Jump to content

Speed of the Motorcade


Recommended Posts

Pat,

I guess I misunderstood you. I thought you were implying by the handload, firecracker sound, and shallow wound that the shot was meant not to make a lot of noise nor necessarily be lethal. Somewhere on Weberman's site I remember Hemming calling this a "meat shot," meant (as best I recall) simply to plant evidence in the body. Ballistics and sniper work are just not my field.

Ron

John, Pat and Ron,

Let me first explain my lack of ready response here on the forum. I am running the overnight shift on my department and am short on street supervisors so I have had only one day off in the last two weeks. Add my part time job and now it looks like I will be working shift on my day off tommorrow and possibly both days off next week, I have not had the time I would like to address these issues.

In the past week I have spent what little time I had away from family obligations to assist a nephew in sighting in a precision assault rifle that came way off from norm, and a coworker in slinging and adding a bi-pod to his Swedish precision rifle and then remounting the scope that he poorly mounted. I have been able to sight it in to my liking, but not to his so I have to find some time tommorrow to get him in-line. I also have to assist in a Federal Cartridge Company Ballistic Conference later next week and have the challenge ammo ready for the penetration through obstruction materials into the ballistic geletin block ready for their challenges on their new ammo line.

John, I will address your interesting scenario but it will take awhile to find the time to give it the attention it deserves.

John, Pat and Ron, what you must understand with subsonic ammunition, whether it be factory or shooter loads, is that it's velocity is under 800fps. Now if we are talking under a fifty meter shot, the trajectory is compromised only slightly. Beyond that, it will go extreme. Wound ballistics is another story as an 800fps projectile does not have the explosive impact and wound channel as a normal rifle caliber projectile that is travelling at speeds of three times that. To complicate issues more, we are dealing with lead time on a moving target and elevation issues of shot origin that would greatly complicate the shot impact.

Suppressors disguise the detonation of the shot but do nothing to cover the sound of the shot in-flight, which is more condusive to witness recognition of shot origin. What happers the latter is preconceived determinations that are exposed to the witnesses that will atler their recall in a critical incident stress recall situation. They can be easily convinced of what they heard and recall the events as to what is consistent with the norm.

This is why I bring up the issues of "canyon shoot" and what Ron referred to as an operational procedure of "masking". No supressors would be required if the shot volley's were timed appropriately.

Again, I will get into this in more detail when I have the time, if you all are interested.

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Al, you input is keenly anticipated. That you take the time to respond in a careful and informative manner given time constraints noted. I am also interested in reading other material of yours, can you post links to other contributions of yours to the matter of ballistics? First thoughts on the above, I was going to go into it in wound ballistics, but I'm also theorising a fragmentation with minimal exits and most of the woundings/skull destruction a result of the enormous peak forces. In my scenario if you consider the direction I'm alluding to, a tangential entry could encounter a 'wall' of skull bone that would absorb much of the impact of the bullet and disintegrate as noted on the one side and the soft brain tissue on the other. The expelled material could then be a blowback of the peak pulse and not indicative of entry but of exit. Anyway I'll go into a more detailed wound ballistics scenario later.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Al, you input is keenly anticipated. That you take the time to respond in a careful and informative manner given time constraints noted. I am also interested in reading other material of yours, can you post links to other contributions of yours to the matter of ballistics?  First thoughts on the above, I was going to go into it in wound ballistics, but I'm also theorising a fragmentation with minimal exits and most of the woundings/skull destruction a result of the enormous peak forces. In my scenario if you consider the direction I'm alluding to, a tangential entry could encounter a 'wall' of skull bone that would absorb much of the impact of the bullet and disintegrate as noted on the one side and the soft brain tissue on the other. The expelled material could then be a blowback of the peak pulse and not indicative of entry but of exit. Anyway I'll go into a more detailed wound ballistics scenario later.

John

John,

Thank you for the kind words and your questions and scenario is somewhat feeding what I have been trying to get across for some time. As far as the links to my previous comments on ballistics, if you would do a search here and on Lancer you would see what I am referring to as I have been consistent throughout.

What we need to keep in mind as far as internal wound ballistics is that fragmentation of the original projectile will greatly decrease sustained velocity within the penetrated cavity and therefore result in minimal disruption within through energy dispersion. Energy dispersion within the cavity is what causes the disruption within the cavity and allows for the blowout effect in the exit wound. A tangential impact strike would create a certain degree of yaw of the bullets true trajectory and stability and create considerable dispersion of energy within the cavity. However, this same tangential strike would not change the bullet's trajectory in an outward manner, as many would have you think, but would turn the bullet inward as the energy is absorbed through penetration. We see this in semi and hard resistent penetrations such as multi-layer resistant material and compressed layed resistant material in the latter as windshield glass. The skull is a shelved or multi-boned layed material and the energy is considerably absorbed through impact. The angled shot impact does not reflect, but turns inward.

To maximize disruption within the cavity, one would seek a projectile compromised of total jacketing or bonded jacketing that would retain as much of its original compostion and shape with disruption of true flight trajectory as possible to create such yaw and keep it true flight path. The more weight and velocity it retains through penetration of the cavity while wavering or yawing through the same, the greater amount of consistent energy it disperses.

A fragmenting projectile will disperse it's minimal energy quickly and not drive through the cavity. The lighter the fragment, the quicker is disperses and looses its energy and the less impact it has within the cavity.

That is why I stand behind a shot trajectory of left of the target striking to the right front of the skull and exiting the right rear. Minimal matter left in the cavity with explosive results through trajectory within the skull cavity and explosive exit in the right rear as we see through 90+ percent of the wits after the shot.

I have published with the Dealey Plaza Echo regarding this to a degree in March of 2001.

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Al, you input is keenly anticipated. That you take the time to respond in a careful and informative manner given time constraints noted. I am also interested in reading other material of yours, can you post links to other contributions of yours to the matter of ballistics?  First thoughts on the above, I was going to go into it in wound ballistics, but I'm also theorising a fragmentation with minimal exits and most of the woundings/skull destruction a result of the enormous peak forces. In my scenario if you consider the direction I'm alluding to, a tangential entry could encounter a 'wall' of skull bone that would absorb much of the impact of the bullet and disintegrate as noted on the one side and the soft brain tissue on the other. The expelled material could then be a blowback of the peak pulse and not indicative of entry but of exit. Anyway I'll go into a more detailed wound ballistics scenario later.

John

John,

Thank you for the kind words and your questions and scenario is somewhat feeding what I have been trying to get across for some time. As far as the links to my previous comments on ballistics, if you would do a search here and on Lancer you would see what I am referring to as I have been consistent throughout.

What we need to keep in mind as far as internal wound ballistics is that fragmentation of the original projectile will greatly decrease sustained velocity within the penetrated cavity and therefore result in minimal disruption within through energy dispersion. Energy dispersion within the cavity is what causes the disruption within the cavity and allows for the blowout effect in the exit wound. A tangential impact strike would create a certain degree of yaw of the bullets true trajectory and stability and create considerable dispersion of energy within the cavity. However, this same tangential strike would not change the bullet's trajectory in an outward manner, as many would have you think, but would turn the bullet inward as the energy is absorbed through penetration. We see this in semi and hard resistent penetrations such as multi-layer resistant material and compressed layed resistant material in the latter as windshield glass. The skull is a shelved or multi-boned layed material and the energy is considerably absorbed through impact. The angled shot impact does not reflect, but turns inward.

To maximize disruption within the cavity, one would seek a projectile compromised of total jacketing or bonded jacketing that would retain as much of its original compostion and shape with disruption of true flight trajectory as possible to create such yaw and keep it true flight path. The more weight and velocity it retains through penetration of the cavity while wavering or yawing through the same, the greater amount of consistent energy it disperses.

A fragmenting projectile will disperse it's minimal energy quickly and not drive through the cavity. The lighter the fragment, the quicker is disperses and looses its energy and the less impact it has within the cavity.

That is why I stand behind a shot trajectory of left of the target striking to the right front of the skull and exiting the right rear. Minimal matter left in the cavity with explosive results through trajectory within the skull cavity and explosive exit in the right rear as we see through 90+ percent of the wits after the shot.

I have published with the Dealey Plaza Echo regarding this to a degree in March of 2001.

Al

Al, I've reread my question and realised I've mistakenly swapped two words :

entry and exit. I meant to say "...not indicative of exit but of entry."

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...