stopping power

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

Pete S RE:stopping power 4/27/2002 10:06:19 PM

Semper Fi, Mac! I'm not sure who you are replying to, but you are confirming the main points: it takes good, solid hits to the central nervous system or the heart area to anchor an enemy. Unless the legs or pelvis is broken, the off- center hits may not stop him. When a person is in full "fight or flight" mode, and pumped on adrenaline or other drug, they can frequently shrug off multiple hits, until weakened by blood loss. History is full of accounts of soldiers who fought on after receiving mortal wounds. Think about what you might have to do if your teammates are endangered. Also the importance of being confident and pro- ficient with your weapons--there are a lot of pro's out there who think the 9mm is tops. I'll keep my .45, also (and my M14). Oo-rah!

Quote Reply

Joe Trenchfoot RE:stopping power 4/30/2002 3:15:17 AM

I agree

Quote Reply

RESERVA120@HOTMAIL.COM RE:stopping power 5/1/2002 4:52:02 PM

THIS IS ABOUT RIGHT ON IN TONE,GIVE A REALIBLE GAILI IN 223AND MAGS(OFTEN OVER LOOKED)LEAVE THE SINPERS TO THE BIGGER STUFF, THE ONLY THING THAT I CAME UPON AS A PROBLEM WITH THE 223 WAS NOT ASKING THE BAD GUY IF IT HURT ENOUGH OR HOW HE FELT ABOUT THE HYDROSHOCK-VALUE, BUT THAT OF REAL WORLD ITEMS,DOORS SMALL WALLS CARS(AS COVER) THAT SORT OF THING,OTHER THAN THAT I'VE NO PROBLEM WITH THE 223 AS A COMBAT ROUND( I'M NOT A HUNTER AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WERE TALKING ABOUT)...I OWN A VERY NICELY MADE KIMBER (CUSTOM)1911-45 AND LOVE THE WAY IT FEELS AND SHOOTS,BUT IN THE FIELD I CARRY A GLOCK, IN THE 45CAL, AS IT IS A BETTER DELIVERY SYSTEM FOR THE 45CAL IN THE MUD&RAIN. SO I GUESS WHAT IT MEANS FOR THE MOST WHEN SHOOTING AT BAD GUYS( ASIDE FROM THE TRAINING&MEN)IS HOW WELL THE WEAPONS HOLD UP UNDER FIELD USE,MORE ROUNDS OVER LESS,MORE IS BETTER,ANYTHING OVER 400MM IS SOMEONE ELSE PROBLEM,SO JUST SHOOT TILL THEN,AND YES IT'S NICE TO HAVE THE 7.69MM GUYS AROUND TO CHEW THOUGH THINGS, AND A MARK19 IS YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE COME TRUE,MAKES BEING A GROUND-POUNDER NOT FUN NOT FUN AT ALL.........ALLAN

Quote Reply

blofeld RE:stopping power 3/9/2003 1:34:49 AM

Muzzle velocity turns out to have a critical effect on the stopping power of 5.56 bullets. See Martin Fackler's seminal work: link Above about 2700 fps the SS-109 will fragment and create very impressive wounds. Below that velocity it will simply tumble, and not create as impressive wounds. The combination of the shorter M4 barrels and heavier SS-109 bullets has reduced the range at which 5.56mm bullets will reliably fragment. See link for details. From a 14.5" M4 barrel the fragmentation range is about 50m with SS-109 ammo. That compares to about 150m with a 20" barrel, or 200m for a 20" barrel shooting the Vietnam-era 55gr bullet. The modern M855 62 grain bullet also exhibits more variation in fragmentation compared to the earlier 55 gr M193.

Quote Reply

Final Historian RE:stopping power 3/9/2003 4:34:06 AM

Stopping power is only absolutely necessary when pistols and shotguns are concerned, because of the range. Both are for fights where you can see the whites of their eyes, and when you are that close you need to be able to put a man down with one shot. The .45 round does that, 9mm doesn't. It is true that the actual traume done by a 9mm round is greater, so in the end it is more likely to kill. But that isn't as important as incapacitating the target long enough to get in a good second shot that keeps them down. For anything over 50 yards, stopping power isn't as important. A wounded enemy at that range can get up from a .45 just as he could a 9mm. True, the .45 would knock him down harder, but at that range the ability to exploit the knock down is low. The lethality difference between the 7.62mm and 5.56 mm is not that great, the original tumbler 5.56 was probably better, as the target would be in more pain and thus be less combat capable. But the problem then becomes punching power. Someone hiding behinda half way decent barrier could be safe from 5.56mm bullets, but 7.62 would have enough punch to get to him. Of course, in an urban combat situation, lower penetration might be advantageous, as it would produce less friendly fire. Its a tought choice to make, I am still not sure which is better overall.

Quote Reply

mustavaris RE:stopping power 3/10/2003 3:17:12 AM

As far as I know the problem has been the fact that they (soldiers in Afghanistan) are facing fanatics who are well-prepared for dying- they must be knocked off with the bullet or they try to kill you- you gotta be able to drop them down before they kill you and while they dont care about themselves the 1-2s delay in incapacitation can be and is crucial. In ordinary combat its not so necessery to kill instantly if distances are long enough as mentioned before. I cannot say for sure if I remember this absolutely correctly but I read a book on wartime wounds and lethality and the statistics* show that more than 75% of the KIA were able to fight (or run or hide etc) at least 10 seconds after being mortally hit and less than 2% lost instantly their capability to fight. * WWII and after that.

Quote Reply

Heorot RE:stopping power 3/10/2003 5:19:59 AM

This is not new. During the Falklands war, an SAS detatchment equipped with M16's assaulted a farm full of Argentinian marine commandos. One Argentinian shot an SAS trooper with a 7.62 FN and he went straight down. It took 3 body hits from an M16 on the Argie before he realised that he had been was shot and despite that, he was still shooting. After that action some of that detachment re-equipped themselves with liberated FN's. They felt that the value of the extra stopping power outweighed the extra weight.

Quote Reply

macawman RE:stopping power 3/10/2003 9:25:34 PM

For MOUT the infantry should use the 9 shot Remington shotgun. Rifles are field weapons, for fighting in building or other close confines for stopping power buck shot and or slugs will instantly drop any druged up fanatic even if he is wearing body armour just make sure your wearing hearing protection.

Quote Reply

Heorot RE:stopping power 3/11/2003 12:15:33 AM

You wouldn't want to give a whole unit shotguns, You would need some longer range weapons to use against snipers etc. But for house to house, shotguns fit the bill. One legal problem though. I think that slugs would be against the Geneva convention. The would probably be considered as bullets, and bullets must be fully jacketed, in rifles at least. Does anyone know for sure?

Quote Reply

mustavaris RE:stopping power 3/11/2003 2:03:35 AM

Finland is thought to be very keen on Geneva stuff and at least our counter-special force and MP units use shotguns.. And so I think that they are legal- they have been used in many conflicts after WWI so I dont think that they are illegal- at least practically all armies use them and no one cares about the "problem". Other case is the fact that they have little use the enemy uses armour and distances are greater than 30m so they are useful only in assaults when distances are short. Shotguns have quite a variety of possible ammunition including HE, CS, ILLUM, smoke etc- and they widen the area of possible use. Even in urban fights distances mostly exceed efficient shotgun range and we find out that there´s no ideal weapon for everything- such would be a shotgun or submachinegun in assaults, short-barrel assaultrifle in urban fights and normal one in rural areas.. Maybe this is why SFs have used shotguns under their assault rifles and had a pistol in their possession?

Quote Reply

1 2