| From: | IronRaven cyberraven@********.net |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Questions of great importance (Steve, Jon, RA:S people |
| Date: | Thu, 02 Sep 1999 16:42:11 -0400 |
>for a rifle. What you're talking about is "hydrostatic shock" and while
>it's based on real physics, it doesn't actually work the way people claim
>it works. In other words, it's bunk.
Marc, you've said this before, and you didn't answer my question the last
time you said it:
If hydrostatics don't work, then how come things like the ACR dart loads
devloped by AAI and Steyr, and the 4.7 mm round for the G11, perform as
well if not better in test against various test media (including a test on
Strassberg goats conducted after the close of the tests, in France) as the
standard 62-gr 5.56 NATO? The G11 rounds are no faster than 5.56, are
smaller, and weigh less. The flechette loads aren't faster, but they are
super light and they have almost no frontal area in compairison to other
rounds.
Now, I know about the gall stone treatment. That simple claim does not
take into acount differences between mineral deposits in the body, live
hard tissue and live soft tissue, in the areas of natural resonance,
elasticity, and the like. It leaves out the fact that the energy
transfeered is less than that of modern rilfe round, and doesn't (accord to
the folks I've talked to) start at a maximum level, but insteads builds
from zero, while rifle rounds are rather sudden. The shock waves are
focused on a relatively focused area, while being shot is more of a full
body experince. You also didn't mention that women who are pregnant aren't
given that treatment, according to the folks I talked to (a couple RNs and
an MD- I've come to know my local ED staff pretty well over the years).
I'm not an expert in physiology, I only have enough knowledge for what I
do and to know where to stick a knife for the best effect. I don't know a
lot of physics, or how shockwaves effect soft tissue. What I do know is
that I've never have shot critters of the same species and roughly the same
size, in the same area. I've never ahd the get up with .223s, but I have
had them get up with .30-30s and 7.62x39 loads that produce the same amount
of force (mass x accelleration) acrss the total frontal area with
low-expansion bullets. If it isn't hydrostatic shock (which you have
claimed), or the effects of a stretch cavity (which I recall you also
stating), and in all cases they exited the main body, so it sure ain't
pentration, what the heck was it?
Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
