[SkyDaver]

I think this might be the appropriate forum, but if not, I won't be insulted if the moderators move it.

I want to find out just what a .50 BMG can penetrate. The Brady Campaign has a press release (http://www.bradycampaign.org/press/release.php?release=623) that claims that .50 BMG can penetrate a nuclear reactor.

Given that the containment vessel is over 4 feet of high pressure reinforced concrete with a high strength steel liner, I think this is ever so slighly bogus.

So, you Barrett owners, would you try these things out (on edit: using standard .50 BMG rounds, nothing exotic)?

1. Standard cinder block, with sand filling the cavities.

2. 12 inch cinder block, also with sand filling the cavities.

3 & 4, same size cinder blocks, but fill the cavities with dry mortar, soak the mortar and let it cure.

If it manages to penetrate all of these, concrete slabs, starting at two or four inch thick slabs.

Does this seem like a reasonable test?

[VARifleman]

That does sound off, but when have they lied to us... :barf:

With all that contrete, lead, shielding, etc. in a nuclear reactor, it would be difficult if possible at all. I think they just stated it to rely on peoples misconceptions of the "instability" of nuclear power... :cuss:

[SkyDaver]

Oh, they said it because they are just a bunch of liars, but I would still like to know actually what the .50 BMG can do. :D

[Black Snowman]

It may count against the innermost vessel that houses the control rods and fuel. But if you can get a 50 BMG that close, you're in close enough for the same weight of high explosives, at which point dragging the bulky BMG along will have seemed stupid.

[mbs357]

I agree with Snowman.
Seriously, if you get in there , why shoot it?

[50 Shooter]

Here's all the info that you'll need.

http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/mg/50_ammo.html

[Risasi]

I have a friend who is one of the main safety engineers for a plant here in Nebraska. He says the safest place in the event of a nuclear attack on this country, would be INSIDE a nuclear plant. Even most of the larger warheads (which are ours BTW).

FYI: AND the whole system is made up of concentric rings of many walls, most of them 8 feet or thicker. I suppose if you were able to penetrate the hard shell of security (who are armed with .223 and .308 caliber rifles, in jeeps) maybe just maybe you could cut through the soft (4 foot think, or whatever) underbelly of the actual reaction chamber...Na, even I can't bring myself to believe that. It's B.S.

[NMshooter]

AP will penetrate 1" of steel armor plate or 16" of wood.

SLAP will penetrate a little more, 1.5" of steel armor plate comes to mind, but I can't find the reference.

[SkyDaver]

Excellent reference, 50 shooter, thanks.

(I'd still love to see the results of my suggestions)

[rick_reno]

I have a friend who has one, and he routinely shoots the moon with his. With a good telescope he's said you can see the hits. I remember in August, 2003 he was shooting at Mars almost nightly, it was only 34 million miles away. I don't know if he hit it, apparently leading it was difficult. :)

[Molon Labe]

I've heard it mentioned that (at shorter distances) a .50 BMG and .30-06 have the same penetration distance in most materials.

[MaterDei]

F-4 Phantom vs. nuclear plant wall.

http://eul0000562.eu.verio.net/bm/JAN05/a/plane-v-concrete/fr.htm

[Nazirite]

I wouldn’t trust a thing the Brady bunch had to say, they’re a bunch of pathological lairs. :scrutiny:

[2nd Amendment]

What a horrible thing to do to a Phantom. :eek:

[TechBrute]

After reading This (http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/mg/50_ammo.html), the .50BMG just doesn't seem like that big a deal. M2 ball only 2" penetration in concrete from 200 yards. :banghead: Quite different from what the Brady Buttheads tell us...

[abaddon]

Just testing it on one cinder block wouldn't do. One cinder block on the ground will break much easier than a cinder block in a wall. The weight of all the blocks above it make it stronger. So testing it right would be expensive, but if you can afford .50 BMG ammo...

Edited for better flow...flow is good, even when interrupted by "..."

[50 Shooter]

TB,
Just more boogeyman scare tactics from the usual suspects.

[TechBrute]

Yeah, well, I still want one...

[Standing Wolf]

Hey, you guys? Where's the part about .50 BMGs knocking airplanes out of the sky from 17 miles away?

[kidcoltoutlaw]

www.fcsa.org

[Elmer Snerd]

This table(7.6) (http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297177-1/fm/3-06.11/ch7.htm#tab7-6) is straight from FM 3-06.11 COMBINED ARMS OPERATIONS IN URBAN TERRAIN (http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297177-1/fm/3-06.11/toc.htm).

A nice anti-.50-hysteria article. (http://www.mega.nu:8080/50calreport.html)

The obligatory silly link. (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?threadid=11039)

[Clean97GTI]

To do a realistic test, you'd need to use a rather high strength concrete instead of cinder blocks.

You can break cinder blocks by kicking them hard enough.(steel toed boots are helpful here) You can also do it with a hammer...block masons do it every day.

I'd be willing to bet that I could build a steel-line concrete barrier that would stop a .50BMG.
The Brady bunch is full of crap.

[ctdonath]

One huge misconception in the issue regards loading the concrete in question.

Yes, most rounds of whatever caliber can make a mess of a standard concrete block just sitting there. HOWEVER, if you put that same block under stress - as found in standard buildings - it can put up with a LOT more abuse.

Recently (and my email program just had a major malfunction so I can't find the data easily), someone went to a building (abandoned school) which was about to be demolished, and actually tried shooting through the walls. Due to the typical loading pressures, cinder blocks in the walls withstood repeated rounds from good-sized calibers. Don't know the details offhand, but recall enough to seriously question how well even a .50BMG would fare; it would probably punch through but I imagine it wouldn't have much oomph left.

So: to address the requested tests starting this thread, may I add that they be done with built, mortared, and holding-up-two-floors-and-a-ceiling configurations.

[TechBrute]

Did no one else read the link that 50shooter posted? :confused: All the data that you're looking for is in there. A .50 will penetrate 2 inches of concrete. At 25 degrees off angle, it takes 300 rounds to penetrate 2 feet of concrete. It also mentions that it will not penetrate a sand-filled 55 gallon drum.

Any questions? :D

Thanks again, 50shooter!

[DelayedReaction]

My school has a nuclear reactor, and it's far less protected than anything done on a production scale. Even so, I would be hard pressed to imagine a full auto burst from a Browning .50-Cal doing anything significant to the structure, let alone a single rifle shot.

[50 Shooter]

Always glad to help out TechBrute. :)

[Art Eatman]

Ignoring the concrete, the stainless steel pressure vessel of a nuclear reactor is 8" thick, or more. The coolant piping is not exactly thin-walled tubing, either.

Art

[halvey]

I have a friend who has one, and he routinely shoots the moon with his. With a good telescope he's said you can see the hits. I remember in August, 2003 he was shooting at Mars almost nightly, it was only 34 million miles away. Big deal. That's NOTHING!!! ;)

[Too Many Choices!?]

I love how they take an event that has a small likelyhood of happening(and an even smaller chance of succeeding) and sensationalze it to the point of people believing it is happening RIGHT THIS INSTANT and Must BE ACTED ON(usually FOR THE CHILDREN) :cuss: ! Heck of a strategy, the Nazis would be proud :( ....