martini-henry vs kevlar


PDA






Puncha
September 27, 2009, 01:54 PM
Will a modern level IIIA soft armor vest be able to stop a 577-450 slug from a martini-henry rifle at a distance of 10 yards? Assume that the round is loaded to original british army specs and that the rifle is the mark I version.

If you enjoyed reading about "martini-henry vs kevlar" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
R.W.Dale
September 27, 2009, 03:00 PM
would say the soft lead, large frontal area and low MV would work in the vests favor.

But I don't know if Kevlar could handle it or not.

gallo
September 27, 2009, 03:03 PM
You may just die from blunt trauma.

rcmodel
September 27, 2009, 03:08 PM
Soft body armor penetration is directly related to the velocity of the bullet.
Fast burns on through, while slow gets stopped.

The 577/450's 480 grain bullet at 1,350 FPS is slow.

However, even if the bullet didn't make it through, the blunt force truma from a soft vest would probably kill you anyway with that long heavy rifle bullet punching you.

rc

Coronach
September 27, 2009, 06:52 PM
Yeah, I dunno about penetration, but I would NOT be volunteering to take that hit even if I was satisfied that it would not make it through the kevlar. That would be brutal.

Mike

alemonkey
September 27, 2009, 09:37 PM
It might not penetrate the kevlar, but it might drag the kevlar vest through your body along with the bullet :) That's a big slug.

atblis
September 27, 2009, 09:47 PM
I dunno, that bullet actually has a pretty good sectional density (on par with a 200gr+ 308 bullet). I think it might actually do it.

GRIZ22
September 27, 2009, 10:24 PM
If the vest would stop a standard 12 ga slug I'd hazard a guess that it would stop the Martini-Henry. Roughly the same weight and velocity.

Nicodemus38
September 27, 2009, 10:34 PM
50-90 has been proven to penetrate and fling "bulletproof" vests around. at such a short range, unless you have a quality vest designed to stop RIFLE rounds such as a 30-06 using military ammo, it will most likely go through.
even if it doesnt, at such a range and such a heavy bullet energy, it will probably create more then enough energy to stop vital organs such as the heart or lungs on impact.

its the famous "is a 10 foot distance from an exploding hand grenade a hit or a miss drill sergeant?'

Coronach
September 27, 2009, 10:41 PM
This looks like a job for the Box o Truth...

alemonkey
September 27, 2009, 11:58 PM
50-90 has been proven to penetrate and fling "bulletproof" vests around. at such a short range

I remember hearing about that test. If I recall correctly so LEO's were testing vests at a range where a guy happened to be shooting a 50-90 so they tried it out just for fun, thinking it wouldn't penetrate. Apparently it really did a number on the kevlar.

Coronach
September 28, 2009, 12:36 AM
And what is old is new again...

Seriously, though? We're witnessing a revolution in protective technology. For the first time since the advent of firearms, it is realistic for a soldier to be equipped with body armor that is proof (for a few shots, at least) against the weapon he carries. This is truly revolutionary, and hasn;t happened in, what, 500 years? More?

I don't think the full implication of that has hit home with our planners just yet, because right now we have it both ways- our foes shoot rounds that our armor can defeat (under the right conditions), and they're too disorganized and poor to have equivalent armor that can defeat our rounds. Once we go up against a first-rate opponent again, we may end up having trouble on either side of the equation- perhaps we'll encounter opponents with better armor, or perhaps someone will end up going back to full-power rifle rounds and buck the 60 year trend towards intermediate power cartridges.

Mike

natman
September 28, 2009, 05:03 AM
If the vest would stop a standard 12 ga slug I'd hazard a guess that it would stop the Martini-Henry. Roughly the same weight and velocity.

A 12 ga slug is roughly the same weight, but of much bigger diameter (.73 vs .45). This gives the Martini bullet a much better sectional density, so it will penetrate better.

Both are large and slow, so they might not penetrate the vest. However, I wouldn't want to be wearing the vest while the proposition was being tested.

alemonkey
September 28, 2009, 09:07 AM
I don't think the full implication of that has hit home with our planners just yet, because right now we have it both ways- our foes shoot rounds that our armor can defeat (under the right conditions), and they're too disorganized and poor to have equivalent armor that can defeat our rounds. Once we go up against a first-rate opponent again, we may end up having trouble on either side of the equation- perhaps we'll encounter opponents with better armor, or perhaps someone will end up going back to full-power rifle rounds and buck the 60 year trend towards intermediate power cartridges.

I think that's a good point, Coronach. We won't be fighting Jihadis forever, and some day when we go up against a modern army the current direction the stuffed shirts are moving our military in is going to look short sighted.

MachIVshooter
September 28, 2009, 09:27 AM
Remember this: A bullet doesn't have to fully penetrate body armor to defeat it. NIJ tests include how deep a depression the bullet leaves in the medium, whether or not the round penetrated. If the depression is deep enough to have severely damaged internal organs, the vest will not be rated for that round, even if the bullet was stopped.

Double Naught Spy
September 28, 2009, 09:35 AM
Soft body armor penetration is directly related to the velocity of the bullet.
Fast burns on through, while slow gets stopped.

Not exactly. Burning through is an issue for calibers/bullet shapes that might not want to otherwise pass between the fibers, so you would need the hyper velocity to make them defeat the armor via blunt force. However, you can slowly press and ice pick right through. You can pass through a spire pointed 9mm round (copper, not lead) at 1100-1200 fps where a ball or hollowpoint round would not pass of the same caliber and velocity.

If the round can separate the fibers, it can pass right through and it doesn't have to be going hugely fast to necessarily do so.

Eightball
September 28, 2009, 09:47 AM
Remember this: A bullet doesn't have to fully penetrate body armor to defeat it. NIJ tests include how deep a depression the bullet leaves in the medium, whether or not the round penetrated. If the depression is deep enough to have severely damaged internal organs, the vest will not be rated for that round, even if the bullet was stopped.So, it seems that a better question would be if a martini-henry round would cavitate your internal organs regardless of penetration of a vest?

My vote would be "probably."

hammerklavier
September 28, 2009, 11:58 AM
We're witnessing a revolution in protective technology. For the first time since the advent of firearms, it is realistic for a soldier to be equipped with body armor that is proof (for a few shots, at least) against the weapon he carries. This is truly revolutionary, and hasn;t happened in, what, 500 years? More?

I've thought about that, it is pretty amazing. In fact, back in the armored knights days, the swords could penetrate chain mail. The advent of heavier plate armor brought a change of weapons: the mace; to inflict blunt force trauma trough the armor as it were. All armored systems were always somewhat susceptible to arrows. Although, the English mitigated their effect with felt padding, and the Mongols with silk.

The end effect (should battle armor become common in other places than the USA and Europe) will be that the soldiers will began carrying more powerful rifles once again (or death rays).

GunTech
September 28, 2009, 12:25 PM
When body armor that can defeat the current generation of small arms becomes prevalent, there are already solution on hand that just haven't been compelling for current operations. Rifle fired flechettes lack the wounding power of conventional bullets, but their penetration is unrivaled. Explosive rounds are already on track - e.g. XM25 and MX-307.

The currently available armor can already defeat full power rifle rounds, so stepping back will accomplish nothing.

Mission gear evolves to meet the operational requirements.

Coronach
September 28, 2009, 01:12 PM
Rifle-fired flechettes? Don't they also have ballistic issues?

Current armor can defeat full-powered rounds, but for practical purposes it's limited to chest plates, AFAIK. And no one is limited to just going to what we think of as "full-powered, AP" rounds. One way to deal with it is to go even bigger, with well constructed AP bullets. Sure, you limit ammo carriage and rate of fire, but you will rapidly exceed the ability of armor to keep up (absent the inevitable technological shift on that side of the equation). The other way is what you said- explosive rounds, or eeking superior penetration out of the existing rounds.

One way or the other, this is an interesting development.

Mike

Puncha
September 28, 2009, 01:28 PM
Okay so we've established that it is not a good idea to take lead from a martini henry up close.......

But if the slug impacted from 50 or even 100 yards away, would level IIIA armor make it survivable w/o blunt trauma killing you?

HorseSoldier
September 28, 2009, 01:37 PM
The end effect (should battle armor become common in other places than the USA and Europe) will be that the soldiers will began carrying more powerful rifles once again (or death rays).

[Science fiction geek mode]

I recall that was a minor point in Jerry Pournelle's stuff set in the CoDominium -- full body protection against small arms was common place, so troops had to carry battle rifle-ish sort of weapons to defeat it.

(Though more science fictiony would be a rail gun shooting something like 4x45 tungsten/steel darts just under friction melt velocities . . .)

[/science fiction geek mode]

atblis
September 28, 2009, 01:44 PM
But if the slug impacted from 50 or even 100 yards away, would level IIIA armor make it survivable w/o blunt trauma killing you?
Same bullet now going probably somewhere between 1300 and 1400 fps (assuming it started at 1500 fps). It would still hurt.

danweasel
September 28, 2009, 04:50 PM
Time for some double-quote action!

Quote:
I don't think the full implication of that has hit home with our planners just yet, because right now we have it both ways- our foes shoot rounds that our armor can defeat (under the right conditions), and they're too disorganized and poor to have equivalent armor that can defeat our rounds. Once we go up against a first-rate opponent again, we may end up having trouble on either side of the equation- perhaps we'll encounter opponents with better armor, or perhaps someone will end up going back to full-power rifle rounds and buck the 60 year trend towards intermediate power cartridges.

I think that's a good point, Coronach. We won't be fighting Jihadis forever, and some day when we go up against a modern army the current direction the stuffed shirts are moving our military in is going to look short sighted.

As a follow on question, does any other military equip it's soldiers with body armor to the level of the US? I know a lot of NATO troops have armor but do ALL of the support troops have it too (Like in the US)? What about possible enemy countries? Just curious...

Oh and lest I be accused of hijacking: My money is on full blown penetration from 10 yards.

GunTech
September 28, 2009, 05:04 PM
Rifle-fired flechettes? Don't they also have ballistic issues?

The have cost of production issues and long range accuracy issues. Rifle flechettes that could penetrated 3/16 armored plate were demonstrated in 1962 (see Ezell's "The deadliest weapon that never was"). The Steyr ACR also had armor piercing capabilities far beyond any small arm now fielded. The problem with weapon like the Steyr ACR is that they had a dispersion that did not allow for pinpoint accuracy. Of course the whole theory of the SPIW and its decedents was that rifles are unnecessarily over-accurate for general combat, and a high rate of fire burst, with a controlled nutation would produce the highest hit probabilities.

The killer for flechettes was and is their lack of lethality. Unlike spitzer type bullets that become unstable when transiting media (such as going from air into flesh) due the center of gravity being well behind the center of aerodynamic pressure, flechettes are very stable when changing media. The fins that give them stability on air work equally well in tissue.

see this thread: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=366659

Winchester did determine that it was possible to produce flechettes that had excellent penetration but would fracture at the waist when striking tissue, resulting in two wide wound tracks and increasing lethality significantly. Whether such a round would meet Hague compliance is another matter.

Bt anyone who has ever seen a tank APFSDS will understand that flechettes are the ideal projectile for defeating armor.

Steyr ACR ammunition

http://sistemadearmas.sites.uol.com.br/sof/sofstyer2.jpg

TehK1w1
September 28, 2009, 05:34 PM
I was under the impression that in clusters they were referred to as flechettes, but when fired singly with a plastic sabot they were referred to as sabot rounds.

Sabot rounds do have impressive AP capability, probably in large part because of their very high sectional density (especially when formed from depleted uranium or tungsten).

atblis
September 28, 2009, 05:55 PM
I think fletchette is simply the dimunitive form of the French word for arrow. "little arrow". Sabot in general refers to the casing around the outside of a projectile.

HorseSoldier
September 28, 2009, 06:00 PM
What atblis said. A sabot round can be anything with a sabot attached to it, be it a tank round or a small arms cartridge.

"Flechette" these days means tiny caliber, fin stabilized projectile, though I think in very early WW1 it referred to a yard-dart looking contraption that pilots would chuck overboard while flying over enemy troops. Don't think they had a good track record for lethality, but sure they sucked pretty wildly if you were unlucky enough to get hit by one . . .

Kernel
September 28, 2009, 06:11 PM
I smell a bar bet:

“Say, I wonder what would of happened if the Zulus had had level IIIA body armor at the Battle of Rorke’s Drift?”

At least that’s slightly more plausible than the ever popular, “What if Napoleon had a B-52 at the battle of Waterloo?”

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/The_defense_of_Rorke%27s_Drift.jpg
Rorke's Drift, South Africa, 1879

PS. For the record, I think Napoleaon would of won.

Maverick223
September 28, 2009, 08:49 PM
I have little faith in the wee little 577-450 punching through...but even less faith in the guy behind the vest. One interesting aspect of body armor is that [when working as designed] despite stopping the round and distributing the payload over a broad area...it captures ALL of the energy of the bullet impact, in the case of the 577-450 that is around 1 ton of force...not all that bad, and would not likely kill the person, but could if it broke a rib and punctured a lung. In short I'll volunteer...but only for pulling the trigger. :D

Sebastian the Ibis
September 28, 2009, 11:24 PM
Kernel, that's easy- the same thing that happened at Isandlwana.

Coronach
September 28, 2009, 11:39 PM
In short I'll volunteer...but only for pulling the trigger.I'll run the camcorder. :D

Maverick223
September 29, 2009, 01:25 AM
I'll run the camcorder.Sounds like we only need a vest and another volunteer for a party...anyone interested? :D

alemonkey
September 29, 2009, 01:23 PM
I agree with the earlier post...someone needs to send this to the Box O Truth!

GunTech
September 29, 2009, 01:47 PM
Flechette does indeed mean 'little arrow' while sabot means 'shoe'. A sabot is a carrier for a subcaliber prjectile. Flechette rifles used sabots to carry the flechette down the barrel. A tanks long rod penetrator like APFSDS uses a sabot.

Here is a subcaliber bullet and its sabot

http://www.sabotreloadingpro.com/files/1670066/uploaded/sabot3.JPG

Here is a penetrator separating from it's sabot

http://www.riflebuilders.com/sabot.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "martini-henry vs kevlar" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!