Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Deadly by design


Recommended Posts

Today’s  weapons are more efficient and can work on a bigger scale with less risk to personnel.

Older weapons and projectiles relied on mass for penetration (due to low velocity and bullet construction), as well as mass for flight stability, along with an ability to inflict mass trauma. Bullet velocities and bullet technology have changed that. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dirty Dan Dawkins said:

Today’s  weapons are more efficient and can work on a bigger scale with less risk to personnel.

Older weapons and projectiles relied on mass for penetration (due to low velocity and bullet construction), as well as mass for flight stability, along with an ability to inflict mass trauma. Bullet velocities and bullet technology have changed that. 

Exactly.

 

Folks not into old guns like us CAS shooters don't understand that 'long range' shooting wasn't invented with smokeless powder.  They see the low muzzle velocities of BP rounds and dismiss them. Like you pointed out, if you have the mass, the velocity doesn't have to be high.

 

Mike Venturino got to test some buffalo guns on state of the art, modern equipment once and wrote about it here.

 

https://powderburns.tripod.com/sharps.html

 

The 1st 1000 yard Creedmoore match was shot in the 1870's.  The US shooters were using falling blocks from Sharps and Remington.  The Irish used muzzleloaders.

 

The US won by 1 point- the last Irish shooter fired at the wrong target.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Smuteye John SASS#24774 said:

 

The US won by 1 point- the last Irish shooter fired at the wrong target.

D*MN IRISH. Ya can't count on them at all:P

 

Disclaimer: Yes, I am of Irish decent.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The liberals always make that comment about how our modern firearms are so "deadly" and "lethal" that nobody should be able to possess them. 

 

These are the same hypocrites that live in exclusive and expensive gated secure communities to keep the rift raft out. Some of them don't own firearms, champion gun control/anti 2A, yet they have armed personal security details that are carrying modern firearms. 

 

Are modern firearms more "lethal" than vintage? Answer is that it depends. I was one of the soldiers on horseback in Afghanistan circa 2002. One of the interesting things we observed back then was a lot of Afghan "snipers" preferred the old WWI iron sighted No1Mk3 or WWII No4Mk1 bolt action Lee Enfield .303 rifles. Why? They were "deadlier" than AK47's. The AK's 7.62x39 round was effectively stopped by the SAPI plate in the conventional Army's Interceptor Body Armor, but the 303 British round fired through the iron sighted Enfield rifles were able to penetrate the SAPI plates.  

 

So there goes the liberal elite's argument. 100 year old weapons are deadlier than the so called modern "assault rifle".  

 

Once our soldiers started being issued upgraded SAPI plates that do stop the 303 round, the Enfield fell out of favor as a sniper rifle. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading back when the Russians were in Afghanistan, that the Afghans' favorite anti-aircraft weapon was the old Martini Henry. They would shoot the Russian helicopters in the tail rotor. If they hit any of the blades, the smear of lead left on the blade would make it be out of balance, and it would shake itself to pieces. And with no tail rotor, the helicopters would go down.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Smuteye John SASS#24774 said:

 

The US won by 1 point- the last Irish shooter fired at the wrong target.

Was alcohol involved? :D

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Alpo said:

I remember reading back when the Russians were in Afghanistan, that the Afghans' favorite anti-aircraft weapon was the old Martini Henry. They would shoot the Russian helicopters in the tail rotor. If they hit any of the blades, the smear of lead left on the blade would make it be out of balance, and it would shake itself to pieces. And with no tail rotor, the helicopters would go down.

 

It isn't a smear of lead that causes it to fail. but the speed at which the blade impacts the bullet. As fast as the tail rotor is spinning just impacting something as soft as a pure lead bullet will do enough damage to the blades leading edge to cause it to fail. 

Same would be true if the side of the blade or any of the supporting control linkages were struck by the bullet. Even the round from an AK or SKS would do enough damage to cause the tail rotor to fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Smuteye John SASS#24774 said:

Exacty

 

The 1st 1000 yard Creedmoore match was shot in the 1870's.  The US shooters were using falling blocks from Sharps and Remington.  The Irish used muzzleloaders.

 

The US won by 1 point- the last Irish shooter fired at the wrong target.

The US won by a Pint, da last Irish shooter had a extra Pint ...

 

Jabez Cowboy

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.