. Sure a muzzle break will save the shooter from some of the energy but that's marginal. If it doesn't knock you on your arse shooting it it won't knock a target over even if it dumps all it's energy into a solid steel plate.
The Mythbusters test was from memory using wine glasses places within cm's of the bullets path and there wasn't even enough energy transfer to make the glasses move.
Best guess for the doe would be the difference between temporary wound cavity vs permenent, Didn't say in the video what round he used but I'd hazard a guess that it had enough zip to not even start deforming or fragment in the few inches of head it passed through leaving mostly a temporary cavity. Bet if they had taken the time to clean that skull off they would of found a near .50 cal hole from one side to the next with a few surrounding fractures.
Same goes for the "knock you on your ass" idea, can't conjure up more energy in the bullet than what the shooter is subjected to when firing it. Sure a muzzle break will save the shooter from some of the energy but that's marginal. If it doesn't knock you on your arse shooting it it won't knock a target over even if it dumps all it's energy into a solid steel plate.
Not sure how the Mythbusters did their "Sonic Boom" testing with the Blue Angels but the Ottawa Terminal was certainly damaged by the F-104 pass.
From Wiki about the Ottawa airport. You can find other reports if you search about it.
I don't believe the Wiki is correct when it says that the F-104 was requested to make the pass supersonic. It seems the supersonic speed was not intentional, or that is what the investigation determined, but the damage was real enough.
From Wiki about the Ottawa airport. You can find other reports if you search about it.
I don't believe the Wiki is correct when it says that the F-104 was requested to make the pass supersonic. It seems the supersonic speed was not intentional, or that is what the investigation determined, but the damage was real enough.
Incidents and accidents[edit]
- In August 1959, a U.S. Air Force Lockheed F-104 Starfighter performed a low fly-by of the airport during celebration of the opening of a new terminal in Ottawa and on request by the organisers went supersonic over the main runway. The result was catastrophic, causing windows and parts of the walls of the terminal to shatter. The terminal was only reopened in 1960.[31]
Here's a good one for temporary vs permanent cavity, temporary is caused by the shockwave and permanent by the bullet mushrooming or fragmenting.
Note the first test, 16 inches of ballistic gel and there's no permanent cavity to speak of. First few inches is virtually an icepick hole, fair enough a .50 icepick hole but nothing earthshattering.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,754
Received 2,738 Likes
on
1,166 Posts
See here:
The jet myth was labeled as 'busted' as they were unable to shatter glass with 8000', 2000' and 500' flybys, but they did get a result on a 200' pass. As mentioned in the video, the direction, any shockwave reflection and the flexibility of the glass pane all have an influence on the end result.
Last edited by Jhieminga; 16th Feb 2021 at 13:20.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
