Mythbusters: water bombers

[Baradium]

Covering the scuba diver in the forest fire myth.   

[undatc]

i see you watched that tonight too.  Its an old episode, but a good one none the less.

[Baradium]

i see you watched that tonight too.  Its an old episode, but a good one none the less.

Like some other times, I think they left some things out they could have tested on some myths...  but that's just me. 


The civil war rocket one, "gun cotton" is what they referred to gunpowder as... they didn't make real gunpowder for the myth.  Was incomplete research IMO...

[undatc]

i see you watched that tonight too.  Its an old episode, but a good one none the less.

Like some other times, I think they left some things out they could have tested on some myths...  but that's just me. 


The civil war rocket one, "gun cotton" is what they referred to gunpowder as... they didn't make real gunpowder for the myth.  Was incomplete research IMO...

Something I think a lot of people miss abbout todays media is that they arent there necessarly for the truth.  Nor the whole story.  They are there to sell advertaising, and they will do whatever is entertaining and will get people to watch, so if the research is long and boring, people wont watch, they sell less stuff, they make less money, and leads to them being canceled.  But yea, there are some instances, like the water sucker thing, that is incomplete.  What about the amphibious planes that "scoupe" water outta lakes.  Im sure they could suck someone up.

[Baradium]

What about the amphibious planes that "scoupe" water outta lakes.  Im sure they could suck someone up.

Bad example, they said the biggest one's intake is only 6" and not big enough to scoop a person.

I thought I'd seen solid buckets, but I don't remember them showing one, just these canvas type ones...

[fireflyr]

What about the amphibious planes that "scoupe" water outta lakes.  Im sure they could suck someone up.

Bad example, they said the biggest one's intake is only 6" and not big enough to scoop a person.

I thought I'd seen solid buckets, but I don't remember them showing one, just these canvas type ones...

That myth is so impossible (and stupid)  --In order to get 'scooped" you would need to be less than 6 inches in size and you would have to be a fast and powerful swimmer to be able to  get into a bucket under a helicopter (plus the helicopter pilot would have to be blind)----how do these ridiculous get started?? 

[tundra_flier]

Actually I felt the scuba diver myth was busted before they started.  They stated that there wasn't any equipment in use that I diver could get into before they really started.  So they just had some entertaining fun with the dummy.

I always felt that the "diving under water will protect you from bullets" myth was one of their better ones.  Very interesting results too.

Phil

[chuckar101]

Don't take it to hard fireflyr, people will believe anything these days.  I also like the water on, didn't the results show that the bullet tore itself apart before it went very far at all.  Can't remember.

[Baradium]

Don't take it to hard fireflyr, people will believe anything these days.  I also like the water on, didn't the results show that the bullet tore itself apart before it went very far at all.  Can't remember.

Even a .50 cal round disentegrated before getting too far.   Vertically they could get farther, but it's hard to stay directly over someone to fire vertically down (and even then it wasn't extremely far).

[tundra_flier]

All of the modern high velocity rifles had the bullets fall apart very close to the surface even though there were using full jacketed military ammo.  The Civil war musket still penetrated 3" of ballistic gel at 12' deep.  The 12Ga slug also penetrated well.

Phil

[spacer]

Yep. In a lot of cases, a slower moving bullet will penetrate much farther than a really fast one.
http://www.theboxotruth.com/docs/bot19_4.htm

Here, the trusty ol' .45-70 blows away the faster, high-zoot modern rifle rounds in penetration.
Of course, in combat that's not always a good thing... ya want the thing to stop inside the target.

[Baradium]

All of the modern high velocity rifles had the bullets fall apart very close to the surface even though there were using full jacketed military ammo.  The Civil war musket still penetrated 3" of ballistic gel at 12' deep.  The 12Ga slug also penetrated well.

Phil

I actually think they should have tried using some solid lead hard cast as well as the full metal jacketed ammo.  I was wondering if maybe the jacketing of the bullet (different materials) contributed to them coming apart.

The 12' was slant range IIRC.... so it only actually got to about 3-4' maybe at the angles they were shooting....


As far as the .45-70... that isn't exactly a lightweight round.  A lot of powder and a lot of mass in that slug!

[tundra_flier]

All of the modern high velocity rifles had the bullets fall apart very close to the surface even though there were using full jacketed military ammo.  The Civil war musket still penetrated 3" of ballistic gel at 12' deep.  The 12Ga slug also penetrated well.

Phil

I actually think they should have tried using some solid lead hard cast as well as the full metal jacketed ammo.  I was wondering if maybe the jacketing of the bullet (different materials) contributed to them coming apart.

The 12' was slant range IIRC.... so it only actually got to about 3-4' maybe at the angles they were shooting....


As far as the .45-70... that isn't exactly a lightweight round.  A lot of powder and a lot of mass in that slug!

Good question, I know I've recovered both ball and hard cast pistol rounds from a soft dirt bank before, and the ball ammo always showed less deformation.  But water could be different, might just deform the lead, where the jacketed bullet falls apart.  Maybe we need our own myth busters trial!

[Baradium]

Good question, I know I've recovered both ball and hard cast pistol rounds from a soft dirt bank before, and the ball ammo always showed less deformation.  But water could be different, might just deform the lead, where the jacketed bullet falls apart.  Maybe we need our own myth busters trial!

I have hard cast rounds for my .44 mag revolver (350 gr)... need to shoot it some anyway, name a time. 

[TWEEK]

Simple physics explains why the lower velocity rounds hold together better than the "modern" fast movers, and not because of bullet composition.  F=MA, correct? A heavier slug moving at a slower rate of speed has the same angular momentum as a lighter round with a faster velocity.  When the heavier, slower moving slug encounters the water, its deceleration relative to its mass results in less force to destroy the bullet, while its greater mass contributes to enhanced cohesion.

So, how do you explain the .50? Once again, a fast mover, even though it is very large.  Think of it this way...after firing, the bullet tip encounters the medium of the water and is slowed by the water's surface tension.  It immediately slows down.  Meanwhile, the tail of the bullet is still traveling at close to muzzle velocity.  If you have the tip of something traveling at, say, 400fps (just a guess, so don't get too uptight) and the tail of the same object still traveling at 2000fps, that object will disintegrate.

So, that is my simplified physics lecture for the day, and you can all shoot holes in it if you want to.