PDA

View Full Version : Water Penetration Tests


PatriotnMore
04-21-2008, 10:30 AM
I saw this episode on Mythbusters and I was surprised by the results, in case you missed it, heres the episode.


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e56_1178245196&c=1

saki302
04-21-2008, 10:02 PM
My riflesmith told me they were too close to let the bullets stabilize properly. Remember the Normandy beach landings? The 8mm MG bullets penetrated the water just fine.

aplinker
04-21-2008, 10:30 PM
My riflesmith told me they were too close to let the bullets stabilize properly. Remember the Normandy beach landings? The 8mm MG bullets penetrated the water just fine.

Are you referring to the movie or were you old enough to be there? :p

Fobjoe
04-21-2008, 11:35 PM
I saw that episode and wondered if the results would have been the same with steel core ammo. Shame they didn't test it with that.

BlueOvalBruin
04-22-2008, 12:32 AM
I'm not surprised at the results. Bullets have a hard time staying together after hitting soft tissue/fluids at those high speeds. The 5.56 NATO rds will fragment in soft tissue if it hits at above 2700fps and will penetrate below that speed. If they had allowed the bullet from the 50BMG to slow down some, it would have penetrated more instead of fragmenting. But the muzzle was just a few feet away from the target and the bullet hit it at full speed. Notice how all the slow projectiles (pistol, muzzleloader, shotgun) penetrated in this test and the fast ones didn't.

wilit
04-22-2008, 6:25 PM
I would say that the Mythbuster's results were pretty accurate.

The Box 'o Truth never lies... And he came up with similar results.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot19.htm

Apparently sand is a much better rifle round stopper though.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot7_2.htm

viras
04-22-2008, 7:05 PM
I would say that the Mythbuster's results were pretty accurate.

The Box 'o Truth never lies... And he came up with similar results.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot19.htm

Apparently sand is a much better rifle round stopper though.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot7_2.htm

The plastic that the jugs are made out of should be considered a variable too. I'd say that the Box'o'truth (in this case) is just as flawed as the Mythbusters test.

Army GI
04-22-2008, 7:17 PM
Are you referring to the movie or were you old enough to be there? :p

He's probably referring to the movie,

But consider that some of those machine guns were firing hundreds of yards from the shoreline. The bullets would have slowed down by the time they hit the water so they may have had less impact energy. The myth-busters test was to simulate firing from a boat or a pier right on top of the water; still close enough to fragment the bullets.

30Cal
04-23-2008, 8:31 AM
This was also tested and published in Hatcher's Notebook way back when.

1lostinspace
04-23-2008, 8:46 AM
Are you referring to the movie or were you old enough to be there? :p

remember how that laser on Independence day blew everything up?:eek:

bohoki
04-23-2008, 9:28 AM
makes sense if you think about it you know how water is uncompressable so the only way to penetrate it is to have it get pushed out of the way and at high speed teh inertia of the water is stronger than the bullet material
the pressure differentials tear the bullet apart one little chunk of bullet may have a bubble against it as the other area of thebullet is like hitting full force into a solid surface



falling into water over 100 feet they say the water is just like hitting concrete



of course i was bumpfiring into a 1 foot deep creek at about a 45deg angle and i went down and checked for bullets and found a bunch that look like they were put in a vice sideways none tore up but it was just wolf fmj
its not as fast as 223 or 308

i fired my 50 bmg into same creek and it was like a guyser 50 feet high and i never found that bullet of course it was very muddy for about a half hour in the slow mooving current