Ignoramus26744 wrote:
This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?
I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:

Ignoramus26744 wrote:
This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?
I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon


LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

And there are dead spaces between some of the layers to help break up
the flame front jet from shaped charges.

Ive got a set of standard 3/4" HRS plates that I hang from chains for
gongs and I have to weld them up or replace them every couple years.
Standard 308 FMJ will penetrate fully a half inch at 400 yrds and a
smidge more at 500 yrds. Can you tell me why it penetrates less at
closer ranges? G

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Gunner

I would suspect that the velocity at a short distance is higher that at long
range and that is the cause of better penetration at longer ranges.

Energy transfer verse velocity, may be more efficient at lower velocity.

Hugh
Not a ballistician.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:

Ignoramus26744 wrote:
This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?
I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon


LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

And there are dead spaces between some of the layers to help break up
the flame front jet from shaped charges.

Ive got a set of standard 3/4" HRS plates that I hang from chains for
gongs and I have to weld them up or replace them every couple years.
Standard 308 FMJ will penetrate fully a half inch at 400 yrds and a
smidge more at 500 yrds. Can you tell me why it penetrates less at
closer ranges? G

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:


Ignoramus26744 wrote:

This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

3006 ammunition is 7.62 mm calibre, isn't it? I don't know much about
guns, but I do recall that the armour used on the famous "Pig" trucks in
Northern Ireland was a little under an inch thick, and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

Chobham armour. I believe it was first used on the British Challenger I
tank, and it's probably a good foot thick. Tanks just have huge engines
and wide tracks to cope with the weight.

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

The rifle because it has the longer barrel, so the bullet has more time
to accelerate, is that right?

Iggy might also like to check out this link. Look at the Steyr round
next to the regular 7.62 mm. That is one big AP round:

http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn46-e.htm

Chris

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:17:37 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:


Ignoramus26744 wrote:

This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

3006 ammunition is 7.62 mm calibre, isn't it? I don't know much about
guns, but I do recall that the armour used on the famous "Pig" trucks in
Northern Ireland was a little under an inch thick, and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.

The diameter of the bullet is 7.62, indeed, but its NOT the same as
the CARTRIDGE designated as the 7.62 x51, which is what the FN-FAL
fired..the basiclly equivelent of our 308 Winchester. The FN-FAL being
the rifle most commonly carried by the Tommies in NA until the *******
SA-80 came into service.

The armor on the Saracen/ BMP type scout vehicles is an alloy, and
well heat treated. Often T1 plate..and its much much tougher than
CRS...chuckle...its a bitch to machine. Very much work hardening.

The Humber Pig used double thick armor with an airspace between
them..at least the later models did...MkII IRRC. Very effective
against hard shot small arms and SOME shaped charges.

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

Chobham armour. I believe it was first used on the British Challenger I
tank, and it's probably a good foot thick. Tanks just have huge engines
and wide tracks to cope with the weight.

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

The rifle because it has the longer barrel, so the bullet has more time
to accelerate, is that right?

Iggy might also like to check out this link. Look at the Steyr round
next to the regular 7.62 mm. That is one big AP round:

http://world.guns.ru/sniper/sn46-e.htm

Chris


Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Gunner Asch wrote:

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:17:37 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:


Ignoramus26744 wrote:

This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

3006 ammunition is 7.62 mm calibre, isn't it? I don't know much about
guns, but I do recall that the armour used on the famous "Pig" trucks in
Northern Ireland was a little under an inch thick, and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.

The diameter of the bullet is 7.62, indeed, but its NOT the same as
the CARTRIDGE designated as the 7.62 x51, which is what the FN-FAL
fired..the basiclly equivelent of our 308 Winchester......

I don't think so, that is the bore of the barrel..

Gunner

Tom

On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 09:56:14 +1300, Tom wrote:


The diameter of the bullet is 7.62, indeed, but its NOT the same as
the CARTRIDGE designated as the 7.62 x51, which is what the FN-FAL
fired..the basiclly equivelent of our 308 Winchester......

I don't think so, that is the bore of the barrel..

Gunner

Tom

7.62, is .308 diameter. The 7.62 Cartridge (x 51) is physically
identical to the commercial civilian version we call the .308
Winchester. There are some minor differences between the throating of
a x51 weapon and the civilian 308. Btw...the usual name for the
military cartridge is the 7.62 Nato..as its one of the common rounds
for Nato usage.

Like the 5.56 Nato..we in the States call the .223 Remington, when
fired from sporting arms.

Ive owned and fired enough FN-Fals to know what goes down the tube G

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Gunner Asch wrote:

snip


LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

3006 ammunition is 7.62 mm calibre, isn't it? I don't know much about
guns, but I do recall that the armour used on the famous "Pig" trucks in
Northern Ireland was a little under an inch thick, and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.


The diameter of the bullet is 7.62, indeed, but its NOT the same as
the CARTRIDGE designated as the 7.62 x51, which is what the FN-FAL
fired..the basiclly equivelent of our 308 Winchester. The FN-FAL being
the rifle most commonly carried by the Tommies in NA until the *******
SA-80 came into service.

The armor on the Saracen/ BMP type scout vehicles is an alloy, and
well heat treated. Often T1 plate..and its much much tougher than
CRS...chuckle...its a bitch to machine. Very much work hardening.

The Humber Pig used double thick armor with an airspace between
them..at least the later models did...MkII IRRC. Very effective
against hard shot small arms and SOME shaped charges.

That's interesting. I've examined several Pigs (including the Mark IIs)
and haven't been able to discern an airspace, so I thought it might be a
myth. Either the airspace is very small, or it wasn't present on all
Mark II vehicles. A guy who is a real Pig enthusiast told me he'd never
seen two identical Pigs, so the latter is entirely possible.

In my opinion, the Pig is the coolest looking armoured vehicle ever
made. It seems it did a pretty good job in Ulster, too, and was lot
cheaper than the Saracen. I saw one for sale for £650 recently. If I'd
had some spare cash and covered storage I would have bought it. Maybe
one day I'll get one...

Chris

Let the record show that Christopher Tidy
wrote back on Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:17:37 +0000 (UTC) in
rec.crafts.metalworking :

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

3006 ammunition is 7.62 mm calibre, isn't it? I don't know much about
guns, but I do recall that the armour used on the famous "Pig" trucks in
Northern Ireland was a little under an inch thick,

And there is a great deal of difference between cold rolled steel, and
"armor" plate. Even the old fashioned "steel" armor of Pre-WW2 vintage.

And tanks did have steel armor more than an inch thick and still
managed to move. Not quickly, I'll admit, but adequate for the job.
(Although the Krauts tended to build behemoths which had their own
problems.)


and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.

And that's the operative phrase "did the job". Could have been better,
could have been worse. As Division commander once said "the better is too
often the enemy of the good." As in "I need tanks now, not better ones in
five years."


tschus
pyotr


--
pyotr filipivich.
as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James
Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at
producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with."

pyotr filipivich wrote:
Let the record show that Christopher Tidy
wrote back on Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:17:37 +0000 (UTC) in
rec.crafts.metalworking :

and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.


And that's the operative phrase "did the job". Could have been better,
could have been worse. As Division commander once said "the better is too
often the enemy of the good." As in "I need tanks now, not better ones in
five years."

I think this pretty well sums up the spirit of the "Pig". Somewhere I
have an article or two about them. The Army built them in a hurry as
they needed armoured trucks immediately, but because of their simplicity
the Pigs outlived many of their intended successors.

Chris

Let the record show that Christopher Tidy
wrote back on Sun, 6 Nov 2005 21:08:06 +0000 (UTC) in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
pyotr filipivich wrote:
Let the record show that Christopher Tidy
wrote back on Mon, 31 Oct 2005 18:17:37 +0000 (UTC) in
rec.crafts.metalworking :

and this was regarded
as being adequate protection against the armour piercing 7.62 mm rounds
available to the IRA in the 1970s. Now it was definitely welded steel
armour, but it may not have been mild steel, and I'm not sure of the
range at which it offered protection, but the British Army found that it
did the job.


And that's the operative phrase "did the job". Could have been better,
could have been worse. As Division commander once said "the better is too
often the enemy of the good." As in "I need tanks now, not better ones in
five years."

I think this pretty well sums up the spirit of the "Pig". Somewhere I
have an article or two about them. The Army built them in a hurry as
they needed armoured trucks immediately, but because of their simplicity
the Pigs outlived many of their intended successors.


One of the myriad of Rule Ones.

"Rule One: if it looks stupid, but it works, it isn't stupid."

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich.
as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James
Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at
producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with."

On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 21:08:06 +0000 (UTC), Christopher Tidy
wrote:

The Army built them in a hurry as
they needed armoured trucks immediately,

The advantage of the Pig was that it wasn't built, it was converted from
existing trucks (the Humber FV1600) which had already been rejected as
too fragile and too expensive to keep in general service. It was a
political boondoggle that provided a bad vehicle and cost as much as the
new-build alternatives offered at the time.


but because of their simplicity
the Pigs outlived many of their intended successors.

There was nothing simple about a Pig. The suspension and drivetrain
complexity is a nightmare. The only way they survived as Pigs was
because they only ever travelled slowly and very rarely went off road.
Braking was marginal on the original Humber and was far underpowered for
the weight of an armoured Pig.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
Ive got a set of standard 3/4" HRS plates that I hang from chains for
gongs and I have to weld them up or replace them every couple years.
Standard 308 FMJ will penetrate fully a half inch at 400 yrds and a
smidge more at 500 yrds. Can you tell me why it penetrates less at
closer ranges? G

OK. I give up. Why does it penetrate further when shot from farther away?

Peter

Physics.

Consider the arc from the end of the rifle to the target.
The close one is where the bullet is flying flat.
The far one is where the bullet is diving to the ground. Gravity assist.

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:


Ignoramus26744 wrote:

This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

And there are dead spaces between some of the layers to help break up
the flame front jet from shaped charges.

Ive got a set of standard 3/4" HRS plates that I hang from chains for
gongs and I have to weld them up or replace them every couple years.
Standard 308 FMJ will penetrate fully a half inch at 400 yrds and a
smidge more at 500 yrds. Can you tell me why it penetrates less at
closer ranges? G

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

For Gunner's question, when the velocity's too high, the bullet
disintegrates too quickly. At lower velocities, it hangs together and
penetrates.

Pete Keillor

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:54:59 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

Physics.

Consider the arc from the end of the rifle to the target.
The close one is where the bullet is flying flat.
The far one is where the bullet is diving to the ground. Gravity assist.

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:


Ignoramus26744 wrote:

This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

And there are dead spaces between some of the layers to help break up
the flame front jet from shaped charges.

Ive got a set of standard 3/4" HRS plates that I hang from chains for
gongs and I have to weld them up or replace them every couple years.
Standard 308 FMJ will penetrate fully a half inch at 400 yrds and a
smidge more at 500 yrds. Can you tell me why it penetrates less at
closer ranges? G

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:05:57 -0500, Pete Keillor
wrote:

For Gunner's question, when the velocity's too high, the bullet
disintegrates too quickly. At lower velocities, it hangs together and
penetrates.

Pete Keillor


Budda BING! Give that man a big gold star and a box of Kmart 22s.

Gunner


On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:54:59 -0600, "Martin H. Eastburn"
wrote:

Physics.

Consider the arc from the end of the rifle to the target.
The close one is where the bullet is flying flat.
The far one is where the bullet is diving to the ground. Gravity assist.

Martin

Martin Eastburn
@ home at Lions' Lair with our computer lionslair at consolidated dot net
NRA LOH, NRA Life
NRA Second Amendment Task Force Charter Founder



Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, Jon Elson
wrote:


Ignoramus26744 wrote:

This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some
bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?

I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are
SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Jon



LOL...Ah Jon? A 3006 will just about punch an inch of CRS at 100 yrds

Tank armor used to be T1 plate..many inches thick, and the glacis
plates..feet thick.

Now its composit armor, various layers of ceramic, kevlar, aluminum
and steel. Google "Cobham armor"

And there are dead spaces between some of the layers to help break up
the flame front jet from shaped charges.

Ive got a set of standard 3/4" HRS plates that I hang from chains for
gongs and I have to weld them up or replace them every couple years.
Standard 308 FMJ will penetrate fully a half inch at 400 yrds and a
smidge more at 500 yrds. Can you tell me why it penetrates less at
closer ranges? G

Which will shoot though a standard stop sign..a 22 rifle or a 22
pistol, both shooting the same cartridge and at the same 25ft range??
(shooting stop signs is NOT recommened btw)

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 09:53:41 GMT, with neither quill nor qualm, Gunner
Asch quickly quoth:

On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 22:05:57 -0500, Pete Keillor
wrote:

For Gunner's question, when the velocity's too high, the bullet
disintegrates too quickly. At lower velocities, it hangs together and
penetrates.

Pete Keillor


Budda BING! Give that man a big gold star and a box of Kmart 22s.

Isn't your statement somewhat of an oxymoron, G? Or is the latter
portion an example of the latter of Pete's 2 statements?


-------------------------------------------
Stain and Poly are their own punishment
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Design
================================================== ====

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 22:16:39 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, Jon
Elson quickly quoth:

Ignoramus26744 wrote:
This is purely an idle question. I have no interest in doing this, for
many reasons. The main reason is that 7mm rem mag is armor piercing
even if bullets are made from dung. Anyway. I have some 4.8mm (3/16)
tungsten electrodes (lanthanated). I could, conceivably, cast some

(Ig, you meant to say "_Someone_ could, conceivably, cast...", right?)


bullets for a 7mm rem mag rifle with the electrode pieces inside, that
would be quite armor piercing. Would they go through, say, 1 inch
thick mild steel plate, assuming propellant loads that are safe for
the rifle?
I'm no expert on armor at all. But, ONE INCH? Have you seen what the
Army and Air Force use for armor piercing ammo? Like the 30 mm rounds
for the A-10? These things weigh a whole POUND each, and are

....with 3' of explosive-filled shell behind them.


SOLID U-238 (both hard and heavy as hell!) The armor they are trying
to pierce is about that thick, as far as I know. A tank couldn't
possibly have steel armor too much more than an inch thick, or it would
be too heavy to move.

Much of the newest armor is a lighter-weight _ceramic_!


--------------------------------------
PESSIMIST: An optimist with experience
--------------------------------------------
www.diversify.com - Web Database Development