[Cosmoline]

We just had a tragic fatality when a car thief fleeing police plowed into a car at an intersection. The APD officers were trying to shoot at the driver beforehand with their side arms, but as with 99% of other cases where officers try to hit a speeding driver with a handgun bullet, they failed. The target is too smal, too fastl and too well protected in the cab for a handgun to nail.

And we've all seen many, many helicopter videos of stolen cars driving over tires spikes only to drive on for many miles on the rims alone. Modern cars are so well made you can still speed on the raw metal. So that's no good.

It got me thinking, as a technical more than legal matter, what would a high-powered rifle round do if fired through the hood into the engine block? The engine is a much bigger and easier target to hit than the driver. Has anyone seen how far a .30'06 bullet will cut through an engine? Would a bullet stop the vehicle quickly? I don't know enough about cars to say one way or the other.

[Sam]

Highly unlikely that you would stop the engine with 1-2 rounds. Hard to locate the engine through the sheet metal. Hard to reach the vitals in any case. There are a lot of things on an IC engine that would stop it if shot but the probablility of landing a bullet in any one are real small. Even busting a cylinder is no guarantee of a stop. A shot low through the oil pan will certainly do the job but like heart shots, they can go a long way without oil or coolant.

Few departments are likely to like you shooting a vehicle or it's driver under those circumstances in any case. Just follow with the helo till he stops. Gonna run out of gas anyway.

Sam

[rocky]

should take em out like the CG does with drug smugglers. 7.62 burst, then get out the .50 BMG to shoot the engine .:D J/K . too bad they can't do that though.

[KriegHund]

.50 BMG.

They are devoloping remot control cars that use electronic signals to run under the cars hood and shut it off.

[Cosmoline]

aren't most car engines just made from aluminum?

[rero360]

my team leader carried a shotgun when he was over in Iraq, he said that slugs work great for killing cars, and the driver for that matter. not that I would want a cop to be shooting from one car at another at high speeds, to dangerous for everyone, I agree follow with the choppers till he runs out of gas.

[Standing Wolf]

If the cops are behind a car, it's a trifle difficult to hit the motor.

[Taurus 66]

We just had a tragic fatality when a car thief fleeing police plowed into a car at an intersection. The APD officers were trying to shoot at the driver beforehand with their side arms, but as with 99% of other cases where officers try to hit a speeding driver with a handgun bullet, they failed. The target is too smal, too fastl and too well protected in the cab for a handgun to nail.

aren't most car engines just made from aluminum?

There you have it: If bullets are not getting through the sheet metal doors or side windows to the driver, a bullet is going to have a tougher time piercing enough into an engine block to have any real stopping power.

[Lupinus]

Very hard to stop an engine, this isn't the movies where a few rounds from a 9mm will blow up a car.

One- Depending on thecar, aiming to hit the engine is hard esspecialy with the smaller engines we see a lot of today. even more so when you are talking about vital areas of the engine. and you are moving.

Two- Engine blocks are pretty solid things. Most handguns simply wont do serious damage to an engine block. Pumps, hoses, etc they could seriously damage, but the block itself will hold up prettly well to most any pistol fire. You need something with a lot more power then a standard issue 9mm or 40S&W to punch through the block.

Three- Even after you get through the block no sure thing it will stop. If you get right into the cylinder that isn't even a sure thing. Ever heard of a miss? Plenty of cars have them. Its where your car isn't running on all cylinders because one isn't igniting or getting poor partial ignition. Shooting a car engine certianly isn't good for it but it takes a long time unless you have a very big gun.

Sure the coast guard does it to boats but look whats used, they use a 50 cal rifle with AP or Incindiary I can't remember which rounds. That aint exactly standard issue. Now shooting an engine block with AP rounds out a 50 cal will do the job but I don't recall many patrol cars having that handing or being able to easily do that, also marine engines are often much different then car engines, often much lighter built.

Lastly you are likly to hit other things. Brake cylinder, power steering pump, etc. These are things you don't want a car doing 80 to loose for the same reason you don't want to tap a guy doing 80 to make him spin out.

[Lupinus]

aren't most car engines just made from aluminum?
Only high preformance engines in high end cars to my knowlage. That and aftermarket engines like Jeg's. Most engine blocks are I believe steel or cast iron. Now intake manifolds and stuff are much more likly to be aluminum, but the blocks are a differet story. Even so depending on the area of the block you are talking possible several inchs esspecialy on a big engine. Even an inch think of good solid aluminum like the kind used in aluminum blocks would hold up alright in my view to most standard issue police weapons.

[Cosmoline]

I know handguns are out, but I'm asking about a high powered rifle round to an engine block. Has anyone actually tried it on an old engine and see what kind of penetration they get?

Again I don't want to get into legalities or department policies of this. And I'm not asking about the strategy issues. I'm just asking a general gun question re:

a) is it even possible with a high powered rifle and
b) assuming you can get penetration, would it stop the engine

Maybe this is one for the Mythbusters.

[Drewtam]

Only high preformance engines in high end cars to my knowlage. That and aftermarket engines like Jeg's. Most engine blocks are I believe steel or cast iron. Now intake manifolds and stuff are much more likly to be aluminum, but the blocks are a differet story.

Most manufacturers have swithced to AL. Even Gm, from thier four bangers to thier gen 4 small blocks V-8s.

Iron blocks are still made, but just aren't standard on passenger cars anymore. Pickups and the like are a different story.

Everytime I read about the military taking an engine out, its always from a burst of some 50 cal, either on a Huey, Blackhawk, or an M2 on a HMMV.

Drew

[Taurus 66]

I know handguns are out, but I'm asking about a high powered rifle round to an engine block. Has anyone actually tried it on an old engine and see what kind of penetration they get?

Too risky. Suppose a rifle round goes in one side, clears over the top of the engine, and exits the other side. It's still going to have enough energy to go the distance, perhaps striking a bystander.

It could in theory work, however. Once the hole has been started, the heat and vibrations could cause a hairline crack to travel, like in a windshield.

[Cosmoline]

No, I'm not asking the tactical question here. That's why I didn't post this on the S&T forum.

[Drewtam]

It could in theory work, however. Once the hole has been started, the heat and vibrations could cause a hairline crack to travel, like in a windshield.

Nah, that would take too long, primary failure would be by one of the following options:

Fast:
Structural damage to the crank, or at least 2 pistons (and or con rod)
Structural damage to the valvetrain
Structural damage to anything in the trans
Damage to the computer
Damage to the fuel delivery (pump, rail, injectors)
Damage to the ignition (plugs, distributor/coil packs)
Slow:
Complete oil loss
Complete coolant loss
Complete fuel loss :D

[UWstudent]

honestly, i'm gonna pick up a free POS car that runs, turn it on and put a few .308's in the engine and see if it still runs, just for YOU guys..

if it's still running, im gonna try the 12 gauge slug

[Sunray]

Even for the best military sniper(LEO shooters aren't snipers), hitting just the block of a vehicle moving at high speed, reliably, would be an extremely difficult shot. Even then, one shot wouldn't do much and you'd still have a ton or so moving at high speed.
Most rifle calibre bullets would just get smashed flat upon hitting an engine block. Al or not. The block may be cracked, but that won't stop the engine right away.

[Mad Chemist]

.50 BMG.

They are devoloping remot control cars that use electronic signals to run under the cars hood and shut it off.

I saw something similar, it used an EMP to disable a vehicle. Is this what you saw?

[GregGry]

Here is my take on it..

Most modern 4 banger engines have aluminum blocks, although some are still iron. Be it aluminum or iron, its going to take more then a 9mm to stop the engine. In a v8, if you were shooting through the grill, the bullet would likely hit the water pump or another accessory before it even remotely hit the block. If the round was able to penetrate the crap thats bolted onto the front of the engine, it would then have to penetrate the block, and somehow do catastrophic damage to a rod, or the crank. The odds of that happening are slim, you would be looking at high power rifle rounds. Remember, the round would likely have to go through a radiator, a heat exchanger (a small radiator like unit for air conditioners) then the stuff bolted on the front of the engine, then through the block. No 9mm will do that, I have serious doubts that even a 44mg could. Even if it sprung a water leak, you could likely drive on for 20 to 30 minutes before it siezed up completely.

Also, as far as why police don't shoot the engine during a chase, thats easy. When a perp runs from the police in a car, the police are behind, not infront of. You don't want to get to close to the car your chasing, because you might not be able to turn fast enough if the perp switches on you. Not to mention it will likely make the perp drive faster, and you don't want that. Positioning a sniper infront of of the car would be impossible, the driver could mike 1,000 diffrent turns, who knows where to position the sniper. Not to mention having a sniper shoot at a moving car with police cars (and other people) behind it is asking for diasaster. For 98% of of car chases, keeping distance, using stop strips, etc, and just waiting for the perp to crash is effictive. The only time thoes methods aren't effective, is when someone has something like a tank. And even then the guy who did that managed to get stuck, and shot to death (I guess he didn't lock the tanks hatch).

[GregGry]

Also, look at this image:
http://www.modularfords.com/forums/attachments/2007-shelby-cobra-gt500/20290-good-and-bad-news-about-the-shelby-motor-pics-no-lowe2r.jpg?d=1137811163

This is what your typical ford engine looks like (v8) minus the supercharger. The round would have to pass through one of thoes pullies, and even if the belt got shot off, the car would still run off the battery

Not to mention look at this:

http://www.modularfords.com/forums/attachments/2007-shelby-cobra-gt500/20291-good-and-bad-news-about-the-shelby-motor-pics-piston-rods.jpg?d=1137811163

The blue part is block wall. To reach a piston you would have to go through about 3/4 of an inch of strong aluminum, about 3/4 of an inch of coolant, and then it would be in the cylinder (that is after the round likely went through the radiator, the heat exchanger, and pulley or two). Even then, it could pass through the cylinder and the engine wouldn't stop. You would lose 1 cylinder maybe, but it would likely still keep going for a short time. There is no way thr round would pass through the piston either, most engines have 3 to 4 inch pistons, that can be forged aluminum. If the round will go through about 7 inches of forged aluminum, then it might be able to pass through the front block wall, and one piston. I have heard people claim a .50bmg round can go through 4 pistons and the block wall, and exit out the back. To do that your talking about going through 1 foot of forged aluminum, and over 4 inches thick of aluminum block wall. I doubt it would, especially with the equivelent of over 6 inches of water it has to go through to do it.

I don't doubt that a .50bmg could go through a v8 engine block if the shot was placed above the cam (in a OHV engine) and below the intake, it would only have 5 to 7 inches total of aluminum/steel to go through, no water, and no forged parts.

[LAK]

A .357, .41, .44 mag and a fullhouse 10mm with very tough and hard bullets will very likely cause catastrophic damage to many automobile engines past and present. I have cracked engine blocks with a 357 and a .41. Many medium bore rifle rounds will destroy an engine right quick.

But it is not just a matter of capability. One of the problems is potential shoot-throughs or complete misses which might richochet off still on a sort of ballistic trajectory. The other is richochets off curved or other engine or ancilliary equipment parts.
-----------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

[GregGry]

A .357, .41, .44 mag and a fullhouse 10mm with very tough and hard bullets will very likely cause catastrophic damage to many automobile engines past and present. I have cracked engine blocks with a 357 and a .41. Many medium bore rifle rounds will destroy an engine right quick.

But it is not just a matter of capability. One of the problems is potential shoot-throughs or complete misses which might richochet off still on a sort of ballistic trajectory. The other is richochets off curved or other engine or ancilliary equipment parts.
-----------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Its true you might be able to crack a block, but people have driven with cracks in the block of their engines for years. Also, a dead on hit to the block, without realistically having the round pass through a radiator, pullies, heat exchanger, etc can't be used to compare a shot to a engine in car. A .44mag would likely still crack the block due to the impact force, (provided it hit the block dead on after geting into the engine compartment) but a crack in the block is not likely a immediate "will kill" scenario.
I remember welding a cast iron block that had one entire side split open by over an inch, from the coolant freezing. The guy got the car to me, with it having no coolant, and that was a 10 minute drive. It was running hot sure, but it goes to show that even if half of a side of block is split off, it wont stop the engine.

[Cosmoline]

Fascinating stuff.

I know engines can still run with cracks. At least one of my heads is cracked and has been for almost a year now :D

[Jeff White]

There aren't any hand held small arms capable of reliably stopping a car or truck. Even 7.62x51 machine guns aren't reliable in that role.

We don't want the police using AT4s or RPGs, and most anti-armor munitions of that type aren't designed to be used against something as fast as an automobile anyway.

You're really getting into the realm of things like the M242 Bushmaster 25mm chain gun on the M2 and M3 Bradley and LAV-25 when you talk about shooting a moving vehicle.

Jeff

[Taurus 66]

A .357, .41, .44 mag and a fullhouse 10mm with very tough and hard bullets will very likely cause catastrophic damage to many automobile engines past and present. I have cracked engine blocks with a 357 and a .41. Many medium bore rifle rounds will destroy an engine right quick.

But it is not just a matter of capability. One of the problems is potential shoot-throughs or complete misses which might richochet off still on a sort of ballistic trajectory. The other is richochets off curved or other engine or ancilliary equipment parts.
-----------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

Keep in mind the differences between cast iron and aluminum. For example: Cast iron is brittle, alloys make it less brittle, but regardless would still give up a critical amount of structural integrity to a well placed shot from the high energy impact of any material. Aluminum is malleable and aluminum alloys are less malleable. You do not want high malleability in your engine block because though it would be great for defeating multiple gunshots, the engine cylinders, pistons, rods, etc (due to heat, pressure and vibration) would warp or become mis-shapened, stretched, compressed, and all would not be good.

Train couplers are cast iron "only" instead of aluminum or some other lighter weight metal. Cast iron either keeps the connection between two cars or breaks (makes or breaks). There's no stretching, not so much as 0.0001" swaging over 1 million route miles.

Airplanes will have to retire after so many years of service because the aluminum within will stretch out to the point of danger. If only the structure of the aircraft could be made of cast iron ... but then again it would weigh a lot more, so this would be impractical.

[No_Brakes23]

Keep in mind that the following is anecdotal, but I have heard of box'o'truth style car shoots done by LEOs/Operators/Enthusiasts etc. They seem to conclude that even .50BMG and 12ga slug are not certain to punch a block, let alone disable the vehicle. Now an M2 firing skads of .50BMG can disable a vehicle, but I haven't seen the boys in blue totin' Ma Deuce in their units.

Hitting the car in the vitals-so to speak is a great idea, but perhaps not a practical one.

[dfaugh]

So far every one has talked primarily about stopping the engine by damaging the engine block itself, and are correct about the inabilty of small arms to penetrate the block or cylinder heads.

BUT, if you own a newer car, open the hood and really look at it...On some cars you can't even SEE most of the engine...because its covered with all kinds of fuel injection parts, electronics, etc. And alot of those parts, if disabled will stop it DRT. A hit to any number of fuel injection, ignition parts, computers (many cars have more than one),even some of the sensors and wiring will stop the engine.

So, I would say that IF you can get a couple rounds, even 9mm, into the engine compartment, there's probably at least a 50/50 chance of disabling it.

My .02

[Father Knows Best]

So far every one has talked primarily about stopping the engine by damaging the engine block itself, and are correct about the inabilty of small arms to penetrate the block or cylinder heads.

BUT, if you own a newer car, open the hood and really look at it...On some cars you can't even SEE most of the engine...because its covered with all kinds of fuel injection parts, electronics, etc. And alot of those parts, if disabled will stop it DRT. A hit to any number of fuel injection, ignition parts, computers (many cars have more than one),even some of the sensors and wiring will stop the engine.

So, I would say that IF you can get a couple rounds, even 9mm, into the engine compartment, there's probably at least a 50/50 chance of disabling it.

My .02

You were o.k. until that last paragraph. There are a number of little pieces in an engine compartment that, if damaged sufficient, could cause the vehicle to stop. These include the ECU and the fuel lines. The odds of hitting one, however, are nowhere near 50/50. Think about shooting a person with a 9 mm. There are lots of little things, like the heart, major arteries, spinal cord, etc., that if hit, would cause nearly instant death. But how many people shot with a 9 mm die instantly? Almost none, despite the fact that a human being is a much softer target, and the lethal areas make up a much larger percentage of the target area.

The odds of actually striking a critical component in an engine compartment with a projectile that is only 3/10 or even a half inch in diameter are miniscule, considering that you probably have no idea where the "vitals" are, both you and the target are moving at high speed, and you need to shoot through a lot of sheet metal (causing deflections and absorbing a lot of energy) in order to reach them.

I'd be willing to bet that we could buy a modern small car, drive it onto a range, start it up, and have a dozen guys start blasting away with handguns, rifles, whatever, and it would take a LONG time to get the engine to stop. I've got $50 that says that when it finally stops, it's because the radiator and cooling hoses (and perhaps even block water jacket, if someone has a .50BMG) have been pierced, causing the coolant to leak out and the engine to overheat and seize up.

[armoredman]

If the driver is not completely crazy, best to follow at safe distance, and not endanger the public anymore than necessary. Following with helicopters is the best, safest method, as Joe Escaper will think he's safe, and SLOW DOWN. To willfully shoot at a vehicle in a manner to cause it to go out of control can lead to very Bad Things. You put a round in Joes' engine outside of town, but when his brakes bleed out is right in front of a crowded school. Shooting at tires is a usual last ditch response, and done very carefully. Any projectile that misses, WILL be found, and a lawsuit WILL be filed. Civilians are positive police departments are loaded with money just waiting to be given away to anyone who finds a spent shotgun pellet in thier front yard and sues for emotional distress....
No, I am not stating that high speed pursuits should be abandoned, just each individual scenario needs to be judged by the officers on the scene, and admin, on it's individual merits. This little I know is from friends who are street LE, the closest I have to a high speed pursuit is chasing down a running inmate on the yard...like he's going anywhere.

[bpisler]

I think it would be easier to take out the
cooling system.Maybe a couple rounds of
buckshot thru the grill area would work
pretty well.However taking any type of
shot at a moving vehicle would be risky.

[Firehand]

Ok, I was just beat to it. I've been asking for years, if you've got a situation where you're justified to shoot to stop the vehicle, from a frontal angle- especially with a shotgun- hit the radiator. Good-sized target, easy to damage, and when the coolant leaks out the engine doesn't run very long.

I've read of a couple of cases of this in years past, but you NEVER hear of it done or mentioned as a method. I've asked several LE officers about it, and they always say something like "If you're justified to shoot, go for the driver" or "Always shoot center of mass", even on a vehicle. Why try to hit a driver inside a metal & glass cage when you can take out the cooling system and, short time later, the car stops?

[middy]

I think Metro police should have a pursuit car with an M2 turret... NOT! :rolleyes:

[Dionysusigma]

What about a .50 BMG AP through the engine, and one of the wheel rims too? :confused:

[Manedwolf]

We just had a tragic fatality when a car thief fleeing police plowed into a car at an intersection. The APD officers were trying to shoot at the driver beforehand with their side arms, but as with 99% of other cases where officers try to hit a speeding driver with a handgun bullet, they failed. The target is too smal, too fastl and too well protected in the cab for a handgun to nail.

And we've all seen many, many helicopter videos of stolen cars driving over tires spikes only to drive on for many miles on the rims alone. Modern cars are so well made you can still speed on the raw metal. So that's no good.

It got me thinking, as a technical more than legal matter, what would a high-powered rifle round do if fired through the hood into the engine block? The engine is a much bigger and easier target to hit than the driver. Has anyone seen how far a .30'06 bullet will cut through an engine? Would a bullet stop the vehicle quickly? I don't know enough about cars to say one way or the other.

I'd thought that was something that the military has done to stop a vehicle, usually from a helicopter... but they also use a .50.

[BryanP]

my team leader carried a shotgun when he was over in Iraq, he said that slugs work great for killing cars, and the driver for that matter. not that I would want a cop to be shooting from one car at another at high speeds, to dangerous for everyone, I agree follow with the choppers till he runs out of gas.

Ithaca used to make a shotgun marketed to police for this purpose. The Ithaca Mag-10 Roadblocker. 10ga semi-auto, 3 round magazine. They claimed that a 10ga slug could pass completely through a car from the rear and crack the engine block.

[Meplat]

I know handguns are out, but I'm asking about a high powered rifle round to an engine block. Has anyone actually tried it on an old engine and see what kind of penetration they get?

Again I don't want to get into legalities or department policies of this. And I'm not asking about the strategy issues. I'm just asking a general gun question re:

a) is it even possible with a high powered rifle and
b) assuming you can get penetration, would it stop the engine

Maybe this is one for the Mythbusters.

Hmmm....where are those boxes of Grand Slams I got whent that sporting goods store went out of business?

"Honey, you go get the Chevy, I'll get the .375 H&H....got something I wanna try..."

[chopinbloc]

the army is phasing out the m60 and replacing it with the m240b. i think they should be surplused to police departments for various uses. one of them would be helicopter mounting. i'm pretty sure that a couple bursts from a pig (the machinegun, not the officer;) ) would do a number on a car's engine. if not, the driver should also be a legitimate target. these chases endager folks and his actions should be considered just as hostile as randomly popping off rounds from an ak. obviously, there are places that you wouldn't want to try this but when you've got the freeway cleared off and there's no one for miles like we often see in these televised chases, the tactic ought to be pretty effective. a dozen rounds or so should almost certainly find something vital. the top of the engine has so many vital bits and pices that i find it unlikely that a burst or two wouldn't do the job. several posters have mentioned that a car can run a couple pistons short. well, sure, but when a bullet passes through the cylinder wall, it's not just putting a clean hole there, it's pushing metal into the cylinder - into the path of the piston. that sort of thing is likely to cause spontaneous, catastrophic disassembly. i'm pretty sure you could get excellent penetration with 7.62 ball but if you loaded with ap, you've got a very effective means of turning off mechanical devices from a distance.

on a related note, i watched a video once where a group of folks rigged an old station wagon with remote control and shot at it from a flat bed. they started with pistols, moved up to rifles and shotguns and then title II devices. they disabled the car several times and repaired it each time but it didn't seem that they were specifically trying to stop the vehicle as that would have shortened their fun. the point is that even the handguns got a "kil" on the old station wagon.

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Time to call in these guys.

http://www.greatevents.mtu.edu/ge/events/MythBusters/mythbusters-poster.jpg

- NF

[dfaugh]

I'd be willing to bet that we could buy a modern small car, drive it onto a range, start it up, and have a dozen guys start blasting away with handguns, rifles, whatever, and it would take a LONG time to get the engine to stop. I've got $50 that says that when it finally stops, it's because the radiator and cooling hoses (and perhaps even block water jacket, if someone has a .50BMG) have been pierced, causing the coolant to leak out and the engine to overheat and seize up.

For alot more that $50... again if I can get a (reasonably) clean shot, I'm going for the upper part of the engine (where the fuel injection stuff is on most engines). even a .22 will go through the sheet metal on a car (I've tried it) with no problem, although maybe won't have enough nergy to do much damage. But anything that's much more powerful will probably do enough damage. 9mm might take couple tries, but with 7.62x39 FMJ, it'll be DRT.

[orangeninja]

Guys...the Russians figured this out a long time ago. The solution? Why an RPG of course.:D

[c_yeager]

The driver himself is a bigger and more visible target than the vital components of an engine block...

Also, if your gonna shoot the engine you need to be next to the car, which is a hard position to mantain if its moving, or you need to be in front of the car, which isnt a place that one is going to want to hang out in for very long.

[engineer151515]

Use a focused beam, EMP burst.


Car rolls to stop - electronics fried, passengers OK.

[James T Thomas]

Somewhere in the past, sorry I forgot to take my memory pill this morning, I saw an experimental "Taser" like device that fired a high voltage emitting projectile that inbedded itself onto the sheet metal of the persued vehicle.

Since the electrical systems are grounded onto the body, the scrambled voltage from this device was able to give the fleeing car a fibbrualtion type processor brain scramble.

Is anyone familiar with this?

[Ultima-Ratio]

Been there done that Cosmo, I demoed a short barreled 1895 Marlin to EPCSD some years ago with yer basic Hornady 500gn solid clocking 1500fps.
We busted up a dozen cast iron V-8 blocks at the local wrecking yard, each shot would penetrate and destroy a cylinder and piston.
Yeppers they bought ammo and shorty Marlins circa 1988

[Crosshair]

My old Escort had a blown head gasket and I drove it for a few months while I looked for a new car. (I was junking the Escort.) I drove 20 miles and the radiator was only 1/2 empty. (Though there was alot of steam.)

[NMshooter]

I have put holes in engine blocks (not all the way through) with .223.

Of course, the cars were junk, just sitting there.

Shoot a car enough times and you will hit something important, but shoot enough times in an urban environment and you are bound to hit something you did not want to...:uhoh:

Some kind of cable that wraps around the driveshaft/halfshafts and locks the whole mess up might be worth investigating. Or a modified spike strip that could do the same thing.

Best way I know of to stop a vehicle is a berm or an anti-vehicle ditch. Or both together. Especially with some landmines.:evil: Having a couple squads to cover your obstacle does not hurt either.;)

No easy answers here.

[RecoilRob]

Guys, the answer to High Speed Chases is here now. It is called Onstar and soon (I heard by '08) will be standard equipment on ALL GM vehicles. In time it will be mandatory on ALL vehicles sold in our country.

The true push behind the technology is NOT to help everyone who is dumb enough to lock their keys....and dog, kids, etc. in their cars.

Once a high percentage of cars on the road have Onstar capability, the pursuing Officer has only to make a call....."please stop the car in front of me" and, with the help of GPS tracking, in a few seconds it can be done.

If they can unlock your doors, they can shut off your engine. And, let us not mention the arrests made by tapping into the com system and listening to the conversations of the vehicles occupants. I can't provide a link to the absolute proof of this but I CAN say that it IS possible.....with appropriate legal warrants and court permissions, of course.

Oh, back on topic....stopping a car engine would be largely chance from the side, nearly impossible from the rear and pretty iffy to do from above or the front unless you use something pretty stout. Only bad thing about the frontal shot is (unless you are travelling ahead of the car to be stopped) you don't have much time and you stand a good chance to be run over!

Also, remember that many modern engines will run a LONG TIME without any coolant. The computer will switch off injectors so the cylinder pumps only air to cool itself and this scheme is cycled through the engine maintaining a safe operating temp. Sure, you are down on power but the engine will not overheat enough to stop.

[Jeff White]

In time it will be mandatory on ALL vehicles sold in our country.

This is someone's pipe dream. Please provide a link to pending legislation or even a proposal by someone in the govt.?

Ediited to add: The last motorist assist that I did that was generated by ONSTAR gave us a location four miles from where the car actually was. I'd hardly trust that technology to turn off the car in front of me.

Jeff

[sm]

One is responsible for every projectile fired.
Makes no difference on what side of the law the shooter is.
Risks occur as the result of people, places and things being fired upon, at, or hit.
Includes two tons of metal - again no difference which side of the law, that two tons metal hitting people places things has a responible tag on it too.

Ever shot a moving target? How about shooting one while moving yourself?
Ever had two tons of metal causing you "severe problems"? Ever shot at a car with the engine running? Add while you are running, driving and shooting?

I have. It ain't easy.

Movies and TV do not always portray what actually happens.

Hard to outrun a radio, a helicopter, or plane.

LEOs have their own respective rules to abide by. Civilian like me have to understand our jurisdictions we are in (home or abroad) in a given time.

Firearms are great, there is a place for them along with other tools in the toolbox.

Firearms are not THE toolbox.

Steve

[JMusic]

I agree Jeff. Where's the tin foil? I miss the days when all you needed was a cow catcher welded to the front of your cruiser.:evil:
Jim

[Jeff White]

If they were legal here, I couldn't even imagine doing a PIT maneuver or something similar with the Impala I am assigned now......

Jeff

[Double Naught Spy]

Shooting engines is great, especially with a shotgun (slug) or higher powered rifle. Now, aside from the fact that the car is moving quickly, the firing officer will probably be in another moving car, and the fact that most officers have no real idea where the "engine" is on a car to shoot it (versus all the other crap crammed into the compartment) and the fact that if a shot misses on one side, it very well may go out the other, then no problem. Otherwise, it is a simple matter of not knowing the target, not knowing the ever changing backstop was the vehicle roars do the road, and not knowing the "beyond" of the target and backstop that is ever changing.

With all that in mind and if you are willing to risk the lives of bystanders because you know you can make the shot that will stop the engine, reduce the risk to the bystanders and just shoot the driver*. As with the stolen tank a few years ago, the driver was shot because of the risk he posed to society while driving the tank. Surely speeding bad guys break enough laws and endanger enough lives where lethal force can be used, at least sometimes, right?

* = only do so where legally valid and with all proper legal, social, and ethnical considerations addressed appropriately.

Of course the other option is that you play Dr. Phil on a PA system as you chase the bad guys and they will eventually commit suicide as a way to get away from Dr. Phil's annoying voice.

[RecoilRob]

This is someone's pipe dream. Please provide a link to pending legislation or even a proposal by someone in the govt.?

Ediited to add: The last motorist assist that I did that was generated by ONSTAR gave us a location four miles from where the car actually was. I'd hardly trust that technology to turn off the car in front of me.

Jeff

They haven't perfected the technology just as yet but is it really so farfetched to see the possibilities?

It has been reported in several car journals that GM IS planning to include the Onstar system in ALL cars very soon. And, I used to work at a Chevy, Buick, Pontiac, Caddy dealer and this WAS discussed as fact. With GM bleeding money for the last many years, it is to wonder where the cash for this system development is coming from?

Washington State HAS had legislation proposed that would mandate GPS devices in ALL cars to log their travels and charge road fees accordingly.

Also, the same thing HAS been proposed in England.....for the reduction of traffic jams, you know!

For now, the implementation of such schemes is not cost effective as most drivers would be forced to buy and install the equipment. Not likely, I'd agree.

But.....when a high percentage of cars on the road already HAVE that equipment installed as standard equipment, is it really SO far fetched to imagine the potentials? I don't think so.

Of course, my foil hat HAS started itching pretty badly with all the negative brain waves it is blocking so I'll leave this subject now.

But, just remember where you saw this when it happens in the future.

[grimjaw]

In time it will be mandatory on ALL vehicles sold in our country.

Does that include retrofitting older vehicles that weren't manufactured or sold with it when they were new? Talk about a rush for the used car lot. Also might not include some commercial equipment, such as dirt haulers.

jmm

[JMusic]

Didn't even think of that. I haven't been in one for 20 years. I'm used to the big Plymouths Fury's and the Real Impala's. Big Blocks and lots of weight. If what your in is front wheel drive I feel sorry for you guys.

I did participate in a stolen "Stone Dump Truck" once. It was an Ohio State Patrol chase down an interstate. The guy wouldn't stop. What was tried was to get in front and slow the vehicle down and the guy just pushed the cruiser off the road. After knocking off some more hubcaps (ours not his) we started shooting. Tires first then radiator. Bunch of rounds took miles for it to seize up. Bad news Bears for the guy when it did.
Jim

[Father Knows Best]

Once a high percentage of cars on the road have Onstar capability, the pursuing Officer has only to make a call....."please stop the car in front of me" and, with the help of GPS tracking, in a few seconds it can be done.

You don't understand how OnStar works. OnStar communicates via cellular telephone service. If you give OnStar the VIN of an OnStar-equipped vehicle, OnStar dials it up just like a cell phone. The vehicle must be within a cellular service area, and respond. If it does, the GPS in the vehicle can relay its coordinates back to OnStar, and OnStar can also do things like check ECU trouble codes, unlock doors, etc.

Without knowing the VIN or some other unique identifier (such as a license plate number linked to the VIN), OnStar has no way to communicate with the vehicle. Thus, police could conceivably use OnStar to shut down a vehicle, but only if they first identify the vehicle by VIN or license plate, and only if that identity is known to OnStar. Of course, anyone can easily defeat OnStar by disconnecting the antenna, which prevents OnStar from establishing a communications link with the vehicle.

Also, remember that many modern engines will run a LONG TIME without any coolant. The computer will switch off injectors so the cylinder pumps only air to cool itself and this scheme is cycled through the engine maintaining a safe operating temp. Sure, you are down on power but the engine will not overheat enough to stop.

That's about the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. What's your citation? There are a few engines on the market today with cylinder deactivation technology (Honda and Cadillac have it on top of the line models), but the technology is for fuel savings, not engine cooling. Even then, deactivating cylinders has no significant cooling effect. Modern internal combustion engines are all water cooled because they need to dissipate excess heat much more quickly than is possible with air cooling.

Don't believe me? Let's try draining the coolant from your engine and see what happens. I've got a week's pay that says that unless you're driving an old air cooled Beetle or Porsche, you'll seize the engine in no time.

[solareclipse]

don't forget that to actually damage the radiator you need to hit a pipe, cooling fins don't count so you still have 50/50 chance even with that.

cars can run oddly enough with a damaged cooling system. when i had a blown gasket it caused the water to leak out so i pretty much was driving it dry after 200 miles. hit the gas and the temp rose up. get it up to good speed though and the air kept it cool enough. idle caused it to go up and very light driving maintained it constant for a long time.

so let's just stick to the old approach that actually works and take the tires out. everything else is just too random to be useful.

[coylh]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/17/Whaling_harpoon.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Whaling_harpoon.jpg

[RecoilRob]

[





That's about the most ridiculous thing I ever heard. What's your citation? There are a few engines on the market today with cylinder deactivation technology (Honda and Cadillac have it on top of the line models), but the technology is for fuel savings, not engine cooling. Even then, deactivating cylinders has no significant cooling effect. Modern internal combustion engines are all water cooled because they need to dissipate excess heat much more quickly than is possible with air cooling.

Don't believe me? Let's try draining the coolant from your engine and see what happens. I've got a week's pay that says that unless you're driving an old air cooled Beetle or Porsche, you'll seize the engine in no time.[/QUOTE]

What kind of income level are you making Father? I drive a 2004 SVT Ford Focus and I will gladly take your bet. It, and many other modern Fords and GM's that I am aware of, will switch off the injectors to save itself from overheating should it lose the coolant.

This is completely different than the variable displacement engines you are thinking of. I'll let you off the hook on the bet because this is THR after all!

And, the Onstar technology is being put in place. They don't have the ability RIGHT NOW to do what I fear, but a skyscraper is not built overnight and the standardization of this system is the foundation for the future....which dooms me to old cars because I will NOT have that technology and intrusion on my vehicle.

Also, when the time comes, the Big Brother System will be intergrated into the car in such a way that you cannot remove it and still operate the vehicle.

[Father Knows Best]

There's a difference between saying that a car's ECU will shut off the fuel injectors, or alter the fuel mixture or ignition timing (which they also do), in order to respond to potential overheating, and saying that the car will actually run for an extended distance without a functioning cooling system. If you are low on coolant, or have a partially blocked radiator, then those types of systems will let a modern vehicle "limp home" without permanent damage. They are not enough, however, to let the vehicle drive for any significant distance in the total absence of coolant circulation.

And I don't doubt that OnStar or something similar will be in every new vehicle before long. The technology is available and quite inexpensive. It's just a GPS (handheld ones cost as little as $100) and a cell phone, with a connection to the vehicle's ECU. With GM's scale and buying power, the total cost of the OnStar hardware is probably as little as a few bucks per vehicle.

The question is what are its capabilities. OnStar does not know at any given time where your car is. It finds out by dialing up your car's built-in cell phone, and asking the GPS to relay its coordinates back to OnStar. The police can't make that happen without telling OnStar which vehicle to call. For that, OnStar needs a VIN or OnStar account number. A bad guy can prevent OnStar from deactivating his vehicle, therefore, just by removing the license plate (or putting a stolen one on). A lot of them do that, already. Or you can defeat OnStar by doing any of scores of little things such as unplugging the cell antenna, or cutting the power supply to the OnStar communications module. Can those latter things be made more difficult? Sure. GM and "big brother" (if you're a member of the tin foil beanie club) can make all kinds of changes to the technology. They could start implanting OnStar units in our brains at birth, for that matter. That isn't happening yet, though, so I see no reason to panic about it. OnStar as it currently exists is not a significant threat.

[GregGry]

I have a video of a honda civic (late 80s early 90s model) that ran for more the 12 minutes at almost full throttle (if not full throttle) with 0 engine coolant. It was throwing sparks out of the exhaust for many minutes. It takes a lote more then 5 minutes for most eninges to sieze up from lack of coolant, which is why shooting a hole in the radiator isn't that effective.

[Father Knows Best]

I have a video of a honda civic (late 80s early 90s model) that ran for more the 12 minutes at almost full throttle (if not full throttle) with 0 engine coolant. It was throwing sparks out of the exhaust for many minutes. It takes a lote more then 5 minutes for most eninges to sieze up from lack of coolant, which is why shooting a hole in the radiator isn't that effective.

Stopping it in 12 minutes is better than not stopping it at all. I have yet to see anyone suggest a more reliable and quicker way of stopping a moving vehicle with a firearm.

[GregGry]

Stopping it in 12 minutes is better than not stopping it at all. I have yet to see anyone suggest a more reliable and quicker way of stopping a moving vehicle with a firearm.

I don't know, having a car that will run at full throttle for 12+ minutes, and retain full ability to manuver around is a heck of a lot better then have 2 or 3 tires blown out, and not being able to turn hardly at all. I have done a chase simulation where I ran over a stop strip, and tried to drive around a course. I want to tell you, you can't turn, you slide. It would be easier to ram a tireless car off the road, then it would a car that has full driving capabilities. Shooting out the tires with a shotgun or similar would be more efficent the shooting the radiator. Shooting tires would allow you to be behind or next to the car, being infront is the only way you could shoot the radiator, which is a spot you wouldn't be at in a chase.

[Father Knows Best]

We don't disagree. My initial point was that it is almost impossible to stop a high speed chase with a firearm. I said that the most likely outcome of shooting a bunch of rounds into the engine compartment would be the eventual seizing of the engine due to loss of coolant. I didn't say it would be quick, or a good idea. I said it more to explain why police DON'T try to stop chases with firearms.

Shooting out the tires is another bad idea. They are very hard to hit on a moving vehicle. If you miss, there is a high likelihood of ricochets, and you usually have to be concerned about bystanders. Even if you hit, you run the risk -- as you point out -- that the driver will lose control. That's typically bad. The ideal stop of a chase is to disable the vehicles engine but leave the driver with brakes and steering, because that way he will generally come to a stop without hitting innocent bystanders. If you shoot out his tires, he may well continue to try and run (we've all seen it on T.V.), but the lack of brakes and effective steering will cause him to collide with something. If that something is a bystander, you have a bad result.

The bottom line is that the best thing to do in most high speed chases is NOT to shoot at the vehicle (or the driver). A car is a heck of a powerful weapon -- 4,000+ pounds of steel and glass moving at 60-100 mph carries a LOT of energy and can do a LOT of damage. The way to stop it is to wait until the chase gets to an area without immediate danger to bystanders (rural road, for example) and then either use standard techniques to force a spin or use a pre-positioned stop strip to blow out his tires in an area where he is unlikely to lose control suddenly and strike a bystander.

[GregGry]

We don't disagree. My initial point was that it is almost impossible to stop a high speed chase with a firearm. I said that the most likely outcome of shooting a bunch of rounds into the engine compartment would be the eventual seizing of the engine due to loss of coolant. I didn't say it would be quick, or a good idea. I said it more to explain why police DON'T try to stop chases with firearms.

Shooting out the tires is another bad idea. They are very hard to hit on a moving vehicle. If you miss, there is a high likelihood of ricochets, and you usually have to be concerned about bystanders. Even if you hit, you run the risk -- as you point out -- that the driver will lose control. That's typically bad. The ideal stop of a chase is to disable the vehicles engine but leave the driver with brakes and steering, because that way he will generally come to a stop without hitting innocent bystanders. If you shoot out his tires, he may well continue to try and run (we've all seen it on T.V.), but the lack of brakes and effective steering will cause him to collide with something. If that something is a bystander, you have a bad result.

The bottom line is that the best thing to do in most high speed chases is NOT to shoot at the vehicle (or the driver). A car is a heck of a powerful weapon -- 4,000+ pounds of steel and glass moving at 60-100 mph carries a LOT of energy and can do a LOT of damage. The way to stop it is to wait until the chase gets to an area without immediate danger to bystanders (rural road, for example) and then either use standard techniques to force a spin or use a pre-positioned stop strip to blow out his tires in an area where he is unlikely to lose control suddenly and strike a bystander.

Yep your right :D

[Father Knows Best]

The LA Times has an article today on new GPS tracking technology intended to make high speed chases unnecessary. It also notes that they are considering "using technology that would disable a vehicle's electronics."

LAPD Pursues High-Tech End to High-Speed Chases
By Richard Winton, Times Staff Writer

Question: "Chief, you said Los Angeles is the car chase capital of the world. What makes it that way?"

Answer: "There are a lot of nuts here."

With that street-cop psychology, Chief William J. Bratton unveiled Thursday a new and decidedly strange weapon in the LAPD's effort to halt high-speed pursuits.

It is an air-propelled miniature dart equipped with a global positioning device. Once fired from a patrol car, it sticks to a fleeing motorist's vehicle and emits a radio signal to police.

Bratton hailed the dart as "the big new idea" and said that if the pilot program was successful, Los Angeles' seemingly daily TV fix of police chases could be a thing of the past.

"Instead of us pushing them doing 70 or 80 miles an hour … this device allows us not to have to pursue after the car," Bratton said. "It allows us to start vectoring where the car is. Even if they bail out of the car, we'll have pretty much instantaneously information where they are."

U.S. Department of Justice officials, Bratton said, suggested that the StarChase system, the brainchild of a Virginia company, be tested in Los Angeles. A small number of patrol cars will be equipped with the compressed air launchers, which fire the miniature GPS receiver in a sticky compound resembling a golf ball, for four to six months as a trial.

There were more than 600 pursuits in Los Angeles and more than 100,000 nationwide last year. Critics have long questioned the wisdom of police pursuits because they can endanger bystanders and officers.

Los Angeles' love-hate relationship with police chases goes back at least to O.J. Simpson's slow-speed pursuit across Southern California freeways in 1994.

LAPD chases — as well as pursuits by other agencies — often end violently. Last year, an LAPD officer fatally shot a 13-year-old boy, who was driving a stolen car, at the end of a pursuit. This week, a pursuit in Chino ended with a San Bernardino County sheriff's deputy firing at the passenger of the car in a controversial incident caught on videotape.

With such things as license-plate reading SMART police cars and facial-recognition cameras, the LAPD is trying to become a testing ground for innovative police technology, Bratton said.

The LAPD may even consider using technology that would disable a vehicle's electronics.