US Police vs. UK Police ???

[David]

I have noticed, that in GENERAL, US Police on duty with long-guns tend to hold them with the gun's muzzle towards the ground, while the UK Police tend to hold their long-guns with the muzzle towards the sky (see photos below as examples).

Why?

What are the pros and cons of each type of carry, if any?

 

[Standing Wolf]

That which goes up will come down somewhere—one generally has no idea where—at nearly the speed at which it began its ascent. That which goes down can be directed safely.

 

[Oleg Volk]

British use may be stemming from the more ceremonial nature of their interactions with guns.

 

[feedthehogs]

Some of the police pics I've seen recently out of the UK show a different style than what I remember.
Black dress, shaved heads and subs strapped on.

 

[Jim K]

Having been in the UK on several occasions when police used guns, I would be very afraid to walk around London today, and my fear would not be of terrorist bombings. In the cases I knew of, the British police, when issued firearms, just went berserk, tending to shoot at anything that moved. They seemed so unfamiliar with guns and so trigger happy that accidental shootings seemed to be part of any situation where armed police were employed. Of course, under the British system, the press reported only a few bare facts, then was told to go cover a royal scandal or something and forget the killings by police.

Jim

 

[carebear]

Well just in the pictures shown, it's apples and oranges and demonstrates mindset and training.

The US cop is at a low ready, the Brits are at parade ground port arms.

 

[entropy]

I'll bet the SAS carries them at low ready. The two bobbies there are for show, to make the Brits feels more comfortable, and to show that Her Majesty cares about her subjects .

 

[Chipperman]

If you look at the Brit pic, you can see that neither of them would be able to deploy the weapon with any degree of speed. The guy on the left isn't even holding the pistol grip. The guy on the right has the stock over his forearm.

 

[dasmi]

The UK cops look like decoration, the US cop looks like he's ready to get down and dirty.

 

[Eightball]

If you look at the Brit pic, you can see that neither of them would be able to deploy the weapon with any degree of speed. The guy on the left isn't even holding the pistol grip. The guy on the right has the stock over his forearm.

I was going to point that out, but it looks like you beat me to the punch. But it bears to be repeated again. Who knows, maybe the Brits are too fascinated by what they're holding (what IS this thing, and how is it useful to us, trained police officers? ) to know how to keep them at the ready?

 

[dasmi]

Heh, the guy on the left looks rather proud of himself

 

[Iain]

You don't think armed British police are highly trained?

 

[entropy]

Not those two. Or else they're not serious about the duty.

The guy on the left has that 'patience, my butt....I'm going to kill something' look.

 

[jdkelly]

...—at nearly the speed at which it began its ascent.---Standing Wolf

Are you sure?



Respectfully,

jdkelly

 

[CAS700850]

Our SWAT guys train muzzle-down, and use muzzle down for both carry on a sling and low-ready. When I asked about it, I got two reasons. First was that they claim to have more controland speed from the ready position if it is muzzle down. I don't know if this is accurate or not. the second was that in the highly unlikely event of an AD during an entry or raid, compare the possible inuries. Muzzle up=injury to head or chest of team member. Muzzle down= injury to foot or leg.

One of the guys then confided that with the gear and slings they use, muzzle down was more comfortable and faster "on the draw" so to speak.

 

[dasmi]

Try holding a gun muzzle up, and bring it down on target without dropping too low first, and having to come back up.
Next, try holding a gun muzzle down, and try to bring it up on target.

 

[firefighter4884]

jdkelly

if you analyze velocies and stuff from physics, then yes it is true. The descending projectile will have the same velocity when it hits the ground as it did when it left the muzzle.

However, there is a parasitic drag on the round from the air as the bullet flies. The question is how much affect does the drag have on the round? It's actually an incredibly complex question...

--Jim

Yes, I'm an engineer.

 

[armoredman]

The guy on the left is holding the MP5 like an Enfield....

 

[David]

Another "odd" photo of UK Police holding their long-arms.

 

[P95Carry]

Hey Jim - good to see you here. Does not tho the projectile only achieve terminal velocity on down trip? 120mph tops.... which is 176 fps. It only has acceleration due to gravity, 32 ft/sec^2. For a 9mm 115 grain this would give approx 8 ft lbs.

I am an engineer too - but an old and rusty one

 

[Control Group]

However, there is a parasitic drag on the round from the air as the bullet flies. The question is how much affect does the drag have on the round? It's actually an incredibly complex question...

But doesn't atmospheric drag act on the round both on the way up and on the way down? That is, won't it amount to two vectors of (pretty much) equal magnitude but opposite direction? I pose this as an actual question, not an argument. This is something I've wondered about for quite a while.

(As you may have surmised, I'm an armchair physicist at best; the math required to actually do physics is beyond me)

 

[Control Group]

P95Carry:

Again, I'm no expert...but that figure rings a bell as the terminal velocity of a skydiver with a closed parachute. I'm fairly sure (but not certain) that terminal velocity in general depends on the coefficient of drag, which is a function of cross section and mass, so I'd assume that a bullet's terminal velocity would be significantly higher than a skydiver's.

But I could be full of it, too.

 

[petrel800]

The bullet will acheive a terminal velocity, and if I recall properly, will have a higher coefficient of drag due to the fact the round will tend to fall bottom first.

The round will still have enough energy to injure or kill someone, as a lady at the Peach Bowl found out when a stray 9mm round pierced the roof and landed in her leg. This was of course the result of someone firing celebratory gun fire into the air on New Years Eve.

 

[P95Carry]

If simplified to a true vertical up trip - then the muzzle velocity will decay over time due to drag and the antagonistic acceleration due to gravity.

Once max altitude reached then only gravity acceleration remains to influence the projectile downward. That will impose itself but air drag will limit the speed (in theory) to the terminal velocity. Take away drag and speed would increase as inverse square law IIRC.

 

[P95Carry]

CG - remember I am rusty! Sure drag coefficient will matter - but of course remember too the old experiment - in a vacuum a feather falls at same speed as a ball bearing. That is when drag taken out of the system.

I know skydivers can I believe push speed from supposed terminal to well over by going into an ''airodynamic'' shape.

However per the original from firefighter - I can think of no way that ''g'' can accelerate a downward travelling projectile to achieve anything like original MV - which we might assume to be from a carbine 9mm - something like 1200 and more fps.