Mythbusters 7/13 show

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmm, they just mentioned that ther were using AP rounds in that .50, but I doubt that.

I mean don't AP rounds have like a hardened tungsten/DU/steel/whatever core so that when the jacket does shed, the penetrator continues on through?

Methinks they were using regular 'ol FMJ.
Click to expand...

Those rounds looked like barret or IMI which are M33 ball. They do have a steel penetrator core but it's not as hard as dedicated AP ammo which are the same but feature a harder metal core.
 
just wondering if it was green (frangable ) ammo they where using? if they were using AP ammo wouldnt the tip be painted? seeing the bullets break up like that made me wonder how law enforcement match rifle to bullet if the bullet breaks up that bad hitting water.
 
Actually, I think their real failure was the angle that they shot at! At a 23 degree angle, an "elongated" rifle round would hit the watter point first, but only on 1/2 of the bullet! This would cause A LOT of undue stress, which would most likely cause fractures. In this case, a HP would have entered the water with no problem.

I did not see if they did the 9mm in the pool, but I would be interested to see if that would happen as well.
 
I too wondered about ricochet.....

I also wish they had used some HP, I am guessing it woulda expanded. The human body is a lot of water, after all.
 
I want a job wherein I can get paid to fire a .50 BMG into an indoor swimming pool!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hillbilly
 
Keaner beat me to it. Though I understand they didn't originally plan the shoot to take place at such a shallow angle, I think the conditions they were forced to perform in very well may have skewed the results. I believe if the original contraption they had used held, their results may have differed.

Having a slug engage a body of water at such an angle seems to me an excellent way to hasten the commencement of bullet yaw. As I’ve personally found true during my own informal tests, once a high velocity bullet with an exposed lead base such as most FMJs yaws and begins traveling base forward through a medium such as water, it's not long before the slug disintegrates from the tail to tip.

However, they did seem to confirm the myth to some degree; taking a dip during a heated firefight might just save your life.

But hey, I'm just a guy behind a computer; what do I know. :D
 
Snowdog-- I agree with your conclusion, if the tank had held, I think it would have been either the AR-15 or the M1 that would have put a hole through the bottom of the tank. One of their biggest mistakes was neglecting to reshoot the 9mm.

Now that I think of it, we "KNOW" that rifle rounds dont shatter on impact like that normally, otherwise, how would CSI units get the rifling from a rifle?

Most CSI units have a water tank that they shoot rounds into, and then they can just pick up the bullet out of the tank. I believe it works for them, because they shoot at a more "downward" angle.
 
22's in the water

I know when I was a kid we used to shoot musk rats (IIRC) in the river as they swam underwater and all you had to do was lead the v ripples they left in the water and they would come floating to the surface. I think they swam at least 3 feet or so below the surface. Next time someone has a carp spawn near them in a river test this one themselves.
 
The difference between the bullet holding together and disintegrating is all about velocity. The 2500 fps+ rounds all disintigrated and the subsonic rounds held up. High velocity rifle rounds fired straight in rather than at a 23 degree angle would have disintegrated as well. High divers know this, the faster you hit the water the harder the water gets. .223 .50bmg 30-.06 all disintigrated. Big slow rounds traveling at less than 2000 fps have better penetration in water.
 
That is partially true Master Blaster, but in that case, the round would not have "shattered" like it did. If aimed directly down, it would have "flattened", similar to when you shoot anything bulletproof. The reason it splits is because only part of it is flattening (the point, and not straight, to the side), so it "tears" off the lower half.
 
Thats quite interesting research, though again, it does go against what logically should happen. They are quite vague about why the previous ballistic bullet traps fail to produce whole rounds, but perhaps that has to do with entrance angle as well.

Put it this way, water at high speeds is often equated to colliding with steel. Now, when fired at a steel panel straight on, a round will most often just collapse, and flatten. When fired at a signifigant angle, the Copper jacket will often fracture, causing pieces.

I still cannot think of a property of water that would cause it to work differently than in other scientific exercises.

BTW: With low velocity rounds, its entirely possible that the round doesnt have enough energy to break its jacket.
 
They did a slopy job in the ac / windows down show. TWO IDENTICAL EXPEDITIONS?NOT :cuss: They should have run each one with/without AC/windows down.Just general use can make a differance in the milage,also speed should have been 55-65 mph more real world. :fire:
 
Looks like the opening sequence of "Saving Private Ryan," with all the 8mm rounds killing guys ten feet under water, needs to be revised :D
 
Cosmoline its probably correct that the bullets at D-day could have penetrated that much water without breaking up, because possibly they had traveled hundreds of yards from the cliffs first. By the time they hit the water they had undergone a significant velocity loss so they did not break up.
 
I wonder if the 8mm's would have simply skipped across the surface, though. At that acute angle I've certainly heard of rounds skimming across entire lakes. It's why I was always told never to fire high-powered rifles at the surface of a lake.

Looks like we need another Myth Buster on this!
 
...also speed should have been 55-65 mph more real world.
Click to expand...
I may be getting this confused with another show where they ran a car on a track, but the reason why they ran the car at that speed was because the centrifugal force was stressing the tires at higher speeds, causing them to heat up, and they wanted to avoid a blowout and subsequent accident.

AFA the swingset...I'm suprised it took them so long to realize, "gee, maybe if we use the same conditions as the scale model, it might work!" In other words, one rocket, at 40deg. :banghead: then again, who wouldn't want to set off 4x100lb rockets. :what: :D
 
Would someone like to point me to ANY opinion in the gun world that has been really tested by the scientific method with correct stats, controls and design?

Most of what is gun wisdom is methodologically unsound. Little would pass the Daubert test to be admitted to court.

Stopping power - hahahahaha!
 
they used 47 BP rockets and blew buster up real bad. he needed 1/2 an hour to cool down so they could touch him withough getting burnt and withough his skin melting off...
 
On the water thing, didn't the Box O' Truth see the same thing with sand? FMJ pistol ammo stayed intact, but the high velocity rifle ammo disintegrated.

I think water being incompressible has something to do with it.
 
Penetration

Julian Hatcher published Army tests that .30 rifle/MG bullets
could be stopped by as little as three feet of water at a strafing
angle of 30 degrees. That was in the 1920s.

Hatcher also found that at 50 feet, .30-06 penetrated 12 inches of oak
and at 200 yards, drilled through 41-42 inches of oak. (Of course, the
bullet yawed in the 12" penetration and ripped up the wood.)

.223 .30-06 and .50 BMG at 2500+ fps would (did) hit water like hitting
a stone wall. The last seven British battleships, the Nelson, George the
Fifth and Vanguard classes, had "water armor" belts that were
flooded before any possible run-in with enemy AP ordnance.

I loved the number the twelve gauge slug did to the Mythbusters'
water tank. Too bad they didn't get to try the .50 on that tank!

Shooting at an angle into the swimming pool is actually
more realistic for combat simulation. Too bad they did not try the
9mm (1100 fps), 12 gauge (1600 fps) or 6.5mm Carcano (2100 fps).

Mythbusters admit they do not always get it right: they have "revisit"
episodes when viewers spot holes in their experiments. They did
special effects for commercials for a living; they aint rocket scientists!

My son used to drive a cement mixer and they occasionally had to
remove concrete with dynamite: you drill a hole in the concrete and
put in a stick. Laying the dynamite on top of the slab won't work.
That's just an excuse to pack the thing with bags of explosives for
a Mythbusters grand finale.
 
I don't think anyone was in the water when any shot was fired. All but the shooter were behind plexiglass shields, and "eyes & ears" worn by all. It seemed safe enough. I'd guess the trajectory of ricochet was figured and the area beyond the building was cleared of people. The pool & building looked pretty ratty, maybe in a school that's about to be demolished. Otherwise they'd be taking a chance of a big repair bill on a pool.

Interesting that the black powder mini-ball seemed to do the most damage through the most water. No wonder the war between the states had so many casualties.

Regards.
 
AFAIK, the main reason that rifle bullets tend to ..

penetrate better at a bit of distance (and they do) is stabilization. At close range they aren't 100% stable.

I learned of this either here or tfl, and it was a couple years back.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

I
  • Locked
New Mythbusters
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
k-frame
K
Back
Top