Discussion in 'On Topic' started by LancerV, Jul 2, 2009.
Warning gore, but god damn
Holy shit...that is INSANE
Have no clue how that didnt hit the femoral artery though
Even got to keep his legs, doctors are amazing nowdays
And then the thread goes on to call the bullet "ineffective"
Oh im sure he still put up a hell of a fight
One guy on there though is saying that the temporary cavity cause the femur to fracture
Looks pretty effective to me, damn.
Lucky strike to the femur doesn't prove how effective or not a projectile might be.
Independent testing on controlled substances that shows relative strengths and weaknesses is the only way to judge a bullet. The father of the study of terminal ballistics notes that he once treated a soldier shot by accident in the leg by M-193... with the bullet travelling on the vertical access.
Lots of muscle to go through, went straight through like an ice pick, and the soldier was back in business in days. 30% of the time, M-193 doesn't fragment.
Yea calling BS on that one
You can tell by the muscular atrophy he wasnt walking for at least a month +
Even if this were true, this is EXACTLY what NATO wants their rounds to do. Incapacitate a solider and require two of his fellow men to pull him off the field, effectively removing 3 people from the fight.
The rounds is doing what it was designed to do in this case.
Not sure where this was at but I doubt he was a soilder I think it was a police shooting.
But either way hes not going to be fighting capable ever again
Imagine if it was 10mm
remember that Dr. Martin Fackler was the same guy who researched and discovered (the much touted) fragmentation in terminal ballistics. He might as well be the father of modern terminal ballistics.
This is actually an urban myth. Anyone who is design a bullet to just wound, has fucking failed and designed a bullet that doesn't work.
When your enemy has his finger on the trigger, and you have a .5 second leg up on him, you want him dead dead dead. Not wounded so his buddies can save him. War is ugly business, and you want it over as soon as possible. When you have waves of Chinese coming out the hills at you, and their bullets kill, and your bullets wound... what do you think is gonna happen.
This notion is myth with no support in reality. The M855 was borne from FN's Minimi program which later became the adopted as the M-249 SAW. To ease logistics, and because it worked decently against expected soviet armor the M855 was adopted for the M-16A2 as well.
The only projectile adopted with terminal ballistics specifically in mind is the recently revealed Mk 318 Mod 0, to be used in conjunction with the MK 16 SCAR.
NATO would let us use expanding ammunition if it were a myth. It all goes back to the Hague Conventions but NATO follows them.
I think you failed at reading last I checked this wasnt in 1980
And I no bullets are always designed to wounds, take out, disable etc... You never wanna make anything that says its desgined for dead dead dead people as you call i hope you never go to court
Lastly I could think of why the military would use a FMJ Steel although soon to be tungeston core over a HP or OTM. Ill let you try and think about that one
And what the fuck is the Mk 318 Mod 0 and the Mk16 Scar that got dropped
Doesn't the Hague convention ban that type of bullet? And since, as you said, NATO follows the terms of the convention, wouldn't that be the reason we don't use expanding bullets? Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see the point you're trying to make.
We use expanding bullets
ChipOnShoulder said that our bullets were not in fact designed to wound, which is false because the Hague Convention says we cannot use expanding ammunition (soft tip basically) in war.
No soft point or polymer tip, nothing designed to rapidly expand like self-defense or hunting ammunition.
Nobody told the Germans that in WWII, my grandfather said he stumbled across a machine shop in a small town in Germany that had a drill press set up to drill the ends out of 8mm Mauser rounds so they would be more effective. War is a bitch.
They're designed to do as much damage as possible, within the constraints of the Hague Convention.
Yea im saying we use them though too, whops was mis marked but its all we got so I guess we have to use it. Or the Mk 262 ammo is theater approved also
Hmm, I didn't know they made HP match ammunition for combat. Neat.
1980 or not, that's the same projectile, and likely the exact same type of rifle that this Filipino was shot with.
1. LOL, I'm sure engineers at Raytheon don't put in their mission statement: "We're gonna make missiles to kill them enemies dead dead", but I wonder what the point of a AIM-9 sidewinder missile is!
2. "Lastly I could think of why the military would use a FMJ Steel although soon to be tungeston core over a HP or OTM. Ill let you try and think about that one"
Uh, re-reading that again, i'll see you were obliquely trying to tout the benefits of penetration against barrier. M-193's higher velocity actually exceeds M855's penetration at ranges below 100 yards. Our current enemies don't wear body armor, and our malnourished. Our needs have evolved, and finally, so has our ammo.
Anyway, i don't think I said anything about this. Thanks for provoking deep thought.
3. The SCAR didn't get dropped, I return your "WTF" with a "WTF are you talking about holmes?"
It's being issued with a battalion of Rangers of the 75th ranger regiment RIGHT THE FUCK NOW in Iraq, it's being issued and evaluated by SOCOM members, it's sitting in the SEAL armory in Coronado (as shown by SMGLee). Shit didn't get dropped holmes.
Here is the NDIA presentation revealing ATK/ Crane NSWC's ammunition projects, the Mk 318 and Mk 319 for the 5.56 and 7.62 versions of the SCAR. Full details on program goals and volumes.
This presentation is a month old.
Phatcyclist: Legally we don't use "JHPs"... but tell me, what does was the Sierra 77 gr "open tip match" called before we pulled it for use in the MK-262 in 2001? Why... HOLLOW POINT! JAG ruled it to be legal for land warfare use, because the open tip isn't an active part of the projectile's wounding mechanism.
The new Mk 318 is the same deal. Superior penetration and terminal ballistics while not violating land warfare rules.
Ejection seats never heard of them?
Yea because were in one war now means were only going to be fighting village men throwing rocks at us the rest of the time so were going to pull all ball ammo And were switching to M856 ammo which has more penetration through armor than M855 if it wasnt that big of a deal why would be field it
Defense Review recently spoke to one of our professional contacts in the tactical firearms community, and he told us on the phone that the MK16/SCAR-L is for all practical purposes “dead”, meaning that it’s not likely to survive for very long, and that the SCAR weapons are continuing to experience teething problems in the field, i.e. breaking down. We don’t have confirmation/verification on this yet, so it’s just a rumor at this point. Anything’s possible, but we’ve spoken with people in the U.S. military Special Operations community who prefer either the AR-config HK416 (also written HK 416) for a gas piston/op-rod carbine/SBR solution or a good old-fashioned DGI Colt SOPMOD M4A1 Carbine or MK18 CQBR SBR for a DGI solution.
Great means jack shit