Re: cop-killer bullets

Many of today's snobbier hunters and shooters kinda of sneer down their nose at that woefully under powered bastard step child of the Springfield 30-03. LOL. Most rifles larger than .22 or .22 magnum would likely punch through the old kevlar fabric only vest. Today the vest is only part of the equation. Typically its a plate carrier, and the over all rating is that of the plate. Level IV will stop most, but probably not every possible rifle round.

"According to the standards set by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), level IV armor plates should stop all calibers up to a 30.06 armor-piercing round."

There are plenty of rifles more powerful than 30-06, put even a less powerful round (smaller bullet) at a much higher velocity might punch armor that would stop a 30-06 depending on the exact load, and the range.

P.S. All the old experienced hunters will tell you a 30-06 will take any big game in North America including moose and grizzly bear. It's not an under power round. I was just taking a shot at the "mine is better" snobs.

P.P.S. "Cop killer bullet" is another made up political term like "assault rifle" and "Saturday night special." Any time you can get people riled up about something specific they can point to (or think they can point to) it can advance the ban agenda.

Note to self: Disengage. Walk away. LOL.

This is a hot issue topic ... wasn't the Black Talon teflon coated bullet the one that make them foul their panties ? There are lots of bullets/loads out there that will punch thru armor , and they ain't all sooooper magnums .

I think the Black Talon was just a segmented hollow point with a lot of advertising hype that kind of failed as it tended to foul with clothing and then not expand.

I might have a couple boxes on the shelf given to me by a buddy of mine in some caliber he didn't have or no longer had. There are lots of similar segmenting hollow points on the market today.

Teflon coating was the thing I recall them getting their panties in a twist over. Never made any sense to me. For it to have any significant affect it had to be a regular armor piercing round anyway. Teflon is relatively soft. Its just slippery. Still have to have the mass velocity, and right construction of the round.

My dad has two boxes of .38 special armor piercing he had from his old hardware store inventory. Some day I'll talk him out of it and do some range day testing with it to see what it will actually penetrate. I have one round of .38 special armor piercing myself that was in a Dan Wesson

357 a buddy of mine traded me for some "other" tools he needed. I guess I could shoot that one, but then if it didn't do anything I'd be all disappointed. Nowhere near as much fun as a 100 rounds that don't do anything. LOL.

Just a side anecdote. In 1982 I was interested in law enforcement as a career. At a youth academy in one of our classes we had a lecturer talk about getting shot while wearing a kevlar fabric vest of the day. He claimed he was very lucky as the vest he was wearing was not rated for ANY kind of rifle round and he was shot with a .22 magnum rifle. I'm still to this day not sure what point he was trying to make. .22 magnum even out of a rifle is considerably less powerful than many hand gun rounds.

I had a range day today. A couple 9s, a 32 S&W long New Regulation Police (circa 1930s), and 4 .22 revolvers were among the arsenal. I had fired neither of the 9s before. Both performed well, and the cheap Chinese 213 (pre-ban of course) shot amazingly well. I was a bit stunned at how well. The 32 long was a repaired gun I bought in a lot of junk guns from a pawn shop. It was totally locked up when it arrived in my shop. It shot very well today for a cosmetically very abused

90ish year old gun. I had intended to shoot a video testing the premise that 22lr/mag revolvers tend to be marginally more accurate shooting magnums than LRs as some of the gun officiandos claimed recently on one of the forums I read. I decided to just have fun shooting with my friend. He's getting older and his hands shake a bit, so I wasn't having a competition. He still shoots well enough you better not be an unwelcome visitor coming down his hallway in the middle of the night.

ANYWAY!!!

Back on topic for this thread. When I was gathering up ammo, equipment, and arms prior to the trip to the range I noticed two boxes of .38 special metal piercing ammo on the shelf. I guess my dad already gave me that "armor piercing" 38 special he had. Now I guess I am kinda obligated to go try to shoot through some things with it. Maybe even film some video.

P.S. I shot two of those repaired junk guns today. They both shot well. 11 more to go.

P.P.S. I didn't shoot the new (used) Browning Buck Mark Target I wanted to shoot. It was missing a couple washers, and a buffer pad when I checked it out a couple days ago. I ordered the parts, but its going to have to wait until my next range day.

"Critics kept complaining about Teflon's ability to penetrate body armor [...] In fact, Teflon cut down on the round's ability to cut through the nylon or Kevlar of body armor."

Facts and logic don't deter the ignorant rabid hate mongers. Ever notice that conservative pollsters ask what you think, liberal ones how you feel?

Lots of things WILL shoot through soft kevlar body armor. Just about any decent power rifle for example. Hence the need for carrier plates.

The big "claim" I heard back when this was a thing was, "There are people out there shooting holes in ships!" I don't recall ever seeing a headline that confirmed that, but real full size ships are pretty tough. Even tankers and freighters.

Lots of things WILL shoot through soft kevlar body armor. Just about any decent power rifle for example. Hence the need for carrier plates.

The big "claim" I heard back when this was a thing was, "There are people out there shooting holes in ships!" I don't recall ever seeing a headline that confirmed that, but real full size ships are pretty tough. Even tankers and freighters.

Bob La Londe

---------------------------

That's because ship hull plates aren't as thick as they used to be.

"Modern commercial ship hulls continue to be built with 14- to

19-millimeter-thick (0.5- to 0.75-inch) plate."

In Titanic's day hulls were mostly 1" thick, but thanks to global warming there will be no more mid-Atlantic icebergs to hit.

Titanic's sister ship Olympic rammed and sank a U-boat without springing a leak.

"The Olympic went to Southhampton with at least two dented hull plates and her prow twisted on one side, but it wasn’t breached."

I think the WW1 dazzle camouflage was meant to confuse estimating the "angle on the bow" or relative course, and to make the ship appear shorter and further away in poor visibility. Like a quarterback, a sub Captain or U-Boot Kaleun had to accurately predict the target's future positions to intercept it with a relatively slow unguided torpedo. In WW2 US subs an electromechanical analog computer modeled the enemy's course and programmed the torpedo to intercept it.

I reference Titanic because there is so much detailed information available on line:

This is another good source: For example here is how to command a U-Boot, retrieved from the captured one in Chicago: It's among the world's most difficult jobs. In general I study how humans interact with challengingly difficult technology, partly to make my constructions easier to use.

My personal involvement included memorizing the circuitry of very complex classified military electronics so I wouldn't need to carry the manuals on service calls and risk their loss or capture. The graduation rate from that unlisted, invitation-only school was under 5%, though dropouts were offered other courses. After the Vietnam draft ceased to bring in college tech grads the Army reverted to simpler board swapping.

No worries. This was a rabbit hole topic from the beginning anyway.

Well, that and sometimes your interests are, well, interesting.

As are yours , Bob .

On 5/27/2023 5:13 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote: ..... No worries. This was a rabbit hole topic from the beginning anyway.

Well, that and sometimes your interests are, well, interesting.

Bob La Londe

------------------------

I posted this in rec.aviation.military and like it enough to add it here:

sans.military

Were you on the aviation groups back when Robert Bass , Frank and others were on their rants about barrel rolling a jet liner?

As far as I know its only been publicly recognized to have been done once (atleast in the western world) at some big fair in the PNW. Some will even argue that it didn't even count as a barrel roll.

That being said the ex brother-in-law of a friend of mine had a copy of chase plane video of a big jet going through a roll. Maybe its from that event, or maybe it has been done more than once. Sadly I think he has passed on, and I have not heard from in years in any case. I never saw the video, but my friend says the big jet was twisted all out of shape as it executed the maneuver. Much of the rest of what I heard said I have forgotten. It boils down to... I heard... he said somebody else said... My friend did see the video, and I trust him to have not overly exaggerated what he saw.

sans.military

Were you on the aviation groups back when Robert Bass , Frank and others were on their rants about barrel rolling a jet liner?

As far as I know its only been publicly recognized to have been done once (atleast in the western world) at some big fair in the PNW. Some will even argue that it didn't even count as a barrel roll.

That being said the ex brother-in-law of a friend of mine had a copy of chase plane video of a big jet going through a roll. Maybe its from that event, or maybe it has been done more than once. Sadly I think he has passed on, and I have not heard from in years in any case. I never saw the video, but my friend says the big jet was twisted all out of shape as it executed the maneuver. Much of the rest of what I heard said I have forgotten. It boils down to... I heard... he said somebody else said... My friend did see the video, and I trust him to have not overly exaggerated what he saw. Bob La Londe

-------------------------

One objection was that the fuel system wasn't designed for negative g but he claimed he maintained positive g throughout the maneuver. It was a barrel roll, not an aileron roll.

F-22 backflip:

Sometimes pilots don't get away with air show stunts in large airplanes: I was in the B-17 "909" two days before it crashed. Long before I had helped its crew chief replace a cracked engine cylinder.

I subscribed to r.c.m. and r.a.m. in the 1990's when I was put on FAA projects and given a Mitre lab at the end of a corridor of Air Force personnel. I had much to learn quickly, in both radio and aviation. I think I was chosen because I had demonstrated ability with computer hardware and A/D converters, both critical to the development of digital radio.

The advanced digital communications systems Mitre developed in the mid 90's still haven't been fully implemented. The current AM VHF aircraft radio system is a relic of the 1940's. Mitre developed similar police and medical digital communications systems and I've been shown the police one in service. I had been a repairman for an Army wired and wireless computer network in the early 1970's.

As with TV, changing from analog to digital permits sending several times as much information in the existing channel bandwidth.

I was more talking about their tiff, vitriole, and wild claims over the subject that spilled over into every group they were involved in at the time. Yeah, this would have been back in the 90s.

...

I was more talking about their tiff, vitriole, and wild claims over the subject that spilled over into every group they were involved in at the time. Yeah, this would have been back in the 90s.

Bob La Londe

------------------------

I thought r.c.m. was somewhat worse. I tried to post separately so they wouldn't become connected but I may have missed on a reply, or been followed. There were more nazis and commies on r.a.m., Altavoz and then Gunner's yapping porch puppies here, so one or more of his political or survival groups which I don't subscribe to may be the culprit.

My reaction:

My first contact with usenet was over at RMH , and I don't recall who said it but I got some really good advice : "It's called a carapace . Grow one ."

Ha Ha Ha... I mostly tried to stay out of the Usenet wars, but a lot of folks on ASA (alt.security.alarms) wanted me to take sides. I used to use my business info in my signature in that group. Some of those guys would call me on the phone to try and convince me their side of their current war was the right one, and if I wasn't openly with them then I was clearly against them.

I admit I was offended when I shared the lyrics for "The Rod & The Honda" (to the tune of Hot Rod Lincoln) on RMH and the first response was, "Well some somebody has to much time on their hands." Woooof. (That's the sound of the wind falling out of my sails.)

You've heard the story of the hot bike race. When the Rod and the Honda was a setting the pace. That story's true I'm hear to say, Cuz I was ridin' that VRSCA.

I got a much better response to the prose. "Poser." I wrote it in the brief time period when I was still in the wheel chair doing service calls with my side hack because I couldn't drive my truck. Sorry I never saved it, and I don't remember much all that well from that time period. From my bad wreck on the V-Rod until I was mostly fishing tournaments instead of riding its just a blur, but amazingly I got a lot of work done and made a lot of money in that time period. I guess when you know what you are doing you can run on automatic for a while.

The stories are from 1955, when the Boeing 707 prototype was taken to an air show in Seattle.

Here is the original one-gravity 707 Barrel Roll video:

.

Joe Gwinn