Nathan Greenfield Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 In his With a Machine Gun to Cambrai George Coppard gives the following list for penetration by a .303 bullet: clay 60 inches earth 40 loose sand 30 sandbags 18 oak 38 dry turf, 80. Does anyone know if he is correct? Cheers, Nathan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Don't know if it is correct or not but there is also a set of figures given in the Field Service Pocket Book in the section on trenches and field works which may be useful for comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Don't see any reason to doubt George. He does, after all, have the tee-shirt! Squirrel is, however, correct but the Field Service Pocket Book goes into things even more finely: Steel plate, best.........................................7/16" Steel plate, ordinary mild, or wrought iron....3/4" Shingle......................................................6" Coal, hard..................................................6" Brickwork, cement mortar............................9" Brickwork, lime mortar.................................14" Chalk.........................................................15" Sand, between boards or in sandbags............18" Sand, loose..................................................30" Hard wood, e.g. oak......................................38" Earth, free from stones (unrammed)..............40" Soft wood, e.g. fir.........................................58" Clay............................................................60" Dry turf or peat............................................80" Failing that - duck! Cheers, Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simb Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 I would have thought myself relatively safe behind 3' of solid oak.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 How many ducks would it take to stop a bullet then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delta Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Figures seem to fit; I recall seeing an infantry section (in the early 70s) chop down a fairly mature fir tree with a GPMG. It was done as an object lesson in choosing cover from fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 With reference to the "brickwork lime mortar 14 inches". Wouldn't that be a 13 1/2 inch wall? Or did they have different size bricks in those days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 All these figures for "shingle" and "dry peat" are all very well, but what's the figure for "human"? It is a serious (ish) question John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 The Field Service Pocket Book (1914) is silent on the subject of the human body as a material for field engineering. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Ian Any guesses? The question in my mind was how many men (if more than one) might a single bullet kill, having passed through the first body, etc. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 It would depend on the range and how close the men were together. I am sure one of the Lee Enfield experts would be able to tell us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanA Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Hi John, A musician, I'm afraid, not an armourer or ballistics expert: so not even a wild guess from me. (Better keep silent and have people think you are a fool than speak and have them know you are!) You can bet your boots that someone will rise to the bait. Cheers, Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Yes, here I am, duty fool! Human body mostly made of water, so, unless round strikes sinew or bone, it could go through a lot of men ..... just imagine a bullet through muddy water! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Take on me Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 But human beings have rather a lot more in them than muddy water. A bullet passing through flesh will lose some of its velocity although the likelihood is that it might be abe to pass through a few people but eventually resistance would stop it. JGM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 from a Google: Within single human body cells water content ranges between 70 and 85%. The percent water in the entire body by weight varies with age, sex, and physical conditioning. Heart and lung contain the most water, about 80%. Fat (about 20%) and bone (about 43%) are among the lowest. Therefore, the total body is an average of all organs, blood, and extracellular fluids. Several physiology texts place average young men at 60% water, and young women at 50% water, the difference due to relatively more fat in females. Thus, a 70 kg young man has about 42 kg (or 42 liters) or water. With age fat increases and muscle decreases, so that in old age the body may contain only 45% water. Infants, by contrast, average 73% or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24225978 Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 It takes very little to deflect the path of a bullet within the human body, particularly within the trunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compo Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 In fact water stops a bullet very effectively. Think of all the tests you have seen on television where they are going to match the marks on a bullet from a criminal's gun with that of the bullet in at a murder; they fire it into a tank of water. I have seen a test by some maniacs here on TV in the USA called Mythbusters where they tested the "myth" in movies that the heroe gets away from the bad guys firing weapons by diving under water. The surprise result was that it worked. The bullet from a 303 rifle was stopped in about 18", provided that there was any kind of an angle of entry. When the angle was a fairly exact 90 degrees it went to about 24". None of the figures in previous postings state at what range the penetrations were tested. Does that mean, I wonder, that a bullet travels at the same velocity at point blank range as it does at 500 yards? Regds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Greenfield Posted 21 July , 2006 Author Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Thanks. NMG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 The question in my mind was how many men (if more than one) might a single bullet kill, having passed through the first body, etc. John. The most graphic answer to this that I can give is...5. (headshots with a Mauser Kar. 98 at point blank range into a row of adult males standing in single file almost touching each other - no details on a body shot). Please don't ask me my source of this information - he is still alive and now enjoys a , well deserved, peaceable existance. dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Err, thanks mate. I think. No, I'll not ask any more. I would not wish to upset this chap. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CROONAERT Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Err, thanks mate. I think. No, I'll not ask any more. I would not wish to upset this chap. John I'll explain all on Tuesday if you wish, so long as it stays out of public view.He had no qualms in describing what he's seen and done to interested parties, but I don't wish to give him any extra undeserving grief by posting details on this forum (which I know can be pretty blinkered at times). Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 I'll explain all on Tuesday if you wish, Not 'alf. And, yes, of course I'll keep me gob shut. Need you ask? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaymen Posted 21 July , 2006 Share Posted 21 July , 2006 Seriously interesting thread - I am staggered at the figure of over 3 foot of solid oak tree !!! Anyway what would I know Glyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 22 July , 2006 Share Posted 22 July , 2006 Or did they have different size bricks in those days? Yes they did, the length and the width of the common brick has remained fairly constant over the centuries, but the depth has varied from about two inches (about 50 mm) or smaller in earlier times to about two-and-one-half inches (about 65 mm) in more recent times. Of course that would make any difference to the penetration, the width being about the same size. This is an an interesting article on the affect of AK47 rounds. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/wbardwel/..._aw_report2.txt Penetration would depend on the distance, what is the optimum range for a SMLE? (not maximum range). I can remember in the mid 80's a RUC officer being hit from a fair distance by several 9mm rounds from a SMG which just penetrated his overcoat. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now