Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: MassiveProng <MassiveProng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:36:28 -0700
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:01:45 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Gave us:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:22:31 -0700, MassiveProngThe perpendicular shot MIGHT embed. It MIGHT bounce back.
<MassiveProng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:38:49 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Gave us:
"Assume" doesn't mean guess or bluster or argue in this context. It
means a clear statement of the problem, to remove any ambiguity, so
one can go ahead and crunch the numbers.
Does not in any way jibe with reality though, dingledorf!
Why wouldn't a bullet embed itself in a bowling ball? Are you saying
that's impossible? Are bowling balls bulletproof? Would a .22 LR go
clean through the ball? A .22 rifle shot will go through about 1.5
copies of a Tom Swift adventure novel; I know, I've done it.
If it's not impossible, then it's a reasonable assumption on which to
base a calculation.
John
Given that it would embed, I'd say that any shot up to about twenty
degrees off center would as well.
HOWEVER, after that, you MUST take into account the rounded nose of
the bullet, and the far less than perpendicular angle of incidence
with the ball.
THOSE shots would NOT EVER embed!
.22s are well known for glancing off of skulls when not
perpendicular to the line of travel, and they are fairly soft.
SO, if YOU wanted to be realistic, YOU would have to accept that MY
remarks about the 45 degree incidental hit would NOT embed, and WOULD
impart a side force into the ball as well as deflecting the slug away
from the now GOUGED ball. The deflected bullet would NOT glance off
at a 90 degree angle from the impact point either, so those assertions
were ALSO wrong! During said gouge, the bullet would change its
vector and even arc a bit. Examination of the gouge would show a
curved trough.
.
- References:
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: MassiveProng
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- From: John Larkin
- Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- Prev by Date: Re: Polaroid's flat OEM battery, from the SX-70 filmpak
- Next by Date: Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- Previous by thread: Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- Next by thread: Re: Tracking of Killer Asteroids Runs Low on Money and Short on Time
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|