From:	"Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: SRII Lethality
Date:	Tue, 23 Dec 1997 18:56:47 +0000

In article <349f5023.12153963@****.direct.ca>, James Lindsay
<jlindsay@******.CA> writes
>On Mon, 22 Dec 1997 20:09:33 -0600, TODD ROBBINS wrote:
>> Yes, hydrostatic shock is a myth. Just as EMP is a myth.
>
>Errr... do you have any facts to back up these claims?
>
>I know for a fact that the hydrostatic shock(wave) that takes place within
>a soft target does actually take place and that severe damage is caused by
>the expansion of the resulting temporary wound cavity. Perhaps you are
>referring to the "theory" that the effect of all that force on the human
>nervous system forces a person into shock due to the simultaneous
>stimulation of so many nerves?

Hydrostatic shock exists, and is not damaging. The shockwave produced by
a 7.62mm bullet is weaker than that created by a lithotriptor (a medical
device used to break up kidney stones), and a single lithotriptor
treatment consists of 2,000 pulses.

The temporary cavitation caused by some rounds is also much less
damaging than frequently imagined. It is extremely dangerous if it
occurs in solid tissues such as the liver, but muscle and most organs
are sufficiently flexible to withstand the damage.

Dr Martin Fackler has produced a fairly extensive body of work on this
subject.

>And EMPs? A myth? I seriously doubt it. Unless, of course, you are
>referring to a particular step in the EMP process and not the effect as a
>whole...

EMP exists, and military equipment is hardened against it. A lot of its
effects are overrated, except in very special circumstances.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk