HIGH-TECH-Arrived-Gun Damage

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

So we're left with a dilemma: do we give .40S&W 2d+2 pi (making it exactly the same as a 9mm, but with heavier ammo and fewer shots in the mag), or do we give it 2d+2 pi+, making it so clearly superior to the .45ACP that no one would carry anything else (esp if it's as deterministic as GURPS makes it look). Many common .40S&W guns in High Tech don't have the 5" barrel needed to get 2d+2 out of the .40, though, and many are 2d+1 pi+, which again thanks to granularity is still better than the .45ACP.

I decided a while back that I'm cool with this because the .40 S&W seems to be pretty popular these days, and while I suspect marketing to be the main driver of this, I'm okay with a popular modern round being better than lower TL rounds it's displacing.

[joelbf]

Originally Posted by Sadurian Mike

Systemic shock is anecdotal and wrong?! Now who needs to do more research! You want cites? Try typing "systemic shock" into Google. Alternatively, get hold of some medical publications or talk to anyone with medical training.

Your claim was that systemic shock without major bloodloss often kills (emphasis mine), and since we are discussing bullet wounds it's probably fair to assume the wound is just that. You really need to back that "often" up with some statistics or it is per definition anecdotal.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Rupert

I decided a while back that I'm cool with this because the .40 S&W seems to be pretty popular these days, and while I suspect marketing to be the main driver of this, I'm okay with a popular modern round being better than lower TL rounds it's displacing.

I think it's one of those things where the compromise made is "just right." the 9mm has great capacity, can be made on small frame pistols, and is an OK manstopper. The .45ACP doesn't have very good capacity unless you make a very large frame pistol (the Glock 21 or Para Ordnance P14.45 are both very large in the grip; the M1911 is only seven or eight shots), and while it's a better wounder, is more easily stopped by ballistic protection.

the .40S&W gets most of the way between each. You get 15 shots in a double stack mag (compare 17 for the 9mm and 13 for the .45 in Glock double-stacks), can make it on a smaller frame pistol, and you split the difference between 9mm and .45ACP in terms of cross section. The modern cartridge and barrel mean that higher pressures are used, although the recent .45GAP circumvents this.

I think that it's enough of what everyone wants to do well.

[AmesJainchill]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

The .50BMG round... This round has been known to blow humans into two pieces (video evidence from both Iraq wars).

Evidence, please?

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by AmesJainchill

Evidence, please?

video. I'll try and find a link. I've watched a film on thermograph where the shot happens, and the torso falls to the ground and the lower half stays in the tower. The rest of the tower residents saw it and fled.

It shouldn't be a surprise; the phenomenon Fred referred to when a .223 hits a rabbit also happens with people; the .50 BMG has 17,000J of energy, about 5x that of a .308 winchester, a round known to have a temporary cavity the size of a volleyball. If cavity is proportional to energy, we're talking 70% larger than that, or maybe 15" in diameter, larger than the typical front-to-back dimensions of a person.

[DouglasCole]

Right now I've only got hearsay:

"There was a documented instance of an enemy sniper in a water tower behind severed in half horizontally at the waist by a M107 sniper rifle from a range of 1,700 yards. " From http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...4173800AAOlv40


I read this account somewhere else; it's the same story. I cannot, however, find the original documentation. The video I referenced has since been shown, I see, to be a myth; its documentation of exploding varmints with high power rifles.

I'm still looking for primary sources, but the tower story I've run across more than once.

[ronom]

Actually in the 70's numerous police experienced "blow through" on suspects, these always were failures to stop as well. I don't have a link but I did see a marine DVD of a .50 kill that can be described as "red smear".

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by ronom

Actually in the 70's numerous police experienced "blow through" on suspects, these always were failures to stop as well. I don't have a link but I did see a marine DVD of a .50 kill that can be described as "red smear".

I've seen a few combat videos, some proporting to be one thing or another. One I saw was later shown to be shooting at varmints; another claimed to be a .50 but was clearly a helicopter engaging several human targets with some sort of autocannon (possibly the 30mm on the Apache). I've read more than once the account of the "torso severing," but never primary source, so I'm looking.

[Verjigorm]

Not completely related, but in Stephen Ambrose's books about tha big Dubya-dubya-Aye-Aye, German soldiers often complained that the .50bmg was a criminal weapon to use against infantry, the german shutzen having an rational fear of it causing dismemberment.

[Ashrem Bayle]

I just wanted to point out that the correct terminology for the phenomenon you guys are discussing is "hydrostatic shock", not "ballistic shock".

And no, hydrostatic shock has not been proven to be a major factor in death by gun shots, and for the most part, is a bit of an urban legend. I mean, we know it exists, but it isn't a big deal.

Direct damage to internal organs, blood loss, and nerve damage are the real killers.